background research report

• 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

Introducing SciSpace’s Citation Booster To Increase Research Visibility

AI for Meta-Analysis — A Comprehensive Guide

How To Write An Argumentative Essay

• Manuscript Preparation

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

• 3 minute read

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

• Research Process

The Top 5 Qualities of Every Good Researcher

You may also like.

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

The Clear Path to An Impactful Paper: ②

The Essentials of Writing to Communicate Research in Medicine

Changing Lines: Sentence Patterns in Academic Writing

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

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.

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

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic 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.

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: May 2, 2024 4:39 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

How to Write the Background of a Study

• Research Process

The background to a study sets the scene . It lays out the “state of the art”. It tells your reader about other research done on the topic in question, via useful review papers and other summaries of the literature.

Updated on May 5, 2023

The background to your study, sometimes called the ‘state of the art’ (especially in grant writing), sets the scene for a paper. This section shows readers why your research is important, relevant, and why they should continue reading. You must hook them in with a great background to your study, which is part of the overall introduction to your research paper.

In higher impact articles, such as those published in Nature or Science (which is what we are all aiming for, after all …), the study background is t he middle section of an essentially three-part introduction . This section is framed by a presentation of ‘the question’ (first part of the introduction) and a quick explanation of ‘what this paper will do’ (the third part of the introduction).

The introduction of a research paper should be “shaped” like an upside down triangle: 

Start broad. Set the scene with a large-scale general research area [e.g., why doing a PhD erases your writing skills (ha ha) or mental health in teenagers and why this is such a widespread global issue] and then focus down to the question your research addresses (e.g., how can writing skills be improved in PhD students, or brain scans and how these can be used in treatment).

Read on to learn more about framing your next research paper with a well-written and researched background section.

What is the background of a study?

The background to a study sets the scene . It lays out the “state of the art”. It tells your reader about other research done on the topic in question, via useful review papers and other summaries of the literature. 

A background is not a literature review: No one wants to read endless citations back-to-back in this section. You don’t need to list all the papers you’ve read, or all the work done in the past on this topic. 

Set the scene and frame your question in the context of the literature. Seek out review articles in particular. The aim of this section is to build on what has come before so your reader will be armed with all the information they need to understand the remainder of your article, and why - in context - the aims of your study are important.

How to write the background to your research paper

Cater to your audience.

It’s important to frame your background to the right audience.

The background of your study needs to be pitched differently depending on your target journal. A more subject-area specific journal (e.g. Journal of Brain Studies ) will be read by specialists in your field. Generally, less information to set up the paper in a wider context and less background information will be required. Your readers are already experts on the topic in question .

However, if you are aiming your paper at a more general audience (a journal like Nature or Science , for example) then you're going to need to explain more in your background. A reader of a specialized journal will know about the neocortex within the brain and where this is located, but a general reader will need you to set things up more.

Readers are always the most important people in research publishing, after all: If you want your work to be read, used, and cited (and therefore drive up your H-index as well as your institution’s ranking) you’ll need a well-pitched background of your study.

What is included in the background of a study?

Remember this section sits in the middle of the introduction. Here’s a handy template for what to include:

• Existing research on the area of study (not everything, but a broad overview. Aim to cite review papers if you can). Start this section with preliminary data and then build it out;
• Mention any controversies around your topic (either that you’ve identified, or that have been picked up by earlier work. Check the discussion sections of recent articles for pointers here);
• Any gaps in existing research?, and;
• How will your study fill these gaps? State your research methodologies. Any further research that needs to be done?

Aim for one paragraph , or a series of short paragraphs within one section. The last two of the topics outlined above can be short, just one or two sentences. These are there to hook the reader in and to frame your background so that the text leads into the final section of the introduction where you explain ‘What your paper is going to do’.

Simple really.

And finally…some thoughts

I used to get really bogged down with article writing, especially the shape of the introduction.

Here’s a trick to keep in mind: Remember that the average length of an academic research paper published in a peer reviewed journal is around 4,000 - 5,000 words - not too long. 

This means that you're likely going to be aiming for an article of about this length the next time you sit down to write: Not too many words for an effective and well-structured introduction. You’ve got about 1,500 - 2,000 words maximum. And aim to keep it short (this will be enforced by word count limits, especially in higher impact journals like Nature and Science ). Editors at these journals are trained to cut down your writing to make sure your research fits in.

Less is more, in other words.

Keeping tight word count limits in mind means you can’t write an expansive, flowing background to your study that goes off in all directions and covers a huge amount of ground. Keep an eye on our tips for what to include, cite review papers, and keep your readers interested in the question your paper seeks to address.

A well written background to your study will ensure your paper gets read all the way through to the end. Can’t ask for more than that!

The AJE Team

See our "Privacy Policy"

• 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

What is the Background of the Study and How to Write It

What is the Background of the Study in Research? 

The background of the study is the first section of a research paper and gives context surrounding the research topic. The background explains to the reader where your research journey started, why you got interested in the topic, and how you developed the research question that you will later specify. That means that you first establish the context of the research you did with a general overview of the field or topic and then present the key issues that drove your decision to study the specific problem you chose.

Once the reader understands where you are coming from and why there was indeed a need for the research you are going to present in the following—because there was a gap in the current research, or because there is an obvious problem with a currently used process or technology—you can proceed with the formulation of your research question and summarize how you are going to address it in the rest of your manuscript.

Why is the Background of the Study Important?

No matter how surprising and important the findings of your study are, if you do not provide the reader with the necessary background information and context, they will not be able to understand your reasons for studying the specific problem you chose and why you think your study is relevant. And more importantly, an editor who does not share your enthusiasm for your work (because you did not fill them in on all the important details) will very probably not even consider your manuscript worthy of their and the reviewers’ time and will immediately send it back to you.

To avoid such desk rejections , you need to make sure you pique the reader’s interest and help them understand the contribution of your work to the specific field you study, the more general research community, or the public. Introducing the study background is crucial to setting the scene for your readers.

Table of Contents:

• What is “Background Information” in a Research Paper?
• What Should the Background of a Research Paper Include?
• Where Does the Background Section Go in Your Paper?

Background of the Study Structure

Before writing your study background, it is essential to understand what to include. The following elements should all be included in the background and are presented in greater detail in the next section:

• A general overview of the topic and why it is important (overlaps with establishing the “importance of the topic” in the Introduction)
• The current state of the research on the topic or on related topics in the field
• Controversies about current knowledge or specific past studies that undergird your research methodology
• Any claims or assumptions that have been made by researchers, institutions, or politicians that might need to be clarified
• Methods and techniques used in the study or from which your study deviated in some way

Presenting the Study Background

As you begin introducing your background, you first need to provide a general overview and include the main issues concerning the topic. Depending on whether you do “basic” (with the aim of providing further knowledge) or “applied” research (to establish new techniques, processes, or products), this is either a literature review that summarizes all relevant earlier studies in the field or a description of the process (e.g., vote counting) or practice (e.g., diagnosis of a specific disease) that you think is problematic or lacking and needs a solution.

Example s of a general overview

If you study the function of a Drosophila gene, for example, you can explain to the reader why and for whom the study of fly genetics is relevant, what is already known and established, and where you see gaps in the existing literature. If you investigated how the way universities have transitioned into online teaching since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic has affected students’ learning progress, then you need to present a summary of what changes have happened around the world, what the effects of those changes have been so far, and where you see problems that need to be addressed. Note that you need to provide sources for every statement and every claim you make here, to establish a solid foundation of knowledge for your own study. 

Describing the current state of knowledge

When the reader understands the main issue(s), you need to fill them in more specifically on the current state of the field (in basic research) or the process/practice/product use you describe (in practical/applied research). Cite all relevant studies that have already reported on the Drosophila gene you are interested in, have failed to reveal certain functions of it, or have suggested that it might be involved in more processes than we know so far. Or list the reports from the education ministries of the countries you are interested in and highlight the data that shows the need for research into the effects of the Corona-19 pandemic on teaching and learning.

Discussing controversies, claims, and assumptions

Are there controversies regarding your topic of interest that need to be mentioned and/or addressed? For example, if your research topic involves an issue that is politically hot, you can acknowledge this here. Have any earlier claims or assumptions been made, by other researchers, institutions, or politicians, that you think need to be clarified?

Mentioning methodologies and approaches

While putting together these details, you also need to mention methodologies : What methods/techniques have been used so far to study what you studied and why are you going to either use the same or a different approach? Are any of the methods included in the literature review flawed in such a way that your study takes specific measures to correct or update? While you shouldn’t spend too much time here justifying your methods (this can be summarized briefly in the rationale of the study at the end of the Introduction and later in the Discussion section), you can engage with the crucial methods applied in previous studies here first.

When you have established the background of the study of your research paper in such a logical way, then the reader should have had no problem following you from the more general information you introduced first to the specific details you added later. You can now easily lead over to the relevance of your research, explain how your work fits into the bigger picture, and specify the aims and objectives of your study. This latter part is usually considered the “ statement of the problem ” of your study. Without a solid research paper background, this statement will come out of nowhere for the reader and very probably raise more questions than you were planning to answer.   

Where does the study background section go in a paper?

Unless you write a research proposal or some kind of report that has a specific “Background” chapter, the background of your study is the first part of your introduction section . This is where you put your work in context and provide all the relevant information the reader needs to follow your rationale. Make sure your background has a logical structure and naturally leads into the statement of the problem at the very end of the introduction so that you bring everything together for the reader to judge the relevance of your work and the validity of your approach before they dig deeper into the details of your study in the methods section .

Consider Receiving Professional Editing Services

Now that you know how to write a background section for a research paper, you might be interested in our AI text editor at Wordvice AI. And be sure to receive professional editing services , including academic editing and proofreading , before submitting your manuscript to journals. On the Wordvice academic resources website, you can also find many more articles and other resources that can help you with writing the other parts of your research paper , with making a research paper outline before you put everything together, or with writing an effective cover letter once you are ready to submit.

Organizing Academic Research Papers: Background Information

• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Executive Summary
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tertiary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Annotated Bibliography
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• How to Manage Group Projects
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Essays
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Acknowledgements

Background information identifies and describes the history and nature of a well-defined research problem with reference to the existing literature. Background information in your Introduction should indicate the root of the problem being studied, 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.  Introductory background information differs from a literature review in that it places the research problem in proper context rather than thoroughly examining pertinent literature.

Importance of Having Enough Background Information

Background information expands upon the key points stated in your introduction but is not the main focus of the paper. Sufficient background information helps your 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.

Background information provides the reader with the essential context needed to understand the research problem . Depending on the topic being studied, forms of contextualization may include:

• Cultural -- the issue placed within the learned behavior of specific groups of people.
• Economic -- of or relating to systems of production and management of material wealth and/or business activities.
• Historical -- the time in which something takes place or was created and how that influences how you interpret it.
• Philosophical -- clarification of the essential nature of being or of phenomena as it relates to the research problem.
• Physical/Spatial -- reflects the space around something and how that influences how you see it.
• 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 around something use and interpret it.
• Temporal -- reflects issues or events of, relating to, or limited by time.

Background information can also include summaries of important, relevant research studies . The key is to summarize for the reader what is known about the specific research problem before you conducted your analysis. This is accomplished with a general review of the foundational research literature (with citations) that report findings that inform your study's 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.

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.  

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 . But precisely how long and in-depth this bridge should be is largely dependent upon how much information you think the reader will need in order to understand the research 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 topic. Keep this in mind because providing succinct background information can be an effective way to show that you have a clear grasp of key issues and concepts underpinning your overall study. Don't try to show off, though!

Given that 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, here are some questions to consider while writing :

• 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 add needed context, to highlight specific people, issues, or events, or to lay a foundation for understanding the emergence of a current issue or event?
• Is the research study unusual in some way that requires additional explanation, such as, a) your study uses a method never applied before to the research problem you are investigating; b) your study investigates a very esoteric or complex research problem; or, c) 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.

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, 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.

• << Previous: 4. The Introduction
• Next: The Research Problem/Question >>
• Last Updated: Jul 18, 2023 11:58 AM
• URL: https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803
• QuickSearch
• Library Catalog
• Databases A-Z
• Publication Finder
• Course Reserves
• Citation Linker
• Digital Commons
• Our Website

Research Support

• Ask a Librarian
• Appointments
• Interlibrary Loan (ILL)
• Research Guides
• Databases by Subject
• Citation Help

Using the Library

• Reserve a Group Study Room
• Renew Books
• Honors Study Rooms
• Off-Campus Access
• Library Policies
• Library Technology

User Information

• Grad Students
• Online Students
• COVID-19 Updates
• Staff Directory
• News & Announcements
• Library Newsletter

My Accounts

• Interlibrary Loan
• Staff Site Login

FIND US ON  

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. 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.

In addition, the background of the study will discuss 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 the background information in your research paper:

• 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?

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

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.

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

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.

• By : Enago Academy

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!

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular

• 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.

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

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

How to Write a Research Paper: Background Research Tips

• Anatomy of a Research Paper
• Developing a Research Focus
• Background Research Tips
• Searching Tips
• Scholarly Journals vs. Popular Journals
• Thesis Statement
• Annotated Bibliography
• Citing Sources
• Evaluating Sources
• Literature Review
• Academic Integrity
• Scholarship as Conversation
• Understanding Fake News
• Data, Information, Knowledge

Suggested Guidelines

*Your instructor will often provide you with an approximate number of source you will need.

Primary vs. Secondary Sources

A primary source is a document or physical object which was written or created at the time under study. 

Types of primary sources include: 

• Original Documents: Diaries, speeches, manuscripts, letters, interviews, news film footage, autobiographies, and official records 
• Creative Works: Poetry, drama, novels music, and art 
• Relics of Artifacts: pottery, furniture, clothing, and buildings

A secondary source interprets and analyzes primary source. These sources are one or more steps removed from the event. Secondary sources may have pictures, quotes, or graphics of primary sources in them. 

Types of secondary sources include: 

• Journal Articles 
• Magazine Articles
• Histories 
• Criticisms 
• Commentaries 
• Encyclopedias

Tertiary sources  index, abstract, organize, compile, or digest other sources. They are not usually not credited to a particular author. 

Types of tertiary sources include: 

• Dictionaries
• Directories 

Keep Track of Resources

-Create the reference or Works Cited page as you gather your resources. This will save you time and effort because you will not have to search for the material again and you will have this part done as you work on the paper. 

-Annotate the reference list so you know why you printed out or saved the article.

• << Previous: Developing a Research Focus
• Next: Searching Tips >>
• Last Updated: Apr 4, 2024 5:51 PM
• URL: https://libguide.umary.edu/researchpaper

Background Research

What is background research, tyes of background information.

• General Sources
• Subject Specific Sources

Background research (or pre-research) is the research that you do before you start writing your paper or working on your project. Sometimes background research happens before you've even chosen a topic. The purpose of background research is to make the research that goes into your paper or project easier and more successful.

Some reasons to do background research include:

• Determining an appropriate scope for your research: Successful research starts with a topic or question that is appropriate to the scope of the assignment. A topic that is too broad means too much relevant information to review and distill. If your topic is too narrow, there won't be enough information to do meaningful research.
• Understanding how your research fits in with the broader conversation surrounding the topic: What are the major points of view or areas of interest in discussions of your research topic and how does your research fit in with these? Answering this question can help you define the parts of your topic that you need to explore.
• Establishing the value of your research : What is the impact of your research and why does it matter? How might your research clarify or change our understanding of the topic?
• Identifying experts and other important perspectives: Are there scholars whose work you need to understand for your research to be complete? Are there points of view that you need to include or address?

Doing background research helps you choose a topic that you'll be happy with and develop a sense of what research you'll need to do in order to successfully complete your assignment. It will also help you plan your research and understand how much time you'll need to dedicate to understanding and exploring your topic.

Some types of information sources can be particularly helpful when you're doing background research. These are often primarily tertiary sources meaning that, rather than conducting original research they often summarize existing research on the topic.

Current Events Briefs Databases like CQ Researcher are focused on understanding controversial topics in current events. They provide information about the background of the issue as well as explanations of the positions of those on either side of a controversy.

Encyclopedias  Encyclopedias are ideal sources for doing background research in order build your knowledge about a topic sufficiently to identify a topic and develop a research plan.

Dictionaries Dictionaries include both general dictionaries like the Oxford English Dictionary as well as more specialized dictionaries focused on a single area. Dictionary entries are usually shorter and less detailed than encyclopedia entries and generally do not include references. However, they can be helpful when your research introduces you to concepts with which you aren't familiar.

Textbooks Your textbook is a potential source of background information, providing an explanation of the topic that prepares you to focus and dig deeper. Textbooks give a general overview of lot of information.

Statistics While you may find that it's difficult to make sense of statistics related to your topic while you're still exploring, statistics can be a powerful tool for establishing the context and importance of your research.

• Next: General Sources >>
• Last Updated: Nov 13, 2023 3:40 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.odu.edu/background

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and Types

Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and Types

Table of Contents

Research Report

Definition:

Research Report is a written document that presents the results of a research project or study, including the research question, methodology, results, and conclusions, in a clear and objective manner.

The purpose of a research report is to communicate the findings of the research to the intended audience, which could be other researchers, stakeholders, or the general public.

Components of Research Report

Components of Research Report are as follows:

Introduction

The introduction sets the stage for the research report and provides a brief overview of the research question or problem being investigated. It should include a clear statement of the purpose of the study and its significance or relevance to the field of research. It may also provide background information or a literature review to help contextualize the research.

Literature Review

The literature review provides a critical analysis and synthesis of the existing research and scholarship relevant to the research question or problem. It should identify the gaps, inconsistencies, and contradictions in the literature and show how the current study addresses these issues. The literature review also establishes the theoretical framework or conceptual model that guides the research.

Methodology

The methodology section describes the research design, methods, and procedures used to collect and analyze data. It should include information on the sample or participants, data collection instruments, data collection procedures, and data analysis techniques. The methodology should be clear and detailed enough to allow other researchers to replicate the study.

The results section presents the findings of the study in a clear and objective manner. It should provide a detailed description of the data and statistics used to answer the research question or test the hypothesis. Tables, graphs, and figures may be included to help visualize the data and illustrate the key findings.

The discussion section interprets the results of the study and explains their significance or relevance to the research question or problem. It should also compare the current findings with those of previous studies and identify the implications for future research or practice. The discussion should be based on the results presented in the previous section and should avoid speculation or unfounded conclusions.

The conclusion summarizes the key findings of the study and restates the main argument or thesis presented in the introduction. It should also provide a brief overview of the contributions of the study to the field of research and the implications for practice or policy.

The references section lists all the sources cited in the research report, following a specific citation style, such as APA or MLA.

The appendices section includes any additional material, such as data tables, figures, or instruments used in the study, that could not be included in the main text due to space limitations.

Types of Research Report

Types of Research Report are as follows:

Thesis is a type of research report. A thesis is a long-form research document that presents the findings and conclusions of an original research study conducted by a student as part of a graduate or postgraduate program. It is typically written by a student pursuing a higher degree, such as a Master’s or Doctoral degree, although it can also be written by researchers or scholars in other fields.

Research Paper

Research paper is a type of research report. A research paper is a document that presents the results of a research study or investigation. Research papers can be written in a variety of fields, including science, social science, humanities, and business. They typically follow a standard format that includes an introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion sections.

Technical Report

A technical report is a detailed report that provides information about a specific technical or scientific problem or project. Technical reports are often used in engineering, science, and other technical fields to document research and development work.

Progress Report

A progress report provides an update on the progress of a research project or program over a specific period of time. Progress reports are typically used to communicate the status of a project to stakeholders, funders, or project managers.

Feasibility Report

A feasibility report assesses the feasibility of a proposed project or plan, providing an analysis of the potential risks, benefits, and costs associated with the project. Feasibility reports are often used in business, engineering, and other fields to determine the viability of a project before it is undertaken.

Field Report

A field report documents observations and findings from fieldwork, which is research conducted in the natural environment or setting. Field reports are often used in anthropology, ecology, and other social and natural sciences.

Experimental Report

An experimental report documents the results of a scientific experiment, including the hypothesis, methods, results, and conclusions. Experimental reports are often used in biology, chemistry, and other sciences to communicate the results of laboratory experiments.

Case Study Report

A case study report provides an in-depth analysis of a specific case or situation, often used in psychology, social work, and other fields to document and understand complex cases or phenomena.

Literature Review Report

A literature review report synthesizes and summarizes existing research on a specific topic, providing an overview of the current state of knowledge on the subject. Literature review reports are often used in social sciences, education, and other fields to identify gaps in the literature and guide future research.

Research Report Example

Following is a Research Report Example sample for Students:

Title: The Impact of Social Media on Academic Performance among High School Students

This study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and academic performance among high school students. The study utilized a quantitative research design, which involved a survey questionnaire administered to a sample of 200 high school students. The findings indicate that there is a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance, suggesting that excessive social media use can lead to poor academic performance among high school students. The results of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers, as they highlight the need for strategies that can help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities.

Introduction:

Social media has become an integral part of the lives of high school students. With the widespread use of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat, students can connect with friends, share photos and videos, and engage in discussions on a range of topics. While social media offers many benefits, concerns have been raised about its impact on academic performance. Many studies have found a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance among high school students (Kirschner & Karpinski, 2010; Paul, Baker, & Cochran, 2012).

Given the growing importance of social media in the lives of high school students, it is important to investigate its impact on academic performance. This study aims to address this gap by examining the relationship between social media use and academic performance among high school students.

Methodology:

The study utilized a quantitative research design, which involved a survey questionnaire administered to a sample of 200 high school students. The questionnaire was developed based on previous studies and was designed to measure the frequency and duration of social media use, as well as academic performance.

The participants were selected using a convenience sampling technique, and the survey questionnaire was distributed in the classroom during regular school hours. The data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlation analysis.

The findings indicate that the majority of high school students use social media platforms on a daily basis, with Facebook being the most popular platform. The results also show a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance, suggesting that excessive social media use can lead to poor academic performance among high school students.

Discussion:

The results of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers. The negative correlation between social media use and academic performance suggests that strategies should be put in place to help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities. For example, educators could incorporate social media into their teaching strategies to engage students and enhance learning. Parents could limit their children’s social media use and encourage them to prioritize their academic responsibilities. Policymakers could develop guidelines and policies to regulate social media use among high school students.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, this study provides evidence of the negative impact of social media on academic performance among high school students. The findings highlight the need for strategies that can help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities. Further research is needed to explore the specific mechanisms by which social media use affects academic performance and to develop effective strategies for addressing this issue.

Limitations:

One limitation of this study is the use of convenience sampling, which limits the generalizability of the findings to other populations. Future studies should use random sampling techniques to increase the representativeness of the sample. Another limitation is the use of self-reported measures, which may be subject to social desirability bias. Future studies could use objective measures of social media use and academic performance, such as tracking software and school records.

Implications:

The findings of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers. Educators could incorporate social media into their teaching strategies to engage students and enhance learning. For example, teachers could use social media platforms to share relevant educational resources and facilitate online discussions. Parents could limit their children’s social media use and encourage them to prioritize their academic responsibilities. They could also engage in open communication with their children to understand their social media use and its impact on their academic performance. Policymakers could develop guidelines and policies to regulate social media use among high school students. For example, schools could implement social media policies that restrict access during class time and encourage responsible use.

References:

• Kirschner, P. A., & Karpinski, A. C. (2010). Facebook® and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1237-1245.
• Paul, J. A., Baker, H. M., & Cochran, J. D. (2012). Effect of online social networking on student academic performance. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, 8(1), 1-19.
• Pantic, I. (2014). Online social networking and mental health. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(10), 652-657.
• Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 948-958.

Note*: Above mention, Example is just a sample for the students’ guide. Do not directly copy and paste as your College or University assignment. Kindly do some research and Write your own.

Applications of Research Report

Research reports have many applications, including:

• Communicating research findings: The primary application of a research report is to communicate the results of a study to other researchers, stakeholders, or the general public. The report serves as a way to share new knowledge, insights, and discoveries with others in the field.
• Informing policy and practice : Research reports can inform policy and practice by providing evidence-based recommendations for decision-makers. For example, a research report on the effectiveness of a new drug could inform regulatory agencies in their decision-making process.
• Supporting further research: Research reports can provide a foundation for further research in a particular area. Other researchers may use the findings and methodology of a report to develop new research questions or to build on existing research.
• Evaluating programs and interventions : Research reports can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and interventions in achieving their intended outcomes. For example, a research report on a new educational program could provide evidence of its impact on student performance.
• Demonstrating impact : Research reports can be used to demonstrate the impact of research funding or to evaluate the success of research projects. By presenting the findings and outcomes of a study, research reports can show the value of research to funders and stakeholders.
• Enhancing professional development : Research reports can be used to enhance professional development by providing a source of information and learning for researchers and practitioners in a particular field. For example, a research report on a new teaching methodology could provide insights and ideas for educators to incorporate into their own practice.

How to write Research Report

Here are some steps you can follow to write a research report:

• Identify the research question: The first step in writing a research report is to identify your research question. This will help you focus your research and organize your findings.
• Conduct research : Once you have identified your research question, you will need to conduct research to gather relevant data and information. This can involve conducting experiments, reviewing literature, or analyzing data.
• Organize your findings: Once you have gathered all of your data, you will need to organize your findings in a way that is clear and understandable. This can involve creating tables, graphs, or charts to illustrate your results.
• Write the report: Once you have organized your findings, you can begin writing the report. Start with an introduction that provides background information and explains the purpose of your research. Next, provide a detailed description of your research methods and findings. Finally, summarize your results and draw conclusions based on your findings.
• Proofread and edit: After you have written your report, be sure to proofread and edit it carefully. Check for grammar and spelling errors, and make sure that your report is well-organized and easy to read.
• Include a reference list: Be sure to include a list of references that you used in your research. This will give credit to your sources and allow readers to further explore the topic if they choose.
• Format your report: Finally, format your report according to the guidelines provided by your instructor or organization. This may include formatting requirements for headings, margins, fonts, and spacing.

Purpose of Research Report

The purpose of a research report is to communicate the results of a research study to a specific audience, such as peers in the same field, stakeholders, or the general public. The report provides a detailed description of the research methods, findings, and conclusions.

Some common purposes of a research report include:

• Sharing knowledge: A research report allows researchers to share their findings and knowledge with others in their field. This helps to advance the field and improve the understanding of a particular topic.
• Identifying trends: A research report can identify trends and patterns in data, which can help guide future research and inform decision-making.
• Addressing problems: A research report can provide insights into problems or issues and suggest solutions or recommendations for addressing them.
• Evaluating programs or interventions : A research report can evaluate the effectiveness of programs or interventions, which can inform decision-making about whether to continue, modify, or discontinue them.
• Meeting regulatory requirements: In some fields, research reports are required to meet regulatory requirements, such as in the case of drug trials or environmental impact studies.

When to Write Research Report

A research report should be written after completing the research study. This includes collecting data, analyzing the results, and drawing conclusions based on the findings. Once the research is complete, the report should be written in a timely manner while the information is still fresh in the researcher’s mind.

In academic settings, research reports are often required as part of coursework or as part of a thesis or dissertation. In this case, the report should be written according to the guidelines provided by the instructor or institution.

In other settings, such as in industry or government, research reports may be required to inform decision-making or to comply with regulatory requirements. In these cases, the report should be written as soon as possible after the research is completed in order to inform decision-making in a timely manner.

Overall, the timing of when to write a research report depends on the purpose of the research, the expectations of the audience, and any regulatory requirements that need to be met. However, it is important to complete the report in a timely manner while the information is still fresh in the researcher’s mind.

Characteristics of Research Report

There are several characteristics of a research report that distinguish it from other types of writing. These characteristics include:

• Objective: A research report should be written in an objective and unbiased manner. It should present the facts and findings of the research study without any personal opinions or biases.
• Systematic: A research report should be written in a systematic manner. It should follow a clear and logical structure, and the information should be presented in a way that is easy to understand and follow.
• Detailed: A research report should be detailed and comprehensive. It should provide a thorough description of the research methods, results, and conclusions.
• Accurate : A research report should be accurate and based on sound research methods. The findings and conclusions should be supported by data and evidence.
• Organized: A research report should be well-organized. It should include headings and subheadings to help the reader navigate the report and understand the main points.
• Clear and concise: A research report should be written in clear and concise language. The information should be presented in a way that is easy to understand, and unnecessary jargon should be avoided.
• Citations and references: A research report should include citations and references to support the findings and conclusions. This helps to give credit to other researchers and to provide readers with the opportunity to further explore the topic.

Advantages of Research Report

Research reports have several advantages, including:

• Communicating research findings: Research reports allow researchers to communicate their findings to a wider audience, including other researchers, stakeholders, and the general public. This helps to disseminate knowledge and advance the understanding of a particular topic.
• Providing evidence for decision-making : Research reports can provide evidence to inform decision-making, such as in the case of policy-making, program planning, or product development. The findings and conclusions can help guide decisions and improve outcomes.
• Supporting further research: Research reports can provide a foundation for further research on a particular topic. Other researchers can build on the findings and conclusions of the report, which can lead to further discoveries and advancements in the field.
• Demonstrating expertise: Research reports can demonstrate the expertise of the researchers and their ability to conduct rigorous and high-quality research. This can be important for securing funding, promotions, and other professional opportunities.
• Meeting regulatory requirements: In some fields, research reports are required to meet regulatory requirements, such as in the case of drug trials or environmental impact studies. Producing a high-quality research report can help ensure compliance with these requirements.

Limitations of Research Report

Despite their advantages, research reports also have some limitations, including:

• Time-consuming: Conducting research and writing a report can be a time-consuming process, particularly for large-scale studies. This can limit the frequency and speed of producing research reports.
• Expensive: Conducting research and producing a report can be expensive, particularly for studies that require specialized equipment, personnel, or data. This can limit the scope and feasibility of some research studies.
• Limited generalizability: Research studies often focus on a specific population or context, which can limit the generalizability of the findings to other populations or contexts.
• Potential bias : Researchers may have biases or conflicts of interest that can influence the findings and conclusions of the research study. Additionally, participants may also have biases or may not be representative of the larger population, which can limit the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Accessibility: Research reports may be written in technical or academic language, which can limit their accessibility to a wider audience. Additionally, some research may be behind paywalls or require specialized access, which can limit the ability of others to read and use the findings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

How do we know whether treatment has failed paradoxical outcomes in counseling with young people running head: paradoxical outcomes in young people.

• 1 Institute for Integrative Counselling and Psychotherapy, Dublin, Ireland
• 2 University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
• 3 Research and Policy, National Children’s Bureau, London, United Kingdom
• 4 Metanoia Institute, London, England, United Kingdom
• 5 University of Roehampton London, Roehampton, London, United Kingdom

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Select one of your emails

You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:

Notify me on publication

Please enter your email address:

If you already have an account, please login

You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here

Background: In both routine practice contexts and research studies, evidence from standardized self-report symptom measures, administered pre- and post-treatment, is predominantly used to determine whether psychotherapy has been successful. Understanding the nature of unsuccessful psychotherapy requires an ability to evaluate the credibility of outcome data generated by such techniques. An important body of research has identified discrepancies between outcomes assessed through symptom measures and those obtained from other sources. However, not enough is known about the extent to which such paradoxical outcomes exist. Objective: This study analyzes the relationship between outcomes, as assessed by a standardized self-report measure, and as assessed by ratings of young people’s descriptions of change at post-counseling interviews. Method: Participants were 50 young people (13-16 years old) who had taken part in a trial of up to ten weeks of school-based humanistic counseling. Our primary standardized measure was the Young Person’s CORE (YP-CORE). To assess young people’s experiences of counseling change, three independent raters scrutinized transcripts of post-counseling interviews, and scored levels of helpfulness on a 1 (Not at all helpful) to 10 (Extremely helpful) scale. Inter-rater reliabilities were .94 (Cronbach’s Alpha) and .96 (McDonald’s Omega). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore relationships between helpfulness ratings and other outcome measures, i.e., satisfaction with counselling (ESQ) and the Goal-Based-Outcome Tool (GBO), and process measures, i.e., the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI-S) and the Barret Lennard Relationship Inventory (BLRI). Results: Multilevel analysis indicated that helpfulness ratings were not significantly associated with changes in YP-CORE scores. Analyzed categorically, 38% of those showing reliable improvement on the standardized measure were below the median for self-described helpfulness, and 47% of those not showing reliable change were at or above the median for self-described helpfulness. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated closer correlations between helpfulness ratings and other outcome measures (ESQ and GBO), and between helpfulness ratings and process measures (WAI-S and BLRI). Discussion: Our results raise questions about reliance on symptom change outcome measures for defining treatment success and failure, given their disparity with clients’ own descriptions of the helpfulness of therapy. Implications for practice and research are discussed.

Keywords: Paradoxical outcome, assessment, self-report, qualitative interviews, humanistic counseling

Received: 23 Feb 2024; Accepted: 02 May 2024.

Copyright: © 2024 McLeod, Stänicke, Oddli, Smith, Pearce and Cooper. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Erik Stänicke, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Duke University Research Needs Phase 2 Report and Service Recommendations

Executive summary.

In 2022, Duke conducted a comprehensive study of Research IT Needs, across all its non-clinical scholarly domains. Following the release of the December 2022 summary report, Duke’s Vice President for Information Technology, Vice President for Research and Innovation and Vice Provost for Library Affairs teamed up with others to sponsor Phase 2 of the effort—developing service proposals to meet the Phase 1 needs expressed by faculty, which encompass much more than IT.

From January-May 2023, six cross-functional staff teams—each with faculty representation—drew up 39 proposed services to address Phase 1 expressed needs. After further service refinement and faculty and sponsor feedback, twelve services are recommended for implementation and they comprise three overarching service clusters , illustrated below, with the relative service priority of each enumerated:

Together these three overarching service clusters and their twelve services reflect a coordinated and integrated research support program across the Office for Research and Innovation (ORI), Office of Information Technology (OIT), Duke University Libraries (DUL) and others, in conjunction with Schools. Five of the twelve proposed service are already being actively pursued by service partners.

These services advance to Phase 3 which will focus on the funding approaches to implement the services (July-September 2023). Phase 3 will be led by financial experts and is likely to involve a multimillion-dollar funding increment on top of the indirect cost recoveries already in place today that support Duke’s research endeavor (in excess of $300M). The funding approaches identified in the Phase 3 process are expected to vary for different services, from university (allocation) funded, to direct-to-grant funded, to overhead (indirect cost recovery) funded. Philanthropy may also be relevant and in some cases a service might be funded in part or in full by internal budget reallocation at the service provider level (but this is assumed to be the exception rather than the norm).

Beyond these twelve services, other proposed services were compelling and may represent targets for future funding or local (School-specific) pilots. As one survey respondent put it, “the solutions are so refined that they ALL sound nearly equally compelling.” Of note, two pilots are already being pursued with Engineering for services that were not advanced to Phase 3 because their need was more localized.

Background and Context for Phase 2

From February-November 2022, Duke’s Information Technology Advisory Council (ITAC) undertook an assessment of Research IT Needs at Duke. The assessment invited participation from 37 faculty and 2 research/teaching staff 1 who were identified by deans and drawn from non-clinical scholarly domains. Their input was synthesized into six major findings and ten recommendations reflecting areas of common, perceived need. It is important to note that various findings and recommendations extended beyond the IT domain to encompass research support more generally.

The result of the assessment was presented to Academic Council on December 1, and a summary report 2 was simultaneously released to document the process and outcomes. Soon after, the Vice President for Information Technology, Vice President for Research and Innovation and Vice Provost for Library Affairs joined together as the three primary sponsors in establishing Phase 2 of the Research IT Needs assessment. The Phase 2 work was designed to be carried out by six cross- functional teams, whose purpose was to identify, develop and prioritize service proposals or projects that would be responsive to the recommendations identified by researchers in the Phase 1 effort.

Phase 2 Working Group Formation and Service Proposal Development and Consolidation

In January 2023, the primary sponsors identified charges and membership for six working groups (teams), one for each of the Phase 1 finding in areas of People, Process/Structure and Technology. The primary sponsors solicited eight other leaders (deans and other administrative executives), each of whom joined in sponsoring one of the Phase 2 working groups. The teams were identified as Groups A-F, corresponding to the finding from Phase 1 on which they were tasked to work.

Each team was largely comprised of staff drawn from ORI, DUL, OIT, and DHTS (Duke Health Technology Solutions), with others. The concentration of membership from these units was acknowledgement that those groups were likely providers of future services and solutions arising from Phase 2. Each group also included at least two faculty champions and other faculty consultees who were selected to monitor the working group’s emerging service and project proposals to ensure the process remained researcher-centric and solutions were responsive to the faculty needs. A total of 55 individuals—26 staff and 29 faculty—were invited to participate in the six Phase 2 working groups, serving in distinct roles as Leads, Members, Faculty Champions, Faculty Consultees, Consulting Experts, and Staff Facilitators. Six of the faculty invited to engage in Phase 2 were active participants from Phase 1 and their inclusion provided a feedback loop between the phases. Other Phase 2 faculty were drawn from ITAC (9) to retain linkage to the body that initiated and oversaw Phase 1, and the balance (14) were drawn from faculty at large in response to Phase 1 feedback from deans, the provost, Academic Council, and others. (See Appendix A for membership and charges.)

1 For simplicity, this report will refer to both the 39 faculty and 2 research/teaching staff participants in Phase 1 as faculty.

2 The full report from Phase 1 is available at https://duke.is/72sjn.

Working groups met with sponsors in February to receive their charge, then each group met weekly over the next ten weeks to review Phase 1 findings, evaluate existing resources and associated gaps, and identify solutions they believed would be responsive to the needs expressed in Phase 1. Meeting frequency for Phase 2 participants was based on role, with each team’s 3-4 leads called on more extensively (weekly) than members (bi-weekly) or faculty champions (3 times in the 10 weeks).

Faculty had the option to engage as extensively as they wished, some choosing to participate deeply and others electing limited participation. Consultees /experts were called upon only as needed.

By early April, the six working groups had identified 39 potential services they believed could help meet the researcher needs expressed in Phase 1. These services are describ ed in Appendix B. On April 6 a poster session was organized for all six groups, with sponsors and participants from both phases of the project invited. More than 50 individuals attended, about half representing Phase 2 staff leads, members, consulting experts and facilitators, and the other half consisting of faculty and sponsors. The poster session stimulated conversation across the various working groups and faculty provided feedback regarding the 39 proposed services (see Appendix C ). As a result, ten service proposals were consolidated into other, similar proposals, leaving 29 distinct services / proposals for further consideration. ( Appendix D details the consolidation process.)

During April and early May, a readout for each working group was held with its sponsors to discuss and refine proposed services. The status of the Phase 2 effort also was reviewed with several groups at the end of the academic year: with Deans Cabinet on April 24, with the Faculty Subcommittee of EROC (Executive Research Oversight Committee) on May 2 and with ITAC on May 11.

In May, poster session feedback, sponsor readouts, and guidance from a faculty expert in survey design were used to further pare the 29 distinct services/projects down the 21 service proposals that were most responsive to the overall needs of researchers as expressed in Phase 1. (See Appendix D. )

Prioritization Process and Resulting Categories of Recommended Outcomes

Proposed services were rated by faculty and sponsors, then graphed. As the following conceptual graph illustrates, they fell into five broad categories with three associated outcomes: twelve services are recommended to advance to Phase 3 for funding strategy development; two services require further evaluation; and at least five services may represent partnering opportunities with Schools.

Appendix E provides an actual graph showing how each distinct Phase 2 service aligns with the different categories (or falls outside them), based on faculty and sponsor ratings, as well as cost. Categories and related services are described next, with estimated costs noted in shorthand ($-$$$).

Faculty Top Quartile Priorities: Faculty from Phases 1&2 (n=58) were surveyed regarding proposed services. Response rate was an impressive 67% overall and based on mean faculty ratings 3 , five top quartile services emerged as highest priority (each with an average score >2.2 score on 3-point scale). The faculty survey responses and write-in commen ts appear in Appendix F.

• Add 15-20 FTEs spanning Libraries, ORI, OIT and Schools to enable and improve new categories of research support and provide more consistent offerings to units. ($$$)
• Devise tools to manage data over its life cycle , understand storage cost, and clarify where data reside. Provide storage capacity to meet 80% of active research project need. ($$)
• Enhance VM provisions (processing / memory) in the Duke Compute Cluster (DCC)

that are provided to researchers; extend access to graduate (PhD) students and postdocs. ($)

• Provide storage flexibility to meet differing research needs (secure + public access) that are

compliant w/ regulations for storage retention. ($$$)

• Develop training programs for faculty and students (grad and undergrad) and ensure IT personnel are well trained on research support services. ($$)

Sponsor Additional Priorities: Sponsors next rated strategic impact of the proposed services 4 and four more service priorities resulted. Each garnering an average sponsor rating >4.5 and was also highly rated by faculty (scoring above the median).

• Better support AI/ML and other research through GPU capacity in the DCC, similar to the

DCC’s on-demand CPUs access (shared and scavenged). ($)

• Use a risk-based approach to establish security and compliance expectations at a project level, based on regulations, risk, and data classification; include guidance for how exceptions can be requested. ($$)
• Build cross-department virtual teams , to better support personnel across Schools and in ORI, OIT, and Libraries, using 1-3 FTEs to manage, develop and support the personnel. ($$)
• Institute protected enclaves to encapsulate individual project data with requisite security protections; enable authorized access/data movement based on the project circumstances. ($$)

High Impact/Low-Cost Priorities: Finally, very rough cost estimate ranges were developed by working group staff, as low ($, <$150K), medium ($$, $150K-$750K), or high ($$$, >$750K). These estimates define the bubble size in the graph in Appendix E and are noted for each service above and below. Three additional services emerge as a result, each with high strategic impact and lower estimated cost:

• Develop a self-service tool to guide service selection based on data classification, access

attributes, etc. (like Cornell’s “Finder tool”). ($)

• Provide secure DCC services that are functionally equivalent to OIT's existing virtual machine (VM) and other offerings. ($)
• Support faculty startup packages /semi-autonomous sub-clusters, delivering priority / immediate access to ‘owners’ while expanding the DCC and leveraging spare cycles. ($)

3 NB: Eight lower-rated services were excluded from the Faculty Survey but were placed along the X-axis of the Appendix E bubble graph based on Poster Session ratings of those services, relative to other service ratings.

4 Sponsors rated all 29 consolidated services/projects, incorporating the eight lower/deferred priority items not presented in the faculty survey. This was in recognition that there could be certain services of high strategic value to the institution, but which would not necessarily be highly rated by individual faculty.

These twelve services recommended for Phase 3 form three broad service clusters , with the number beside each service corresponding to its overall priority as determined by the process detailed above.

On-the-Bubble Service Priorities: Two other services are worthy of further evaluation: both had reasonably high ratings by sponsors (4.0-4.25), but each received slightly lower faculty ratings and has an estimated annual cost that requires further financial validation:

• Create Data Continuity Services that ensure data integrity and availability , including providing the storage associated with maintaining data continuity. ($$-$$$)
• Create a single, central protected research network rather than the separate ones provided by OIT and DHTS. ($-$$)

Of note, a project to pilot moving a Basic Sciences unit to OIT’s network is being explored.

School Based Priorities: Variation in priorities across scholarly domains motivates further discussion. Appendix G gives more detail on services with high domain-specific ratings but not promoted in the global process. One service highly rated by Basic Sciences/Nursing (create a single, central protected research network) already appears in the On-the-Bubble category above, with its strategy identified.

In addition, five other services rated highly within one or two domains, but not overall. These reflect collaborative opportunities with specific service partners (designated to the right of each service):

Of course, other services not called out above as collaborative opportunities can certainly be pursued, especially where the service has low estimated implementation costs or where creative approaches to implementation might be pursued. Consider, for example, two other services that were of particular interest to faculty in Natural Sciences/Environment (Create/optimize a special- purpose VM environment for graphical intensive work ) and Engineering (Formalize/extend special purpose FastMPI cluster ). In both cases the sponsors perceive opportunities to develop proposals with domain faculty to fund these services via foundation or federal agency grants. In the case of the Engineering FastMPI cluster, the graph in Appendix E shows two points, differenting its two cost approaches: one if funded institutionally and the other reflecting funding through grants.

This type of creative partnering could lead to implementation of considerably more than the twelve services initially prioritized and advanced to Phase 3. Of significance, this Research IT Needs process has already spurred creative implementation approaches for two pilots with Engineering. The FastMPI cluster referenced above is being funded primarily by Engineering, then opportunistically, an education cluster (School priority (c) above) will be created through the “trickle down” of some legacy Engineering MPI equipment, already operated by OIT. Each cluster’s usage model will follow the DCC model, where a primary queue provides priority access to the designated Pratt function(s), and lower priority queue(s) provide other researchers throughout Duke with ‘scavenger’ access to unused computational nodes.

Conclusion and Next Steps

The twelve services enumerated on page 3 now advance to Phase 3, due to their high likelihood of enhancing Research IT (and related) support across Duke. These services will form a coordinated and integrated research support program across the Office of Information Technology (OIT), Office of Research and Innovation (ORI), Duke University Libraries (DUL) and others, in conjunction with Schools. They will be pursued via the three Service Clusters articulated on page 4. Service partners have already launched initial work for five of the twelve priority services with low- cost estimates ($), even ahead of the essential and anticipated funding commitments in Phase 3.

Although implementing these services requires an incremental multimillion-dollar investment, the process through Phases 1 & 2 reinforces that even despite Duke’s extensive existing investment in research, new technological, regulatory, and competitive challenges demand appreciable, further investment for Duke to remain preeminent among research universities.

Phase 3 will aim to develop funding strategies for these services, in aggregate and individually. This will likely involve a combination of allocated funding, F&A/Indirect rate changes, services billed direct to grants, philanthropy or other approaches. Financial experts, along with sponsors and other leaders, will guide the Phase 3 work and develop financial proposals over the first quarter of FY24.

In parallel, two services identified on page 4 that do not advance to Phase 3 will be more fully studied by service providers / sponsors as potential targets for pilots in FY25. Further evaluation will refine their service definitions, cost estimates, and / or identify alternative approaches.

Finally, five further services designated as (a)-(e) on page 4 (and possibly others), reflect potential partnering opportunities among sponsors and individual Schools, at a pace and scale determined by the parties and based on localized priorities and resources at the service provider and School level. These services are estimated to be modest in cost (estimated <$150K), but because their value—at least initially—is believed to be more localized, they become opportunities to be funded by Schools.

The sponsors acknowledge and thank the many faculty and staff who have contributed to the process to date and are optimistic that after Phase 3 and the twelve initial service implementations, that some non-prioritized services above may become candidates to pursue in a future stage of this project.

Molten Salt Reactors

• Molten salt reactors operated in the 1960s.
• They are seen as a promising technology today principally as a thorium fuel cycle prospect or for using spent LWR fuel.
• A variety of designs is being developed, some as fast neutron types.
• Global research is currently led by China.
• Some have solid fuel similar to HTR fuel, others have fuel dissolved in the molten salt coolant.

Molten salt reactors (MSRs) use molten fluoride salts as primary coolant, at low pressure. This itself is not a radical departure when the fuel is solid and fixed. But extending the concept to dissolving the fissile and fertile fuel in the salt certainly represents a leap in lateral thinking relative to nearly every reactor operated so far. However, the concept is not new, as outlined below.

MSRs may operate with epithermal or fast neutron spectrums, and with a variety of fuels. Much of the interest today in reviving the MSR concept relates to using thorium (to breed fissile uranium-233), where an initial source of fissile material such as plutonium-239 needs to be provided. There are a number of different MSR design concepts, and a number of interesting challenges in the commercialisation of many, especially with thorium.

The salts concerned as primary coolant, mostly lithium-beryllium fluoride and lithium fluoride, remain liquid without pressurization from about 500°C up to about 1400°C, in marked contrast to a PWR which operates at about 315°C under 150 atmospheres pressure.

The main MSR concept is to have the fuel dissolved in the coolant as fuel salt, and ultimately to reprocess that online. Thorium, uranium, and plutonium all form suitable fluoride salts that readily dissolve in the LiF-BeF 2 (FLiBe) mixture, and thorium and uranium can be easily separated from one another in fluoride form. Batch reprocessing is likely in the short term, and fuel life is quoted at 4-7 years, with high burn-up. Intermediate designs and the AHTR have fuel particles in solid graphite and have less potential for thorium use.

Graphite as moderator is chemically compatible with the fluoride salts.

The US MSR programme originated in the Aircraft Reactor Experiment* at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Tennessee (built as part of the wartime Manhattan Project).

* It had primary coolant of NaF-ZrF 4 with UF 4 and secondary coolant of NaK at 880°C, to produce 60 MWt.

During the 1960s, the USA developed the molten salt breeder reactor concept at the ORNL. It was the primary back-up option for the fast breeder reactor (cooled by liquid metal) and the small prototype 8 MWt Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE) operated at Oak Ridge over four years to 1969 (the MSR programme ran 1957-1976). In the first campaign (1965-68), uranium-235 tetrafluoride (UF 4 ) enriched to 33% was dissolved in molten lithium, beryllium and zirconium fluorides at 600-650°C which flowed through a graphite moderator at ambient pressure. The fuel comprised about one percent of the fluid.*

* LiF-BeF 2 -ZrF 4 -UF 4 (65:29.1:5:0.9 mole %)

The coolant salt in a secondary circuit was eutectic lithium + beryllium fluoride (FLiBe).* There was no breeding blanket, this being omitted for simplicity in favour of neutron measurements.

* Fuel salt melting point 434°C, coolant salt melting point 455°C. See Wong & Merrill 2004 reference .

The original objectives of the MSRE to demonstrate the concept as a simple reliable reactor were achieved by March 1965, and the U-235 campaign concluded. A second campaign (1968-69) used U-233 fuel which was then available, making MSRE the first reactor to use U-233, though it was imported and not bred in the reactor. This programme prepared the way for building a MSR breeder utilizing thorium, which would operate in the thermal (slow) neutron spectrum. A total of 10,000 operating hours was logged.

The culmination of the Oak Ridge research over 1970-76 resulted in an MSR design that would use LiF-BeF 2 -ThF 4 -UF 4 (72:16:12:0.4) as primary coolant with fuel. It would be moderated by graphite with a four-year replacement schedule, use NaF-NaBF 4 as the secondary coolant, and have a peak operating temperature of 705°C. 1

The R&D programme demonstrated the feasibility of this system, albeit excluding online reprocessing, and highlighted some unique corrosion and safety issues that would need to be addressed if constructing a larger pilot MSR with fuel salt. With a radioactive primary coolant loop, challenges would include processing facilities to remove the main fission products, though gaseous fission products come off readily in the gas purge system. It also showed that breeding required a different design, with a larger blanket loop and two fluids (heterogeneous). Tritium production was a problem (see below re lithium enrichment). The breeder project to produce U-233 from thorium was discontinued.

From 1975 to 2010 little happened in the USA with MSRs, though in 1980 ONRL published a study to "examine the conceptual feasibility” of a denatured MSR (DMSR) fuelled with low-enriched uranium-235 “and operated with a minimum of chemical processing," solely as a burner reactor. The main priority was proliferation resistance, avoiding use of HEU. 2

In the UK a large (2.5 GWe) lead-cooled fast spectrum MSR (MSFR) with the plutonium fuel dissolved in a molten chloride salt was designed, with experimental work undertaken over 1968-73. Funding ceased in 1974.

There is now renewed interest in the MSR concept in Japan, Russia, China, France and the USA, and one of the six Generation IV designs selected for further development is the MSR in two distinct variants, the molten salt fast reactor (MSFR) and the advanced high temperature reactor (AHTR) – also known as the fluoride salt-cooled high-temperature reactor (FHR) with solid fuel, or PB-FHR specifically with pebble fuel. The Generation IV international Forum (GIF) mentions 'salt processing' as a technology gap for MSRs, putting the initial focus clearly on burners rather than breeders.

Since the 2002 Generation IV selection process, significant changes in design philosophy have taken place, according to a 2015 report by Energy Process Developments Ltd (EPD). The first is to design simpler, less ambitious, MSRs that do not breed new fuel, do not require online fuel reprocessing and which use the well-established enriched uranium fuel cycle. In this regard, both American researchers and the China Academy of Sciences/SINAP are working on solid fuel, salt-cooled reactor technology as a realistic first step into MSRs. In 2014, as part of an assessment of MSR activity internationally, proposals were made for pilot-scale implementation, where technical readiness was claimed. Six such specific proposals* were assessed over 12 months with commissioned expertise from established UK nuclear engineering firms. These proposals were all seen as credible for building a prototype, with one emerging in the EPD report as currently most suitable as a basis for UK MSR development, the Moltex SSR.

* from Flibe Energy, ThorCon, Moltex, Seaborg Technologies, Terrestrial Energy and Transatomic Power.

In the normal or basic MSR concept, the fuel is a molten mixture of lithium and beryllium fluoride (FLiBe) salts with dissolved low-enriched uranium (U-235 or U-233) fluorides (UF 4 ). The core consists of unclad graphite moderator arranged to allow the flow of salt at about 700°C and at low pressure. Much higher temperatures are possible but not yet tested. Heat is transferred to a secondary salt circuit and thence to steam or process heat. The basic design is not a fast neutron reactor, but with some moderation by the graphite is epithermal (intermediate neutron speed) and breeding ratio is less than 1.

However, this concept, with fuel dissolved in the salt, is further from commercialisation than solid fuel designs, where the ceramic fuel may be set in prisms, plates, or pebbles, or one design with liquid fuel in static tubes. Reprocessing that fuel salt online is even further from commercialization.

Considering liquid-fuel MSR designs, thorium can be dissolved with the uranium in a single fluid MSR, known as a homogeneous design. Two-fluid, or heterogeneous MSRs, would have fertile salt containing thorium in a second loop separate from the fuel salt containing fissile uranium or plutonium and could operate as a breeder reactor (MSBR). Here, the U-233 is progressively removed* and transferred to the primary circuit. However, graphite degradation from neutron flux limits the useful life of the reactor core with the fuel and breeding fluids in close juxtaposition, and in the 1960s it was assumed that the entire reactor vessel in the two-fluid design would be replaced after about eight years.**

* e.g. by bubbling fluorine through the salt so that UF 6 is formed and removed as a gas. The UF 6 is reduced and added to the fuel stream.

** Graphite is used to slow neutrons in epithermal designs, and deteriorates in a high neutron flux environment. The rate of damage increases with temperature, which is a particular problem with MSRs at 700°C.

In liquid-fuel MSR designs the fission products dissolve in the fuel salt and are ideally removed continuously in an adjacent online reprocessing loop and replaced with fissile uranium, plutonium and other actinides or, potentially, fertile Th-232 or U-238. Meanwhile caesium and iodine in particular remain secure in the molten salt. Xenon is removed rapidly by outgassing, but protactinium-233 is a problem with thorium as a fuel source. (It is an intermediate product in producing U-233 and is a major neutron absorber.) Constant removal of fission products means that a much higher fuel burn-up could be achieved (> 50%) and the removal of fission products means less decay heat to contend with after reactor shutdown. Actinides are fully recycled and remain in the reactor until they fission or are converted to higher actinides which do so. Hence fissile plutonium is largely consumed, and contributes significant energy. The high-level waste would comprise fission products only, hence with shorter-lived radioactivity.

Compared with solid-fuelled reactors, MSR systems with circulating fuel salt are claimed to have lower fissile inventories*, no radiation damage constraint on fuel burn-up, no requirement to fabricate and handle solid fuel or solid used fuel, and a homogeneous isotopic composition of fuel in the reactor. Actinides are less-readily formed from U-233 than in fuel with atomic mass greater than 235. These and other characteristics may enable MSRs to have unique capabilities and competitive economics for actinide burning and extending fuel resources. Safety is high due to passive cooling up to any size. Also, several designs have freeze plugs so that if excessive temperatures are reached, the primary salt will be drained by gravity away from the moderator into dump tanks configured to prevent criticality.

* In particular, a small inventory of weapons-fissile material (Pu-242 being the dominant Pu isotope remaining), and low fuel use (the French self-breeding variant claims 50kg of thorium and 50kg U-238 per billion kWh).

MSRs have large negative temperature and void coefficients of reactivity, and are designed to shut down due to expansion of the fuel salt as temperature increases beyond design limits. The negative temperature and void reactivity coefficients passively reduce the rate of power increase in the case of an inadvertent control rod withdrawal (technically known as a ‘reactivity insertion’). When tests were made on the MSRE, a control rod was intentionally withdrawn during normal reactor operations at full power (8 MWt) to observe the dynamic response of core power. Such was the rate of fuel salt thermal expansion that reactor power levelled off at 9 MWt without any operator intervention.

The MSR thus has a significant load-following capability where reduced heat abstraction through the boiler tubes leads to increased coolant temperature, or greater heat removal reduces coolant temperature and increases reactivity. Primary reactivity control is using the secondary coolant salt pump or circulation which changes the temperature of the fuel salt in the core, thus altering reactivity due to its strong negative reactivity coefficient. The MSR works at near atmospheric pressure, eliminating the risk of explosive release of volatile radioactive materials.

One MSR developer, Moltex, has put forward a molten salt heat storage concept ( GridReserve ) to enable the reactor to supplement intermittent renewables. Hot nitrate salt at about 600°C is transferred to storage tanks which are able to hold eight hours of reactor output at 2.5 GW thermal (as used in solar CSP plants). The heat store is said to add only £3/MWh to the levelised cost of electricity.

In the MSBR, the reactor-grade U-233 bred in the secondary circuit needs to be removed, or it will fission there and contaminate that circuit with ‘hot’ fission products. Therefore in practice the protactinium (Pa-233) formed from the thorium needs to be removed before it decays to U-233*, but this process is unproven at any scale. It is relatively easy to remove the U-233 from the Pa-233 by fluorination to UF 6 before reducing it to UF 4 for adding to the primary fuel salt circuit. However, the U-233 is contaminated with up to 400 ppm U-232 which complicates processing, due to its highly gamma-active decay progeny.

* Th-232 gains a neutron to form Th-233, which soon beta decays (half-life 22 minutes) to protactinium-233. The Pa-233 (half-life of 27 days) decays into U-233. Some U-232 is also formed via Pa-232 along with Th-233, and a decay product of this is very gamma active.

MSRs would normally operate at much higher temperatures than LWRs – up to at least 700°C, and hence have potential for process heat. Up to this temperature, satisfactory structural materials are available. ‘Alloy N’ is a nickel-based alloy (Ni-Cr-Mo-Si) developed at ORNL specifically for MSRs with fluoride salts.

Primary and secondary cooling, the fluoride salts

Fluoride salts have very low vapour pressure even at red heat, carry more heat than the same volume of water, have reasonably good heat transfer properties, are not damaged by radiation, do not react violently with air or water, and are inert to some common structural metals. However having the fuel in solution also means that the primary coolant salt becomes radioactive, complicating maintenance procedures, and the chemistry of the salt must be monitored closely to maintain a chemically reduced state to minimise corrosion. Also the beryllium in the salt is toxic, which leads to at least one design avoiding it, though this requires higher temperatures to keep LiF liquid. LiF however can carry a higher concentration of uranium than FLiBe, allowing less enrichment. There are difficulties with plutonium and other TRU fluorides in fluoride solvents.

Lithium used in the salt must be fairly pure Li-7, since Li-6 produces tritium when (readily) fissioned by neutrons. Li-7 has a very small neutron cross-section (0.045 barns). This means that lithium must be enriched beyond its natural 92.5% Li-7 level to minimise tritium production. Lithium-7 is being produced at least in Russia and possibly China today as a by-product of enriching lithium-6 to produce tritium for thermonuclear weapons. See also Lithium paper.

LiF is exceptionally stable chemically, and the LiF-BeF 2 mix ('FLiBe')* is eutectic (at 459°C it has a lower melting point than either ingredient – LiF is about 500°C). It boils at 1430°C. It is favoured in MSR and AHTR primary cooling and when uncontaminated has a low corrosion effect. The three nuclides (Li-7, Be, F) are among the few to have low enough thermal neutron capture cross-sections not to interfere with fission reactions.

* Approx. 2:1 molar, hence sometimes represented as Li 2 BeF 4 . 

LiF without the toxic beryllium solidifies at about 500°C and boils at about 1200°C. FLiNaK (LiF-NaF-KF) is also eutectic and solidifies at 454°C and boils at 1570°C. It has a higher neutron cross-section than FLiBe or LiF but can be used in intermediate cooling loops. Sodium-beryllium fluoride (BeF 2 -NaF) solidifying at 385°C is used as fuel salt in one design for cost reasons.

The hot molten salt in the primary circuit can be used with secondary salt circuit or secondary helium coolant generating power via the Brayton cycle as with HTR designs, with potential thermal efficiencies of 48% at 750°C to 59% at 1000°C, or simply with steam generators. In industrial applications molten fluoride salts (possibly simply cryolite – Na-Al fluoride) are a preferred interface fluid in a secondary circuit between the nuclear heat source and any chemical plant. The aluminium smelting industry provides substantial experience in managing them safely.

Most secondary coolant salts do not use lithium, for cost reasons. ZrF 4 -NaF-KF, ZrF 4 -KF, NaF-BeF 2 eutectic mixes are usual, as well as LiF-NaF-KF (FLiNaK).

In the secondary cooling circuit of the AHTR concept, air is compressed, heated, flows through gas turbines producing electricity, enters a steam recovery boiler producing steam that produces additional electricity, and exits to the atmosphere. Added peak power can be produced by injecting natural gas (or hydrogen in the future) after nuclear heating of the compressed air to raise gas temperatures and plant output, giving it rapidly variable output (of great value in grid stability and for peak load demand where renewables have significant input). This is described as an air Brayton combined-cycle (ABCC) system in secondary circuit.

In the 1960s MSRE, an alternative secondary coolant salt considered was 8% NaF + 92% NaF-BeF 2  with melting point 385°C, though this would be more corrosive.

Chloride salts, fast spectrum reactors

Chloride salts have some attractive features compared with fluorides, in particular the actinide trichlorides form lower melting point solutions and have higher solubility for actinides so can contain significant amounts of transuranic elements. PuCl 3 in NaCl has been well researched. While NaCl has good nuclear, chemical and physical properties, its high melting point means it needs to be blended with MgCl 2 or CaCl 2 , the former being preferred in eutectic, and allowing the addition of actinide trichlorides. The major isotope of chlorine, Cl-35 gives rise to Cl-36 as an activation product – a long-lived energetic beta source, so Cl-37 is much preferable in a reactor.

A British design contains the chloride fuel salt in vertical tubes and relies on convection to circulate the secondary salt coolant, which is a fluoride mix.

Fast spectrum MSRs (MSFRs) can have conversion ratios ranging from burner to converter to breeder. This may be within a single unit as the ratio of U-238 to transuranics (TRU) is varied – less U-238 giving more fission. They can be optimised for burning minor actinides, for breeding plutonium from U-238, or they may be open-cycle power plants without heavy metal separation from fission products. The fast neutron spectrum allows the possibility of not having onsite processing to remove TRUs. While fission products have relatively large neutron capture cross sections in the thermal energy range, the capture cross sections at higher energies is much lower, allowing much greater fission product build-up in an MSFR than in a thermal-spectrum MSR (gaseous fission products separate out of the liquid fuel). Eventually the fuel salt heavily loaded with fission products can be sent occasionally for batch processing or allowed to solidify and be disposed of in a repository. For full breeder configuration the fissile material needs to be progressively removed.   MSFRs have a negative void coefficient in the salt and a negative thermal reactivity feedback, so can maintain a high power density with passive safety. Freeze plugs to drain the fuel salt are a further passive safety measure as in other MSRs.

MSR research emphasis

American researchers and the China Academy of Sciences/SINAP are working primarily on solid fuel MSR technology. The main reason is that this is a realistic first step. In China this is focused on thorium-fuelled versions (see TMSR in China's dual programme section below). The technical difficulty of using molten salts is significantly lower when they do not have the very high activity levels associated with them bearing the dissolved fuels and wastes. The experience gained with component design, operation, and maintenance with clean salts makes it much easier then to move on and consider the use of liquid fuels, while gaining several key advantages from the ability to operate reactors at low pressure and deliver higher temperatures.

In the Generation IV programme for the MSR, collaborative R&D is pursued by interested members under the auspices of a provisional steering committee. There will be a long lead time to prototypes, and the R&D orientation has changed since the project was set up, due to increased interest. It now has two baseline concepts:

• The Molten Salt Fast Neutron Reactor (MSFR), which will take in thorium fuel cycle, recycling of actinides, closed Th/U fuel cycle with no U enrichment, with enhanced safety and minimal wastes. it is a liquid-fuel design.
• The Advanced High-Temperature Reactor (AHTR) – also known as the fluoride salt-cooled high-temperature reactor (FHR) – with the same graphite and solid fuel core structures as the VHTR and molten salt as coolant instead of helium, enabling power densities 4 to 6 times greater than HTRs and power levels up to 4000 MWt with passive safety systems. A 5 MWt prototype is under construction at Shanghai Institute of Nuclear Applied Physics (SINAP, under the China Academy of Sciences).

The GIF 2014 Roadmap said that a lot of work needed to be done on salts before demonstration reactors were operational, and suggested 2025 as the end of the viability R&D phase.

Russia's Molten Salt Actinide Recycler and Transmuter (MOSART) is a fast reactor fuelled only by transuranic (TRU) fluorides from uranium and MOX LWR used fuel. It is part of the MARS project (minor actinide recycling in molten salt) involving RIAR, Kurchatov and other research organisations. The 2400 MWt design has a homogeneous core of Li-Na-Be or Li-Be fluorides without a graphite moderator and has reduced reprocessing compared with the original US design. Thorium may also be used, though it is described as a burner-converter rather than a breeder.

The SAMOFAR (Safety Assessment of the Molten Salt Fast Reactor) project, based in the Netherlands and funded by the European Commission, aims to prove the safety concepts of the MSFR in breeding mode from thorium. It plans advanced experimental and numerical techniques, to deliver a breakthrough in nuclear safety and optimal waste management, and to create a consortium of stakeholders. "The use of the Th-U fuel cycle is of particular interest to the MSR, because this reactor is the only one in which the Pa-233 can be stored in a hold-up tank to let it decay to U-233." The SAMOFAR consortium consists of 11 participants and is mainly undertaken by universities and research laboratories such as CNRS, JRC, CIRTEN, TU Delft and PSI, thereby exploiting each other’s expertise and infrastructure. It commenced in 2015.

China's dual programme

China plans for the TMSR-SF to be an energy solution for the northwest half of the country, with lower population density and little water. The application of water-free cooling in arid regions is envisaged from about 2025.

The China Academy of Sciences in January 2011 launched an R&D programme on LFTRs, known there as the thorium-breeding molten-salt reactor (Th-MSR or TMSR), and claimed to have the world's largest national effort on it, hoping to obtain full intellectual property rights on the technology. This is also known as the fluoride salt-cooled high-temperature reactor (FHR). The TMSR Centre at Shanghai Institute of Nuclear Applied Physics (SINAP, under the China Academy of Sciences) at Jiading is responsible. In the 1970s SINAP worked towards building a 25 MWe MSR, but this endeavour gave way to the Qinshan PWR project.

SINAP has two streams of TMSR development – solid fuel (TRISO in pebbles or prisms/blocks) with once-through fuel cycle, and liquid fuel (dissolved in fluoride coolant) with reprocessing and recycle. A third stream of fast reactors to consume actinides from LWRs is planned. The aim is to develop both the thorium fuel cycle and non-electrical applications in a 20-30 year timeframe.

• The TMSR-SF stream has only partial utilization of thorium, relying on some breeding as with U-238, and needing fissile uranium input as well. It is optimized for high-temperature based hybrid nuclear energy applications. SINAP aimed at a 2 MW pilot plant initially, though this has been superseded by a simulator (TMSR-SF0). A 100 MWt demonstration pebble bed plant (TMSR-SF2) with open fuel cycle is planned by about 2025. TRISO particles will be with both low-enriched uranium and thorium, separately.
• The TMSR-LF stream claims full closed Th-U fuel cycle with breeding of U-233 and much better sustainability with thorium but greater technical difficulty. It is optimized for utilization of thorium with electrometallurgical pyroprocessing. SINAP aims for a 2 MWt pilot plant (TMSR-LF1) initially, then a 10 MWt experimental reactor (TMSR-LF2) by 2025, and a 100 MWt demonstration plant (TMSR-LF3) with full electrometallurgical reprocessing by about 2035, followed by 1 a GW demonstration plant. The TMSR-LF timeline is about ten years behind the SF one.
• A TMSFR-LF fast reactor optimized for burning minor actinides is to follow.

SINAP sees molten salt fuel being superior to the TRISO fuel in effectively unlimited burn-up, less waste, and lower fabricating cost, but achieving lower temperatures (600°C+) than the TRISO fuel reactors (1200°C+). Near-term goals include preparing nuclear-grade ThF 4  and ThO 2  and testing them in a MSR. It appears that the postponement of building the 2 MW test reactor may be due to inadequate supplies of pure lithium-7.

The TMSR-SF programme is proceeding with preliminary engineering design in cooperation with the Nuclear Power Institute of China (NPIC) and Shanghai Nuclear Engineering Research & Design Institute (SNERDI). Nickel-based alloys are being developed for structures, along with very fine-grained graphite.

Two methods of tritium stripping are being evaluated, and also tritium storage.

The TMSR-SF0 is one-third scale and has a 370 kW electric heat source with FLiNaK primary coolant at 650°C and FLiNaK secondary coolant.

The 10 MWt TMSR-SF1 has 17% enriched TRISO fuel in 60mm pebbles, similar to HTR-PM fuel, and coolant at 630°C and low pressure. Primary coolant is FLiBe (with 99.99% Li-7) and secondary coolant is FLiNaK. Core height is 3 m, diameter 2.85 m, in a 7.8 m high and 3 m diameter pressure vessel. Residual heat removal is passive, by cavity cooling. A 20-year operating life was envisaged but the project is discontinued.

The 2 MWt TMSR-LF1 is under construction at Wu Wei in Gansu in a $3.3 billion programme. It will use fuel enriched to under 20% U-235, have a thorium inventory of about 50 kg and conversion ratio of about 0.1. FLiBe with 99.95% Li-7 would be used, and fuel as UF 4 . The project would start on a batch basis with some online refuelling and removal of gaseous fission products, but discharging all fuel salt after 5-8 years for reprocessing and separation of fission products and minor actinides for storage. It would proceed to a continuous process of recycling salt, uranium and thorium, with online separation of fission products and minor actinides. It would work up from about 20% thorium fission to about 80%.

Beyond these, a 373 MWt/168 MWe liquid-fuel MSR small modular reactor is planned, with supercritical CO 2 cycle in a tertiary loop at 23 MPa using Brayton cycle, after a radioactive isolation secondary loop. Various applications as well as electricity generation are envisaged. It would be loaded with 15.7 tonnes of thorium and 2.1 tonnes of uranium (19.75% enriched), with one kilogram of uranium added daily, and have 330 GWd/t burn-up with 30% of energy from thorium. Online refuelling would enable eight years of operation before shutdown, with the graphite moderator needing attention.

The US Department of Energy is collaborating with the China Academy of Sciences on the programme, which had a start-up budget of $350 million. TMSR commercial deployment is anticipated in the 2030s.

Other solid- or fixed-fuel types

Research on molten salt coolant has been revived at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in the USA with the Advanced High Temperature Reactor (AHTR). This is a larger reactor using a coated-particle graphite-matrix TRISO fuel like that in the GT-MHR (see the information paper on Small Nuclear Power Reactors ) and with molten fluoride (FLiBe) salt as primary coolant. It is also known as the Fluoride High Temperature Reactor (FHR). While similar to the gas-cooled HTR it operates at low pressure (less than 1 atmosphere) and higher temperature, and gives better heat transfer than helium. The FLiBe salt is used solely as coolant, and achieves temperatures of 750-1000°C or more while at low pressure. This could be used in thermochemical hydrogen manufacture.

A small version of the AHTR/FHR is the SmAHTR, with 125 MWt size-matched to early process heat markets, or producing 50+MWe. The operating temperature is 700°C with FLiBe primary coolant and three integral heat exchangers. It is truck transportable, being 9m long and 3.5m diameter. Fuel is 19.75% enriched uranium in TRISO particles in graphite blocks or fuel plates. The refuelling interval is 2.5 to 4 years depending on fuel configuration. Secondary coolant is FLiNaK to Brayton cycle, and for passive decay heat removal, separate auxiliary loops go to air-cooled radiators. Later versions are intended to reach 850° to 1000°C, using materials yet to be developed.

AHTR reactor sizes of 1500 MWe/3600 MWt are envisaged, with capital costs estimated at less than $1000/kW.

In the secondary cooling circuit, air is compressed, heated, flows through gas turbines producing electricity, enters a steam recovery boiler producing steam that produces additional electricity, and exits to the atmosphere. Added peak power can be produced by injecting natural gas (or hydrogen in the future) after nuclear heating of the compressed air to raise gas temperatures and plant output, giving it rapidly variable output (of great value in grid stability and for peak load demand where renewables have significant input). This is described as an air Brayton combined-cycle (ABCC) system in secondary circuit.

Kairos Power FHR and Hermes

Kairos Power in the USA has designed a 320 MWt/140 MWe fluoride (FLiBe) salt-cooled high temperature reactor (KP-FHR) which it plans to build at the East Tennessee Technology Park at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, in collaboration with Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The reactor uses 19.75% enriched TRISO fuel in pebble form with online refuelling and operates at up to 650°C. Secondary circuit salt is ‘solar’ nitrate, feeding a steam generator ('60/40 nitrate salt', i.e. 60:40 by weight sodium nitrate to potassium nitrate). It has passive shutdown and decay heat removal. The prototype is the Hermes reduced-scale test reactor (<50 MWt), selected by the DOE in December 2020 for a $629 million programme over seven years (DOE share $303 million from the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program). In May 2021 the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) agreed to provide engineering, operations, and licensing support for the Hermes project. TVA holds an early site permit for the Clinch River site.

Moltex Energy's  Stable Salt Reactor (SSR) is a conceptual UK reactor design that, like all conventional reactors in operation, relies on convection from static vertical fuel tubes in the core to convey heat to the reactor coolant. Because the nuclear material is contained in fuel assemblies, standard industrial pumps can be used for the low radioactivity coolant salt. Core temperature is 500-600°C, at atmospheric pressure. Decay heat is removed by natural air convection.

Fuel tubes of nickel-chromium alloy three-quarters filled with the molten fuel salt (60% NaCl, 40% Pu, U & lanthanide trichlorides) are grouped into fuel assemblies which are similar to those used in standard reactors and use similar structural materials. The individual fuel tubes are vented so that fission product gases escape into the coolant salt, which is a NaF-KF-ZrF 4 mix (Li-7 fluoride is avoided for cost reasons). The assemblies can be moved laterally without removing them. Refuelling is thus continuous online, and after five years depleted assemblies are stored at one side of the pool pending reprocessing.

SSR factory-produced modules are 150 MWe containing fuel, pumps, primary heat exchanger, control blades and instrumentation. Several, up to gigawatt-scale, can share a reactor tank, half-filled with the coolant salt which transfers heat away from the fuel assemblies to the peripheral steam generators, essentially by convection, at atmospheric pressure. There are three versions: the SSR-W (Stable Salt Reactor – Wasteburner); the SSR-U (uranium-fuelled); and the SSR-Th (thorium).

The SSR-W is simplest and cheapest, due to compact core and no moderator. The primary fissile fuel in this original fast reactor version was to be plutonium-239 chloride with minor actinides and lanthanides, recovered from LWR fuel or from an SSR-U reactor. In 2020 the SSR-W fuel was 25% reactor-grade PuCl 3 with 30% UCl 3 and 45% KCl. This is in 451 fuel assemblies in a hexagonal array. Primary coolant salt is ZrF 4 -KF stabilized with ZrF 2 at maximum temperature of 590°C. Secondary coolant is nitrate salt buffer. Burn-up is 120-200 GWd/t. A 750 MWt/300 MWe demonstration plant was envisaged, the SSR-W300. However, a limited market for this version is anticipated. An agreement has been signed with New Brunswick Power for initial deployment at Point Lepreau in Canada, and in March 2021 the Canadian government announced a C$50.5 million investment towards this. In April 2021 plans were confirmed for this plus a plant for recycling used Canadian nuclear fuel for it. In November 2020 the two companies were joined by ARC Canada in setting up an SMR vendor cluster there. A Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission pre-licensing vendor design review has commenced.

The company then announced the physically larger and more expensive SSR-U ‘global workhorse version’ of its design, with a thermal neutron spectrum running on LEU fluorides (up to 7% enriched) with graphite built into the fuel assemblies, which increases the size of the core. It runs at a higher temperature than the fast version – minimum 600°C – with ZrF 4 -NaF coolant salt stabilized with ZrF 2 . As well as electricity, hydrogen production is its purpose. It is designed to be compatible with thorium breeding to U-233. It is seen as having a much larger potential market, and initial deployment in the UK in the 2030s is anticipated, with potential for replacing CCGT and coal plants.

In the SSR-Th, thorium would be in the coolant salt and the U-233 produced is progressively dissolved in bismuth at the bottom of the salt pool. This contains U-238 to denature it. Once the desired level of U-233 is achieved, the bismuth with uranium would be taken out batch-wise, and the mixed-isotope uranium is chlorinated to become fuel. If the fuel is used in a fast reactor, plutonium and actinides can be added.

Moltex has also put forward its GridReserve molten salt heat storage concept to enable the SSR-W reactor to supplement intermittent renewables, and so that the 300 MWe reactor can peak at up to 900 MWe from the heat bank of secondary coolant salt.

Mark 1 Pebble Bed FHR

This was a pre-conceptual US design completed in 2014 to evaluate the potential benefits of FHR technology. A consortium including University of California, Berkeley, Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Westinghouse designed it as a 236 MWt/100 MWe pebble-bed FHR , with annular core, operating at 700°C. It is designed for modular construction, and from 100 MWe base-load it is able to deliver 240 MWe with gas co-firing for peak loads. Fuel pebbles are 30 mm diameter, much less than gas-cooled HTRs. The project looked at how FHRs might be coupled to a Brayton combined-cycle turbine to generate power, design of a passive decay heat removal system, and the annular pebble bed core. The PB-FHR has negative void reactivity and passive decay heat removal.

Other liquid-fuel types: two-fluid breeders

Liquid fluoride thorium reactor.

The liquid fluoride thorium reactor (LFTR) is a heterogeneous MSR design which breeds its U-233 fuel from a fertile blanket of lithium-beryllium fluoride (FLiBe) salts with thorium fluoride. The thorium-232 captures neutrons from the reactor core to become protactinium-233, which decays (27-day half-life) to U-233. It may be possible to separate Pa-233 on-line and let it decay to U-233. Otherwise, newly-formed U-233 forms soluble uranium tetrafluoride (UF 4 ), which is converted to gaseous uranium hexafluoride (UF 6 ) by bubbling fluorine gas through the salt (which does not chemically affect the less-reactive thorium tetrafluoride). The volatile uranium hexafluoride is captured, reduced back to soluble UF 4 by hydrogen gas, and finally is added to the FLiBe core to serve as fissile fuel. A complication is that traces of U-232 are formed, reporting with the U-233, and having highly gamma-active decay progeny.

LFTRs can rapidly change their power output, and hence be used for load-following. Because they are expected to be inexpensive to build and operate, 100 MWe LFTRs could be used as peak and back-up reserve power units.

Flibe Energy in the USA is studying a 40 MW two-fluid graphite-moderated thermal reactor concept based on the 1960s-'70s US molten-salt reactor programme. It uses lithium fluoride/beryllium fluoride (FLiBe) salt as its primary coolant in both circuits. Fuel is uranium-233 bred from thorium in FLiBe blanket salt. Fuel salt circulates through graphite logs. Secondary loop coolant salt is sodium-beryllium fluoride (BeF 2 -NaF). A 2 MWt pilot plant is envisaged, and eventually 2225 MWt commercial plants.

Other liquid fuel types: single-fluid, thermal spectrum

Integral msr.

Canada-based Terrestrial Energy  has designed the Integral MSR. This simplified MSR, based closely on the Oak Ridge MSRE, integrates the primary reactor components, including primary heat exchangers to secondary clean salt circuit, in a sealed and replaceable core vessel that has a projected life of seven years. The IMSR will operate at 600-700°C, which can support many industrial process heat applications. It operates in the thermal neutron spectrum with a hexagonal arrangement of graphite elements forming the moderator. The fuel-salt is a eutectic of low-enriched (2-4%) uranium-235 fuel (as UF 4 ) and a fluoride carrier salt – likely sodium rubidium fluoride. Initially no Li or Be will be used but there is potential to change to FLiBe – at atmospheric pressure. Secondary loop coolant salt is ZrF 4 -KF. Multiple pumps and six heat exchangers allow for redundancy. Emergency cooling and residual heat removal are passive. When the sealed core is replaced after seven years, it is then left for fission products to decay. Each plant would have space for two reactors, allowing seven-year changeover, with the used unit removed for off-site reprocessing when it has cooled.

The IMSR was designed in three sizes: 80 MWt (32.5 MWe), 300 MWt, and 600 MWt but the current concept is 440 MWt/195 MWe. The total levelized cost of electricity from the largest is projected to be competitive with natural gas. The smallest is designed for off-grid, remote power applications, and as a prototype. The company completed the first of three phases in the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission's pre-licensing vendor design review in October 2018. It aims to have the first IMSRs in operation before 2030.

Transatomic TAP

Transatomic Power  is a new US company partly funded by Founders Fund and aiming to develop a single-fluid MSR using very low-enriched uranium fuel (1.8%) or the entire actinide component of used LWR fuel. The TAP reactor has an efficient zirconium hydride* moderator and a LiF-based fuel salt bearing the UF 4  and actinides, hence a very compact core. The secondary coolant is FLiNaK salt (LiF-KF-NaF) to a steam generator.

* as used in TRIGA research reactors and TOPAZ and SNAP reactors for space programme.

Owing to the ZrH moderator, there are significantly more neutrons in the thermal region (less than 1 eV) compared with a graphite moderator, thereby enabling the reactor to generate power from very low-enriched uranium or used LWR fuel. The epithermal (1 eV - 1 MeV) spectrum is lower than that with graphite, but in the fast spectrum (over 1 MeV) the neutron flux is greater than with graphite moderator, and therefore contributes strongly to actinide burning. It would give up to 96% actinide burn-up. Fission products are mostly removed batch-wise and fresh fuel added. In addition to negative void and thermal coefficients, the moderator starts to fail at higher temperatures due to hydrogen loss. Decay heat removal can be by convection.

After a 20 MWt demonstration reactor, the envisaged first commercial plant will be 1250 MWt/550 MWe running at 44% thermal efficiency with 650°C in the primary loop, using a steam cycle. The overnight cost for an nth-of-a-kind 550 MWe plant, including lithium-7 inventory and online fission product removal and storage, is estimated at $2 billion with a three-year construction schedule. A version of the reactor may utilize thorium fuel.

The company had to withdraw some exaggerated claims concerning actinide burn-up made in MIT Technology Review in 2016. In September 2018 the company announced that it would cease operations and make its intellectual property freely available online.

The Fuji MSR is a 100-200 MWe graphite-moderated design to operate as a near-breeder with ThF 4 -UF 4 fuel salt and FLiBe coolant at 700°C.  It can consume plutonium and actinides, and be from 100 to 1000 MWe. Batch reprocessing. It is being developed internationally by a Japanese, Russian and US consortium: the International Thorium Molten Salt Forum (ITMSF), based in Japan. It is derived from the Oak Ridge MSBR, and several variants have been designed, including a 10 MWe mini Fuji. Thorium Tech Solutions Inc (TTS) plan to commercialise the Fuji concept, and is working on it with the Halden test reactor in Norway.

Martingale in the USA is designing the ThorCon MSR, which is a 250 MWe scaled-up Oak Ridge MSRE. It is a single-fluid thorium converter reactor in the thermal spectrum, graphite moderated. It uses a combination of U-233 from thorium and low-enriched U-235 from mined uranium. Fuel salt is sodium-beryllium fluoride (BeF 2 -NaF) with dissolved uranium and thorium tetrafluorides (Li-7 fluoride is avoided for cost reasons). Secondary loop coolant salt is also sodium-beryllium fluoride. It operates at 700°C. There is no on-line processing – this takes place in a centralized plant at the end of the core life, with off-gassing of some fission products meanwhile. A pilot plant would be similar to the mini Fuji.

Several 550 MWt units would comprise a power station, and a 1000 MWe Thorcon plant would comprise about 200 factory- or shipyard-build modules installed below grade (30 m down). All components are deigned to be easily and frequently replaced. For instance, every four years the entire primary loop would be changed out, returned to a centralized recycling facility, decontaminated, disassembled, inspected, and refurbished. Incipient problems would be rectified and major upgrades could be introduced without significantly disrupting power generation. The company claims generation costs of 3 to 5 c/kWh depending on scale, and is "targeting its first installations in forward-looking countries that support technology-neutral nuclear regulations and see the benefits of the license-by-test process."

Seaborg Compact Molten Salt Reactor

Seaborg Technologies in Denmark (founded 2015) has a thermal-epithermal single fluid reactor design for a 50 MWt pilot unit Compact Molten Salt Reactor (CMSR) with a view to 250 MWt commercial modular units fuelled by spent LWR fuel and thorium. Fuel salt is Li-7 fluoride initially with uranium as fluoride. Later, thorium, plutonium and minor actinides as fluorides are envisaged as fuel, hence the reactor being called a waste burner. This is pumped through the graphite column core and heat exchanger. Fission products are extracted online. Secondary coolant salt is FLiNaK, at 700°C. Spent LWR fuel would have the uranium extracted for recycle, leaving plutonium and minor actinides to become part of the MSR fuel, with thorium. The company claims very fast power ramp time. High temperature output will allow application to hydrogen production, synthentic fuels, etc .

In March 2017 the public funding agency Innovation Fund Denmark made a grant to Seaborg to "build up central elements in its long-term strategy and position itself for additional investments required to progress towards commercial maturity." This is the first Danish investment into nuclear fission research since the country introduced a ban on nuclear power in 1985. In December 2020 the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) issued a feasibility statement regarding the reactor’s use on barges. This is the first stage in the ABS's five-phase New Technology Qualification process. Seaborg aims to deploy the first full-scale prototype power barge by 2025.

Other liquid fuel types: single-fluid, fast spectrum

Southern co, mcfr.

Southern Company Services in the USA is developing a molten chloride fast reactor (MCFR) with TerraPower, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) – which hosts the work, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and Vanderbilt University. No details are available, and it is not certain that it is a single-fluid type. However, fuel is in the chloride salt (see section above) and as a fast reactor it can burn U-238, actinides and thorium as well as used light water reactor fuel, requiring no enrichment apart from the initial fuel load (these details from TerraPower, not Southern). It is reported to be large.

In January 2016 the US DOE awarded a Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN) grant to the project, worth up to $40 million. In August 2016 Southern Nuclear Operating Company signed an agreement to work with X-energy to collaborate on development and commercialization of their respective small reactor designs. With TerraPower and ORNL, X-energy is designing the Xe-100 pebble-bed HTR of 48 MWe.

Elysium MCSFR

Elysium Industries in the USA and Canada have the Molten Chloride Salt Fast Breeder Reactor (MCSFR) design with fuel in the chloride salt. It operates below grade at near atmospheric pressure. Primary fuel salt and secondary salt convey heat to steam generators at 650°C. It is designed to load-follow. A range of sizes from 125 to 3000 MWt (50 MWe to 1200 MWe) are under consideration. Used fuel from light water reactors or depleted uranium with some plutonium can fuel it though in 2020 fuel was shown as PuCl 3 with fission products, or 15% HALEU. Selected fission products are removed online. Passive safety includes a freeze plug. It has negative temperature and void coefficients. 

Notes & references

General sources.

Ho M.K.M., Yeoh G.H., & Braoudakis G., 2013, Molten Salt Reactors , in Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments , ed A.Mendez-Vilas, Formatex Research Centre

Merle-Lucotte, E. et al 2009, Minimising the fissile inventory of the Molten Salt Fast Reactor, Advances in Nuclear Fuel Management IV (ANFM 2009), American Nuclear Society

Merle-Lucotte, E. et al 2007, The Thorium molten salt reactor: launching the thorium cycle while closing the current fuel cycle, ENC 2007

Forsberg, C.W., Peterson, P.F., Zhao, H.H. 2004, An advanced molten salt reactor using high-temperature reactor technology, American Nuclear Society

LeBlanc, D, 2009, Molten Salt Reactors: a new beginning for an old idea, Nuclear Engineering & Design 2010, Elsevier

Transatomic Power Corp., technical white paper, March 2014

Ignatiev, V & Feynberg, O, Kurchatov Inst, Molten Salt Reactor: overview and perspectives, OECD 2012

Appendix 6.0 Molten Salt Reactor, Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Ten-Year Program Plan – Fiscal Year 2007, Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (September 2007)

Hargraves, R & Moir, R, 2010, Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors, American Scientist 98

Fluoride-Salt-Cooled High-Temperature Reactors (FHRs) for Base-Load and Peak Electricity, Grid Stabilization, and Process Heat, Forsberg, Hu, Peterson, Sridharan, 2013, MIT

Wong, C & Merrill, B, 2004, Relevant MSRE and MSR Experience , ITER TBM Project Meeting at UCLA, 23-25 February 2004

Energy Process Developments Ltd, July 2015, MSR Review: Feasibility of Developing a Pilot Scale Molten Salt Reactor in the UK , July 2015

Sherrell Greene, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, SmAHTR – the Small Modular Advanced High Temperature Reactor (September 2010)

Xu, Hongjie, SINAP, Status and Perspective of TMSR in China , presented at the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) Molten Salt Reactor Workshop at the the Paul Scherrer Institute on 24 January 2017

Holcomb D.E. et al, July 2011, Fast Spectrum Molten Salt Reactor Options, ORNL

1. Background, Status, and Issues Related to the Regulation of Advanced Spent Nuclear Fuel Recycle Facilities , A White Paper of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste and Materials, NUREG-1909 (June 2008) [ Back ]

2. J.R. Engel et al. , Conceptual Design Characteristics of a Denatured Molten-Salt Reactor with Once-Through Fueling , Engineering Technology Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (July 1980) [ Back ]

Related information

Hot Topics: Censorship, Banned, and Challenged Books

• Definitions
• Current News

The Fiery History of Banned Books (Feat. Princess Weekes)

Banned and challenged books statistics, database - reports.

• Law and Legislation
• Scholarly Articles

• Censorship by the Numbers ALA compiles data on book challenges from reports filed with its Office for Intellectual Freedom by library professionals in the field and from news stories published throughout the United States.
• Top 10 Most Challenged Books of 2023 Every year, ALA's Office for Intellectual Freedom (OIF) compiles a list of the Top 10 Most Challenged Books in order to inform the public about censorship in libraries and schools. The lists are based on information from reports filed by library professionals and community members, as well as news stories published throughout the United States.
• Book Ban Data The American Library Association's Office for Intellectual Freedom (OIF) has released new data documenting book challenges throughout the United States, finding that challenges of unique titles surged 65% in 2023 compared to 2022 numbers, reaching the highest level ever documented by ALA.
• Top 100 Most Banned and Challenged Books: 2010-2019
• Top 100 Banned/Challenged Books: 2000-2009
• 100 most frequently challenged books: 1990-1999

Provides unbiased coverage of health, social trends, criminal justice, international affairs, education, the environment, technology, and the economy, 1991 present.

• Issues & Controversies This link opens in a new window Updated weekly, this database offers in depth articles to researchers seeking understanding in todays crucial issues in topics such as politics, business, society and education.
• Free Speech on Campus Are legislators and activists curbing free expression?
• Are the Book Challenges Sweeping School and Public Libraries Across the Country in the Best Interests of Students?
• New Study Demonstrates the Importance of Diverse Books Through this intervention study, participating educators selected and added diverse books to their classroom libraries, and completed bi-monthly tracking surveys to gauge the impact of those diverse books. Among the findings: the pilot study revealed that increasing access to diverse books in the classroom environment increases the amount of time that children spend reading, and positively impacts students’ reading scores.
• Key Events in the History of Book Bans
• << Previous: Current News
• Next: Law and Legislation >>
• Last Updated: Apr 26, 2024 3:19 PM
• URL: https://research.library.gsu.edu/bannedbooks