background of the study in a research paper

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

How to Write an Effective Background of the Study: A Comprehensive Guide

Table of Contents

The background of the study in a research paper offers a clear context, highlighting why the research is essential and the problem it aims to address.

As a researcher, this foundational section is essential for you to chart the course of your study, Moreover, it allows readers to understand the importance and path of your research.

Whether in academic communities or to the general public, a well-articulated background aids in communicating the essence of the research effectively.

While it may seem straightforward, crafting an effective background requires a blend of clarity, precision, and relevance. Therefore, this article aims to be your guide, offering insights into:

• Understanding the concept of the background of the study.
• Learning how to craft a compelling background effectively.
• Identifying and sidestepping common pitfalls in writing the background.
• Exploring practical examples that bring the theory to life.
• Enhancing both your writing and reading of academic papers.

Keeping these compelling insights in mind, let's delve deeper into the details of the empirical background of the study, exploring its definition, distinctions, and the art of writing it effectively.

What is the background of the study?

The background of the study is placed at the beginning of a research paper. It provides the context, circumstances, and history that led to the research problem or topic being explored.

It offers readers a snapshot of the existing knowledge on the topic and the reasons that spurred your current research.

When crafting the background of your study, consider the following questions.

• What's the context of your research?
• Which previous research will you refer to?
• Are there any knowledge gaps in the existing relevant literature?
• How will you justify the need for your current research?
• Have you concisely presented the research question or problem?

In a typical research paper structure, after presenting the background, the introduction section follows. The introduction delves deeper into the specific objectives of the research and often outlines the structure or main points that the paper will cover.

Together, they create a cohesive starting point, ensuring readers are well-equipped to understand the subsequent sections of the research paper.

While the background of the study and the introduction section of the research manuscript may seem similar and sometimes even overlap, each serves a unique purpose in the research narrative.

Difference between background and introduction

A well-written background of the study and introduction are preliminary sections of a research paper and serve distinct purposes.

Here’s a detailed tabular comparison between the two of them.

What is the relevance of the background of the study?

It is necessary for you to provide your readers with the background of your research. Without this, readers may grapple with questions such as: Why was this specific research topic chosen? What led to this decision? Why is this study relevant? Is it worth their time?

Such uncertainties can deter them from fully engaging with your study, leading to the rejection of your research paper. Additionally, this can diminish its impact in the academic community, and reduce its potential for real-world application or policy influence .

To address these concerns and offer clarity, the background section plays a pivotal role in research papers.

The background of the study in research is important as it:

• Provides context: It offers readers a clear picture of the existing knowledge, helping them understand where the current research fits in.
• Highlights relevance: By detailing the reasons for the research, it underscores the study's significance and its potential impact.
• Guides the narrative: The background shapes the narrative flow of the paper, ensuring a logical progression from what's known to what the research aims to uncover.
• Enhances engagement: A well-crafted background piques the reader's interest, encouraging them to delve deeper into the research paper.
• Aids in comprehension: By setting the scenario, it aids readers in better grasping the research objectives, methodologies, and findings.

How to write the background of the study in a research paper?

The journey of presenting a compelling argument begins with the background study. This section holds the power to either captivate or lose the reader's interest.

An effectively written background not only provides context but also sets the tone for the entire research paper. It's the bridge that connects a broad topic to a specific research question, guiding readers through the logic behind the study.

But how does one craft a background of the study that resonates, informs, and engages?

Here, we’ll discuss how to write an impactful background study, ensuring your research stands out and captures the attention it deserves.

Identify the research problem

The first step is to start pinpointing the specific issue or gap you're addressing. This should be a significant and relevant problem in your field.

A well-defined problem is specific, relevant, and significant to your field. It should resonate with both experts and readers.

Here’s more on how to write an effective research problem .

Provide context

Here, you need to provide a broader perspective, illustrating how your research aligns with or contributes to the overarching context or the wider field of study. A comprehensive context is grounded in facts, offers multiple perspectives, and is relatable.

In addition to stating facts, you should weave a story that connects key concepts from the past, present, and potential future research. For instance, consider the following approach.

• Offer a brief history of the topic, highlighting major milestones or turning points that have shaped the current landscape.
• Discuss contemporary developments or current trends that provide relevant information to your research problem. This could include technological advancements, policy changes, or shifts in societal attitudes.
• Highlight the views of different stakeholders. For a topic like sustainable agriculture, this could mean discussing the perspectives of farmers, environmentalists, policymakers, and consumers.
• If relevant, compare and contrast global trends with local conditions and circumstances. This can offer readers a more holistic understanding of the topic.

Literature review

For this step, you’ll deep dive into the existing literature on the same topic. It's where you explore what scholars, researchers, and experts have already discovered or discussed about your topic.

Conducting a thorough literature review isn't just a recap of past works. To elevate its efficacy, it's essential to analyze the methods, outcomes, and intricacies of prior research work, demonstrating a thorough engagement with the existing body of knowledge.

• Instead of merely listing past research study, delve into their methodologies, findings, and limitations. Highlight groundbreaking studies and those that had contrasting results.
• Try to identify patterns. Look for recurring themes or trends in the literature. Are there common conclusions or contentious points?
• The next step would be to connect the dots. Show how different pieces of research relate to each other. This can help in understanding the evolution of thought on the topic.

By showcasing what's already known, you can better highlight the background of the study in research.

Highlight the research gap

This step involves identifying the unexplored areas or unanswered questions in the existing literature. Your research seeks to address these gaps, providing new insights or answers.

A clear research gap shows you've thoroughly engaged with existing literature and found an area that needs further exploration.

How can you efficiently highlight the research gap?

• Find the overlooked areas. Point out topics or angles that haven't been adequately addressed.
• Highlight questions that have emerged due to recent developments or changing circumstances.
• Identify areas where insights from other fields might be beneficial but haven't been explored yet.

State your objectives

Here, it’s all about laying out your game plan — What do you hope to achieve with your research? You need to mention a clear objective that’s specific, actionable, and directly tied to the research gap.

How to state your objectives?

• List the primary questions guiding your research.
• If applicable, state any hypotheses or predictions you aim to test.
• Specify what you hope to achieve, whether it's new insights, solutions, or methodologies.

Discuss the significance

This step describes your 'why'. Why is your research important? What broader implications does it have?

The significance of “why” should be both theoretical (adding to the existing literature) and practical (having real-world implications).

How do we effectively discuss the significance?

• Discuss how your research adds to the existing body of knowledge.
• Highlight how your findings could be applied in real-world scenarios, from policy changes to on-ground practices.
• Point out how your research could pave the way for further studies or open up new areas of exploration.

Summarize your points

A concise summary acts as a bridge, smoothly transitioning readers from the background to the main body of the paper. This step is a brief recap, ensuring that readers have grasped the foundational concepts.

How to summarize your study?

• Revisit the key points discussed, from the research problem to its significance.
• Prepare the reader for the subsequent sections, ensuring they understand the research's direction.

Include examples for better understanding

Research and come up with real-world or hypothetical examples to clarify complex concepts or to illustrate the practical applications of your research. Relevant examples make abstract ideas tangible, aiding comprehension.

How to include an effective example of the background of the study?

• Use past events or scenarios to explain concepts.
• Craft potential scenarios to demonstrate the implications of your findings.
• Use comparisons to simplify complex ideas, making them more relatable.

Crafting a compelling background of the study in research is about striking the right balance between providing essential context, showcasing your comprehensive understanding of the existing literature, and highlighting the unique value of your research .

While writing the background of the study, keep your readers at the forefront of your mind. Every piece of information, every example, and every objective should be geared toward helping them understand and appreciate your research.

How to avoid mistakes in the background of the study in research?

To write a well-crafted background of the study, you should be aware of the following potential research pitfalls .

• Stay away from ambiguity. Always assume that your reader might not be familiar with intricate details about your topic.
• Avoid discussing unrelated themes. Stick to what's directly relevant to your research problem.
• Ensure your background is well-organized. Information should flow logically, making it easy for readers to follow.
• While it's vital to provide context, avoid overwhelming the reader with excessive details that might not be directly relevant to your research problem.
• Ensure you've covered the most significant and relevant studies i` n your field. Overlooking key pieces of literature can make your background seem incomplete.
• Aim for a balanced presentation of facts, and avoid showing overt bias or presenting only one side of an argument.
• While academic paper often involves specialized terms, ensure they're adequately explained or use simpler alternatives when possible.
• Every claim or piece of information taken from existing literature should be appropriately cited. Failing to do so can lead to issues of plagiarism.
• Avoid making the background too lengthy. While thoroughness is appreciated, it should not come at the expense of losing the reader's interest. Maybe prefer to keep it to one-two paragraphs long.
• Especially in rapidly evolving fields, it's crucial to ensure that your literature review section is up-to-date and includes the latest research.

Example of an effective background of the study

Let's consider a topic: "The Impact of Online Learning on Student Performance." The ideal background of the study section for this topic would be as follows.

In the last decade, the rise of the internet has revolutionized many sectors, including education. Online learning platforms, once a supplementary educational tool, have now become a primary mode of instruction for many institutions worldwide. With the recent global events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a rapid shift from traditional classroom learning to online modes, making it imperative to understand its effects on student performance.

Previous studies have explored various facets of online learning, from its accessibility to its flexibility. However, there is a growing need to assess its direct impact on student outcomes. While some educators advocate for its benefits, citing the convenience and vast resources available, others express concerns about potential drawbacks, such as reduced student engagement and the challenges of self-discipline.

This research aims to delve deeper into this debate, evaluating the true impact of online learning on student performance.

Why is this example considered as an effective background section of a research paper?

This background section example effectively sets the context by highlighting the rise of online learning and its increased relevance due to recent global events. It references prior research on the topic, indicating a foundation built on existing knowledge.

By presenting both the potential advantages and concerns of online learning, it establishes a balanced view, leading to the clear purpose of the study: to evaluate the true impact of online learning on student performance.

As we've explored, writing an effective background of the study in research requires clarity, precision, and a keen understanding of both the broader landscape and the specific details of your topic.

From identifying the research problem, providing context, reviewing existing literature to highlighting research gaps and stating objectives, each step is pivotal in shaping the narrative of your research. And while there are best practices to follow, it's equally crucial to be aware of the pitfalls to avoid.

Remember, writing or refining the background of your study is essential to engage your readers, familiarize them with the research context, and set the ground for the insights your research project will unveil.

Drawing from all the important details, insights and guidance shared, you're now in a strong position to craft a background of the study that not only informs but also engages and resonates with your readers.

Now that you've a clear understanding of what the background of the study aims to achieve, the natural progression is to delve into the next crucial component — write an effective introduction section of a research paper. Read here .

Frequently Asked Questions

The background of the study should include a clear context for the research, references to relevant previous studies, identification of knowledge gaps, justification for the current research, a concise overview of the research problem or question, and an indication of the study's significance or potential impact.

The background of the study is written to provide readers with a clear understanding of the context, significance, and rationale behind the research. It offers a snapshot of existing knowledge on the topic, highlights the relevance of the study, and sets the stage for the research questions and objectives. It ensures that readers can grasp the importance of the research and its place within the broader field of study.

The background of the study is a section in a research paper that provides context, circumstances, and history leading to the research problem or topic being explored. It presents existing knowledge on the topic and outlines the reasons that spurred the current research, helping readers understand the research's foundation and its significance in the broader academic landscape.

The number of paragraphs in the background of the study can vary based on the complexity of the topic and the depth of the context required. Typically, it might range from 3 to 5 paragraphs, but in more detailed or complex research papers, it could be longer. The key is to ensure that all relevant information is presented clearly and concisely, without unnecessary repetition.

You might also like

Boosting Citations: A Comparative Analysis of Graphical Abstract vs. Video Abstract

The Impact of Visual Abstracts on Boosting Citations

Introducing SciSpace’s Citation Booster To Increase Research Visibility

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

What is the Background of a Study and How to Write It (Examples Included)

Have you ever found yourself struggling to write a background of the study for your research paper? You’re not alone. While the background of a study is an essential element of a research manuscript, it’s also one of the most challenging pieces to write. This is because it requires researchers to provide context and justification for their research, highlight the significance of their study, and situate their work within the existing body of knowledge in the field.  

Despite its challenges, the background of a study is crucial for any research paper. A compelling well-written background of the study can not only promote confidence in the overall quality of your research analysis and findings, but it can also determine whether readers will be interested in knowing more about the rest of the research study.  

In this article, we’ll explore the key elements of the background of a study and provide simple guidelines on how to write one effectively. Whether you’re a seasoned researcher or a graduate student working on your first research manuscript, this post will explain how to write a background for your study that is compelling and informative.  

Table of Contents

What is the background of a study ?  

Typically placed in the beginning of your research paper, the background of a study serves to convey the central argument of your study and its significance clearly and logically to an uninformed audience. The background of a study in a research paper helps to establish the research problem or gap in knowledge that the study aims to address, sets the stage for the research question and objectives, and highlights the significance of the research. The background of a study also includes a review of relevant literature, which helps researchers understand where the research study is placed in the current body of knowledge in a specific research discipline. It includes the reason for the study, the thesis statement, and a summary of the concept or problem being examined by the researcher. At times, the background of a study can may even examine whether your research supports or contradicts the results of earlier studies or existing knowledge on the subject.  

How is the background of a study different from the introduction?  

It is common to find early career researchers getting confused between the background of a study and the introduction in a research paper. Many incorrectly consider these two vital parts of a research paper the same and use these terms interchangeably. The confusion is understandable, however, it’s important to know that the introduction and the background of the study are distinct elements and serve very different purposes.   

• The basic different between the background of a study and the introduction is kind of information that is shared with the readers . While the introduction provides an overview of the specific research topic and touches upon key parts of the research paper, the background of the study presents a detailed discussion on the existing literature in the field, identifies research gaps, and how the research being done will add to current knowledge.  
• The introduction aims to capture the reader’s attention and interest and to provide a clear and concise summary of the research project. It typically begins with a general statement of the research problem and then narrows down to the specific research question. It may also include an overview of the research design, methodology, and scope. The background of the study outlines the historical, theoretical, and empirical background that led to the research question to highlight its importance. It typically offers an overview of the research field and may include a review of the literature to highlight gaps, controversies, or limitations in the existing knowledge and to justify the need for further research.  
• Both these sections appear at the beginning of a research paper. In some cases the introduction may come before the background of the study , although in most instances the latter is integrated into the introduction itself. The length of the introduction and background of a study can differ based on the journal guidelines and the complexity of a specific research study.  

Learn to convey study relevance, integrate literature reviews, and articulate research gaps in the background section. Get your All Access Pack now!    

To put it simply, the background of the study provides context for the study by explaining how your research fills a research gap in existing knowledge in the field and how it will add to it. The introduction section explains how the research fills this gap by stating the research topic, the objectives of the research and the findings – it sets the context for the rest of the paper.   

Where is the background of a study placed in a research paper?  

T he background of a study is typically placed in the introduction section of a research paper and is positioned after the statement of the problem. Researchers should try and present the background of the study in clear logical structure by dividing it into several sections, such as introduction, literature review, and research gap. This will make it easier for the reader to understand the research problem and the motivation for the study.  

So, when should you write the background of your study ? It’s recommended that researchers write this section after they have conducted a thorough literature review and identified the research problem, research question, and objectives. This way, they can effectively situate their study within the existing body of knowledge in the field and provide a clear rationale for their research.  

Creating an effective background of a study structure  

Given that the purpose of writing the background of your study is to make readers understand the reasons for conducting the research, it is important to create an outline and basic framework to work within. This will make it easier to write the background of the study and will ensure that it is comprehensive and compelling for readers.  

While creating a background of the study structure for research papers, it is crucial to have a clear understanding of the essential elements that should be included. Make sure you incorporate the following elements in the background of the study section :   

• Present a general overview of the research topic, its significance, and main aims; this may be like establishing the “importance of the topic” in the introduction.   
• Discuss the existing level of research done on the research topic or on related topics in the field to set context for your research. Be concise and mention only the relevant part of studies, ideally in chronological order to reflect the progress being made.  
• Highlight disputes in the field as well as claims made by scientists, organizations, or key policymakers that need to be investigated. This forms the foundation of your research methodology and solidifies the aims of your study.   
• Describe if and how the methods and techniques used in the research study are different from those used in previous research on similar topics.   

By including these critical elements in the background of your study , you can provide your readers with a comprehensive understanding of your research and its context.  

How to write a background of the study in research papers ?  

Now that you know the essential elements to include, it’s time to discuss how to write the background of the study in a concise and interesting way that engages audiences. The best way to do this is to build a clear narrative around the central theme of your research so that readers can grasp the concept and identify the gaps that the study will address. While the length and detail presented in the background of a study could vary depending on the complexity and novelty of the research topic, it is imperative to avoid wordiness. For research that is interdisciplinary, mentioning how the disciplines are connected and highlighting specific aspects to be studied helps readers understand the research better.   

While there are different styles of writing the background of a study , it always helps to have a clear plan in place. Let us look at how to write a background of study for research papers.    

• Identify the research problem: Begin the background by defining the research topic, and highlighting the main issue or question that the research aims to address. The research problem should be clear, specific, and relevant to the field of study. It should be framed using simple, easy to understand language and must be meaningful to intended audiences.  
• Craft an impactful statement of the research objectives: While writing the background of the study it is critical to highlight the research objectives and specific goals that the study aims to achieve. The research objectives should be closely related to the research problem and must be aligned with the overall purpose of the study.  
• Conduct a review of available literature: When writing the background of the research , provide a summary of relevant literature in the field and related research that has been conducted around the topic. Remember to record the search terms used and keep track of articles that you read so that sources can be cited accurately. Ensure that the literature you include is sourced from credible sources.  
• Address existing controversies and assumptions: It is a good idea to acknowledge and clarify existing claims and controversies regarding the subject of your research. For example, if your research topic involves an issue that has been widely discussed due to ethical or politically considerations, it is best to address them when writing the background of the study .  
• Present the relevance of the study: It is also important to provide a justification for the research. This is where the researcher explains why the study is important and what contributions it will make to existing knowledge on the subject. Highlighting key concepts and theories and explaining terms and ideas that may feel unfamiliar to readers makes the background of the study content more impactful.  
• Proofread to eliminate errors in language, structure, and data shared: Once the first draft is done, it is a good idea to read and re-read the draft a few times to weed out possible grammatical errors or inaccuracies in the information provided. In fact, experts suggest that it is helpful to have your supervisor or peers read and edit the background of the study . Their feedback can help ensure that even inadvertent errors are not overlooked.  

Get exclusive discounts on e xpert-led editing to publication support with Researcher.Life’s All Access Pack. Get yours now!  

How to avoid mistakes in writing the background of a study  

While figuring out how to write the background of a study , it is also important to know the most common mistakes authors make so you can steer clear of these in your research paper.   

• Write the background of a study in a formal academic tone while keeping the language clear and simple. Check for the excessive use of jargon and technical terminology that could confuse your readers.   
• Avoid including unrelated concepts that could distract from the subject of research. Instead, focus your discussion around the key aspects of your study by highlighting gaps in existing literature and knowledge and the novelty and necessity of your study.   
• Provide relevant, reliable evidence to support your claims and citing sources correctly; be sure to follow a consistent referencing format and style throughout the paper.   
• Ensure that the details presented in the background of the study are captured chronologically and organized into sub-sections for easy reading and comprehension.  
• Check the journal guidelines for the recommended length for this section so that you include all the important details in a concise manner. 

By keeping these tips in mind, you can create a clear, concise, and compelling background of the study for your research paper. Take this example of a background of the study on the impact of social media on mental health.  

Social media has become a ubiquitous aspect of modern life, with people of all ages, genders, and backgrounds using platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter to connect with others, share information, and stay updated on news and events. While social media has many potential benefits, including increased social connectivity and access to information, there is growing concern about its impact on mental health.   Research has suggested that social media use is associated with a range of negative mental health outcomes, including increased rates of anxiety, depression, and loneliness. This is thought to be due, in part, to the social comparison processes that occur on social media, whereby users compare their lives to the idealized versions of others that are presented online.   Despite these concerns, there is also evidence to suggest that social media can have positive effects on mental health. For example, social media can provide a sense of social support and community, which can be beneficial for individuals who are socially isolated or marginalized.   Given the potential benefits and risks of social media use for mental health, it is important to gain a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying these effects. This study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes, with a particular focus on the role of social comparison processes. By doing so, we hope to shed light on the potential risks and benefits of social media use for mental health, and to provide insights that can inform interventions and policies aimed at promoting healthy social media use.  

To conclude, the background of a study is a crucial component of a research manuscript and must be planned, structured, and presented in a way that attracts reader attention, compels them to read the manuscript, creates an impact on the minds of readers and sets the stage for future discussions. 

A well-written background of the study not only provides researchers with a clear direction on conducting their research, but it also enables readers to understand and appreciate the relevance of the research work being done.   

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on background of the study

Q: How does the background of the study help the reader understand the research better?

The background of the study plays a crucial role in helping readers understand the research better by providing the necessary context, framing the research problem, and establishing its significance. It helps readers:

• understand the larger framework, historical development, and existing knowledge related to a research topic
• identify gaps, limitations, or unresolved issues in the existing literature or knowledge
• outline potential contributions, practical implications, or theoretical advancements that the research aims to achieve
• and learn the specific context and limitations of the research project

Q: Does the background of the study need citation?

Yes, the background of the study in a research paper should include citations to support and acknowledge the sources of information and ideas presented. When you provide information or make statements in the background section that are based on previous studies, theories, or established knowledge, it is important to cite the relevant sources. This establishes credibility, enables verification, and demonstrates the depth of literature review you’ve done.

Q: What is the difference between background of the study and problem statement?

The background of the study provides context and establishes the research’s foundation while the problem statement clearly states the problem being addressed and the research questions or objectives.

Editage All Access is a subscription-based platform that unifies the best AI tools and services designed to speed up, simplify, and streamline every step of a researcher’s journey. The Editage All Access Pack is a one-of-a-kind subscription that unlocks full access to an AI writing assistant, literature recommender, journal finder, scientific illustration tool, and exclusive discounts on professional publication services from Editage.  

Based on 22+ years of experience in academia, Editage All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $14 a month !    

Related Posts

What are the Best Research Funding Sources

Inductive vs. Deductive Research Approach

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

What is the Background of a Study and How Should it be Written?

• 3 minute read
• 985.2K views

Table of Contents

The background of a study is one of the most important components of a research paper. The quality of the background determines whether the reader will be interested in the rest of the study. Thus, to ensure that the audience is invested in reading the entire research paper, it is important to write an appealing and effective background. So, what constitutes the background of a study, and how must it be written?

What is the background of a study?

The background of a study is the first section of the paper and establishes the context underlying the research. It contains the rationale, the key problem statement, and a brief overview of research questions that are addressed in the rest of the paper. The background forms the crux of the study because it introduces an unaware audience to the research and its importance in a clear and logical manner. At times, the background may even explore whether the study builds on or refutes findings from previous studies. Any relevant information that the readers need to know before delving into the paper should be made available to them in the background.

How is a background different from the introduction?

The introduction of your research paper is presented before the background. Let’s find out what factors differentiate the background from the introduction.

• The introduction only contains preliminary data about the research topic and does not state the purpose of the study. On the contrary, the background clarifies the importance of the study in detail.
• The introduction provides an overview of the research topic from a broader perspective, while the background provides a detailed understanding of the topic.
• The introduction should end with the mention of the research questions, aims, and objectives of the study. In contrast, the background follows no such format and only provides essential context to the study.

How should one write the background of a research paper?

The length and detail presented in the background varies for different research papers, depending on the complexity and novelty of the research topic. At times, a simple background suffices, even if the study is complex. Before writing and adding details in the background, take a note of these additional points:

• Start with a strong beginning: Begin the background by defining the research topic and then identify the target audience.
• Cover key components: Explain all theories, concepts, terms, and ideas that may feel unfamiliar to the target audience thoroughly.
• Take note of important prerequisites: Go through the relevant literature in detail. Take notes while reading and cite the sources.
• Maintain a balance: Make sure that the background is focused on important details, but also appeals to a broader audience.
• Include historical data: Current issues largely originate from historical events or findings. If the research borrows information from a historical context, add relevant data in the background.
• Explain novelty: If the research study or methodology is unique or novel, provide an explanation that helps to understand the research better.
• Increase engagement: To make the background engaging, build a story around the central theme of the research

Avoid these mistakes while writing the background:

• Ambiguity: Don’t be ambiguous. While writing, assume that the reader does not understand any intricate detail about your research.
• Unrelated themes: Steer clear from topics that are not related to the key aspects of your research topic.
• Poor organization: Do not place information without a structure. Make sure that the background reads in a chronological manner and organize the sub-sections so that it flows well.

Writing the background for a research paper should not be a daunting task. But directions to go about it can always help. At Elsevier Author Services we provide essential insights on how to write a high quality, appealing, and logically structured paper for publication, beginning with a robust background. For further queries, contact our experts now!

How to Use Tables and Figures effectively in Research Papers

The Top 5 Qualities of Every Good Researcher

You may also like.

Submission 101: What format should be used for academic papers?

Page-Turner Articles are More Than Just Good Arguments: Be Mindful of Tone and Structure!

A Must-see for Researchers! How to Ensure Inclusivity in Your Scientific Writing

Make Hook, Line, and Sinker: The Art of Crafting Engaging Introductions

Can Describing Study Limitations Improve the Quality of Your Paper?

A Guide to Crafting Shorter, Impactful Sentences in Academic Writing

6 Steps to Write an Excellent Discussion in Your Manuscript

How to Write Clear and Crisp Civil Engineering Papers? Here are 5 Key Tips to Consider

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

Mastering the Basics of Writing Background of the Study

Table of contents

• 1 Purpose of the Research Paper Background
• 2.1 Starting with Preliminary Research for Broad Context
• 2.2.1 Chronological
• 2.2.2 Thematical
• 2.2.3 Methodological
• 2.3 Link to Your Research Question
• 2.4 Avoid Plagiarism and Ensuring Proper Citation
• 2.5 Using Clear, Academic Language
• 2.6 Don’t Overload with Excessive Details
• 2.7 Review Relevant Literature
• 2.8 Identify Gaps or Contradiction
• 2.9 Keep Your Target Audience in Mind
• 2.10 Stay Objective
• 2.11 Mention Methodologies, Scope, and Limitations
• 3 Bottom Line
• 4.1 How long should background information be?
• 4.2 What is the difference between background of the study and problem statement?
• 4.3 Why is background research important to the research process?

Writing a research paper can be a juggling act, especially for those with little experience. There are so many elements to consider, and you need to cover all the bases if you want your paper to elevate your academic standings.

The background in research paper is where you lay out the topic, the gaps in the literature that this study seeks to fill, and your study’s general and unique contributions. Thus, developing the research paper background section is crucial to give a general overview of the study.

That’s why we’ve decided to give you some pointers, including:

• The purpose of the background of the study;
• Collecting and organizing background information;
• Linking the background to your present study;
• Using proper citation and wording, retaining objectivity.

Purpose of the Research Paper Background

When you write a research background of the study, you explain the rationale and foundation for doing the research. It’s quite different from the research paper introduction section or a literature review. Here, you explore the history, nature, and scope of your research problem. Once you determine how previous studies have covered the problem, you can pinpoint the remaining gaps, discuss their importance, and how your study can fill them.

Essentially, it’s the foundation of your entire study. It determines the structure of your paper, highlights a well-defined research problem, and helps the reader determine your research’s unique and general contributions. Besides serving as a clear roadmap, a well-written background of the study must help the reader understand the value and purpose of your research.

How to Write a Background of the Study

Any researcher needs to understand the steps that go into writing an effective background of the study. Since you don’t have clarity in the early stages, you need to collect more information via preliminary research. Then, you should organize your information in a structure that can seamlessly lead up to your research paper in a way that shows the significance of your study.

So, if you’re wondering what is background of the study in research and how to compose it, here are some tips.

Starting with Preliminary Research for Broad Context

Before delving into writing the background of a research paper, you need a comprehensive review of the most important articles and reports on the subject in a literature review to acquire some introductory background information. Basically, you need to collect as much research data as possible.

To start with the background of an article, look for prior studies that address your issue statement in detail. Refer to reputable resources, such as academic databases and publications, and use their bibliography and literature review section to find new sources. This lets you discover new authors treating your research topic.

Finally, keep note of each piece of material you find if you decide to include it in your thesis. It helps you avoid or at least reduce plagiarism in research when you integrate those sources into your work.

Organize the Information

Now it’s time to discuss a vital writing tip: background information categorization. Most researchers use one of the three approaches: chronological, thematic, or methodological.

Chronological

Here, the study background and contextual information are organized in a chronological structure. As such, the reader can understand how you arrived at your conclusions about the development and the next steps you want to take in your research.

It can also be based on a trend. This method should be used only if you’re sure that the trends build logically upon one another and trace back in time. Overall, you must:

• Highlight only the most crucial background information in research
• Only use facts that can be objectively confirmed
• Find gaps in previous studies
• Give your opinion

When the background of a research paper is thematic, it is structured around the topics comprising your research problem. Start by identifying the main and secondary themes. Then, create hierarchies based on their importance or how they’re related to each other.

In other words, it requires structuring the basic background information into paragraphs that highlight themes and identify patterns in the research topic.

Separate each paragraph with a topic sentence, and ensure that each sentence effectively synthesizes background information from many sources. You can also use the famous inverted pyramid method to go from a general overview to the specifics. Overall, this method gives an overview of all topics and themes of your research subject.

Methodological

This approach for writing background of study in research focuses on the methodology in research paper rather than specific topics or the chronological order. It draws attention to the differences and similarities across research methods and offers alternative insights into the subject.

If you cover a topic where there are many relevant models or theories, it is helpful to highlight the most popular ones. In this manner, you can get a basic understanding of the most common perspectives on your subject by categorizing the paper according to the theoretical framework.

Link to Your Research Question

Be specific about the knowledge gap your research study intends to fill and show how this inspired your research questions or theories. This will help place your study in the context of the larger academic discussion while also highlighting its unique contribution.

Avoid talking about irrelevant topics, and focus on what is most important regarding your subject. In other words, every step or theme you discuss should disclose the problems and explain why you deem it important to solve them.

Avoid Plagiarism and Ensuring Proper Citation

Plagiarism is one of the main reasons for writers to seek professional help with research paper writing. To avoid accusations of plagiarism, it is important to properly credit the ideas, models, and conclusions of others. Accurately citing your sources helps maintain academic honesty and gives readers easy access to further basic research papers.

The citation style you use may be determined by the guidelines of the publication or the institution you’re affiliated with. There are plenty of online resources, including guidelines and generators, that help you adhere to the given requirements.

Using Clear, Academic Language

An effective background should clearly highlight the research problem and how you plan to address it. This can only be achieved by using the correct terminology while keeping the text clear and understandable. Thus, use technical phrases with caution and provide essential context and definitions for any unfamiliar term.

Make sure that even readers who aren’t familiar with your field can understand the rationale and hypothesis in study papers. Your study will be more accessible and appealing if you do this.

Don’t Overload with Excessive Details

Keep your writing simple and to the point. Although providing sufficient background information helps simplify your study, you should avoid using too many words. Going too deeply into the evidence that inspired your research problem might just confuse your readers.

In other words, it is not necessary to describe every step or every point of relevant research studies. In the background section, only discuss the important details and results that led you to formulate your research question.

Review Relevant Literature

Only by knowing and understanding what has been said and discovered before you can hope to give your contribution. When reviewing relevant research literature, you should provide a concise summary of previous studies and other works that have laid the groundwork for your own. Ensuring the material you use comes from credible sources in research is key. Also, remember to explore all nuances that could help with your research topic.

Identify Gaps or Contradiction

Normally, research objectives are based on the gaps and contradictions found in analyzing the literature review and previous research. Failing to do so might create a redundant or meaningless paper. That’s why, in the background section, you must clarify the reasoning behind how you unveiled the problems you seek to solve. You should also detail the methods to test and quantify your study hypothesis and how your findings will add to what’s already known.

Note that you’re also likely to leave a research gap or have some contradictions in your study. Don’t forget to recognize and inform your readers about them. It shows professionalism and enhances your credibility.

Keep Your Target Audience in Mind

It’s crucial to tailor the background of the study to your audience. Whether for an assignment or an academic publishing, you must write in a way that makes your message come across. So, if you know that the paper is going to be read by experts in the field, it’s ok to use a more technical and complex vocabulary.

Conversely, if the audience is more general, consider their scholarly background, avoid jargon, provide contextual information and explain concepts in a simple way.

Stay Objective

Retaining objectivity is one of the defining key components for all academic essay writers . However, having a personal interest or predisposition for a certain point of view might make it difficult to avoid bias and retain impartiality. Using a wide range of sources that address various topics, viewpoints, and research methods is crucial for maintaining objectivity both in the background and literature review section.

Mention Methodologies, Scope, and Limitations

Scientific research demands appropriate and proven methodologies. That’s why it’s important to clarify which ones you used, why and how they fit in the context of your research. The explanation should include the methodology for data collection and analysis, models, and the tools used.

The reasoning must be linked with the scope of your research. This must be clearly stated and intertwined with methods and context.

Finally, identify and discuss the shortcomings of your study background. It demonstrates that you’ve given careful thought to the study’s limits and have a firm grasp of the subject at hand. Researchers and reviewers will respect you more if you are upfront about the limits of your research methodology and go into depth about them rather than pretending they don’t exist.

Bottom Line

The first stage in writing a great research paper is to provide an intriguing background for the study. Its purpose is to explain the bigger picture, stress the importance of your study, and lay out the key issues you chose to study. Don’t forget that the background section of research paper writing isn’t a literature review. It discusses the reasons behind your study, points out any gaps in existing works, and explains how you would help fill those gaps.

All this should have taught you how to write a background for a research paper. But don’t forget that knowing the theory is only the first step. Whenever you feel stuck, don’t be shy to ask for guidance and rely on the help of experts.

How long should background information be?

What is the difference between background of the study and problem statement, why is background research important to the research process, readers also enjoyed.

WHY WAIT? PLACE AN ORDER RIGHT NOW!

Just fill out the form, press the button, and have no worries!

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy.

• Privacy Policy

Home » Significance of the Study – Examples and Writing Guide

Significance of the Study – Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Significance of the Study

Definition:

Significance of the study in research refers to the potential importance, relevance, or impact of the research findings. It outlines how the research contributes to the existing body of knowledge, what gaps it fills, or what new understanding it brings to a particular field of study.

In general, the significance of a study can be assessed based on several factors, including:

• Originality : The extent to which the study advances existing knowledge or introduces new ideas and perspectives.
• Practical relevance: The potential implications of the study for real-world situations, such as improving policy or practice.
• Theoretical contribution: The extent to which the study provides new insights or perspectives on theoretical concepts or frameworks.
• Methodological rigor : The extent to which the study employs appropriate and robust methods and techniques to generate reliable and valid data.
• Social or cultural impact : The potential impact of the study on society, culture, or public perception of a particular issue.

Types of Significance of the Study

The significance of the Study can be divided into the following types:

Theoretical Significance

Theoretical significance refers to the contribution that a study makes to the existing body of theories in a specific field. This could be by confirming, refuting, or adding nuance to a currently accepted theory, or by proposing an entirely new theory.

Practical Significance

Practical significance refers to the direct applicability and usefulness of the research findings in real-world contexts. Studies with practical significance often address real-life problems and offer potential solutions or strategies. For example, a study in the field of public health might identify a new intervention that significantly reduces the spread of a certain disease.

Significance for Future Research

This pertains to the potential of a study to inspire further research. A study might open up new areas of investigation, provide new research methodologies, or propose new hypotheses that need to be tested.

How to Write Significance of the Study

Here’s a guide to writing an effective “Significance of the Study” section in research paper, thesis, or dissertation:

• Background : Begin by giving some context about your study. This could include a brief introduction to your subject area, the current state of research in the field, and the specific problem or question your study addresses.
• Identify the Gap : Demonstrate that there’s a gap in the existing literature or knowledge that needs to be filled, which is where your study comes in. The gap could be a lack of research on a particular topic, differing results in existing studies, or a new problem that has arisen and hasn’t yet been studied.
• State the Purpose of Your Study : Clearly state the main objective of your research. You may want to state the purpose as a solution to the problem or gap you’ve previously identified.
• Contributes to the existing body of knowledge.
• Addresses a significant research gap.
• Offers a new or better solution to a problem.
• Impacts policy or practice.
• Leads to improvements in a particular field or sector.
• Identify Beneficiaries : Identify who will benefit from your study. This could include other researchers, practitioners in your field, policy-makers, communities, businesses, or others. Explain how your findings could be used and by whom.
• Future Implications : Discuss the implications of your study for future research. This could involve questions that are left open, new questions that have been raised, or potential future methodologies suggested by your study.

Significance of the Study in Research Paper

The Significance of the Study in a research paper refers to the importance or relevance of the research topic being investigated. It answers the question “Why is this research important?” and highlights the potential contributions and impacts of the study.

The significance of the study can be presented in the introduction or background section of a research paper. It typically includes the following components:

• Importance of the research problem: This describes why the research problem is worth investigating and how it relates to existing knowledge and theories.
• Potential benefits and implications: This explains the potential contributions and impacts of the research on theory, practice, policy, or society.
• Originality and novelty: This highlights how the research adds new insights, approaches, or methods to the existing body of knowledge.
• Scope and limitations: This outlines the boundaries and constraints of the research and clarifies what the study will and will not address.

Suppose a researcher is conducting a study on the “Effects of social media use on the mental health of adolescents”.

The significance of the study may be:

“The present study is significant because it addresses a pressing public health issue of the negative impact of social media use on adolescent mental health. Given the widespread use of social media among this age group, understanding the effects of social media on mental health is critical for developing effective prevention and intervention strategies. This study will contribute to the existing literature by examining the moderating factors that may affect the relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes. It will also shed light on the potential benefits and risks of social media use for adolescents and inform the development of evidence-based guidelines for promoting healthy social media use among this population. The limitations of this study include the use of self-reported measures and the cross-sectional design, which precludes causal inference.”

Significance of the Study In Thesis

The significance of the study in a thesis refers to the importance or relevance of the research topic and the potential impact of the study on the field of study or society as a whole. It explains why the research is worth doing and what contribution it will make to existing knowledge.

For example, the significance of a thesis on “Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare” could be:

• With the increasing availability of healthcare data and the development of advanced machine learning algorithms, AI has the potential to revolutionize the healthcare industry by improving diagnosis, treatment, and patient outcomes. Therefore, this thesis can contribute to the understanding of how AI can be applied in healthcare and how it can benefit patients and healthcare providers.
• AI in healthcare also raises ethical and social issues, such as privacy concerns, bias in algorithms, and the impact on healthcare jobs. By exploring these issues in the thesis, it can provide insights into the potential risks and benefits of AI in healthcare and inform policy decisions.
• Finally, the thesis can also advance the field of computer science by developing new AI algorithms or techniques that can be applied to healthcare data, which can have broader applications in other industries or fields of research.

Significance of the Study in Research Proposal

The significance of a study in a research proposal refers to the importance or relevance of the research question, problem, or objective that the study aims to address. It explains why the research is valuable, relevant, and important to the academic or scientific community, policymakers, or society at large. A strong statement of significance can help to persuade the reviewers or funders of the research proposal that the study is worth funding and conducting.

Here is an example of a significance statement in a research proposal:

Title : The Effects of Gamification on Learning Programming: A Comparative Study

Significance Statement:

This proposed study aims to investigate the effects of gamification on learning programming. With the increasing demand for computer science professionals, programming has become a fundamental skill in the computer field. However, learning programming can be challenging, and students may struggle with motivation and engagement. Gamification has emerged as a promising approach to improve students’ engagement and motivation in learning, but its effects on programming education are not yet fully understood. This study is significant because it can provide valuable insights into the potential benefits of gamification in programming education and inform the development of effective teaching strategies to enhance students’ learning outcomes and interest in programming.

Examples of Significance of the Study

Here are some examples of the significance of a study that indicates how you can write this into your research paper according to your research topic:

Research on an Improved Water Filtration System : This study has the potential to impact millions of people living in water-scarce regions or those with limited access to clean water. A more efficient and affordable water filtration system can reduce water-borne diseases and improve the overall health of communities, enabling them to lead healthier, more productive lives.

Study on the Impact of Remote Work on Employee Productivity : Given the shift towards remote work due to recent events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, this study is of considerable significance. Findings could help organizations better structure their remote work policies and offer insights on how to maximize employee productivity, wellbeing, and job satisfaction.

Investigation into the Use of Solar Power in Developing Countries : With the world increasingly moving towards renewable energy, this study could provide important data on the feasibility and benefits of implementing solar power solutions in developing countries. This could potentially stimulate economic growth, reduce reliance on non-renewable resources, and contribute to global efforts to combat climate change.

Research on New Learning Strategies in Special Education : This study has the potential to greatly impact the field of special education. By understanding the effectiveness of new learning strategies, educators can improve their curriculum to provide better support for students with learning disabilities, fostering their academic growth and social development.

Examination of Mental Health Support in the Workplace : This study could highlight the impact of mental health initiatives on employee wellbeing and productivity. It could influence organizational policies across industries, promoting the implementation of mental health programs in the workplace, ultimately leading to healthier work environments.

Evaluation of a New Cancer Treatment Method : The significance of this study could be lifesaving. The research could lead to the development of more effective cancer treatments, increasing the survival rate and quality of life for patients worldwide.

When to Write Significance of the Study

The Significance of the Study section is an integral part of a research proposal or a thesis. This section is typically written after the introduction and the literature review. In the research process, the structure typically follows this order:

• Title – The name of your research.
• Abstract – A brief summary of the entire research.
• Introduction – A presentation of the problem your research aims to solve.
• Literature Review – A review of existing research on the topic to establish what is already known and where gaps exist.
• Significance of the Study – An explanation of why the research matters and its potential impact.

In the Significance of the Study section, you will discuss why your study is important, who it benefits, and how it adds to existing knowledge or practice in your field. This section is your opportunity to convince readers, and potentially funders or supervisors, that your research is valuable and worth undertaking.

Advantages of Significance of the Study

The Significance of the Study section in a research paper has multiple advantages:

• Establishes Relevance: This section helps to articulate the importance of your research to your field of study, as well as the wider society, by explicitly stating its relevance. This makes it easier for other researchers, funders, and policymakers to understand why your work is necessary and worth supporting.
• Guides the Research: Writing the significance can help you refine your research questions and objectives. This happens as you critically think about why your research is important and how it contributes to your field.
• Attracts Funding: If you are seeking funding or support for your research, having a well-written significance of the study section can be key. It helps to convince potential funders of the value of your work.
• Opens up Further Research: By stating the significance of the study, you’re also indicating what further research could be carried out in the future, based on your work. This helps to pave the way for future studies and demonstrates that your research is a valuable addition to the field.
• Provides Practical Applications: The significance of the study section often outlines how the research can be applied in real-world situations. This can be particularly important in applied sciences, where the practical implications of research are crucial.
• Enhances Understanding: This section can help readers understand how your study fits into the broader context of your field, adding value to the existing literature and contributing new knowledge or insights.

Limitations of Significance of the Study

The Significance of the Study section plays an essential role in any research. However, it is not without potential limitations. Here are some that you should be aware of:

• Subjectivity: The importance and implications of a study can be subjective and may vary from person to person. What one researcher considers significant might be seen as less critical by others. The assessment of significance often depends on personal judgement, biases, and perspectives.
• Predictability of Impact: While you can outline the potential implications of your research in the Significance of the Study section, the actual impact can be unpredictable. Research doesn’t always yield the expected results or have the predicted impact on the field or society.
• Difficulty in Measuring: The significance of a study is often qualitative and can be challenging to measure or quantify. You can explain how you think your research will contribute to your field or society, but measuring these outcomes can be complex.
• Possibility of Overstatement: Researchers may feel pressured to amplify the potential significance of their study to attract funding or interest. This can lead to overstating the potential benefits or implications, which can harm the credibility of the study if these results are not achieved.
• Overshadowing of Limitations: Sometimes, the significance of the study may overshadow the limitations of the research. It is important to balance the potential significance with a thorough discussion of the study’s limitations.
• Dependence on Successful Implementation: The significance of the study relies on the successful implementation of the research. If the research process has flaws or unexpected issues arise, the anticipated significance might not be realized.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Findings – Types Examples and Writing...

Research Recommendations – Examples and Writing...

How to Publish a Research Paper – Step by Step...

Thesis Format – Templates and Samples

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

Background of The Study – Examples and Writing...

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• Background Information
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

Background information identifies and describes the history and nature of a well-defined research problem with reference to contextualizing existing literature. The background information should indicate the root of the problem being studied, appropriate context of the problem in relation to theory, research, and/or practice , its scope, and the extent to which previous studies have successfully investigated the problem, noting, in particular, where gaps exist that your study attempts to address. Background information does not replace the literature review section of a research paper; it is intended to place the research problem within a specific context and an established plan for its solution.

Fitterling, Lori. Researching and Writing an Effective Background Section of a Research Paper. Kansas City University of Medicine & Biosciences; Creating a Research Paper: How to Write the Background to a Study. DurousseauElectricalInstitute.com; Background Information: Definition of Background Information. Literary Devices Definition and Examples of Literary Terms.

Importance of Having Enough Background Information

Background information expands upon the key points stated in the beginning of your introduction but is not intended to be the main focus of the paper. It generally supports the question, what is the most important information the reader needs to understand before continuing to read the paper? Sufficient background information helps the reader determine if you have a basic understanding of the research problem being investigated and promotes confidence in the overall quality of your analysis and findings. This information provides the reader with the essential context needed to conceptualize the research problem and its significance before moving on to a more thorough analysis of prior research.

Forms of contextualization included in background information can include describing one or more of the following:

• Cultural -- placed within the learned behavior of a specific group or groups of people.
• Economic -- of or relating to systems of production and management of material wealth and/or business activities.
• Gender -- located within the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with being self-identified as male, female, or other form of  gender expression.
• Historical -- the time in which something takes place or was created and how the condition of time influences how you interpret it.
• Interdisciplinary -- explanation of theories, concepts, ideas, or methodologies borrowed from other disciplines applied to the research problem rooted in a discipline other than the discipline where your paper resides.
• Philosophical -- clarification of the essential nature of being or of phenomena as it relates to the research problem.
• Physical/Spatial -- reflects the meaning of space around something and how that influences how it is understood.
• Political -- concerns the environment in which something is produced indicating it's public purpose or agenda.
• Social -- the environment of people that surrounds something's creation or intended audience, reflecting how the people associated with something use and interpret it.
• Temporal -- reflects issues or events of, relating to, or limited by time. Concerns past, present, or future contextualization and not just a historical past.

Background information can also include summaries of important research studies . This can be a particularly important element of providing background information if an innovative or groundbreaking study about the research problem laid a foundation for further research or there was a key study that is essential to understanding your arguments. The priority is to summarize for the reader what is known about the research problem before you conduct the analysis of prior research. This is accomplished with a general summary of the foundational research literature [with citations] that document findings that inform your study's overall aims and objectives.

NOTE: Research studies cited as part of the background information of your introduction should not include very specific, lengthy explanations. This should be discussed in greater detail in your literature review section. If you find a study requiring lengthy explanation, consider moving it to the literature review section.

ANOTHER NOTE: In some cases, your paper's introduction only needs to introduce the research problem, explain its significance, and then describe a road map for how you are going to address the problem; the background information basically forms the introduction part of your literature review. That said, while providing background information is not required, including it in the introduction is a way to highlight important contextual information that could otherwise be hidden or overlooked by the reader if placed in the literature review section.

YET ANOTHER NOTE: In some research studies, the background information is described in a separate section after the introduction and before the literature review. This is most often done if the topic is especially complex or requires a lot of context in order to fully grasp the significance of the research problem. Most college-level research papers do not require this unless required by your professor. However, if you find yourself needing to write more than a couple of pages [double-spaced lines] to provide the background information, it can be written as a separate section to ensure the introduction is not too lengthy.

Background of the Problem Section: What do you Need to Consider? Anonymous. Harvard University; Hopkins, Will G. How to Write a Research Paper. SPORTSCIENCE, Perspectives/Research Resources. Department of Physiology and School of Physical Education, University of Otago, 1999; Green, L. H. How to Write the Background/Introduction Section. Physics 499 Powerpoint slides. University of Illinois; Pyrczak, Fred. Writing Empirical Research Reports: A Basic Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioral Sciences . 8th edition. Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing, 2014; Stevens, Kathleen C. “Can We Improve Reading by Teaching Background Information?.” Journal of Reading 25 (January 1982): 326-329; Woodall, W. Gill. Writing the Background and Significance Section. Senior Research Scientist and Professor of Communication. Center on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, and Addictions. University of New Mexico.

Structure and Writing Style

Providing background information in the introduction of a research paper serves as a bridge that links the reader to the research problem . Precisely how long and in-depth this bridge should be is largely dependent upon how much information you think the reader will need to know in order to fully understand the problem being discussed and to appreciate why the issues you are investigating are important.

From another perspective, the length and detail of background information also depends on the degree to which you need to demonstrate to your professor how much you understand the research problem. Keep this in mind because providing pertinent background information can be an effective way to demonstrate that you have a clear grasp of key issues, debates, and concepts related to your overall study.

The structure and writing style of your background information can vary depending upon the complexity of your research and/or the nature of the assignment. However, in most cases it should be limited to only one to two paragraphs in your introduction.

Given this, here are some questions to consider while writing this part of your introduction :

• Are there concepts, terms, theories, or ideas that may be unfamiliar to the reader and, thus, require additional explanation?
• Are there historical elements that need to be explored in order to provide needed context, to highlight specific people, issues, or events, or to lay a foundation for understanding the emergence of a current issue or event?
• Are there theories, concepts, or ideas borrowed from other disciplines or academic traditions that may be unfamiliar to the reader and therefore require further explanation?
• Is there a key study or small set of studies that set the stage for understanding the topic and frames why it is important to conduct further research on the topic?
• Y our study uses a method of analysis never applied before;
• Your study investigates a very esoteric or complex research problem;
• Your study introduces new or unique variables that need to be taken into account ; or,
• Your study relies upon analyzing unique texts or documents, such as, archival materials or primary documents like diaries or personal letters that do not represent the established body of source literature on the topic?

Almost all introductions to a research problem require some contextualizing, but the scope and breadth of background information varies depending on your assumption about the reader's level of prior knowledge . However, despite this assessment, background information should be brief and succinct and sets the stage for the elaboration of critical points or in-depth discussion of key issues in the literature review section of your paper.

Writing Tip

Background Information vs. the Literature Review

Incorporating background information into the introduction is intended to provide the reader with critical information about the topic being studied, such as, highlighting and expanding upon foundational studies conducted in the past, describing important historical events that inform why and in what ways the research problem exists, defining key components of your study [concepts, people, places, phenomena] and/or placing the research problem within a particular context. Although introductory background information can often blend into the literature review portion of the paper, essential background information should not be considered a substitute for a comprehensive review and synthesis of relevant research literature.

Hart, Cris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998; Pyrczak, Fred. Writing Empirical Research Reports: A Basic Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioral Sciences . 8th edition. Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing, 2014.

• << Previous: The C.A.R.S. Model
• Next: The Research Problem/Question >>
• Last Updated: Aug 13, 2024 12:57 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

What Is Background in a Research Paper?

So you have carefully written your research paper  and probably ran it through your colleagues ten to fifteen times. While there are many elements to a good research article, one of the most important elements for your readers is the background of your study.

What is Background of the Study in Research

The background of your study will provide context to the information discussed throughout the research paper . Background information may include both important and relevant studies. This is particularly important if a study either supports or refutes your thesis.

Why is Background of the Study Necessary in Research?

The background of the study discusses your problem statement, rationale, and research questions. It links  introduction to your research topic  and ensures a logical flow of ideas.  Thus, it helps readers understand your reasons for conducting the study.

Providing Background Information

The reader should be able to understand your topic and its importance. The length and detail of your background also depend on the degree to which you need to demonstrate your understanding of the topic. Paying close attention to the following questions will help you in writing background information:

• Are there any theories, concepts, terms, and ideas that may be unfamiliar to the target audience and will require you to provide any additional explanation?
• Any historical data that need to be shared in order to provide context on why the current issue emerged?
• Are there any concepts that may have been borrowed from other disciplines that may be unfamiliar to the reader and need an explanation?

Related: Ready with the background and searching for more information on journal ranking? Check this infographic on the SCImago Journal Rank today!

Is the research study unique for which additional explanation is needed? For instance, you may have used a completely new method

How to Write a Background of the Study

The structure of a background study in a research paper generally follows a logical sequence to provide context, justification, and an understanding of the research problem. It includes an introduction, general background, literature review , rationale , objectives, scope and limitations , significance of the study and the research hypothesis . Following the structure can provide a comprehensive and well-organized background for your research.

Here are the steps to effectively write a background of the study.

1. Identify Your Audience:

Determine the level of expertise of your target audience. Tailor the depth and complexity of your background information accordingly.

2. Understand the Research Problem:

Define the research problem or question your study aims to address. Identify the significance of the problem within the broader context of the field.

3. Review Existing Literature:

Conduct a thorough literature review to understand what is already known in the area. Summarize key findings, theories, and concepts relevant to your research.

4. Include Historical Data:

Integrate historical data if relevant to the research, as current issues often trace back to historical events.

5. Identify Controversies and Gaps:

Note any controversies or debates within the existing literature. Identify gaps , limitations, or unanswered questions that your research can address.

6. Select Key Components:

Choose the most critical elements to include in the background based on their relevance to your research problem. Prioritize information that helps build a strong foundation for your study.

7. Craft a Logical Flow:

Organize the background information in a logical sequence. Start with general context, move to specific theories and concepts, and then focus on the specific problem.

8. Highlight the Novelty of Your Research:

Clearly explain the unique aspects or contributions of your study. Emphasize why your research is different from or builds upon existing work.

Here are some extra tips to increase the quality of your research background:

Example of a Research Background

Here is an example of a research background to help you understand better.

The above hypothetical example provides a research background, addresses the gap and highlights the potential outcome of the study; thereby aiding a better understanding of the proposed research.

What Makes the Introduction Different from the Background?

Your introduction is different from your background in a number of ways.

• The introduction contains preliminary data about your topic that  the reader will most likely read , whereas the background clarifies the importance of the paper.
• The background of your study discusses in depth about the topic, whereas the introduction only gives an overview.
• The introduction should end with your research questions, aims, and objectives, whereas your background should not (except in some cases where your background is integrated into your introduction). For instance, the C.A.R.S. ( Creating a Research Space ) model, created by John Swales is based on his analysis of journal articles. This model attempts to explain and describe the organizational pattern of writing the introduction in social sciences.

Points to Note

Your background should begin with defining a topic and audience. It is important that you identify which topic you need to review and what your audience already knows about the topic. You should proceed by searching and researching the relevant literature. In this case, it is advisable to keep track of the search terms you used and the articles that you downloaded. It is helpful to use one of the research paper management systems such as Papers, Mendeley, Evernote, or Sente. Next, it is helpful to take notes while reading. Be careful when copying quotes verbatim and make sure to put them in quotation marks and cite the sources. In addition, you should keep your background focused but balanced enough so that it is relevant to a broader audience. Aside from these, your background should be critical, consistent, and logically structured.

Writing the background of your study should not be an overly daunting task. Many guides that can help you organize your thoughts as you write the background. The background of the study is the key to introduce your audience to your research topic and should be done with strong knowledge and thoughtful writing.

The background of a research paper typically ranges from one to two paragraphs, summarizing the relevant literature and context of the study. It should be concise, providing enough information to contextualize the research problem and justify the need for the study. Journal instructions about any word count limits should be kept in mind while deciding on the length of the final content.

The background of a research paper provides the context and relevant literature to understand the research problem, while the introduction also introduces the specific research topic, states the research objectives, and outlines the scope of the study. The background focuses on the broader context, whereas the introduction focuses on the specific research project and its objectives.

When writing the background for a study, start by providing a brief overview of the research topic and its significance in the field. Then, highlight the gaps in existing knowledge or unresolved issues that the study aims to address. Finally, summarize the key findings from relevant literature to establish the context and rationale for conducting the research, emphasizing the need and importance of the study within the broader academic landscape.

The background in a research paper is crucial as it sets the stage for the study by providing essential context and rationale. It helps readers understand the significance of the research problem and its relevance in the broader field. By presenting relevant literature and highlighting gaps, the background justifies the need for the study, building a strong foundation for the research and enhancing its credibility.

The presentation very informative

It is really educative. I love the workshop. It really motivated me into writing my first paper for publication.

an interesting clue here, thanks.

thanks for the answers.

Good and interesting explanation. Thanks

Thank you for good presentation.

Hi Adam, we are glad to know that you found our article beneficial

The background of the study is the key to introduce your audience to YOUR research topic.

Awesome. Exactly what i was looking forwards to 😉

Hi Maryam, we are glad to know that you found our resource useful.

my understanding of ‘Background of study’ has been elevated.

Hi Peter, we are glad to know that our article has helped you get a better understanding of the background in a research paper.

thanks to give advanced information

Hi Shimelis, we are glad to know that you found the information in our article beneficial.

When i was studying it is very much hard for me to conduct a research study and know the background because my teacher in practical research is having a research so i make it now so that i will done my research

Very informative……….Thank you.

The confusion i had before, regarding an introduction and background to a research work is now a thing of the past. Thank you so much.

Thanks for your help…

Thanks for your kind information about the background of a research paper.

Thanks for the answer

Very informative. I liked even more when the difference between background and introduction was given. I am looking forward to learning more from this site. I am in Botswana

Hello, I am Benoît from Central African Republic. Right now I am writing down my research paper in order to get my master degree in British Literature. Thank you very much for posting all this information about the background of the study. I really appreciate. Thanks!

The write up is quite good, detailed and informative. Thanks a lot. The article has certainly enhanced my understanding of the topic.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• AI in Academia
• Infographic
• Manuscripts & Grants
• Reporting Research
• Trending Now

Can AI Tools Prepare a Research Manuscript From Scratch? — A comprehensive guide

As technology continues to advance, the question of whether artificial intelligence (AI) tools can prepare…

Abstract Vs. Introduction — Do you know the difference?

Ross wants to publish his research. Feeling positive about his research outcomes, he begins to…

• Old Webinars
• Webinar Mobile App

Demystifying Research Methodology With Field Experts

Choosing research methodology Research design and methodology Evidence-based research approach How RAxter can assist researchers

• Manuscript Preparation
• Publishing Research

How to Choose Best Research Methodology for Your Study

Successful research conduction requires proper planning and execution. While there are multiple reasons and aspects…

Top 5 Key Differences Between Methods and Methodology

While burning the midnight oil during literature review, most researchers do not realize that the…

How to Draft the Acknowledgment Section of a Manuscript

Discussion Vs. Conclusion: Know the Difference Before Drafting Manuscripts

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

• Industry News
• Promoting Research
• Career Corner
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer-Review Week 2023
• Open Access Week 2023
• Conference Videos
• Enago Report
• Journal Finder
• Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
• Editing Services
• Publication Support Services
• Research Impact
• Translation Services
• Publication solutions
• AI-Based Solutions
• Thought Leadership
• Call for Articles
• Call for Speakers
• Author Training
• Edit Profile

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

In your opinion, what is the most effective way to improve integrity in the peer review process?

• Translators
• Graphic Designers

Please enter the email address you used for your account. Your sign in information will be sent to your email address after it has been verified.

Tips for Writing an Effective Background of the Study

The Background of the Study is an integral part of any research paper that sets the context and the stage for the research presented in the paper. It's the section that provides a detailed context of the study by explaining the problem under investigation, the gaps in existing research that the study aims to fill, and the relevance of the study to the research field. It often incorporates aspects of the existing literature and gives readers an understanding of why the research is necessary and the theoretical framework that it is grounded in.

The Background of the Study holds a significant position in the process of research. It serves as the scaffold upon which the entire research project is built. It helps the reader understand the problem, its significance, and how your research will contribute to the existing body of knowledge. A well-articulated background can provide a clear roadmap for your study and assist others in understanding the direction and value of your research. Without it, readers may struggle to grasp the purpose and importance of your work.

The aim of this blog post is to guide budding researchers, students, and academicians on how to craft an effective Background of the Study section for their research paper. It is designed to provide practical tips, highlight key components, and elucidate common mistakes to avoid. By the end of this blog post, readers should have a clear understanding of how to construct a compelling background that successfully contextualizes their research, highlights its significance, and sets a clear path for their investigation.

Understanding the background of the study

The Background of the Study in a research context refers to a section of your research paper that discloses the basis and reasons behind the conduction of the study. It sets the broader context for your research by presenting the problem that your study intends to address, giving a brief overview of the subject domain, and highlighting the existing gaps in knowledge. This section also presents the theoretical or conceptual framework and states the research objectives, and often includes the research question or hypothesis . The Background of the Study gives your readers a deeper understanding of the purpose, importance, and direction of your study.

How it fits into the overall structure of a research paper

The Background of the Study typically appears after the introduction and before the literature review in the overall structure of a research paper. It acts as a bridge between the general introduction, where the topic is initially presented, and the more specific aspects of the paper such as the literature review, methodology , results , and discussion. It provides necessary information to help readers understand the relevance and value of the study in a wider context, before zooming in to specific details of your research.

Difference between the background of the study, introduction, and literature review

Now that we understand the role of the Background of the Study within a research paper, let's delve deeper to differentiate it from two other crucial components of the paper - the Introduction and the Literature Review.

• Background of the Study: This section provides a comprehensive context for the research, including a statement of the problem , the theoretical or conceptual framework, the gap that the study intends to fill, and the overall significance of the research. It guides the reader from a broad understanding of the research context to the specifics of your study.
• Introduction: This is the first section of the research paper that provides a broad overview of the topic , introduces the research question or hypothesis , and briefly mentions the methodology used in the study. It piques the reader's interest and gives them a reason to continue reading the paper.
• Literature Review: This section presents an organized summary of the existing research related to your study. It helps identify what we already know and what we do not know about the topic, thereby establishing the necessity for your research. The literature review allows you to demonstrate how your study contributes to and extends the existing body of knowledge.

While these three sections may overlap in some aspects, each serves a unique purpose and plays a critical role in the research paper.

Components of the background of the study

Statement of the problem.

This is the issue or situation that your research is intended to address. It should be a clear, concise declaration that explains the problem in detail, its context, and the negative impacts if it remains unresolved. This statement also explains why there's a need to study the problem, making it crucial for defining the research objectives.

Importance of the study

In this component, you outline the reasons why your research is significant. How does it contribute to the existing body of knowledge? Does it provide insights into a particular issue, offer solutions to a problem, or fill gaps in existing research? Clarifying the importance of your study helps affirm its value to your field and the larger academic community.

Relevant previous research and literature

Present an overview of the major studies and research conducted on the topic. This not only shows that you have a broad understanding of your field, but it also allows you to highlight the knowledge gaps that your study aims to fill. It also helps establish the context of your study within the larger academic dialogue.

Theoretical framework

The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a theory of a research study. It presents the theories, concepts, or ideas which are relevant to the study and explains how these theories apply to your research. It helps to connect your findings to the broader constructs and theories in your field.

Research questions or hypotheses

These are the specific queries your research aims to answer or the predictions you are testing. They should be directly aligned with your problem statement and clearly set out what you hope to discover through your research.

Potential implications of the research

This involves outlining the potential applications of your research findings in your field and possibly beyond. What changes could your research inspire? How might it influence future studies? By explaining this, you underscore the potential impact of your research and its significance in a broader context.

How to write a comprehensive background of the study

Identify and articulate the problem statement.

To successfully identify and articulate your problem statement, consider the following steps:

• Start by clearly defining the problem your research aims to solve. The problem should be specific and researchable.
• Provide context for the problem. Where does it arise? Who or what is affected by it?
• Clearly articulate why the problem is significant. Is it a new issue, or has it been a long-standing problem in your field? How does it impact the broader field or society at large?
• Express the potential adverse effects if the problem remains unresolved. This can help underscore the urgency or importance of your research.
• Remember, while your problem statement should be comprehensive, aim for conciseness. You want to communicate the gravity of the issue in a precise and clear manner.

Conduct and summarize relevant literature review

A well-executed literature review is fundamental for situating your study within the broader context of existing research. Here's how you can approach it:

• Begin by conducting a comprehensive search for existing research that is relevant to your problem statement. Make use of academic databases, scholarly journals, and other credible sources of research.
• As you read these studies, pay close attention to their key findings, research methodologies, and any gaps in the research that they've identified. These elements will be crucial in the summary of your literature review.
• Make an effort to analyze, rather than just list, the studies. This means drawing connections between different research findings, contrasting methodologies, and identifying overarching trends or conflicts in the field.
• When summarizing the literature review, focus on synthesis . Explain how these studies relate to each other and how they collectively relate to your own research. This could mean identifying patterns, themes, or gaps that your research aims to address.

Describe the theoretical framework

The theoretical framework of your research is crucial as it grounds your work in established concepts and provides a lens through which your results can be interpreted. Here's how to effectively describe it:

• Begin by identifying the theories, ideas, or models upon which your research is based. These may come from your literature review or your understanding of the subject matter.
• Explain these theories or concepts in simple terms, bearing in mind that your reader may not be familiar with them. Be sure to define any technical terms or jargon that you use.
• Make connections between these theories and your research. How do they relate to your study? Do they inform your research questions or hypotheses?
• Show how these theories guide your research methodology and your analysis. For instance, do they suggest certain methods for data collection or specific ways of interpreting your data?
• Remember, your theoretical framework should act as the "lens" through which your results are viewed, so it needs to be relevant and applicable to your study.

Formulate your research questions or hypotheses

Crafting well-defined research questions or hypotheses is a crucial step in outlining the scope of your research. Here's how you can effectively approach this process:

• Begin by establishing the specific questions your research aims to answer. If your study is more exploratory in nature, you may formulate research questions. If it is more explanatory or confirmatory, you may state hypotheses.
• Ensure that your questions or hypotheses are researchable. They should be specific, clear, and measurable with the methods you plan to use.
• Check that your research questions or hypotheses align with your problem statement and research objectives. They should be a natural extension of the issues outlined in your background of the study.
• Finally, remember that well-crafted research questions or hypotheses will guide your research design and help structure your entire paper. They act as the anchors around which your research revolves.

Highlight the potential implications and significance of your research

To conclude your Background of the Study, it's essential to highlight the potential implications and significance of your work. Here's how to do it effectively:

• Start by providing a clear explanation of your research's potential implications. This could relate to the advancement of theoretical knowledge or practical applications in the real world.
• Discuss the importance of your research within the context of your field. How does it contribute to the existing body of knowledge? Does it challenge current theories or practices?
• Highlight how your research could influence future studies. Could it open new avenues of inquiry? Does it suggest a need for further research in certain areas?
• Finally, consider the practical applications of your research. How could your findings be used in policy-making, business strategies, educational practices, or other real-world scenarios?
• Always keep in mind that demonstrating the broader impact of your research increases its relevance and appeal to a wider audience, extending beyond the immediate academic circle.

Following these guidelines can help you effectively highlight the potential implications and significance of your research, thereby strengthening the impact of your study.

Practical tips for writing the background of the study

Keeping the section concise and focused.

Maintain clarity and brevity in your writing. While you need to provide sufficient detail to set the stage for your research, avoid unnecessary verbosity. Stay focused on the main aspects related to your research problem, its context, and your study's contribution.

Ensuring the background aligns with your research questions or hypotheses

Ensure a clear connection between your background and your research questions or hypotheses. Your problem statement, review of relevant literature, theoretical framework, and the identified gap in research should logically lead to your research questions or hypotheses.

Citing your sources correctly

Always attribute the ideas, theories, and research findings of others appropriately to avoid plagiarism . Correct citation not only upholds academic integrity but also allows your readers to access your sources if they wish to explore them in depth. The citation style may depend on your field of study or the requirements of the journal or institution.

Bridging the gap between existing research and your study

Identify the gap in existing research that your study aims to fill and make it explicit. Show how your research questions or hypotheses emerged from this identified gap. This helps to position your research within the broader academic conversation and highlights the unique contribution of your study.

Avoiding excessive jargon

While technical terms are often unavoidable in academic writing, use them sparingly and make sure to define any necessary jargon for your reader. Your Background of the Study should be understandable to people outside your field as well. This will increase the accessibility and impact of your research.

Common mistakes to avoid while writing the background of the study

Being overly verbose or vague.

While it's important to provide sufficient context, avoid being overly verbose in your descriptions. Also, steer clear of vague or ambiguous phrases. The Background of the Study should be clear, concise, and specific, giving the reader a precise understanding of the study's purpose and context.

Failing to relate the background to the research problem

The entire purpose of the Background of the Study is to set the stage for your research problem. If it doesn't directly relate to your problem statement, research questions, or hypotheses, it may confuse the reader. Always ensure that every element of the background ties back to your study.

Neglecting to mention important related studies

Not mentioning significant related studies is another common mistake. The Background of the Study section should give a summary of the existing literature related to your research. Omitting key pieces of literature can give the impression that you haven't thoroughly researched the topic.

Overusing technical jargon without explanation

While certain technical terms may be necessary, overuse of jargon can make your paper inaccessible to readers outside your immediate field. If you need to use technical terms, make sure you define them clearly. Strive for clarity and simplicity in your writing as much as possible.

Not citing sources or citing them incorrectly

Academic integrity is paramount in research writing. Ensure that every idea, finding, or theory that is not your own is properly attributed to its original source. Neglecting to cite, or citing incorrectly, can lead to accusations of plagiarism and can discredit your research. Always follow the citation style guide relevant to your field.

Writing an effective Background of the Study is a critical step in crafting a compelling research paper. It serves to contextualize your research, highlight its significance, and present the problem your study seeks to address. Remember, your background should provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of research, identify gaps in existing literature, and indicate how your research will fill these gaps. Keep your writing concise, focused, and jargon-free, making sure to correctly cite all sources. Avoiding common mistakes and adhering to the strategies outlined in this post will help you develop a robust and engaging background for your study. As you embark on your research journey, remember that the Background of the Study sets the stage for your entire research project, so investing time and effort into crafting it effectively will undoubtedly pay dividends in the end.

Header image by Flamingo Images .

In a research paper, what is the background of study?

Research papers should include a background of study statement that provides context for the study. Read the article and learn more about it!

Unless you provide the background information needed for the reader to understand your choice of the subject and why your study is important, they will not be able to grasp the significance of the findings of your research, regardless of how significant and fascinating they are. 

Research papers should include a background of study statement that provides context for the study. A reader’s interest in the rest of the study is determined by the quality of the background. It is therefore imperative to write an engaging and effective background. How should a study’s background be written, and how should it be presented?

What is the background of study in the research paper?

The background of a study outlines how your research began, your interest in the subject, and the development of your study question. In other words, you should provide a broad overview of the research that you performed, followed by a discussion of what motivated you to choose the particular problem that you studied. 

Your topic should be clearly understood by the reader. Whether and to what extent you need to explain your background depends on what you are writing about. 

A research paper’s background section

The background of a research paper acts as the first element readers will notice; so it is important that it is informative and fascinating enough to get them interested in reading further. In the background, the volume and the specifics vary according to the research paper, particularly if the topic is complex or novel. 

Complex studies can sometimes be simplified by a simple background. Reviewing previous literature on the topic of your study is typically part of your research background. After identifying the gaps in existing knowledge, you should explain how your study will fill them.

The difference between the background of the study and the introduction section

There are a number of ways in which your introduction differs from your background. In the introduction, you provide preliminary information about the paper that is likely to be studied by the reader, but in the background section, you explain why the paper is relevant. 

In your study’s background, you discuss the topic in great detail, in contrast to the introduction, which provides an overall view of the topic. You should conclude your introduction with reasons for conducting research, objectives, and research goals, not your background, other than when it is incorporated into the introduction.

Here are the steps to writing a background of study

• Defining the research topic and identifying the target audience is the best way to start the background.
• Provide a detailed discussion of all concepts, terminology, keywords, and information that may feel new to the intended audience.
• Examine the relevant literature in depth to learn more about the essential requirements. 
• Read carefully and make notes. Cite your sources when you are done.
• Be sure to strike a balance between emphasizing key points, as well as communicating to a wide audience.
• History is a significant source of current issues. Add relevant data in the background if your research relies on historical information.
• Provide an explanation to help people understand the research if it is groundbreaking or novel.
• Develop a compelling narrative around the research theme to increase engagement. Don’t forget to add the necessary infographics.

Here are some things to avoid in a study’s background

In the case of your research paper, when you established the background in an organized manner, you would have been able to lead the reader seamlessly throughout. Nevertheless, you should be careful as well, here are a few points to keep in mind.

• Avoid unclear language at all costs. Consider your reader as unaware of any complex details about your research while writing.
• Avoid writing an excessively long or short background. Write concisely while not forgetting to include everything that is important.  
• Don’t devote time to topics that don’t relate to the main thrust of the research.
• Putting information without a structure is a disorganized approach. A chronology should be followed for the background, and subsections should be ordered logically.
• Be sure to cite every source.

For more information on how to write research articles and papers, please visit our blog . 

Create science-based infographics in a few clicks

That’s right, creating infographics is as easy as clicking a few buttons. With Mind the Graph’s infographic maker, you can create accurate science-based infographics for your research paper effortlessly.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

Sign Up for Free

Try the best infographic maker and promote your research with scientifically-accurate beautiful figures

no credit card required

About Aayushi Zaveri

Aayushi Zaveri majored in biotechnology engineering. She is currently pursuing a master's degree in Bioentrepreneurship from Karolinska Institute. She is interested in health and diseases, global health, socioeconomic development, and women's health. As a science enthusiast, she is keen in learning more about the scientific world and wants to play a part in making a difference.

Content tags

What is the Background in a Research Paper?

An effective Background section in your manuscript establishes the context for your study. And while original research requires novel findings, providing the necessary background information for these findings may be just as important. It lets your readers know that your findings are novel, important, and worthy of their time and attention.

Updated on October 3, 2022

A good Background section explains the history and nature of your research question in relation to existing literature – a “state of the art.” This section, along with the rationale, helps readers understand why you chose to study this problem and why your study is worthwhile. This article will show you how to do this.

Read on to better understand the:

• Real purpose of the Background section
• Typical length of a Background section and its placement
• Elements of an effective Background

What is the Background section of a research paper?

The Background section is an essential element of every study, answering:

• What do we already know about the topic?
• How does your study relate to what's been done so far in your field?
• What is its scope?
• Why does the topic warrant your interest and their interest?
• How did you develop the research question that you'll later introduce?

In grant writing, a Background section is often referred to as the “state of the art,” and this is a useful term to have in mind when writing this part of your paper.

What comes next?

After you make the above points,

• Formulate your research question/hypothesis . Research aims and objectives should be closely related to how you'll fill the gap you've identified in the literature. Your research gap is the central theme of your article and why people should read it.
• Summarize how you'll address it in the paper . Your methodology needs to be appropriate for addressing the “problem” you've identified.
• Describe the significance of your study . Show how your research fits into the bigger picture.

Note that the Background section isn't the same as the research rationale. Rather, it provides the relevant information the reader needs so they can follow your rationale. For example, it

• Explains scientific terms
• Provides available data and statistics on the topic
• Describes the methods used so far on your topic. Especially if these are different from what you're going to do. Take special care here, because this is often where peer reviewers focus intently.

This is a logical approach to what comes after the study's background. Use it and the reader can easily follow along from the broader information to the specific details that come later. Crucially, they'll have confidence that your analysis and findings are valid.

Where should the background be placed in a research paper?

Usually, the background comes after the statement of the problem, in the Introduction section. Logically, you need to provide the study context before discussing the research questions, methodology, and results.

The background can be found in:

The abstract

The background typically forms the first few sentences of the abstract. Why did you do the study? Most journals state this clearly. In an unstructured (no subheadings) abstract, it's the first sentence or two. In a structured abstract, it might be called the Introduction, Background, or State-of-the-Art.

PLOS Medicine , for example, asks for research article abstracts to be split into three sections: Background, Methods and Findings, and Conclusions. Journals in the humanities or social sciences might not clearly ask for it because articles sometimes have a looser structure than STEM articles.

The first part of the Introduction section

In the journal Nature , for example, the Introduction should be around 200 words and include

• Two to three sentences giving a basic introduction to the field.
• The background and rationale of the study are stated briefly.
• A simple phrase “Here we show ...”, or “In this study, we show ....” (to round out the Introduction).

The Journal of Organic Chemistry has similar author guidelines.

The Background as a distinct section

This is often the case for research proposals or some types of reports, as discussed above. Rather than reviewing the literature, this is a concise summary of what's currently known in the field relevant to the question being addressed in this proposed study.

How long should the Background section be?

As mentioned, there's no set length for the Background section. It generally depends on the journal and the content of your manuscript. Check the journal's author guidelines, the research center, granting agency, etc. If it's still not clear or if the instructions are contradictory, email or phone them directly.

The length of your background will depend on:

The manuscript length and content

A book-length study needs a more extensive Background than a four-page research article. Exploring a relatively unknown method or question might also need a longer Background.

For example, see this Frontiers article on the applications of artificial intelligence for developing COVID-19 vaccines. It has a seven-paragraph long Background (1,200 words) in a separate section. The authors need to discuss earlier successful uses of machine learning for therapy discovery to make a convincing case.

An academic paper published in an international journal is usually around 5,000 words. Your paper needs to be balanced, with appropriate text lengths used for the different sections: It would make no sense to have a 300-word introduction and then 4,000 words for the methods, for example. In a 5,000-word manuscript, you'll be able to use about 1,500 for the introduction, which includes the background.

How much you need to show your understanding of the topic

A lengthy grant application might need a longer Background (sub-)section. That's because if they're going to grant you money, they need a very good reason to. You'll need to show that the work is both interesting and doable. The Background is where you can do this.

What should the Background of a research manuscript include?

The Background of a research paper needs to show two things:

The study's territory ( scope )

First, provide a general overview of the field. Scientists in most disciplines should find it relatively easy to understand. Be broad, keep it interesting. Don't go into the specifics of your particular study.

Let's look at two examples:

• one from basic research (seeking to generate new knowledge)
• one from applied research (trying to solve or improve existing processes or products)

Applied research

This Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence article explores how AI can help discover treatments for COVID-19.

The background of the study can be found (i) in the abstract and (ii) in a separate section discussed at the end of this article. The abstract starts with this general overview: “SARS-COV-2 has roused the scientific community with a call to action to combat the growing pandemic.” ( Arshadi et al., 2020 ). This is broad, and it's interesting. This is a topic that many researchers (even from outside this specific area) may want to learn more about.

Think of any theories, models, concepts, or terms (maybe borrowed from different disciplines) that may be unfamiliar to your reader. Be sure to clarify them in plainer language, if necessary.

For example, this systematic review looks at the connections of physician burnout with career engagement and quality of patient care. The Background is in the Introduction section. It starts by defining what burnout is:

• “Burnout is defined as a syndrome related to work that involves three key dimensions.” ( Hodkinson et al., 2022 )

The authors go on to explain its three aspects: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a sense of reduced personal accomplishment.

Basic research

Imagine you're investigating how universities' moves to online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic impacted students' learning outcomes in the United Kingdom. The overview could be:

• The COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing lockdown generated tremendous challenges across the higher education sector. University campuses were forced to close. Face-to-face teaching and assessment transitioned into a virtual format.

2. The niche in the field (motivation)

To establish the niche in your field, describe what drove you to explore this specific topic.

• Explain how (un)successfully previous studies have investigated the problem.
• Note the knowledge gap or present a problem with a currently used process/practice/product.

After setting the stage, the abstract of the Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence article identifies a problem:

• “At the time of this writing, there are as yet no novel antiviral agents or approved vaccines available for deployment as a frontline defense.” ( Arshadi et al., 2020 )

The authors need to support their claim that computational methods can help discover new COVID-19 treatments. They do so by referring to previous research findings:

• “In the last decade, machine learning-based models, trained on specific biomolecules, have offered inexpensive and rapid implementation methods for the discovery of effective viral therapies.” ( Arshadi et al., 2020 )

Going back to the study on students' learning outcomes after universities introduced e-learning. The background section will next identify and describe the current knowledge gap and your proposed method of fixing it. It may be something like:

• Existing literature and studies by the UK Department for Education reveal x + y changes and effects on teaching and learning. Yet they provide little to no information on students' learning outcomes. Understanding the impact of online teaching and assessments on student outcomes is key to adopting future teaching practices and ensuring students from disadvantaged backgrounds are not left behind.

How is the background different from the literature review?

Both the background and literature review sections compile previous studies that are relevant and important to the topic.

Despite their similarities, they're different in scope and aims.

Overall, the research background could be seen as a small part of the detailed critical discussion in the literature review. Almost always, primary research articles do not include a detailed literature review.

How is the Background different from the Introduction section?

Although often part of the Introduction, the Background differs from the Introduction in scope and aim.

Breakdown of the Background in published articles

Consider this systematic review looking at the connections of physician burnout with career engagement and quality of patient care.

The Background is placed in the Introduction section. It's critical, consistent, and logically structured, moving from general to specific information.

You can also check out the summary paragraph breakdown provided by Nature. (Nature's “summary paragraph” is essentially an abstract.)

And if you're looking for some help, or have an article that's finished but needs a pre-submission review click here to connect with one of our expert AJE editors.

Gareth Dyke, PhD

Director of Global Content

See our "Privacy Policy"

PHILO-notes

Free Online Learning Materials

How to Write the Background of the Study in Research (Part 1)

Background of the Study in Research: Definition and the Core Elements it Contains

Before we embark on a detailed discussion on how to write the background of the study of your proposed research or thesis, it is important to first discuss its meaning and the core elements that it should contain. This is obviously because understanding the nature of the background of the study in research and knowing exactly what to include in it allow us to have both greater control and clear direction of the writing process.

So, what really is the background of the study and what are the core elements that it should contain?

The background of the study, which usually forms the first section of the introduction to a research paper or thesis, provides the overview of the study. In other words, it is that section of the research paper or thesis that establishes the context of the study. Its main function is to explain why the proposed research is important and essential to understanding the main aspects of the study.

The background of the study, therefore, is the section of the research paper or thesis that identifies the problem or gap of the study that needs to addressed and justifies the need for conducting the study. It also articulates the main goal of the study and the thesis statement, that is, the main claim or argument of the paper.

Given this brief understanding of the background of the study, we can anticipate what readers or thesis committee members expect from it. As we can see, the background of the study should contain the following major points:

1) brief discussion on what is known about the topic under investigation; 2) An articulation of the research gap or problem that needs to be addressed; 3) What the researcher would like to do or aim to achieve in the study ( research goal); 4) The thesis statement, that is, the main argument or contention of the paper (which also serves as the reason why the researcher would want to pursue the study); 5) The major significance or contribution of the study to a particular discipline; and 6) Depending on the nature of the study, an articulation of the hypothesis of the study.

Thus, when writing the background of the study, you should plan and structure it based on the major points just mentioned. With this, you will have a clear picture of the flow of the tasks that need to be completed in writing this section of your research or thesis proposal.

Now, how do you go about writing the background of the study in your proposed research or thesis?

The next lessons will address this question.

How to Write the Opening Paragraphs of the Background of the Study?

To begin with, let us assume that you already have conducted a preliminary research on your chosen topic, that is, you already have read a lot of literature and gathered relevant information for writing the background of your study. Let us also assume that you already have identified the gap of your proposed research and have already developed the research questions and thesis statement. If you have not yet identified the gap in your proposed research, you might as well go back to our lesson on how to identify a research gap.

So, we will just put together everything that you have researched into a background of the study (assuming, again, that you already have the necessary information). But in this lesson, let’s just focus on writing the opening paragraphs.

It is important to note at this point that there are different styles of writing the background of the study. Hence, what I will be sharing with you here is not just “the” only way of writing the background of the study. As a matter of fact, there is no “one-size-fits-all” style of writing this part of the research or thesis. At the end of the day, you are free to develop your own. However, whatever style it would be, it always starts with a plan which structures the writing process into stages or steps. The steps that I will share with below are just some of the most effective ways of writing the background of the study in research.

So, let’s begin.

It is always a good idea to begin the background of your study by giving an overview of your research topic. This may include providing a definition of the key concepts of your research or highlighting the main developments of the research topic.

Let us suppose that the topic of your study is the “lived experiences of students with mathematical anxiety”.

Here, you may start the background of your study with a discussion on the meaning, nature, and dynamics of the term “mathematical anxiety”. The reason for this is too obvious: “mathematical anxiety” is a highly technical term that is specific to mathematics. Hence, this term is not readily understandable to non-specialists in this field.

So, you may write the opening paragraph of your background of the study with this:

“Mathematical anxiety refers to the individual’s unpleasant emotional mood responses when confronted with a mathematical situation.”

Since you do not invent the definition of the term “mathematical anxiety”, then you need to provide a citation to the source of the material from which you are quoting. For example, you may now say:

“Mathematical anxiety refers to the individual’s unpleasant emotional mood responses when confronted with a mathematical situation (Eliot, 2020).”

And then you may proceed with the discussion on the nature and dynamics of the term “mathematical anxiety”. You may say:

“Lou (2019) specifically identifies some of the manifestations of this type of anxiety, which include, but not limited to, depression, helplessness, nervousness and fearfulness in doing mathematical and numerical tasks.”

After explaining to your readers the meaning, nature, and dynamics (as well as some historical development if you wish to) of the term “mathematical anxiety”, you may now proceed to showing the problem or gap of the study. As you may already know, the research gap is the problem that needs to be addressed in the study. This is important because no research activity is possible without the research gap.

Let us suppose that your research problem or gap is: “Mathematical anxiety can negatively affect not just the academic achievement of the students but also their future career plans and total well-being. Also, there are no known studies that deal with the mathematical anxiety of junior high school students in New Zealand.” With this, you may say:

“If left unchecked, as Shapiro (2019) claims, this problem will expand and create a total avoidance pattern on the part of the students, which can be expressed most visibly in the form of cutting classes and habitual absenteeism. As we can see, this will negatively affect the performance of students in mathematics. In fact, the study conducted by Luttenberger and Wimmer (2018) revealed that the outcomes of mathematical anxiety do not only negatively affect the students’ performance in math-related situations but also their future career as professionals. Without a doubt, therefore, mathematical anxiety is a recurring problem for many individuals which will negatively affect the academic success and future career of the student.”

Now that you already have both explained the meaning, nature, and dynamics of the term “mathematical anxiety” and articulated the gap of your proposed research, you may now state the main goal of your study. You may say:

“Hence, it is precisely in this context that the researcher aims to determine the lived experiences of those students with mathematical anxiety. In particular, this proposed thesis aims to determine the lived experiences of the junior high school students in New Zealand and identify the factors that caused them to become disinterested in mathematics.”

Please note that you should not end the first paragraph of your background of the study with the articulation of the research goal. You also need to articulate the “thesis statement”, which usually comes after the research goal. As is well known, the thesis statement is the statement of your argument or contention in the study. It is more of a personal argument or claim of the researcher, which specifically highlights the possible contribution of the study. For example, you may say:

“The researcher argues that there is a need to determine the lived experiences of these students with mathematical anxiety because knowing and understanding the difficulties and challenges that they have encountered will put the researcher in the best position to offer some alternatives to the problem. Indeed, it is only when we have performed some kind of a ‘diagnosis’ that we can offer practicable solutions to the problem. And in the case of the junior high school students in New Zealand who are having mathematical anxiety, determining their lived experiences as well as identifying the factors that caused them to become disinterested in mathematics are the very first steps in addressing the problem.”

If we combine the bits and pieces that we have written above, we can now come up with the opening paragraphs of your background of the study, which reads:

As we can see, we can find in the first paragraph 5 essential elements that must be articulated in the background of the study, namely:

1) A brief discussion on what is known about the topic under investigation; 2) An articulation of the research gap or problem that needs to be addressed; 3) What the researcher would like to do or aim to achieve in the study (research goal); 4) The thesis statement , that is, the main argument or claim of the paper; and 5) The major significance or contribution of the study to a particular discipline. So, that’s how you write the opening paragraphs of your background of the study. The next lesson will talk about writing the body of the background of the study.

How to Write the Body of the Background of the Study?

If we liken the background of the study to a sitting cat, then the opening paragraphs that we have completed in the previous lesson would just represent the head of the cat.

This means we still have to write the body (body of the cat) and the conclusion (tail). But how do we write the body of the background of the study? What should be its content?

Truly, this is one of the most difficult challenges that fledgling scholars faced. Because they are inexperienced researchers and didn’t know what to do next, they just wrote whatever they wished to write. Fortunately, this is relatively easy if they know the technique.

One of the best ways to write the body of the background of the study is to attack it from the vantage point of the research gap. If you recall, when we articulated the research gap in the opening paragraphs, we made a bold claim there, that is, there are junior high school students in New Zealand who are experiencing mathematical anxiety. Now, you have to remember that a “statement” remains an assumption until you can provide concrete proofs to it. This is what we call the “epistemological” aspect of research. As we may already know, epistemology is a specific branch of philosophy that deals with the validity of knowledge. And to validate knowledge is to provide concrete proofs to our statements. Hence, the reason why we need to provide proofs to our claim that there are indeed junior high school students in New Zealand who are experiencing mathematical anxiety is the obvious fact that if there are none, then we cannot proceed with our study. We have no one to interview with in the first. In short, we don’t have respondents.

The body of the background of the study, therefore, should be a presentation and articulation of the proofs to our claim that indeed there are junior high school students in New Zealand who are experiencing mathematical anxiety. Please note, however, that this idea is true only if you follow the style of writing the background of the study that I introduced in this course.

So, how do we do this?

One of the best ways to do this is to look for literature on mathematical anxiety among junior high school students in New Zealand and cite them here. However, if there are not enough literature on this topic in New Zealand, then we need to conduct initial interviews with these students or make actual classroom observations and record instances of mathematical anxiety among these students. But it is always a good idea if we combine literature review with interviews and actual observations.

Assuming you already have the data, then you may now proceed with the writing of the body of your background of the study. For example, you may say:

“According to records and based on the researcher’s firsthand experience with students in some junior high schools in New Zealand, indeed, there are students who lost interest in mathematics. For one, while checking the daily attendance and monitoring of the students, it was observed that some of them are not always attending classes in mathematics but are regularly attending the rest of the required subjects.”

After this sentence, you may insert some literature that will support this position. For example, you may say:

“As a matter of fact, this phenomenon is also observed in the work of Estonanto. In his study titled ‘Impact of Math Anxiety on Academic Performance in Pre-Calculus of Senior High School’, Estonanto (2019) found out that, inter alia, students with mathematical anxiety have the tendency to intentionally prioritize other subjects and commit habitual tardiness and absences.”

Then you may proceed saying:

“With this initial knowledge in mind, the researcher conducted initial interviews with some of these students. The researcher learned that one student did not regularly attend his math subject because he believed that he is not good in math and no matter how he listens to the topic he will not learn.”

Then you may say:

“Another student also mentioned that she was influenced by her friends’ perception that mathematics is hard; hence, she avoids the subject. Indeed, these are concrete proofs that there are some junior high school students in New Zealand who have mathematical anxiety. As already hinted, “disinterest” or the loss of interest in mathematics is one of the manifestations of a mathematical anxiety.”

If we combine what we have just written above, then we can have the first two paragraphs of the body of our background of the study. It reads:

“According to records and based on the researcher’s firsthand experience with students in some junior high schools in New Zealand, indeed there are students who lost interest in mathematics. For one, while checking the daily attendance and monitoring of the students, it was observed that some of them are not always attending classes in mathematics but are regularly attending the rest of the required subjects. As a matter of fact, this phenomenon is also observed in the work of Estonanto. In his study titled ‘Impact of Math Anxiety on Academic Performance in Pre-Calculus of Senior High School’, Estonanto (2019) found out that, inter alia, students with mathematical anxiety have the tendency to intentionally prioritize other subjects and commit habitual tardiness and absences.

With this initial knowledge in mind, the researcher conducted initial interviews with some of these students. The researcher learned that one student did not regularly attend his math subject because he believed that he is not good in math and no matter how he listens to the topic he will not learn. Another student also mentioned that she was influenced by her friends’ perception that mathematics is hard; hence, she avoids the subject. Indeed, these are concrete proofs that there are some junior high school students in New Zealand who have mathematical anxiety. As already hinted, “disinterest” or the loss of interest in mathematics is one of the manifestations of a mathematical anxiety.”

And then you need validate this observation by conducting another round of interview and observation in other schools. So, you may continue writing the body of the background of the study with this:

“To validate the information gathered from the initial interviews and observations, the researcher conducted another round of interview and observation with other junior high school students in New Zealand.”

“On the one hand, the researcher found out that during mathematics time some students felt uneasy; in fact, they showed a feeling of being tensed or anxious while working with numbers and mathematical problems. Some were even afraid to seat in front, while some students at the back were secretly playing with their mobile phones. These students also show remarkable apprehension during board works like trembling hands, nervous laughter, and the like.”

Then provide some literature that will support your position. You may say:

“As Finlayson (2017) corroborates, emotional symptoms of mathematical anxiety involve feeling of helplessness, lack of confidence, and being nervous for being put on the spot. It must be noted that these occasionally extreme emotional reactions are not triggered by provocative procedures. As a matter of fact, there are no personally sensitive questions or intentional manipulations of stress. The teacher simply asked a very simple question, like identifying the parts of a circle. Certainly, this observation also conforms with the study of Ashcraft (2016) when he mentions that students with mathematical anxiety show a negative attitude towards math and hold self-perceptions about their mathematical abilities.”

And then you proceed:

“On the other hand, when the class had their other subjects, the students show a feeling of excitement. They even hurried to seat in front and attentively participating in the class discussion without hesitation and without the feeling of being tensed or anxious. For sure, this is another concrete proof that there are junior high school students in New Zealand who have mathematical anxiety.”

To further prove the point that there indeed junior high school students in New Zealand who have mathematical anxiety, you may solicit observations from other math teachers. For instance, you may say:

“The researcher further verified if the problem is also happening in other sections and whether other mathematics teachers experienced the same observation that the researcher had. This validation or verification is important in establishing credibility of the claim (Buchbinder, 2016) and ensuring reliability and validity of the assertion (Morse et al., 2002). In this regard, the researcher attempted to open up the issue of math anxiety during the Departmentalized Learning Action Cell (LAC), a group discussion of educators per quarter, with the objective of ‘Teaching Strategies to Develop Critical Thinking of the Students’. During the session, one teacher corroborates the researcher’s observation that there are indeed junior high school students in New Zealand who have mathematical anxiety. The teacher pointed out that truly there were students who showed no extra effort in mathematics class in addition to the fact that some students really avoided the subject. In addition, another math teacher expressed her frustrations about these students who have mathematical anxiety. She quipped: “How can a teacher develop the critical thinking skills or ability of the students if in the first place these students show avoidance and disinterest in the subject?’.”

Again, if we combine what we have just written above, then we can now have the remaining parts of the body of the background of the study. It reads:

So, that’s how we write the body of the background of the study in research . Of course, you may add any relevant points which you think might amplify your content. What is important at this point is that you now have a clear idea of how to write the body of the background of the study.

How to Write the Concluding Part of the Background of the Study?

Since we have already completed the body of our background of the study in the previous lesson, we may now write the concluding paragraph (the tail of the cat). This is important because one of the rules of thumb in writing is that we always put a close to what we have started.

It is important to note that the conclusion of the background of the study is just a rehashing of the research gap and main goal of the study stated in the introductory paragraph, but framed differently. The purpose of this is just to emphasize, after presenting the justifications, what the study aims to attain and why it wants to do it. The conclusion, therefore, will look just like this:

“Given the above discussion, it is evident that there are indeed junior high school students in New Zealand who are experiencing mathematical anxiety. And as we can see, mathematical anxiety can negatively affect not just the academic achievement of the students but also their future career plans and total well-being. Again, it is for this reason that the researcher attempts to determine the lived experiences of those junior high school students in New Zealand who are experiencing a mathematical anxiety.”

If we combine all that we have written from the very beginning, the entire background of the study would now read:

If we analyze the background of the study that we have just completed, we can observe that in addition to the important elements that it should contain, it has also addressed other important elements that readers or thesis committee members expect from it.

On the one hand, it provides the researcher with a clear direction in the conduct of the study. As we can see, the background of the study that we have just completed enables us to move in the right direction with a strong focus as it has set clear goals and the reasons why we want to do it. Indeed, we now exactly know what to do next and how to write the rest of the research paper or thesis.

On the other hand, most researchers start their research with scattered ideas and usually get stuck with how to proceed further. But with a well-written background of the study, just as the one above, we have decluttered and organized our thoughts. We have also become aware of what have and have not been done in our area of study, as well as what we can significantly contribute in the already existing body of knowledge in this area of study.

Please note, however, as I already mentioned previously, that the model that I have just presented is only one of the many models available in textbooks and other sources. You are, of course, free to choose your own style of writing the background of the study. You may also consult your thesis supervisor for some guidance on how to attack the writing of your background of the study.

Lastly, and as you may already know, universities around the world have their own thesis formats. Hence, you should follow your university’s rules on the format and style in writing your research or thesis. What is important is that with the lessons that you learned in this course, you can now easily write the introductory part of your thesis, such as the background of the study.

Writing Research Background

Research background is a brief outline of the most important studies that have been conducted so far presented in a chronological order. Research background part in introduction chapter can be also headed ‘Background of the Study.” Research background should also include a brief discussion of major theories and models related to the research problem.

Specifically, when writing research background you can discuss major theories and models related to your research problem in a chronological order to outline historical developments in the research area.  When writing research background, you also need to demonstrate how your research relates to what has been done so far in the research area.

Research background is written after the literature review. Therefore, literature review has to be the first and the longest stage in the research process, even before the formulation of research aims and objectives, right after the selection of the research area. Once the research area is selected, the literature review is commenced in order to identify gaps in the research area.

Research aims and objectives need to be closely associated with the elimination of this gap in the literature. The main difference between background of the study and literature review is that the former only provides general information about what has been done so far in the research area, whereas the latter elaborates and critically reviews previous works.

John Dudovskiy

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Write the Rationale of the Study in Research (Examples)

What is the Rationale of the Study?

The rationale of the study is the justification for taking on a given study. It explains the reason the study was conducted or should be conducted. This means the study rationale should explain to the reader or examiner why the study is/was necessary. It is also sometimes called the “purpose” or “justification” of a study. While this is not difficult to grasp in itself, you might wonder how the rationale of the study is different from your research question or from the statement of the problem of your study, and how it fits into the rest of your thesis or research paper. 

The rationale of the study links the background of the study to your specific research question and justifies the need for the latter on the basis of the former. In brief, you first provide and discuss existing data on the topic, and then you tell the reader, based on the background evidence you just presented, where you identified gaps or issues and why you think it is important to address those. The problem statement, lastly, is the formulation of the specific research question you choose to investigate, following logically from your rationale, and the approach you are planning to use to do that.

Table of Contents:

How to write a rationale for a research paper , how do you justify the need for a research study.

• Study Rationale Example: Where Does It Go In Your Paper?

The basis for writing a research rationale is preliminary data or a clear description of an observation. If you are doing basic/theoretical research, then a literature review will help you identify gaps in current knowledge. In applied/practical research, you base your rationale on an existing issue with a certain process (e.g., vaccine proof registration) or practice (e.g., patient treatment) that is well documented and needs to be addressed. By presenting the reader with earlier evidence or observations, you can (and have to) convince them that you are not just repeating what other people have already done or said and that your ideas are not coming out of thin air. 

Once you have explained where you are coming from, you should justify the need for doing additional research–this is essentially the rationale of your study. Finally, when you have convinced the reader of the purpose of your work, you can end your introduction section with the statement of the problem of your research that contains clear aims and objectives and also briefly describes (and justifies) your methodological approach. 

When is the Rationale for Research Written?

The author can present the study rationale both before and after the research is conducted. 

• Before conducting research : The study rationale is a central component of the research proposal . It represents the plan of your work, constructed before the study is actually executed.
• Once research has been conducted : After the study is completed, the rationale is presented in a research article or  PhD dissertation  to explain why you focused on this specific research question. When writing the study rationale for this purpose, the author should link the rationale of the research to the aims and outcomes of the study.

What to Include in the Study Rationale

Although every study rationale is different and discusses different specific elements of a study’s method or approach, there are some elements that should be included to write a good rationale. Make sure to touch on the following:

• A summary of conclusions from your review of the relevant literature
• What is currently unknown (gaps in knowledge)
• Inconclusive or contested results  from previous studies on the same or similar topic
• The necessity to improve or build on previous research, such as to improve methodology or utilize newer techniques and/or technologies

There are different types of limitations that you can use to justify the need for your study. In applied/practical research, the justification for investigating something is always that an existing process/practice has a problem or is not satisfactory. Let’s say, for example, that people in a certain country/city/community commonly complain about hospital care on weekends (not enough staff, not enough attention, no decisions being made), but you looked into it and realized that nobody ever investigated whether these perceived problems are actually based on objective shortages/non-availabilities of care or whether the lower numbers of patients who are treated during weekends are commensurate with the provided services.

In this case, “lack of data” is your justification for digging deeper into the problem. Or, if it is obvious that there is a shortage of staff and provided services on weekends, you could decide to investigate which of the usual procedures are skipped during weekends as a result and what the negative consequences are. 

In basic/theoretical research, lack of knowledge is of course a common and accepted justification for additional research—but make sure that it is not your only motivation. “Nobody has ever done this” is only a convincing reason for a study if you explain to the reader why you think we should know more about this specific phenomenon. If there is earlier research but you think it has limitations, then those can usually be classified into “methodological”, “contextual”, and “conceptual” limitations. To identify such limitations, you can ask specific questions and let those questions guide you when you explain to the reader why your study was necessary:

Methodological limitations

• Did earlier studies try but failed to measure/identify a specific phenomenon?
• Was earlier research based on incorrect conceptualizations of variables?
• Were earlier studies based on questionable operationalizations of key concepts?
• Did earlier studies use questionable or inappropriate research designs?

Contextual limitations

• Have recent changes in the studied problem made previous studies irrelevant?
• Are you studying a new/particular context that previous findings do not apply to?

Conceptual limitations

• Do previous findings only make sense within a specific framework or ideology?

Study Rationale Examples

Let’s look at an example from one of our earlier articles on the statement of the problem to clarify how your rationale fits into your introduction section. This is a very short introduction for a practical research study on the challenges of online learning. Your introduction might be much longer (especially the context/background section), and this example does not contain any sources (which you will have to provide for all claims you make and all earlier studies you cite)—but please pay attention to how the background presentation , rationale, and problem statement blend into each other in a logical way so that the reader can follow and has no reason to question your motivation or the foundation of your research.

Background presentation

Since the beginning of the Covid pandemic, most educational institutions around the world have transitioned to a fully online study model, at least during peak times of infections and social distancing measures. This transition has not been easy and even two years into the pandemic, problems with online teaching and studying persist (reference needed) . 

While the increasing gap between those with access to technology and equipment and those without access has been determined to be one of the main challenges (reference needed) , others claim that online learning offers more opportunities for many students by breaking down barriers of location and distance (reference needed) .  

Rationale of the study

Since teachers and students cannot wait for circumstances to go back to normal, the measures that schools and universities have implemented during the last two years, their advantages and disadvantages, and the impact of those measures on students’ progress, satisfaction, and well-being need to be understood so that improvements can be made and demographics that have been left behind can receive the support they need as soon as possible.

Statement of the problem

To identify what changes in the learning environment were considered the most challenging and how those changes relate to a variety of student outcome measures, we conducted surveys and interviews among teachers and students at ten institutions of higher education in four different major cities, two in the US (New York and Chicago), one in South Korea (Seoul), and one in the UK (London). Responses were analyzed with a focus on different student demographics and how they might have been affected differently by the current situation.

How long is a study rationale?

In a research article bound for journal publication, your rationale should not be longer than a few sentences (no longer than one brief paragraph). A  dissertation or thesis  usually allows for a longer description; depending on the length and nature of your document, this could be up to a couple of paragraphs in length. A completely novel or unconventional approach might warrant a longer and more detailed justification than an approach that slightly deviates from well-established methods and approaches.

Consider Using Professional Academic Editing Services

Now that you know how to write the rationale of the study for a research proposal or paper, you should make use of Wordvice AI’s free AI Grammar Checker , or receive professional academic proofreading services from Wordvice, including research paper editing services and manuscript editing services to polish your submitted research documents.

You can also find many more articles, for example on writing the other parts of your research paper , on choosing a title , or on making sure you understand and adhere to the author instructions before you submit to a journal, on the Wordvice academic resources pages.

PROCEDURE FOR WRITING A BACKGROUND STUDY FOR A RESEARCH PAPER -WITH A PRACTICAL EXAMPLE BY DR BENARD LANGO

• September 2020

• Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Biplab Sarkar
• 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

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Background Information

• Purpose of Guide
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• The Research Problem/Question
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Evaluating Sources
• Reading Research Effectively
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Is it Peer-Reviewed?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism [linked guide]
• Annotated Bibliography
• Grading Someone Else's Paper

Background information identifies and describes the history and nature of a well-defined research problem with reference to the existing literature. The background information should indicate the root of the problem being studied, appropriate context of the problem in relation to theory, research, and/or practice , its scope, and the extent to which previous studies have successfully investigated the problem, noting, in particular, where gaps exist that your study attempts to address.

Structure and Writing Style

Providing background information in the introduction of a research paper serves as a bridge that links the reader to the topic of your study . Precisely how long and in-depth this bridge should be is largely dependent upon how much information you think the reader will need to know in order to fully understand the topic being discussed and to appreciate why the issues you are investigating are important.

From another perspective, the length and detail of background information also depends on the degree to which you need to demonstrate to your professor how much you understand the research problem. Keep this in mind because providing pertinent background information can be an effective way to demonstrate that you have a clear grasp of key issues and concepts underpinning your overall study. Don't try to show off, though! And, avoid stating the obvious.

The structure and writing style of your background information can vary depending upon the complexity of your research and/or the nature of the assignment. Given this, here are some questions to consider while writing this part of your introduction :

• Are there concepts, terms, theories, or ideas that may be unfamiliar to the reader and, thus, require additional explanation?
• Are there historical elements that need to be explored in order to provide needed context, to highlight specific people, issues, or events, or to lay a foundation for understanding the emergence of a current issue or event?
• Are there theories, concepts, or ideas borrowed from other disciplines or academic traditions that may be unfamiliar to the reader and therefore require further explanation?
• Is the research study unusual in a way that requires additional explanation, such as, 1) your study uses a method of analysis never applied before; 2) your study investigates a very esoteric or complex research problem; or, 3) your study relies upon analyzing unique texts or documents, such as, archival materials or primary documents like diaries or personal letters that do not represent the established body of source literature on the topic.

Almost all introductions to a research problem require some contextualizing, but the scope and breadth of background information varies depending on your assumption about the reader's level of prior knowledge . Despite this assessment, however, background information should be brief and succinct; save any elaboration of critical points or in-depth discussion of key issues for the literature review section of your paper.

Background of the Problem Section: What do you Need to Consider? Anonymous. Harvard University; Hopkins, Will G. How to Write a Research Paper . SPORTSCIENCE, Perspectives/Research Resources. Department of Physiology and School of Physical Education, University of Otago, 1999; Green, L. H. How to Write the Background/Introduction Section . Physics 499 Powerpoint slides. University of Illinois; Woodall, W. Gill. Writing the Background and Significance Section . Senior Research Scientist and Professor of Communication. Center on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, and Addictions. University of New Mexico.

Writing Tip

Background Information vs. the Literature Review

Incorporating background information into the introduction is intended to provide the reader with critical information about the topic being studied, such as, highlighting and expanding upon foundational studies conducted in the past, describing important historical events that inform why and in what ways the research problem exists, or defining key components of your study [concepts, people, places, things]. Although in  social sciences research introductory background information can often blend into the literature review portion of the paper, basic background information should not be considered a substitute for a comprehensive review and synthesis of relevant research literature.

Hart, Cris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.

• << Previous: The C.A.R.S. Model
• Next: Theoretical Framework >>
• Last Updated: Sep 8, 2023 12:19 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.txstate.edu/socialscienceresearch

How to Write a Research Proposal: (with Examples & Templates)

Table of Contents

Before conducting a study, a research proposal should be created that outlines researchers’ plans and methodology and is submitted to the concerned evaluating organization or person. Creating a research proposal is an important step to ensure that researchers are on track and are moving forward as intended. A research proposal can be defined as a detailed plan or blueprint for the proposed research that you intend to undertake. It provides readers with a snapshot of your project by describing what you will investigate, why it is needed, and how you will conduct the research.  

Your research proposal should aim to explain to the readers why your research is relevant and original, that you understand the context and current scenario in the field, have the appropriate resources to conduct the research, and that the research is feasible given the usual constraints.  

This article will describe in detail the purpose and typical structure of a research proposal , along with examples and templates to help you ace this step in your research journey.  

What is a Research Proposal ?  

A research proposal¹ ,²  can be defined as a formal report that describes your proposed research, its objectives, methodology, implications, and other important details. Research proposals are the framework of your research and are used to obtain approvals or grants to conduct the study from various committees or organizations. Consequently, research proposals should convince readers of your study’s credibility, accuracy, achievability, practicality, and reproducibility.   

With research proposals , researchers usually aim to persuade the readers, funding agencies, educational institutions, and supervisors to approve the proposal. To achieve this, the report should be well structured with the objectives written in clear, understandable language devoid of jargon. A well-organized research proposal conveys to the readers or evaluators that the writer has thought out the research plan meticulously and has the resources to ensure timely completion.  

Purpose of Research Proposals  

A research proposal is a sales pitch and therefore should be detailed enough to convince your readers, who could be supervisors, ethics committees, universities, etc., that what you’re proposing has merit and is feasible . Research proposals can help students discuss their dissertation with their faculty or fulfill course requirements and also help researchers obtain funding. A well-structured proposal instills confidence among readers about your ability to conduct and complete the study as proposed.  

Research proposals can be written for several reasons:³  

• To describe the importance of research in the specific topic  
• Address any potential challenges you may encounter  
• Showcase knowledge in the field and your ability to conduct a study  
• Apply for a role at a research institute  
• Convince a research supervisor or university that your research can satisfy the requirements of a degree program  
• Highlight the importance of your research to organizations that may sponsor your project  
• Identify implications of your project and how it can benefit the audience  

What Goes in a Research Proposal?    

Research proposals should aim to answer the three basic questions—what, why, and how.  

The What question should be answered by describing the specific subject being researched. It should typically include the objectives, the cohort details, and the location or setting.  

The Why question should be answered by describing the existing scenario of the subject, listing unanswered questions, identifying gaps in the existing research, and describing how your study can address these gaps, along with the implications and significance.  

The How question should be answered by describing the proposed research methodology, data analysis tools expected to be used, and other details to describe your proposed methodology.   

Research Proposal Example  

Here is a research proposal sample template (with examples) from the University of Rochester Medical Center. 4 The sections in all research proposals are essentially the same although different terminology and other specific sections may be used depending on the subject.  

Structure of a Research Proposal  

If you want to know how to make a research proposal impactful, include the following components:¹  

1. Introduction  

This section provides a background of the study, including the research topic, what is already known about it and the gaps, and the significance of the proposed research.  

2. Literature review  

This section contains descriptions of all the previous relevant studies pertaining to the research topic. Every study cited should be described in a few sentences, starting with the general studies to the more specific ones. This section builds on the understanding gained by readers in the Introduction section and supports it by citing relevant prior literature, indicating to readers that you have thoroughly researched your subject.  

3. Objectives  

Once the background and gaps in the research topic have been established, authors must now state the aims of the research clearly. Hypotheses should be mentioned here. This section further helps readers understand what your study’s specific goals are.  

4. Research design and methodology  

Here, authors should clearly describe the methods they intend to use to achieve their proposed objectives. Important components of this section include the population and sample size, data collection and analysis methods and duration, statistical analysis software, measures to avoid bias (randomization, blinding), etc.  

5. Ethical considerations  

This refers to the protection of participants’ rights, such as the right to privacy, right to confidentiality, etc. Researchers need to obtain informed consent and institutional review approval by the required authorities and mention this clearly for transparency.  

6. Budget/funding  

Researchers should prepare their budget and include all expected expenditures. An additional allowance for contingencies such as delays should also be factored in.  

7. Appendices  

This section typically includes information that supports the research proposal and may include informed consent forms, questionnaires, participant information, measurement tools, etc.  

8. Citations  

Important Tips for Writing a Research Proposal  

Writing a research proposal begins much before the actual task of writing. Planning the research proposal structure and content is an important stage, which if done efficiently, can help you seamlessly transition into the writing stage. 3,5  

The Planning Stage  

• Manage your time efficiently. Plan to have the draft version ready at least two weeks before your deadline and the final version at least two to three days before the deadline.
• What is the primary objective of your research?  
• Will your research address any existing gap?  
• What is the impact of your proposed research?  
• Do people outside your field find your research applicable in other areas?  
• If your research is unsuccessful, would there still be other useful research outcomes?  

  The Writing Stage  

• Create an outline with main section headings that are typically used.  
• Focus only on writing and getting your points across without worrying about the format of the research proposal , grammar, punctuation, etc. These can be fixed during the subsequent passes. Add details to each section heading you created in the beginning.   
• Ensure your sentences are concise and use plain language. A research proposal usually contains about 2,000 to 4,000 words or four to seven pages.  
• Don’t use too many technical terms and abbreviations assuming that the readers would know them. Define the abbreviations and technical terms.  
• Ensure that the entire content is readable. Avoid using long paragraphs because they affect the continuity in reading. Break them into shorter paragraphs and introduce some white space for readability.  
• Focus on only the major research issues and cite sources accordingly. Don’t include generic information or their sources in the literature review.  
• Proofread your final document to ensure there are no grammatical errors so readers can enjoy a seamless, uninterrupted read.  
• Use academic, scholarly language because it brings formality into a document.  
• Ensure that your title is created using the keywords in the document and is neither too long and specific nor too short and general.  
• Cite all sources appropriately to avoid plagiarism.  
• Make sure that you follow guidelines, if provided. This includes rules as simple as using a specific font or a hyphen or en dash between numerical ranges.  
• Ensure that you’ve answered all questions requested by the evaluating authority.  

Key Takeaways   

Here’s a summary of the main points about research proposals discussed in the previous sections:  

• A research proposal is a document that outlines the details of a proposed study and is created by researchers to submit to evaluators who could be research institutions, universities, faculty, etc.  
• Research proposals are usually about 2,000-4,000 words long, but this depends on the evaluating authority’s guidelines.  
• A good research proposal ensures that you’ve done your background research and assessed the feasibility of the research.  
• Research proposals have the following main sections—introduction, literature review, objectives, methodology, ethical considerations, and budget.  

Frequently Asked Questions  

Q1. How is a research proposal evaluated?  

A1. In general, most evaluators, including universities, broadly use the following criteria to evaluate research proposals . 6  

• Significance —Does the research address any important subject or issue, which may or may not be specific to the evaluator or university?  
• Content and design —Is the proposed methodology appropriate to answer the research question? Are the objectives clear and well aligned with the proposed methodology?  
• Sample size and selection —Is the target population or cohort size clearly mentioned? Is the sampling process used to select participants randomized, appropriate, and free of bias?  
• Timing —Are the proposed data collection dates mentioned clearly? Is the project feasible given the specified resources and timeline?  
• Data management and dissemination —Who will have access to the data? What is the plan for data analysis?  

Q2. What is the difference between the Introduction and Literature Review sections in a research proposal ?  

A2. The Introduction or Background section in a research proposal sets the context of the study by describing the current scenario of the subject and identifying the gaps and need for the research. A Literature Review, on the other hand, provides references to all prior relevant literature to help corroborate the gaps identified and the research need.  

Q3. How long should a research proposal be?  

A3. Research proposal lengths vary with the evaluating authority like universities or committees and also the subject. Here’s a table that lists the typical research proposal lengths for a few universities.  

Q4. What are the common mistakes to avoid in a research proposal ?  

A4. Here are a few common mistakes that you must avoid while writing a research proposal . 7  

• No clear objectives: Objectives should be clear, specific, and measurable for the easy understanding among readers.  
• Incomplete or unconvincing background research: Background research usually includes a review of the current scenario of the particular industry and also a review of the previous literature on the subject. This helps readers understand your reasons for undertaking this research because you identified gaps in the existing research.  
• Overlooking project feasibility: The project scope and estimates should be realistic considering the resources and time available.   
• Neglecting the impact and significance of the study: In a research proposal , readers and evaluators look for the implications or significance of your research and how it contributes to the existing research. This information should always be included.  
• Unstructured format of a research proposal : A well-structured document gives confidence to evaluators that you have read the guidelines carefully and are well organized in your approach, consequently affirming that you will be able to undertake the research as mentioned in your proposal.  
• Ineffective writing style: The language used should be formal and grammatically correct. If required, editors could be consulted, including AI-based tools such as Paperpal , to refine the research proposal structure and language.  

Thus, a research proposal is an essential document that can help you promote your research and secure funds and grants for conducting your research. Consequently, it should be well written in clear language and include all essential details to convince the evaluators of your ability to conduct the research as proposed.  

This article has described all the important components of a research proposal and has also provided tips to improve your writing style. We hope all these tips will help you write a well-structured research proposal to ensure receipt of grants or any other purpose.  

References  

• Sudheesh K, Duggappa DR, Nethra SS. How to write a research proposal? Indian J Anaesth. 2016;60(9):631-634. Accessed July 15, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5037942/  
• Writing research proposals. Harvard College Office of Undergraduate Research and Fellowships. Harvard University. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://uraf.harvard.edu/apply-opportunities/app-components/essays/research-proposals  
• What is a research proposal? Plus how to write one. Indeed website. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/research-proposal  
• Research proposal template. University of Rochester Medical Center. Accessed July 16, 2024. https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/MediaLibraries/URMCMedia/pediatrics/research/documents/Research-proposal-Template.pdf  
• Tips for successful proposal writing. Johns Hopkins University. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://research.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Tips-for-Successful-Proposal-Writing.pdf  
• Formal review of research proposals. Cornell University. Accessed July 18, 2024. https://irp.dpb.cornell.edu/surveys/survey-assessment-review-group/research-proposals  
• 7 Mistakes you must avoid in your research proposal. Aveksana (via LinkedIn). Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/7-mistakes-you-must-avoid-your-research-proposal-aveksana-cmtwf/  

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

How to write a phd research proposal.

• What are the Benefits of Generative AI for Academic Writing?
• How to Avoid Plagiarism When Using Generative AI Tools
• What is Hedging in Academic Writing?  

How to Write Your Research Paper in APA Format

The future of academia: how ai tools are changing the way we do research, you may also like, dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide), maintaining academic integrity with paperpal’s generative ai writing..., research funding basics: what should a grant proposal..., how to write an abstract in research papers..., how to write dissertation acknowledgements.

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Online First
• Implications of child poverty reduction targets for public health and health inequalities in England: a modelling study between 2024 and 2033
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8649-6913 Ronan McCabe 1 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7286-8106 Roxana Pollack 1 ,
• Philip Broadbent 1 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3060-939X Rachel M Thomson 1 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2863-4983 Erik Igelström 1 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0085-5263 Anna Pearce 1 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1294-6851 Clare Bambra 2 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3480-6566 Davara Lee Bennett 3 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3533-3238 Alexiou Alexandros 3 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4573-4628 Konstantinos Daras 3 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5828-7724 David Taylor-Robinson 3 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4208-9475 Benjamin Barr 3 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6593-9092 Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi 1
• 1 MRC/CSO Social & Public Health Sciences Unit , University of Glasgow , Glasgow , UK
• 2 Population Health Sciences Institute , Newcastle University Institute for Health and Society , Newcastle upon Tyne , UK
• 3 Public Health, Policy & Systems , University of Liverpool , Liverpool , UK
• Correspondence to Dr Ronan McCabe, MRC/CSO Social & Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8TB, UK; ronan.mccabe{at}glasgow.ac.uk

Background We investigated the potential impacts of child poverty (CP) reduction scenarios on population health and health inequalities in England between 2024 and 2033.

Methods We combined aggregate local authority-level data with published and newly created estimates on the association between CP and the rate per 100 000 of infant mortality, children (aged <16) looked after, child (aged <16) hospitalisations for nutritional anaemia and child (aged <16) all-cause emergency hospital admissions. We modelled relative, absolute (per 100 000) and total (per total population) annual changes for these outcomes under three CP reduction scenarios between 2024 and 2033— low-ambition (15% reduction), medium-ambition (25% reduction) and high-ambition (35% reduction)—compared with a baseline CP scenario (15% increase). Annual changes were aggregated between 2024 and 2033 at national, regional and deprivation (IMD tertiles) levels to investigate inequalities.

Results All CP reduction scenarios would result in substantial improvements to child health. Meeting the high-ambition reduction would decrease total cases of infant mortality (293; 95% CI 118 to 461), children looked after (4696; 95% CI 1987 to 7593), nutritional anaemia (458, 95% CI 336 to 574) and emergency admissions (32 650; 95% CI 4022 to 61 126) between 2024 and 2033. Northern regions (eg, North East) exhibited the greatest relative and absolute benefit. The most deprived tertile would experience the largest relative, absolute and total benefit; under high-ambition reduction, total infant mortality cases were predicted to fall by 126 (95% CI 51 to 199) in the most deprived tertile compared with 71 (95% CI 29 to 112) in the least between 2024 and 2033.

Conclusions Achieving reductions in CP could substantially improve child health and reduce health inequalities in England.

• INEQUALITIES
• CHILD HEALTH

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. Alternatively, the data is also available through the place-based longitudinal data resource: https://pldr.org/ .

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See:  https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2024-222313

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPIC

Child poverty is a key determinant of population health and health inequalities.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

Child poverty is responsive to policy. We are the first to explore the health impact of meeting hypothetical future child poverty targets in England between 2024 and 2033. We show that reducing child poverty across this period would substantially improve child health and reduce health inequalities.

HOW THIS STUDY MIGHT AFFECT RESEARCH, PRACTICE OR POLICY

We demonstrate the importance of renewed policy efforts to reduce child poverty.

Child poverty is a key determinant of population health and health inequalities. 1 Experiencing child poverty is associated with worse outcomes across a wide range of early years health indicators, with evidence suggesting that these associations are often causal. 2–4 Child poverty also likely reinforces the clustering and accumulation of adverse exposures. 5 Government policy exerts a major influence over rates of child poverty. For example, higher levels of social spending were associated with lower levels of child poverty across European countries in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, whereas countries such as the UK that have enacted high levels of austerity following the crisis—including retrenchment of social spending and local government budgets—have exhibited worse trends in child health outcomes. 6–9

In the UK, progress had been made in reducing child poverty with the ‘New Labour’ Government (1997–2010) introducing several policies under the aim of being “(…) the first generation to end child poverty (in the UK)”. 10 These included targeted measures to supplement income such as the Child Tax Credit and increases in Child Benefit, alongside other measures to improve early years services such as Sure Start programmes. 10 11 Consequently, relative child poverty (before housing costs, BHC) declined from 27% to 20% across this period (a 25.9% reduction) 12 ; corresponding declines in infant mortality rates were observed, particularly in the most deprived areas. 13 However, following the 2008 financial crash and the subsequent enactment of austerity measures by consecutive Conservative-led Governments since 2010, child poverty levels began rising from 17% in 2014 to 23% (BHC) in 2020. 12 This period coincided with a rise in infant mortality. 9 Child poverty is responsive to policy; levels fell to 19% in 2021 following a brief uplift in social spending which was withdrawn by the end of that same year, with levels rising back to 22% in 2023. 12 14 The UK also exhibits wide geographical variation in child poverty levels and its devolved governments have (although limited) powers to influence levels; for example, in 2021, the Scottish Government introduced the weekly Scottish Child Payment for low-income parents/carers, although the impact of this policy on child poverty has not been evaluated yet. 15 16 The societal effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing ‘cost of living’ crisis have heightened concerns about the level of child poverty in the UK and its current and future impact on child health. 17–21 While some broad measures have been taken by the UK Government in response to this situation, there has been a lack of policy explicitly addressing rising child poverty—such as removing the ‘two-child limit’ and ‘benefit cap’ on financial support. 22 Similarly, the UK Government’s initiative to ‘level up’ regional inequalities makes no reference to child poverty, despite the wide regional variations in child poverty rates. 16 23 As such, it is important to understand how levels of child poverty could change under different hypothetical policy scenarios and the likely consequences these scenarios would have for child health.

We therefore aimed to investigate the potential impact of meeting different child poverty reduction scenarios on child health outcomes and inequalities in England over the next decade. We selected four child health outcomes which are associated with poverty and deprivation in childhood and for which there were local authority-level data available in England: (1) infant mortality; (2) children (<16 years old) entering local authority care; (3) child (<16 years old) hospital admissions for nutritional anaemia; and (4) child (<16 years old) all-cause emergency hospital admissions. 9 13 24–27 While children entering care is not a direct measure of health, it is associated with a range of short-term and long-term adverse health consequences. 24

Study setting and design

We created a dynamic policy simulation model using aggregated local authority-level data from England. This model allows for the exploration of ex-ante policy impacts under different scenarios between 2024 and 2033, drawing on existing data and published evidence of the relationship between child poverty and health outcomes. 28

This ecological study used data for 145 English upper-tier local authorities (UTLAs). We excluded four UTLAs due to either small population size or irreconcilable boundary changes over the study period (City of London, Isles of Scilly, Bournemouth, Christchurch, and Poole and Dorset) 24 and two further UTLAs due to a lack of published outcome data (Buckinghamshire and Northamptonshire). Exposure data on relative child poverty were acquired from the children in low-income families (CiLIF) statistics, compiled by the Department of Work and Pensions and His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. 29 Outcome data for infant mortality were derived from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). 30 Data for looked-after children were obtained from the UK Government’s Department of Education, 31 and local authority-level data on the number of hospitalisations for nutritional anaemia and all-cause emergency admissions were derived from NHS Hospital Episode Statistics data and supplied by the University of Liverpool’s Place-Based Longitudinal Data Resource (PLDR). 32 Data on local authority-level income deprivation were derived from the 2019 Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), using the local authority average rank. 33

We used the prevalence of relative child poverty BHC, captured in the CiLIF statistics, as our study exposure. This was defined as the proportion of children <16 years old living in families with an income of <60% of the contemporary national median income BHC. We used the 2020 CiLIF estimate to project annual values forward until the study end date in 2033 for each UTLA (see ‘modelled scenarios’ below); while estimates have subsequently been published until 2023, these are at present provisional.

We examined four outcome measures at UTLA level: infant mortality, defined as the total number of deaths under the age of one per 100 000 live births per year; children looked after, defined as the total number of children (<16 years old) entering local authority care (whose care had been with local authorities for >24 hours period) per 100 000 of the <16 population per year; total child (<16 years old) hospitalisations for nutritional anaemia per 100 000 of the <16 population per year; and total child (<16 years old) all-cause emergency admissions per 100 000 of the <16 population per year. The final available values (numerator and denominator) for each outcome—2021 for infant mortality and children looked after, and 2019 for nutritional anaemias and emergency admissions—were held constant until start of the intervention period in 2024 (see online supplemental data ).

Supplemental material

Data analysis, effect estimates.

We calculated additional cases attributable to changes in child poverty for each scenario using separate effect estimates for each outcome. For infant mortality and looked-after children, we used published estimates. For the former, we used an estimate from a time trends analysis of local authority-level data in England between 2000 and 2017, where a one-point change in the prevalence of child poverty was associated with a change in infant mortality of 5.8 (95% CI 2.4 to 8.9) deaths per 100 000 live births. 9 For the latter, we used an estimate from a longitudinal ecological analysis of local authority-level data in England between 2015 and 2020, where a one-point change in the prevalence of child poverty was associated with a change in children looked after of 5.2 (95% CI 2.2 to 8.3) children per 100 000 children <16 years old. 24

For nutritional anaemia and emergency admissions, we did not find relevant estimates in the published literature. Instead, we derived estimates for each outcome from new analysis of annual local authority-level data from the PLDR 32 between 2015 and 2019. Estimates were derived using linear within-between regression analysis, in line with similar studies. 24 This approach uses the strengths of both fixed and random effects models, integrating information on differences between and across areas. We found that a one-point change in the prevalence of child poverty was associated with 0.53 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.67) and 37.7 (95% CI 3.8 to 72.1) additional cases per 100 000 children <16 years old for nutritional anaemia and emergency admissions, respectively.

Modelled policy scenarios

We modelled a baseline child poverty scenario as a logarithmic annual increase (ie, curvilinear with a falling rate of change over time) from the 2020 prevalence of child poverty for each UTLA, resulting in a total cumulative increase of 15% from 2020 to 2033. This formed the baseline scenario to which the effects of other scenarios were compared (see below); that is, we were interested in modelling the potential effects of successful action to reduce child poverty versus unsuccessful or no action. Using the 2023 baseline prevalence of child poverty, we then modelled three scenarios at UTLA level over a 10-year period from 2024 until 2033 (see table 1 ): (1) low ambition reduction, a cumulative exponential decrease (ie, increasing rate of change over time) in child poverty of 15% on 2023 levels between 2027 and 2033 (3-year delay); (2) medium ambition reduction, a cumulative exponential decrease of 25% on 2023 levels between 2026 and 2033 (2-year delay); and (3) high ambition reduction, a cumulative exponential decrease of 35% on 2023 levels between 2025 and 2033 (1-year delay). We understood these scenarios to be realistic in light of the 26% fall in prevalence previously observed in the UK between 1997 and 2010 under previous governments. 34 All scenarios were created using MS Excel (see online supplemental data ).

• View inline

Descriptive statistics for baseline exposure and outcomes, derived from modelled projections

Modelling approach

We calculated the annual number of attributable (avoided or added) cases at UTLA level for each outcome under each scenario: the annual relative change in child poverty (%) multiplied by the effect size per number exposed in that same year. We used a Monte Carlo approach to randomly sample (1000 iterations) from the distribution of the effect size of child poverty for each health outcome based on its mean and SE, taking the median of the sample to determine the point estimate of attributable cases, and the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles for the upper and lower CIs. For each scenario compared with baseline, we report the change in cases for each outcome as the (1) total change per individuals exposed, (2) absolute change, as the risk difference (RD) per 100 000 exposed, and (3) relative change, as risk ratio (RR) at local authority level, regional level, national level and by IMD tertiles across the whole intervention period (2024–2033). Both RR and RD account for differences in population size and are thus suitable for comparison, but only compare extreme categories of the distribution. To quantify effects on inequalities in outcomes taking account for the whole distribution of deprivation, we estimated absolute and relative changes, respectively, as the difference in slope index of inequality (SII) and ratio of relative index of inequality (RII) under each scenario compared with baseline (see online supplemental appendix 1 for details). 35 The SII can be interpreted as the difference in the rate of outcomes between the hypothetically most and least deprived local authorities, whereas the RII can be interpreted as the ratio between those local authorities.

Across the 145 UTLAs included in analysis, the population-weighted mean prevalence of child poverty in 2023 projected under the baseline scenario was 20.7% ( table 1 ). At regional level, the prevalence of child poverty was typically higher in northern regions compared with southern, with the North East having the highest median prevalence at 27.6% (IQR=4.2) and the South East and South West both had the lowest at 15.4% (IQR=8.5–6.7, respectively) in 2023. Across IMD tertiles, the median prevalence was 27.8% (IQR=10.1) in the most deprived tertile and 13.9% (IQR=4.6) in the least deprived tertile. Cases per 100 000 in 2023 are given for each outcome in table 2 , with emergency admission being the most frequent and hospitalisations for nutritional anaemia being the least. For each outcome, cases tended to be highest in regions with high child poverty. Outcome trends (cases per 100 000 exposed) at national level over the period for which official data were available (2015–2019) are presented in online supplemental appendix 2 figure A : admissions fluctuated across this period although were rising 2017–2019, hospitalisations for nutritional anaemia continued rising, and infant mortality and children looked after both fell from 2017 onwards.

Modelled relative and absolute changes (95% CI) under three child poverty reduction scenarios between 2024 and 2033, relative to a baseline scenario of increasing child poverty

Modelled changes

Increasingly ambitious scenarios corresponded to greater relative and absolute beneficial effects, with effect sizes in the high-ambition policy target around twice that of the low-ambition target across all outcome measures at all levels of aggregation ( tables 2 and 3 , online supplemental appendix 2 tables A,B ).

Modelled relative and absolute changes by Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) tertile and change in Slope Index of Inequality (SII) under three child poverty reduction scenarios between 2024 and 2033, relative to a baseline scenario of increasing child poverty

Between 2024 and 2033 across England, compared with baseline, we anticipate a reduction in: infant mortality of 1.6% (293 avoided cases, 95% CI 118 to 461) under the high-ambition scenario versus 0.9% (155 avoided cases, 95% CI 62 to 244) under the low-ambition scenario; children looked after of 2% (4696 avoided cases, 95% CI 1987 to 7593) versus 1% (2483 avoided cases, 95% CI 1051 to 4015); hospitalisations for nutritional anaemia of 4.1% (458 avoided cases, 95% CI 336 to 574) versus 2.2% (242 avoided cases, 95% CI 177 to 304); and emergency admissions of 0.4% (32 650 avoided cases, 95% CI 4022 to 34 126) versus 0.2% (17 266 avoided cases, 95% CI 2127 to 32 324) ( table 2 and online supplemental appendix 2 table A ).

At regional level, estimated absolute reductions were typically higher in the north and west of England (eg, North East, West Midlands and Yorkshire and The Humber) compared with the south (see table 2 ); this pattern is highlighted in figures 1 and 2 for cases of emergency admissions avoided per 100 000 compared with baseline under the high-ambition scenario. Between 2024 and 2033, for all child poverty reduction scenarios, we anticipate cases avoided (compared with baseline) per 100 000 would be largest in the North East for all outcomes and smallest in the South East ( table 2 ). Under the high-ambition scenario, estimated total avoided cases in the North East would be 18 (95% CI 7 to 28) for infant mortality, 298 (95% CI 126 to 482) for children looked after, 29 (95% CI 21 to 36) for nutritional anaemias, and 2070 (95% CI 255 to 3876) for emergency admissions ( online supplemental appendix 2 table A ). Regional patterns of relative change were less uniform ( table 2 ), while total cases avoided were typically highest in regions with greater population size (eg, London) ( online supplemental appendix 2 table A ). At local authority level across reduction scenarios, absolute changes per 100 000 were highest in Middlesborough, Oldham, Bradford and Birmingham for all outcome measures (see online supplemental data ); this is visually displayed for emergency admissions in figures 1 and 2 .

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint

Absolute changes in avoided cases of emergency admissions (per 100 000) for the high ambition scenario (compared to baseline) at local authority level. Grey areas represent excluded local authorities.

Absolute changes in avoided cases of emergency admissions (per 100 000) for the high ambition scenario (compared to baseline) at region level.

Considering deprivation level, anticipated reductions on the difference scale (per 100 000) compared with baseline were highest in the most deprived tertile of UTLAs for all outcome measures (see table 3 ). Under the high-ambition scenario, this equated to a total avoided cases of 126 (95% CI 51 to 199) in the most deprived versus 71 (95% CI 29 to 112) in the least for infant mortality, 1907 (95% CI 807 to 3083) versus 1199 (95% CI 507 to 1939) for children looked after, 189 (95% CI 137 to 234) versus 117 (95% CI 86 to 146) for nutritional anaemias and 13 302 (95% CI 1639 to 24 903) versus 8 322 (95% CI 1025 to 15 581) for emergency admissions ( online supplemental appendix 2 table B ); total avoided cases under each scenario for each outcome measure are shown in figure 3 . Changes on the ratio scale followed a broadly similar pattern ( table 3 ). Greater reductions in child poverty were associated with greater reductions in absolute (SII difference) and relative (RII ratio) inequalities ( table 3 and online supplemental appendix 2 table C , respectively).

Estimated total avoided cases of four health outcomes under low, medium and high poverty reduction scenarios by Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD tertile), 2024-2033.

Reducing child poverty will likely improve a range of child health outcomes and reduce health inequalities if similar or larger declines to those observed between 1997 and 2010 were achieved. We estimated relative, absolute and total changes in infant mortality, children looked after, nutritional anaemias and all-cause emergency admissions using local authority-level data in England under three different child poverty reduction scenarios between 2024 and 2033 compared with a baseline scenario of increasing child poverty. Achieving an ambitious but realistic reduction of 35% on 2023 levels would be expected to result in avoiding a total of 293 infant deaths, 4696 children entering care, 458 childhood admissions with nutritional anaemias and 32 650 childhood emergency admissions. These reductions would likely translate into significant savings for, and relieve pressure on, local authorities (in relation to children looked after) and health services. Benefits are likely to be greatest in the most disadvantaged areas, helping efforts to ‘level up’. Other health impacts that we have not been able to quantify are also likely.

We used administrative data from trusted sources and outcome estimates from previous empirical studies where available. Our modelling approach was simple and transparent, relying on a limited set of assumptions and a realistic baseline scenario (eg, we predicted mean relative child poverty BHC at 20.7%, whereas the provisional CiLif estimate for 2023 gives 20.1%). 29 However, there are limitations to this work. We focused here on a limited set of outcomes which capture different dimensions of child health and for which there were data readily available. However, future work could extend this analysis to look at other common child health outcomes such as obesity and mental health which are both associated with child poverty. 36 37 Relatedly, we used emergency admissions as a health outcome but acknowledge that they can be affected by health service access (changes in admission practice, transport, etc). Nonetheless, our analyses to parameterise the model excluded the COVID-19 pandemic when changes in practice were most likely to be problematic. We adopted the exposure of relative child poverty rate BHC. However, findings may have differed with alternative measures of child poverty such as absolute rates and rates after housing costs. Additionally, our analyses are predicated on the associations between child poverty and health outcomes accurately reflecting causal effects. While our analyses of changes within local authorities account for time-invariant confounding, risks of residual confounding remain. It is also possible that the effect estimates we observed for each outcome could differ as a consequence of the differing time periods for which data were available. Shorter time periods may lead to underestimated effect sizes within panel data analyses. 38 This might imply our estimates of the impacts on emergency admissions and nutritional anaemia are underestimated. Relatedly, it is possible that the relationship between child poverty and outcomes does not exhibit the linear dose–response relationship that we have assumed here. A few local authorities were excluded due to small numbers, with possible consequences for overall estimates. Finally, our analyses are based on aggregate (ecological) data which could be subject to the ecological fallacy; although, while individual-level data analyses are of interest, these may be subject to the atomistic fallacy (ie, addressing child poverty could have positive impacts for communities beyond the individual). 39 Aggregate data meant that we were also unable to account for variation within and between local authorities in the mechanisms influencing child poverty—for example, the depth of child poverty might differ and the health effects of addressing severe child poverty might differ from addressing less severe poverty. Furthermore, different policies to reduce child poverty (such as minimum wages, tax credits, welfare benefits) might have quite heterogenous effects that we do not distinguish. We would anticipate the impacts of the above factors to result in our estimates being conservative.

To our knowledge, this study is the first to explore the potential impacts of future child poverty reductions on a range of child health outcomes in England. It builds on previous empirical work that has highlighted the consequences of child poverty on outcomes such as infant mortality and children looked after in England. 9 13 24 For example, this research found that reductions in child poverty in the UK between 1997 and 2010 led to a reduction in infant mortality, while subsequent increases in child poverty led to increases in infant mortality. 9 13 Tying into factors influencing child poverty, previous studies have also found associations between increased local authority spending in England and reductions in hospital admissions for nutritional anaemia, although this association lacked precision among those <14 years old (rate ratio=0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05). 40 Similarly, a study using local authority data by the Nuffield Trust showed that, in 2015/2016, the number of emergency admissions was higher with increasing deprivation among those <14 years old. 26

We highlight that if policy-makers were to set and achieve child poverty targets for England—for example, through suggested measures such as removing the two-child limit and benefit cap 22 —this would likely improve child health, particularly among the most socioeconomically disadvantaged and ‘level up’ regional inequalities.

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication.

Not applicable.

Ethics approval

Acknowledgments.

For the purpose of open access, the author(s) have applied a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission.

• Whitehead M , et al
• Wickham S ,
• Barr B , et al
• Kelly-Irving M , et al
• Spencer N , et al
• Broadbent P ,
• Pearce A , et al
• Taylor-Robinson D ,
• Wickham S , et al
• Piachaud D ,
• Sutherland H
• UK Government Department for Work and Pensions
• Robinson T ,
• Norman PD , et al
• Ray-Chaudhuri S ,
• Social Security Scotland
• Lee AC , et al
• Hefferon C ,
• Bennett D , et al
• Uthayakumar-Cumarasamy A
• Thomson R ,
• Kopasker D , et al
• Taylor-Robinson DC ,
• Riordan R ,
• Ford J , et al
• University of York Cost of Living Research Group
• UK Government
• Bennett DL ,
• Schlüter DK ,
• Melis G , et al
• Arghavani H ,
• Issah A , et al
• Kossarova L ,
• Hargreaves D , et al
• Murray ET ,
• Maughan B , et al
• Zucchelli E ,
• Office for National Statistics (ONS)
• UK Government Department for Education
• ↵ Place-based logitudinal data resource . 2024 . Available : https://pldr.org/
• National statistics
• Moreno-Betancur M ,
• Latouche A ,
• Menvielle G , et al
• National statistics (UK)
• Roos JM , et al
• Diez-Roux AV
• Jenkins R ,
• Mason KE , et al

Supplementary materials

Supplementary data.

This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

• Data supplement 1
• Data supplement 2
• Data supplement 3

X @roxana_pollack, @Rachel_Thomson, @igelstorm, @ProfBambra, @benj_barr2, @vkatikireddi

BB and SVK contributed equally.

RM and RP contributed equally.

Contributors RM serves as guarantor for this study. SVK and BB conceptualised the study. RM, RP, DLB, AA and KD were involved in data curation. RP, EI, RMT and PB contributed to analysis code. RM finalised analysis code, conducted formal analyses and visualised findings. RM, RP, AP and SVK wrote the original draft. All authors were involved in the review and editing of the original draft.

Funding RM, RP, EI, RMT, AP and SVK declare funding from the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2) and the Scottish Government’s Chief Scientists Office (SPHSU17). CB declares funding from the Wellcome Trust (221266/Z/20/Z). AP declares funding from the Wellcome Trust (205412/Z/16/Z). SVK acknowledges funding from the European Research Council (949582). This work also received support from Population Health Improvement UK (PHI-UK), a national research network that seeks to transform health and reduce inequalities through change at the population level. UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) funding for the PHI-UK Policy Modelling for Health theme(s) is gratefully acknowledged [grant reference MR/Y030656/1].

Map disclaimer The depiction of boundaries on this map does not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of BMJ (or any member of its group) concerning the legal status of any country, territory, jurisdiction or area or of its authorities. This map is provided without any warranty of any kind, either express or implied.

Competing interests None declared.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

• DOI: 10.61511/emagrap.v2i1.2024.872
• Corpus ID: 271613261

The influence of regional minimum wages on unemployment rates in Indonesia multiple linear regression analysis

• Aditya Ramadan , Ageng Teguh , +2 authors E. Antriyandarti
• Published in Economic Military and… 31 July 2024
• Economic Military and Geographically Business Review

Related Papers

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

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

Published on 14.8.2024 in Vol 26 (2024)

Cancer Prevention and Treatment on Chinese Social Media: Machine Learning–Based Content Analysis Study

Authors of this article:

Original Paper

• Keyang Zhao 1 * , DPhil   ; 
• Xiaojing Li 1, 2 * , Prof Dr   ; 
• Jingyang Li 3 , DPhil  

1 School of Media & Communication, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China

2 Institute of Psychology and Behavioral Science, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China

3 School of Software, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China

*these authors contributed equally

Corresponding Author:

Xiaojing Li, Prof Dr

School of Media & Communication

Shanghai Jiao Tong University

800 Dongchuan Rd.

Minhang District

Shanghai, 200240

Phone: 86 13918611103

Fax:86 21 34207088

Email: [email protected]

Background: Nowadays, social media plays a crucial role in disseminating information about cancer prevention and treatment. A growing body of research has focused on assessing access and communication effects of cancer information on social media. However, there remains a limited understanding of the comprehensive presentation of cancer prevention and treatment methods across social media platforms. Furthermore, research comparing the differences between medical social media (MSM) and common social media (CSM) is also lacking.

Objective: Using big data analytics, this study aims to comprehensively map the characteristics of cancer treatment and prevention information on MSM and CSM. This approach promises to enhance cancer coverage and assist patients in making informed treatment decisions.

Methods: We collected all posts (N=60,843) from 4 medical WeChat official accounts (accounts with professional medical backgrounds, classified as MSM in this paper) and 5 health and lifestyle WeChat official accounts (accounts with nonprofessional medical backgrounds, classified as CSM in this paper). We applied latent Dirichlet allocation topic modeling to extract cancer-related posts (N=8427) and identified 6 cancer themes separately in CSM and MSM. After manually labeling posts according to our codebook, we used a neural-based method for automated labeling. Specifically, we framed our task as a multilabel task and utilized different pretrained models, such as Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) and Global Vectors for Word Representation (GloVe), to learn document-level semantic representations for labeling.

Results: We analyzed a total of 4479 articles from MSM and 3948 articles from CSM related to cancer. Among these, 35.52% (2993/8427) contained prevention information and 44.43% (3744/8427) contained treatment information. Themes in CSM were predominantly related to lifestyle, whereas MSM focused more on medical aspects. The most frequently mentioned prevention measures were early screening and testing, healthy diet, and physical exercise. MSM mentioned vaccinations for cancer prevention more frequently compared with CSM. Both types of media provided limited coverage of radiation prevention (including sun protection) and breastfeeding. The most mentioned treatment measures were surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. Compared with MSM (1137/8427, 13.49%), CSM (2993/8427, 35.52%) focused more on prevention.

Conclusions: The information about cancer prevention and treatment on social media revealed a lack of balance. The focus was primarily limited to a few aspects, indicating a need for broader coverage of prevention measures and treatments in social media. Additionally, the study’s findings underscored the potential of applying machine learning to content analysis as a promising research approach for mapping key dimensions of cancer information on social media. These findings hold methodological and practical significance for future studies and health promotion.

Introduction

In 2020, 4.57 million new cancer cases were reported in China, accounting for 23.7% of the world’s total [ 1 ]. Many of these cancers, however, can be prevented [ 2 , 3 ]. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), 30%-50% of cancers could be avoided through early detection and by reducing exposure to known lifestyle and environmental risks [ 4 ]. This underscores the imperative to advance education on cancer prevention and treatment.

Mass media serves not only as a primary channel for disseminating cancer information but also as a potent force in shaping the public health agenda [ 5 , 6 ]. Previous studies have underscored the necessity of understanding how specific cancer-related content is presented in the media. For example, the specific cancer types frequently mentioned in news reports have the potential to influence the public’s perception of the actual incidence of cancer [ 7 ].

Nowadays, social media plays an essential role in disseminating health information, coordinating resources, and promoting health campaigns aimed at educating individuals about prevention measures [ 8 ]. Additionally, it influences patients’ decision-making processes regarding treatment [ 9 ]. A study revealed that social media use correlates with increased awareness of cancer screening in the general population [ 10 ]. In recent years, there has been a notable surge in studies evaluating cancer-related content on social media. However, previous studies often focused on specific cancer types [ 11 ] and limited aspects of cancer-related issues [ 12 ]. The most recent comprehensive systematic content analysis of cancer coverage, conducted in 2013, indicated that cancer news coverage has heavily focused on treatment, while devoting very little attention to prevention, detection, or coping [ 13 ].

Evaluating cancer prevention information on social media is crucial for future efforts by health educators and cancer control organizations. Moreover, providing reliable medical information to individuals helps alleviate feelings of fear and uncertainty [ 14 ]. Specifically, patients often seek information online when making critical treatment decisions, such as chemotherapy [ 15 ]. Therefore, it is significant to comprehensively evaluate the types of treatment information available on social media.

Although many studies have explored cancer-related posts from the perspectives of patients with cancer [ 16 ] and caregivers [ 17 ], the analysis of posts from medical professionals has been found to be inadequate [ 18 ]. This paradox arises from the expectation that medical professionals, given their professional advantages, should take the lead in providing cancer education on social media. Nevertheless, a significant number of studies have highlighted the prevalence of unreliable medical information on social media [ 19 ]. A Japanese study highlighted a concerning phenomenon: despite efforts by medical professionals to promote cancer screening online, a significant number of antiscreening activists disseminated contradictory messages on the internet, potentially undermining the effectiveness of cancer education initiatives [ 20 ]. Hence, there is an urgent need for the accurate dissemination of health information on social media, with greater involvement from scientists or professional institutions, to combat the spread of misinformation [ 21 ]. Despite efforts to study professional medical websites [ 22 ] and apps [ 23 ], there remains a lack of comprehensive understanding of the content posted on medical social media (MSM). Further study is thus needed to compare the differences between cancer information on social media from professional medical sources and nonprofessional sources to enhance cancer education.

For this study, we defined social media as internet-based platforms characterized by social interactive functions such as reading, commenting, retweeting, and timely interaction [ 24 ]. Based on this definition, we further classified 2 types of media based on ownership, content, and contributors: common social media (CSM) and MSM. MSM refers to social media platforms owned by professional medical institutions or organizations. It primarily provides medical and health information by medical professionals, including medical-focused accounts on social media and mobile health apps. CSM refers to social media owned or managed by individuals without medical backgrounds. It mainly provides health and lifestyle content.

Similar to Facebook (Meta Platforms, Inc.), WeChat (Tencent Holdings Limited) is the most popular social media platform in China, installed on more than 90% of smartphones. Zhang et al [ 25 ] has indicated that 63.26% of people prefer to obtain health information from WeChat. Unlike other Chinese social media platforms, WeChat has a broader user base that spans various age groups [ 26 ]. WeChat Public Accounts (WPAs) operate within the WeChat platform, offering services and information to the public. Many hospitals and primary care institutions in China have increasingly registered WPAs to provide health care services, medical information, health education, and more [ 27 ]. Therefore, this study selected WPA as the focus of research.

Based on big data analytics, this study aims to comprehensively map the characteristics of cancer treatment and prevention information on MSM and CSM, which could significantly enhance cancer coverage and assist patients in treatment decision-making. To address the aforementioned research gaps, 2 research questions were formulated.

• Research question 1: What are the characteristics of cancer prevention information discussed on social media? What are the differences between MSM and CSM?
• Research question 2: What are the characteristics of cancer treatment information discussed on social media? What are the differences between MSM and CSM?

Data Collection and Processing

We selected representative WPAs based on the reports from the “Ranking of Influential Health WeChat Public Accounts” [ 28 ] and the “2021 National Rankings of Best Hospitals by Specialty” [ 29 ]. In this study, we focused on 4 medical WPAs within MSM: Doctor Dingxiang (丁香医生), 91Huayi (华医网), The Cancer Hospital of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (中国医学科学院肿瘤医院), and Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (复旦大学附属肿瘤医院). We also selected 5 health and lifestyle WeChat Official Accounts classified as CSM for this study: Health Times (健康时报), Family Doctor (家庭医生), CCTV Lifestyle (CCTV 生活圈), Road to Health (健康之路), and Life Times (生命时报).

We implemented a Python-based (Python Foundation) crawler to retrieve posts from the aforementioned WPAs. Subsequently, we implemented a filtration process to eliminate noisy and unreliable data. Note that our focus is on WPAs that provide substantial information, defined as containing no fewer than a certain number of characters. We have deleted documents that contain less than 100 Chinese characters. Furthermore, we have removed figures and videos from the remaining documents. Eventually, we conducted an analysis at the paragraph level. According to our findings from random sampling, noise in articles from WPAs mostly originates from advertisements, which are typically found in specific paragraphs. Therefore, we retained only paragraphs that did not contain advertising keywords. In total, we collected 60,843 posts from these WPAs, comprising 20,654 articles from MSM and 40,189 articles from CSM.

The workflow chart in Figure 1 depicts all procedures following data collection and preprocessing. After obtaining meaningful raw documents, we performed word-level segmentation on the texts. We then removed insignificant stopwords and replaced specific types of cancers with a general term to facilitate coarse-grained latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA)–based filtering. Subsequently, we conducted fine-grained LDA topic modeling on the filtered documents without replacing keywords to visualize the topics extracted from the WPAs. Furthermore, we utilized a manually labeled codebook to train a long short-term memory (LSTM) network for document classification into various categories. Finally, we performed data analysis using both the topic distribution derived from fine-grained LDA and the classified documents.

Latent Dirichlet Allocation Topic Modeling

LDA is a generative statistical model that explains sets of observations by latent groups, revealing why some parts of the data are similar [ 30 ]. The LDA algorithm can speculate on the topic distribution of a document.

When comparing LDA with other natural language processing methods such as LSTM-based deep learning, it is worth noting that LDA stands out as an unsupervised learning algorithm. Unlike its counterparts, LDA has the ability to uncover hidden topics without relying on labeled training data. Its strength lies in its capability to automatically identify latent topics within documents by analyzing statistical patterns of word co-occurrences. In addition, LDA provides interpretable outcomes by assigning a probability distribution to each document, representing its association with various topics. Similarly, it assigns a probability distribution to each topic, indicating the prevalence of specific words within that topic. This feature enables researchers to understand the principal themes present in their corpus and the extent to which these themes are manifested in individual documents.

The foundational principle of LDA involves using probabilistic inference to estimate the distribution of topics and word allocations. Specifically, LDA assumes that each document is composed of a mixture of a small number of topics, and each word’s presence can be attributed to one of these topics. This approach allows for overlapping content among documents, rather than strict categorization into separate groups. For a deeper understanding of the technical and theoretical aspects of the LDA algorithm, readers are encouraged to refer to the research conducted by Blei et al [ 30 ]. In this context, our primary focus was on the application of the algorithm to our corpus, and the procedure is outlined in the following sections.

Document Selection

Initially, document selection involves using a methodological approach to sample documents from the corpus, which may include random selection or be guided by predetermined criteria such as document relevance or popularity within the social media context.

Topic Inference

Utilizing LDA or a similar topic modeling technique, we infer the underlying topical structure within each document. This involves modeling documents as mixtures of latent topics represented by a Dirichlet distribution, from which topic proportions are sampled.

Topic Assignment to Words

After determining topic proportions, we proceed to assign topics to individual words in the document. Using a multinomial distribution, each word is probabilistically associated with one of the inferred topics based on the previously derived topic proportions.

Word Distribution Estimation

Each topic is characterized by a distinct distribution over the vocabulary, representing the likelihood of observing specific words within that topic. Using a Dirichlet distribution, we estimate the word distribution for each inferred topic.

Word Generation

Finally, using the multinomial distribution again, we generate words for the document by sampling from the estimated word distribution corresponding to the topic assigned to each word. This iterative process produces synthetic text that mirrors the statistical properties of the original corpus.

To filter out noncancer-related documents in our case, we replaced cancer-related words with “癌症” (cancer or tumor in Chinese) in all documents. We then conducted an LDA analysis to compute the topic distribution of each document and retained documents related to topics where “癌症” appears among the top 10 words.

In our study, we used Python packages such as jieba and gensim for document segmentation and extracting per-topic-per-word probabilities from the model. During segmentation, we applied a stopword dictionary to filter out meaningless words and transformed each document into a cleaned version containing only meaningful words.

During the LDA analysis, to determine the optimal number of topics, our main goal was to compute the topic coherence for various numbers of topics and select the model that yielded the highest coherence score. Coherence measures the interpretability of each topic by assessing whether the words within the same topic are logically associated with each other. The higher the score for a specific number k , the more closely related the words are within that topic. In this phase, we used the Python package pyLDAvis to compare coherence scores with different numbers of topics. Subsequently, we filtered and retained only the documents related to cancer topics, resulting in 4479 articles from MSM and 3948 articles from CSM.

Among the filtered articles, we conducted another LDA analysis to extract topics from the original articles without replacing cancer-related words. Using pyLDAvis, we calculated the coherence score and identified 6 topics for both MSM and CSM articles.

To visualize the topic modeling results, we created bar graphs where the y-axis indicates the top 10 keywords associated with each topic, and the x-axis represents the weight of each keyword (indicating its contribution to the topic). At the bottom of each graph ( Figures 2 and 3 ), we generalized and presented the name of each topic based on the top 10 most relevant keywords.

Manual Content Analysis: Coding Procedure

Based on the codebook, 2 independent coders (KZ and JL) engaged in discussions regarding the coding rules to ensure a shared understanding of the conceptual and operational distinctions among the coding items. To ensure the reliability of the coding process, both coders independently coded 100 randomly selected articles. Upon completion of the pilot coding, any disagreements were resolved through discussion between the 2 coders.

For the subsequent coding phase, each coder was assigned an equitable proportion of articles, with 10% of the cancer-related articles randomly sampled from both MSM samples (450/4479) and CSM samples (394/3948). Manual coding was performed on a total of 844 articles, which served as the training data set for the machine learning model. The operational definitions of each coding variable are detailed in Multimedia Appendix 1 .

Coding Measures

Cancer prevention measures.

Coders identified whether an article mentioned any of the following cancer prevention measures [ 31 - 35 ]: (1) avoid tobacco use, (2) maintain a healthy weight, (3) healthy diet, (4) exercise regularly, (5) limit alcohol use, (6) get vaccinated, (7) reduce exposure to ultraviolet radiation and ionizing radiation, (8) avoid urban air pollution and indoor smoke from household use of solid fuels, (9) early screening and detection, (10) breastfeeding, (11) controlling chronic infections, and (12) other prevention measures.

Cancer Treatment Measures

Coders identified whether an article mentioned any of the following treatments [ 36 ]: (1) surgery (including cryotherapy, lasers, hyperthermia, photodynamic therapy, cuts with scalpels), (2) radiotherapy, (3) chemotherapy, (4) immunotherapy, (5) targeted therapy, (6) hormone therapy, (7) stem cell transplant, (8) precision medicine, (9) cancer biomarker testing, and (10) other treatment measures.

Neural-Based Machine Learning

In this part, we attempted to label each article using a neural network. As mentioned earlier, we manually labeled 450 MSM articles and 394 CSM articles. We divided the labeled data into a training set and a test set with a ratio of 4:1. We adopted the pretrained Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) model. As BERT can only accept inputs with fewer than 512 tokens [ 37 ], we segmented each document into pieces of 510 tokens (accounting for BERT’s automatic [CLS] and [SEP] tokens, where [CLS] denotes the start of a sentence or a document, and [SEP] denotes the end of a sentence or a document) with an overlap of 384 tokens between adjacent pieces. We began by utilizing a BERT-based encoder to encode each piece and predict its labels using a multioutput decoder. After predicting labels for each piece, we pooled the outputs for all pieces within the same document and used an LSTM network to predict final labels for each document.

Ethical Considerations

This study did not require institutional research board review as it did not involve interactions with humans or other living entities, private or personally identifiable information, or any pharmaceuticals or medical devices. The data set consists solely of publicly available social media posts.

Cancer Topics on Social Media

Applying LDA, we identified 6 topics each for MSM and CSM articles. The distribution of topics among MSM and CSM is presented in Table 1 , while the keyword weights for each topic are illustrated in Figures 2 and 3 .

a In each article, different topics may appear at the same time. Therefore, the total frequency of each topic did not equate to the total number of 8427 articles.

b To ensure the accuracy of the results, directly translating sampled texts from Chinese into English posed challenges due to differences in semantic elements. In English, cancer screening refers to detecting the possibility of cancer before symptoms appear, while diagnostic tests confirm the presence of cancer after symptoms are observed. However, in Chinese, the term “检查” encompasses both meanings. Therefore, we translated it as both screening and testing.

Among MSM articles, topic 5 was the most frequent (2548/8427, 30.24%), followed by topic 6 (1741/8427, 20.66%) and topic 2 (1611/8427, 19.12%). Both topics 5 and 6 focused on clinical treatments, with topic 5 specifically emphasizing cancer diagnosis. The keywords in topic 6, such as “polyp,” “tumor,” and “surgery,” emphasized the risk and diagnosis of precancerous lesions. Topic 2 primarily focused on cancer surgeries related to breast cancer, lung cancer, and ovarian cancer. The results indicate that MSM articles concentrated on specific cancers with higher incidence in China, including stomach cancer, liver cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, and cervical cancer [ 10 ].

On CSM, topic 4 (1947/8427, 23.10%) had the highest proportion, followed by topic 5 (1790/8427, 21.24%) and topic 3 (1599/8427, 18.97%). Topic 6 had the smallest proportion. Topics 1 and 4 were related to lifestyle. Topic 1 particularly focused on cancer-causing substances, with keywords such as “food,” “nutrition,” and “carcinogen” appearing most frequently. Topic 4 was centered around exercise, diet, and their impact on cancer risk. Topics 3 and 5 were oriented toward cancer screening and diagnosis. Topic 3 specifically focused on female-related cancers, with discussions prominently featuring breast cancer screening and testing. Topic 5 emphasized early detection and diagnosis of stomach and lung cancers, highlighting keywords such as “screening” and “symptom.”

Cancer Prevention Information

Our experiment on the test set showed that the machine learning model achieved F 1 -scores above 85 for both prevention and treatment categories in both MSM and CSM. For subclasses within prevention and treatment, we achieved F 1 -scores of at least 70 for dense categories (with an occurrence rate >10%, ie, occurs in >1 of 10 entries) and at least 50 for sparse categories (with an occurrence rate <10%, ie, occurs in <1 of 10 entries). Subsequently, we removed items labeled as “other prevention measures” and “other treatment measures” due to semantic ambiguity.

Table 2 presents the distribution of cancer prevention information across MSM (n=4479) and CSM (n=3948).

a MSM: medical social media.

b CSM: common social media.

Cancer Prevention Information on MSM

The distribution of cancer prevention information on MSM (n=4479) is as follows: articles discussing prevention measures accounted for 25.39% (1137/4479) of all MSM cancer-related articles. The most frequently mentioned measure was “early screening and testing” (737/4479, 16.45%). The second and third most frequently mentioned prevention measures were “healthy diet” (278/4479, 6.21%) and “get vaccinated” (261/4479, 5.83%). The least mentioned prevention measures were “controlling chronic infections” (3/4479, 0.07%), “reduce exposure to radiation” (2/4479, 0.04%), and “breastfeeding” (1/4479, 0.02%), each appearing in only 1-3 articles.

Cancer Prevention Information on CSM

As many as 1856 out of 3948 (47.01%) articles on CSM referred to cancer prevention information. Among these, “early screening and testing” (1085/3948, 27.48%) was the most commonly mentioned prevention measure. “Exercise regularly” (661/3948, 16.74%) and “healthy diet” (598/3948, 15.15%) were the 2 most frequently mentioned lifestyle-related prevention measures. Additionally, “avoid tobacco use” accounted for 9.32% (368/3948) of mentions. Other lifestyle-related prevention measures were “limit alcohol use” (281/3948, 7.12%) and “maintain a healthy weight” (193/3948, 4.89%). The least mentioned prevention measures were “practice safe sex” (4/3948, 0.10%), “reduce exposure to radiation” (1/3948, 0.03%), and “breastfeeding” (1/3948, 0.03%), each appearing in only 1-4 articles.

Cancer Prevention Information on Social Media

Table 3 presents the overall distribution of cancer prevention information on social media (N=8427). Notably, CSM showed a stronger focus on cancer prevention (1856/3948, 47.01%) compared with MSM (1137/8427, 13.49%). Both platforms highlighted the importance of early screening and testing. However, MSM placed greater emphasis on vaccination as a prevention measure. In addition to lifestyle-related prevention measures, both CSM and MSM showed relatively less emphasis on avoiding exposure to environmental carcinogens, such as air pollution, indoor smoke, and radiation. “Breastfeeding” was the least mentioned prevention measure (2/3948, 0.05%) on both types of social media.

Cancer Treatment Information

Table 4 presents the distribution of cancer treatment information on MSM (n=4479) and CSM (n=3948).

Cancer Treatment Information on MSM

Cancer treatment information appeared in 66.22% (2966/4479) of MSM posts. “Surgery” was the most frequently mentioned treatment measure (2045/4479, 45.66%), followed by “chemotherapy” (1122/4479, 25.05%) and “radiation therapy” (1108/4479, 24.74%). The proportions of “cancer biomarker testing” (380/4479, 8.48%), “targeted therapy” (379/4479, 8.46%), and “immunotherapy” (317/4479, 7.08%) were comparable. Only a minimal percentage of articles (47/4479, 1.05%) addressed “hormone therapy.” Furthermore, “stem cell transplantation therapy” was mentioned in just 5 out of 4479 (0.11%) articles.

Cancer Treatment Information on CSM

Cancer treatment information accounted for only 19.71% (778/3948) of CSM posts. “Surgery” was the most frequently mentioned treatment measure (419/3948, 10.61%), followed by “chemotherapy” (285/3948, 7.22%) and “radiation therapy” (232/3948, 5.88%). Relatively, the frequency of “targeted therapy” (181/3948, 4.58%) was similar to that of the first 3 types. However, “cancer biomarker testing” (55/3948, 1.39%), “immunotherapy” (22/3948, 0.56%), and “hormone therapy” (14/3948, 0.35%) appeared rarely on CSM. Notably, there were no articles on CSM mentioning stem cell transplantation.

Cancer Treatment Information on Social Media

Table 5 shows the overall distribution of cancer treatment information on social media (N=8427). A total of 44.43% (3744/8427) of articles contained treatment information. MSM (2966/8427, 35.20%) discussed treatment information much more frequently than CSM (778/8427, 9.23%). Furthermore, the frequency of all types of treatment measures mentioned was higher on MSM than on CSM. The 3 most frequently mentioned types of treatment measures were surgery (2464/8427, 29.24%), chemotherapy (1407/8427, 16.70%), and radiation therapy (1340/8427, 15.90%). Relatively, MSM (380/8427, 4.51%) showed a higher focus on cancer biomarker testing compared with CSM (55/8427, 0.65%).

Cancer Topics on MSM and CSM

In MSM, treatment-related topics constituted the largest proportion, featuring keywords related to medical examinations. Conversely, in CSM, the distribution of topics appeared more balanced, with keywords frequently associated with cancer risk and screening. Overall, the distribution of topics on MSM and CSM revealed that CSM placed greater emphasis on lifestyle factors and early screening and testing. Specifically, CSM topics focused more on early cancer screening and addressed cancer types with high incidence rates. By contrast, MSM topics centered more on clinical treatment, medical testing, and the cervical cancer vaccine in cancer prevention. Additionally, MSM focused on types of cancers that are easier to screen and prevent, including liver cancer, stomach cancer, breast cancer, cervical cancer, and colon cancer.

Cancer Prevention Information on MSM and CSM

Through content analysis, it was found that 35.52% (2993/8427) of articles on social media contained prevention information, and 44.43% (3744/8427) contained treatment information. Compared with MSM (1137/8427, 13.49%), CSM (2993/8427, 35.52%) focused more on prevention.

Primary prevention mainly involves adopting healthy behaviors to lower the risk of developing cancer, which has been proven to have long-term effects on cancer prevention. Secondary prevention focuses on inhibiting or reversing carcinogenesis, including early screening and detection, as well as the treatment or removal of precancerous lesions [ 38 ]. Compared with cancer screening and treatment, primary prevention is considered the most cost-effective approach to reducing the cancer burden.

From our results, “early screening and testing” (1822/8427, 21.62%) was the most frequently mentioned prevention measure on both MSM and CSM. According to a cancer study from China, behavioral risk factors were identified as the primary cause of cancer [ 10 ]. However, measures related to primary prevention were not frequently mentioned. Additionally, lifestyle-related measures such as “healthy diet,” “regular exercise,” “avoiding tobacco use,” and “limiting alcohol use” were mentioned much less frequently on MSM compared with CSM.

Furthermore, “avoiding tobacco use” (554/8427, 6.57%) and “limiting alcohol use” (409/8427, 4.85%) were rarely mentioned, despite tobacco and alcohol being the leading causes of cancer. In China, public policies on the production, sale, and consumption of alcohol are weaker compared with Western countries. Notably, traditional Chinese customs often promote the belief that moderate drinking is beneficial for health [ 39 ]. Moreover, studies indicated that the smoking rate among adult men exceeded 50% in 2015. By 2018, 25.6% of Chinese adults aged 18 and above were smokers, totaling approximately 282 million smokers in China (271 million males and 11 million females) [ 40 ]. These statistics align with the consistently high incidence of lung cancer among Chinese men [ 41 ]. Simultaneously, the incidence and mortality of lung cancer in Chinese women were more likely associated with exposure to second-hand smoke or occupation-related risk factors.

Although MSM (261/8427, 3.10%) mentioned vaccination more frequently than CSM (113/8427, 1.34%), vaccination was not widely discussed on social media overall (374/8427, 4.44%). The introduction of human papillomavirus vaccination in China has lagged for more than 10 years compared with Western countries. A bivalent vaccine was approved by the Chinese Food and Drug Administration in 2017 but has not been included in the national immunization schedules up to now [ 42 ].

According to the “European Code Against Cancer” [ 43 ], breastfeeding is recommended as a measure to prevent breast cancer. However, there were no articles mentioning the role of breastfeeding in preventing breast cancer on social media.

One of the least frequently mentioned measures was “radiation protection,” which includes sun protection. Although skin cancer is not as common in China as in Western countries, China has the largest population in the world. A study showed that only 55.2% of Chinese people knew that ultraviolet radiation causes skin cancer [ 33 ]. Additional efforts should be made to enhance public awareness of skin cancer prevention through media campaigns.

Overall, our results indicate that social media, especially MSM, focused more on secondary prevention. The outcomes of primary prevention are challenging to identify in individuals, and studies on cancer education may partly explain why primary prevention was often overlooked [ 44 ].

Cancer Treatment Information on MSM and CSM

Compared with a related content analysis study in the United States, our findings also indicate that the media placed greater emphasis on treatment [ 45 ]. Treatment information on MSM was more diverse than on CSM, with a higher proportion of the 3 most common cancer treatments—surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy—mentioned on MSM compared with CSM. Notably, CSM (232/8427, 2.75%) mentioned radiation therapy less frequently compared with MSM (1108/8427, 13.15%), despite it being one of the most common cancer treatment measures in clinical practice.

In addition to common treatment methods, other approaches such as targeted therapy (560/8427, 6.65%) and immunotherapy (339/8427, 4.02%) were rarely discussed. This could be attributed to the high costs associated with these treatments. A study revealed that each newly diagnosed patient with cancer in China faced out-of-pocket expenses of US $4947, amounting to 57.5% of the family’s annual income, posing an unaffordable economic burden of 77.6% [ 46 ]. In 2017, the Chinese government released the National Health Insurance Coverage (NHIC) policy to improve the accessibility and affordability of innovative anticancer medicines, leading to reduced prices and increased availability and utilization of 15 negotiated drugs. However, a study indicated that the availability of these innovative anticancer drugs remained limited. By 2019, the NHIC policy had benefited 44,600 people, while the number of new cancer cases in China in 2020 was 4.57 million [ 47 ]. The promotion of information on innovative therapies helped patients gain a better understanding of their cancer treatment options [ 48 ].

Practical Implications

This research highlighted that MSM did not fully leverage its professional background in providing comprehensive cancer information to the public. In fact, MSM holds substantial potential for contributing to cancer education. The findings from the content analysis also have practical implications for practitioners. They provide valuable insights for experts to assess the effectiveness of social media, monitor the types of information available to the public and patients with cancer, and guide communication and medical professionals in crafting educational and persuasive messages based on widely covered or less attended content.

Limitations and Future Directions

This study had some limitations. First, we only collected 60,843 articles from 9 WPAs in China. Future research could broaden the scope by collecting data from diverse countries and social media platforms. Second, our manual labeling only extracted 10% (450/4479 for MSM and 394/3948 for CSM) of the samples; the accuracy of the machine learning model could be enhanced by training it with a larger set of labeled articles. Finally, our results only represented the media’s presentation, and the impact of this information on individuals remains unclear. Further work could examine its influence on behavioral intentions or actions related to cancer prevention among the audience.

Conclusions

The analysis of cancer-related information on social media revealed an imbalance between prevention and treatment content. Overall, there was more treatment information than prevention information. Compared with MSM, CSM mentioned more prevention information. On MSM, the proportion of treatment information was greater than prevention information, whereas on CSM, the 2 were equal. The focus on cancer prevention and treatment information was primarily limited to a few aspects, with a predominant emphasis on secondary prevention rather than primary prevention. There is a need for further improvement in the coverage of prevention measures and treatments for cancer on social media. Additionally, the findings underscored the potential of applying machine learning to content analysis as a promising research paradigm for mapping key dimensions of cancer information on social media. These findings offer methodological and practical significance for future studies and health promotion.

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by The Major Program of the Chinese National Foundation of Social Sciences under the project “The Challenge and Governance of Smart Media on News Authenticity” (grant number 23&ZD213).

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

Definitions and descriptions of coding items.

• International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), World Health Organization (WHO). Cancer today: the global cancer observatory. IARC. Geneva, Switzerland. WHO; 2020. URL: https://gco.iarc.who.int/today/en [accessed 2023-12-25]
• Yu S, Yang CS, Li J, You W, Chen J, Cao Y, et al. Cancer prevention research in China. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). Aug 2015;8(8):662-674. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Xia C, Dong X, Li H, Cao M, Sun D, He S, et al. Cancer statistics in China and United States, 2022: profiles, trends, and determinants. Chin Med J (Engl). Feb 09, 2022;135(5):584-590. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• World Health Organization (WHO). Cancer. WHO. 2023. URL: https://www.who.int/news-room/facts-in-pictures/detail/cancer [accessed 2023-12-27]
• Pagoto S, Waring ME, Xu R. A call for a public health agenda for social media research. J Med Internet Res. Dec 19, 2019;21(12):e16661. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Tekeli-Yesil S, Tanner M. Understanding the contribution of conventional media in earthquake risk communication. J Emerg Manag Disaster Commun. Jun 01, 2024;05(01):111-133. [ CrossRef ]
• Jensen JD, Scherr CL, Brown N, Jones C, Christy K, Hurley RJ. Public estimates of cancer frequency: cancer incidence perceptions mirror distorted media depictions. J Health Commun. 2014;19(5):609-624. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Banaye Yazdipour A, Niakan Kalhori SR, Bostan H, Masoorian H, Ataee E, Sajjadi H. Effect of social media interventions on the education and communication among patients with cancer: a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open. Nov 30, 2022;12(11):e066550. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Wallner LP, Martinez KA, Li Y, Jagsi R, Janz NK, Katz SJ, et al. Use of online communication by patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer during the treatment decision process. JAMA Oncol. Dec 01, 2016;2(12):1654-1656. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Sun D, Li H, Cao M, He S, Lei L, Peng J, et al. Cancer burden in China: trends, risk factors and prevention. Cancer Biol Med. Nov 15, 2020;17(4):879-895. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Basch CH, Menafro A, Mongiovi J, Hillyer GC, Basch CE. A content analysis of YouTube videos related to prostate cancer. Am J Mens Health. Jan 2017;11(1):154-157. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Vasconcelos Silva C, Jayasinghe D, Janda M. What can Twitter tell us about skin cancer communication and prevention on social media? Dermatology. 2020;236(2):81-89. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hurley RJ, Riles JM, Sangalang A. Online cancer news: trends regarding article types, specific cancers, and the cancer continuum. Health Commun. 2014;29(1):41-50. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Mishel MH, Germino BB, Lin L, Pruthi RS, Wallen EM, Crandell J, et al. Managing uncertainty about treatment decision making in early stage prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. Patient Educ Couns. Dec 2009;77(3):349-359. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Brown P, Kwan V, Vallerga M, Obhi HK, Woodhead EL. The use of anecdotal information in a hypothetical lung cancer treatment decision. Health Commun. Jun 2019;34(7):713-719. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Crannell WC, Clark E, Jones C, James TA, Moore J. A pattern-matched Twitter analysis of US cancer-patient sentiments. J Surg Res. Dec 2016;206(2):536-542. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Gage-Bouchard EA, LaValley S, Mollica M, Beaupin LK. Cancer communication on social media: examining how cancer caregivers use Facebook for cancer-related communication. Cancer Nurs. 2017;40(4):332-338. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Reid BB, Rodriguez KN, Thompson MA, Matthews GD. Cancer-specific Twitter conversations among physicians in 2014. JCO. May 20, 2015;33(15_suppl):e17500. [ CrossRef ]
• Warner EL, Waters AR, Cloyes KG, Ellington L, Kirchhoff AC. Young adult cancer caregivers' exposure to cancer misinformation on social media. Cancer. Apr 15, 2021;127(8):1318-1324. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Okuhara T, Ishikawa H, Okada M, Kato M, Kiuchi T. Assertions of Japanese websites for and against cancer screening: a text mining analysis. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. Apr 01, 2017;18(4):1069-1075. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Qin L, Zhang X, Wu A, Miser JS, Liu Y, Hsu JC, et al. Association between social media use and cancer screening awareness and behavior for people without a cancer diagnosis: matched cohort study. J Med Internet Res. Aug 27, 2021;23(8):e26395. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Denecke K, Nejdl W. How valuable is medical social media data? Content analysis of the medical web. Information Sciences. May 30, 2009;179(12):1870-1880. [ CrossRef ]
• Bender JL, Yue RYK, To MJ, Deacken L, Jadad AR. A lot of action, but not in the right direction: systematic review and content analysis of smartphone applications for the prevention, detection, and management of cancer. J Med Internet Res. Dec 23, 2013;15(12):e287. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Li X, Liu Q. Social media use, eHealth literacy, disease knowledge, and preventive behaviors in the COVID-19 pandemic: cross-sectional study on Chinese netizens. J Med Internet Res. Oct 09, 2020;22(10):e19684. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Zhang X, Wen D, Liang J, Lei J. How the public uses social media wechat to obtain health information in China: a survey study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. Jul 05, 2017;17(Suppl 2):66. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Elad B. WeChat statistics by device allocation, active users, country wise traffic, demographics and marketing channels, social media traffic. EnterpriseAppsToday. 2023. URL: https://www.enterpriseappstoday.com/stats/wechat-statistics.html [accessed 2023-12-26]
• Liang X, Yan M, Li H, Deng Z, Lu Y, Lu P, et al. WeChat official accounts' posts on medication use of 251 community healthcare centers in Shanghai, China: content analysis and quality assessment. Front Med (Lausanne). 2023;10:1155428. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• NewRank. Ranking of influential health WeChat public accounts（中国健康类微信影响力排行榜）. NewRank（新榜）. 2018. URL: https://newrank.cn/public/info/rank_detail.html?name=health [accessed 2021-04-30]
• Hospital Management Institute of Fudan University. 2021 National rankings of best hospitals by oncology specialty （2021年度肿瘤科专科声誉排行榜）. Hospital Management Institute of Fudan University. 2021. URL: https://rank.cn-healthcare.com/fudan/specialty-reputation/year/2021/sid/2 [accessed 2021-05-01]
• Blei D, Ng A, Jordan M. Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research. 2003;3:993-1022. [ FREE Full text ]
• World Health Organization (WHO). Health topic: cancer. WHO. URL: https://www.who.int/health-topics/cancer#tab=tab_2 [accessed 2023-12-27]
• Moore SC, Lee I, Weiderpass E, Campbell PT, Sampson JN, Kitahara CM, et al. Association of leisure-time physical activity with risk of 26 types of cancer in 1.44 million adults. JAMA Intern Med. Jun 01, 2016;176(6):816-825. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Stephens P, Martin B, Ghafari G, Luong J, Nahar V, Pham L, et al. Skin cancer knowledge, attitudes, and practices among Chinese population: a narrative review. Dermatol Res Pract. 2018;2018:1965674. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Agents classified by the IARC monographs, volumes 1–136. IARC. URL: https://monographs.iarc.who.int/agents-classified-by-the-iarc/ [accessed 2023-12-25]
• Han CJ, Lee YJ, Demiris G. Interventions using social media for cancer prevention and management. Cancer Nurs. 2018;41(6):E19-E31. [ CrossRef ]
• National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Cancer Institute (NCI). Types of cancer treatment. NIH. URL: https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/types [accessed 2021-03-15]
• Cui Y, Che W, Liu T, Qin B, Yang Z. Pre-training with whole word masking for Chinese BERT. IEEE/ACM Trans Audio Speech Lang Process. 2021;29:3504-3514. [ CrossRef ]
• Loomans-Kropp HA, Umar A. Cancer prevention and screening: the next step in the era of precision medicine. NPJ Precis Oncol. 2019;3:3. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Tang Y, Xiang X, Wang X, Cubells JF, Babor TF, Hao W. Alcohol and alcohol-related harm in China: policy changes needed. Bull World Health Organ. Jan 22, 2013;91(4):270-276. [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang M, Yang L, Wang L, Jiang Y, Huang Z, Zhao Z, et al. Trends in smoking prevalence in urban and rural China, 2007 to 2018: findings from 5 consecutive nationally representative cross-sectional surveys. PLoS Med. Aug 2022;19(8):e1004064. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Li J, Wu B, Selbæk G, Krokstad S, Helvik A. Factors associated with consumption of alcohol in older adults - a comparison between two cultures, China and Norway: the CLHLS and the HUNT-study. BMC Geriatr. Jul 31, 2017;17(1):172. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Feng R, Zong Y, Cao S, Xu R. Current cancer situation in China: good or bad news from the 2018 Global Cancer Statistics? Cancer Commun (Lond). Apr 29, 2019;39(1):22. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Scoccianti C, Key TJ, Anderson AS, Armaroli P, Berrino F, Cecchini M, et al. European code against cancer 4th Edition: breastfeeding and cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. Dec 2015;39 Suppl 1:S101-S106. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Espina C, Porta M, Schüz J, Aguado IH, Percival RV, Dora C, et al. Environmental and occupational interventions for primary prevention of cancer: a cross-sectorial policy framework. Environ Health Perspect. Apr 2013;121(4):420-426. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Jensen JD, Moriarty CM, Hurley RJ, Stryker JE. Making sense of cancer news coverage trends: a comparison of three comprehensive content analyses. J Health Commun. Mar 2010;15(2):136-151. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Huang H, Shi J, Guo L, Zhu X, Wang L, Liao X, et al. Expenditure and financial burden for common cancers in China: a hospital-based multicentre cross-sectional study. The Lancet. Oct 2016;388:S10. [ CrossRef ]
• People's Daily. 17 Cancer drugs included in medical insurance at reduced prices, reducing medication costs by over 75% (17种抗癌药降价进医保减轻药费负担超75%). People's Daily. 2019. URL: http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2019-02/13/content_5365211.htm [accessed 2023-12-25]
• Fang W, Xu X, Zhu Y, Dai H, Shang L, Li X. Impact of the National Health Insurance Coverage Policy on the Utilisation and Accessibility of Innovative Anti-cancer Medicines in China: An Interrupted Time-Series Study. Front Public Health. 2021;9:714127. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]

Abbreviations

Edited by S Ma; submitted 02.01.24; peer-reviewed by F Yang, D Wawrzuta; comments to author 20.03.24; revised version received 19.04.24; accepted 03.06.24; published 14.08.24.

©Keyang Zhao, Xiaojing Li, Jingyang Li. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 14.08.2024.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (ISSN 1438-8871), is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.