research results and discussion sample

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

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

The discussion section contains the results and outcomes of a study. An effective discussion informs readers what can be learned from your experiment and provides context for the results.

What makes an effective discussion?

When you’re ready to write your discussion, you’ve already introduced the purpose of your study and provided an in-depth description of the methodology. The discussion informs readers about the larger implications of your study based on the results. Highlighting these implications while not overstating the findings can be challenging, especially when you’re submitting to a journal that selects articles based on novelty or potential impact. Regardless of what journal you are submitting to, the discussion section always serves the same purpose: concluding what your study results actually mean.

A successful discussion section puts your findings in context. It should include:

• the results of your research,
• a discussion of related research, and
• a comparison between your results and initial hypothesis.

Tip: Not all journals share the same naming conventions.

You can apply the advice in this article to the conclusion, results or discussion sections of your manuscript.

Our Early Career Researcher community tells us that the conclusion is often considered the most difficult aspect of a manuscript to write. To help, this guide provides questions to ask yourself, a basic structure to model your discussion off of and examples from published manuscripts. 

Questions to ask yourself:

• Was my hypothesis correct?
• If my hypothesis is partially correct or entirely different, what can be learned from the results? 
• How do the conclusions reshape or add onto the existing knowledge in the field? What does previous research say about the topic? 
• Why are the results important or relevant to your audience? Do they add further evidence to a scientific consensus or disprove prior studies? 
• How can future research build on these observations? What are the key experiments that must be done? 
• What is the “take-home” message you want your reader to leave with?

How to structure a discussion

Trying to fit a complete discussion into a single paragraph can add unnecessary stress to the writing process. If possible, you’ll want to give yourself two or three paragraphs to give the reader a comprehensive understanding of your study as a whole. Here’s one way to structure an effective discussion:

Writing Tips

While the above sections can help you brainstorm and structure your discussion, there are many common mistakes that writers revert to when having difficulties with their paper. Writing a discussion can be a delicate balance between summarizing your results, providing proper context for your research and avoiding introducing new information. Remember that your paper should be both confident and honest about the results! 

• Read the journal’s guidelines on the discussion and conclusion sections. If possible, learn about the guidelines before writing the discussion to ensure you’re writing to meet their expectations. 
• Begin with a clear statement of the principal findings. This will reinforce the main take-away for the reader and set up the rest of the discussion. 
• Explain why the outcomes of your study are important to the reader. Discuss the implications of your findings realistically based on previous literature, highlighting both the strengths and limitations of the research. 
• State whether the results prove or disprove your hypothesis. If your hypothesis was disproved, what might be the reasons? 
• Introduce new or expanded ways to think about the research question. Indicate what next steps can be taken to further pursue any unresolved questions. 
• If dealing with a contemporary or ongoing problem, such as climate change, discuss possible consequences if the problem is avoided. 
• Be concise. Adding unnecessary detail can distract from the main findings. 

Don’t

• Rewrite your abstract. Statements with “we investigated” or “we studied” generally do not belong in the discussion. 
• Include new arguments or evidence not previously discussed. Necessary information and evidence should be introduced in the main body of the paper. 
• Apologize. Even if your research contains significant limitations, don’t undermine your authority by including statements that doubt your methodology or execution. 
• Shy away from speaking on limitations or negative results. Including limitations and negative results will give readers a complete understanding of the presented research. Potential limitations include sources of potential bias, threats to internal or external validity, barriers to implementing an intervention and other issues inherent to the study design. 
• Overstate the importance of your findings. Making grand statements about how a study will fully resolve large questions can lead readers to doubt the success of the research. 

Snippets of Effective Discussions:

Consumer-based actions to reduce plastic pollution in rivers: A multi-criteria decision analysis approach

Identifying reliable indicators of fitness in polar bears

• How to Write a Great Title
• How to Write an Abstract
• How to Write Your Methods
• How to Report Statistics
• How to Edit Your Work

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

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

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

• Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

Home » Research Results Section – Writing Guide and Examples

Research Results Section – Writing Guide and Examples

Table of Contents

Research Results

Research results refer to the findings and conclusions derived from a systematic investigation or study conducted to answer a specific question or hypothesis. These results are typically presented in a written report or paper and can include various forms of data such as numerical data, qualitative data, statistics, charts, graphs, and visual aids.

Results Section in Research

The results section of the research paper presents the findings of the study. It is the part of the paper where the researcher reports the data collected during the study and analyzes it to draw conclusions.

In the results section, the researcher should describe the data that was collected, the statistical analysis performed, and the findings of the study. It is important to be objective and not interpret the data in this section. Instead, the researcher should report the data as accurately and objectively as possible.

Structure of Research Results Section

The structure of the research results section can vary depending on the type of research conducted, but in general, it should contain the following components:

• Introduction: The introduction should provide an overview of the study, its aims, and its research questions. It should also briefly explain the methodology used to conduct the study.
• Data presentation : This section presents the data collected during the study. It may include tables, graphs, or other visual aids to help readers better understand the data. The data presented should be organized in a logical and coherent way, with headings and subheadings used to help guide the reader.
• Data analysis: In this section, the data presented in the previous section are analyzed and interpreted. The statistical tests used to analyze the data should be clearly explained, and the results of the tests should be presented in a way that is easy to understand.
• Discussion of results : This section should provide an interpretation of the results of the study, including a discussion of any unexpected findings. The discussion should also address the study’s research questions and explain how the results contribute to the field of study.
• Limitations: This section should acknowledge any limitations of the study, such as sample size, data collection methods, or other factors that may have influenced the results.
• Conclusions: The conclusions should summarize the main findings of the study and provide a final interpretation of the results. The conclusions should also address the study’s research questions and explain how the results contribute to the field of study.
• Recommendations : This section may provide recommendations for future research based on the study’s findings. It may also suggest practical applications for the study’s results in real-world settings.

Outline of Research Results Section

The following is an outline of the key components typically included in the Results section:

I. Introduction

• A brief overview of the research objectives and hypotheses
• A statement of the research question

II. Descriptive statistics

• Summary statistics (e.g., mean, standard deviation) for each variable analyzed
• Frequencies and percentages for categorical variables

III. Inferential statistics

• Results of statistical analyses, including tests of hypotheses
• Tables or figures to display statistical results

IV. Effect sizes and confidence intervals

• Effect sizes (e.g., Cohen’s d, odds ratio) to quantify the strength of the relationship between variables
• Confidence intervals to estimate the range of plausible values for the effect size

V. Subgroup analyses

• Results of analyses that examined differences between subgroups (e.g., by gender, age, treatment group)

VI. Limitations and assumptions

• Discussion of any limitations of the study and potential sources of bias
• Assumptions made in the statistical analyses

VII. Conclusions

• A summary of the key findings and their implications
• A statement of whether the hypotheses were supported or not
• Suggestions for future research

Example of Research Results Section

An Example of a Research Results Section could be:

• This study sought to examine the relationship between sleep quality and academic performance in college students.
• Hypothesis : College students who report better sleep quality will have higher GPAs than those who report poor sleep quality.
• Methodology : Participants completed a survey about their sleep habits and academic performance.

II. Participants

• Participants were college students (N=200) from a mid-sized public university in the United States.
• The sample was evenly split by gender (50% female, 50% male) and predominantly white (85%).
• Participants were recruited through flyers and online advertisements.

III. Results

• Participants who reported better sleep quality had significantly higher GPAs (M=3.5, SD=0.5) than those who reported poor sleep quality (M=2.9, SD=0.6).
• See Table 1 for a summary of the results.
• Participants who reported consistent sleep schedules had higher GPAs than those with irregular sleep schedules.

IV. Discussion

• The results support the hypothesis that better sleep quality is associated with higher academic performance in college students.
• These findings have implications for college students, as prioritizing sleep could lead to better academic outcomes.
• Limitations of the study include self-reported data and the lack of control for other variables that could impact academic performance.

V. Conclusion

• College students who prioritize sleep may see a positive impact on their academic performance.
• These findings highlight the importance of sleep in academic success.
• Future research could explore interventions to improve sleep quality in college students.

Example of Research Results in Research Paper :

Our study aimed to compare the performance of three different machine learning algorithms (Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, and Neural Network) in predicting customer churn in a telecommunications company. We collected a dataset of 10,000 customer records, with 20 predictor variables and a binary churn outcome variable.

Our analysis revealed that all three algorithms performed well in predicting customer churn, with an overall accuracy of 85%. However, the Random Forest algorithm showed the highest accuracy (88%), followed by the Support Vector Machine (86%) and the Neural Network (84%).

Furthermore, we found that the most important predictor variables for customer churn were monthly charges, contract type, and tenure. Random Forest identified monthly charges as the most important variable, while Support Vector Machine and Neural Network identified contract type as the most important.

Overall, our results suggest that machine learning algorithms can be effective in predicting customer churn in a telecommunications company, and that Random Forest is the most accurate algorithm for this task.

Example 3 :

Title : The Impact of Social Media on Body Image and Self-Esteem

Abstract : This study aimed to investigate the relationship between social media use, body image, and self-esteem among young adults. A total of 200 participants were recruited from a university and completed self-report measures of social media use, body image satisfaction, and self-esteem.

Results: The results showed that social media use was significantly associated with body image dissatisfaction and lower self-esteem. Specifically, participants who reported spending more time on social media platforms had lower levels of body image satisfaction and self-esteem compared to those who reported less social media use. Moreover, the study found that comparing oneself to others on social media was a significant predictor of body image dissatisfaction and lower self-esteem.

Conclusion : These results suggest that social media use can have negative effects on body image satisfaction and self-esteem among young adults. It is important for individuals to be mindful of their social media use and to recognize the potential negative impact it can have on their mental health. Furthermore, interventions aimed at promoting positive body image and self-esteem should take into account the role of social media in shaping these attitudes and behaviors.

Importance of Research Results

Research results are important for several reasons, including:

• Advancing knowledge: Research results can contribute to the advancement of knowledge in a particular field, whether it be in science, technology, medicine, social sciences, or humanities.
• Developing theories: Research results can help to develop or modify existing theories and create new ones.
• Improving practices: Research results can inform and improve practices in various fields, such as education, healthcare, business, and public policy.
• Identifying problems and solutions: Research results can identify problems and provide solutions to complex issues in society, including issues related to health, environment, social justice, and economics.
• Validating claims : Research results can validate or refute claims made by individuals or groups in society, such as politicians, corporations, or activists.
• Providing evidence: Research results can provide evidence to support decision-making, policy-making, and resource allocation in various fields.

How to Write Results in A Research Paper

Here are some general guidelines on how to write results in a research paper:

• Organize the results section: Start by organizing the results section in a logical and coherent manner. Divide the section into subsections if necessary, based on the research questions or hypotheses.
• Present the findings: Present the findings in a clear and concise manner. Use tables, graphs, and figures to illustrate the data and make the presentation more engaging.
• Describe the data: Describe the data in detail, including the sample size, response rate, and any missing data. Provide relevant descriptive statistics such as means, standard deviations, and ranges.
• Interpret the findings: Interpret the findings in light of the research questions or hypotheses. Discuss the implications of the findings and the extent to which they support or contradict existing theories or previous research.
• Discuss the limitations : Discuss the limitations of the study, including any potential sources of bias or confounding factors that may have affected the results.
• Compare the results : Compare the results with those of previous studies or theoretical predictions. Discuss any similarities, differences, or inconsistencies.
• Avoid redundancy: Avoid repeating information that has already been presented in the introduction or methods sections. Instead, focus on presenting new and relevant information.
• Be objective: Be objective in presenting the results, avoiding any personal biases or interpretations.

When to Write Research Results

Here are situations When to Write Research Results”

• After conducting research on the chosen topic and obtaining relevant data, organize the findings in a structured format that accurately represents the information gathered.
• Once the data has been analyzed and interpreted, and conclusions have been drawn, begin the writing process.
• Before starting to write, ensure that the research results adhere to the guidelines and requirements of the intended audience, such as a scientific journal or academic conference.
• Begin by writing an abstract that briefly summarizes the research question, methodology, findings, and conclusions.
• Follow the abstract with an introduction that provides context for the research, explains its significance, and outlines the research question and objectives.
• The next section should be a literature review that provides an overview of existing research on the topic and highlights the gaps in knowledge that the current research seeks to address.
• The methodology section should provide a detailed explanation of the research design, including the sample size, data collection methods, and analytical techniques used.
• Present the research results in a clear and concise manner, using graphs, tables, and figures to illustrate the findings.
• Discuss the implications of the research results, including how they contribute to the existing body of knowledge on the topic and what further research is needed.
• Conclude the paper by summarizing the main findings, reiterating the significance of the research, and offering suggestions for future research.

Purpose of Research Results

The purposes of Research Results are as follows:

• Informing policy and practice: Research results can provide evidence-based information to inform policy decisions, such as in the fields of healthcare, education, and environmental regulation. They can also inform best practices in fields such as business, engineering, and social work.
• Addressing societal problems : Research results can be used to help address societal problems, such as reducing poverty, improving public health, and promoting social justice.
• Generating economic benefits : Research results can lead to the development of new products, services, and technologies that can create economic value and improve quality of life.
• Supporting academic and professional development : Research results can be used to support academic and professional development by providing opportunities for students, researchers, and practitioners to learn about new findings and methodologies in their field.
• Enhancing public understanding: Research results can help to educate the public about important issues and promote scientific literacy, leading to more informed decision-making and better public policy.
• Evaluating interventions: Research results can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, such as treatments, educational programs, and social policies. This can help to identify areas where improvements are needed and guide future interventions.
• Contributing to scientific progress: Research results can contribute to the advancement of science by providing new insights and discoveries that can lead to new theories, methods, and techniques.
• Informing decision-making : Research results can provide decision-makers with the information they need to make informed decisions. This can include decision-making at the individual, organizational, or governmental levels.
• Fostering collaboration : Research results can facilitate collaboration between researchers and practitioners, leading to new partnerships, interdisciplinary approaches, and innovative solutions to complex problems.

Advantages of Research Results

Some Advantages of Research Results are as follows:

• Improved decision-making: Research results can help inform decision-making in various fields, including medicine, business, and government. For example, research on the effectiveness of different treatments for a particular disease can help doctors make informed decisions about the best course of treatment for their patients.
• Innovation : Research results can lead to the development of new technologies, products, and services. For example, research on renewable energy sources can lead to the development of new and more efficient ways to harness renewable energy.
• Economic benefits: Research results can stimulate economic growth by providing new opportunities for businesses and entrepreneurs. For example, research on new materials or manufacturing techniques can lead to the development of new products and processes that can create new jobs and boost economic activity.
• Improved quality of life: Research results can contribute to improving the quality of life for individuals and society as a whole. For example, research on the causes of a particular disease can lead to the development of new treatments and cures, improving the health and well-being of millions of people.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

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

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Generate accurate APA citations for free

• Knowledge Base
• APA Style 7th edition
• How to write an APA results section

Reporting Research Results in APA Style | Tips & Examples

Published on December 21, 2020 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on January 17, 2024.

The results section of a quantitative research paper is where you summarize your data and report the findings of any relevant statistical analyses.

The APA manual provides rigorous guidelines for what to report in quantitative research papers in the fields of psychology, education, and other social sciences.

Use these standards to answer your research questions and report your data analyses in a complete and transparent way.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

What goes in your results section, introduce your data, summarize your data, report statistical results, presenting numbers effectively, what doesn’t belong in your results section, frequently asked questions about results in apa.

In APA style, the results section includes preliminary information about the participants and data, descriptive and inferential statistics, and the results of any exploratory analyses.

Include these in your results section:

• Participant flow and recruitment period. Report the number of participants at every stage of the study, as well as the dates when recruitment took place.
• Missing data . Identify the proportion of data that wasn’t included in your final analysis and state the reasons.
• Any adverse events. Make sure to report any unexpected events or side effects (for clinical studies).
• Descriptive statistics . Summarize the primary and secondary outcomes of the study.
• Inferential statistics , including confidence intervals and effect sizes. Address the primary and secondary research questions by reporting the detailed results of your main analyses.
• Results of subgroup or exploratory analyses, if applicable. Place detailed results in supplementary materials.

Write up the results in the past tense because you’re describing the outcomes of a completed research study.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Before diving into your research findings, first describe the flow of participants at every stage of your study and whether any data were excluded from the final analysis.

Participant flow and recruitment period

It’s necessary to report any attrition, which is the decline in participants at every sequential stage of a study. That’s because an uneven number of participants across groups sometimes threatens internal validity and makes it difficult to compare groups. Be sure to also state all reasons for attrition.

If your study has multiple stages (e.g., pre-test, intervention, and post-test) and groups (e.g., experimental and control groups), a flow chart is the best way to report the number of participants in each group per stage and reasons for attrition.

Also report the dates for when you recruited participants or performed follow-up sessions.

Missing data

Another key issue is the completeness of your dataset. It’s necessary to report both the amount and reasons for data that was missing or excluded.

Data can become unusable due to equipment malfunctions, improper storage, unexpected events, participant ineligibility, and so on. For each case, state the reason why the data were unusable.

Some data points may be removed from the final analysis because they are outliers—but you must be able to justify how you decided what to exclude.

If you applied any techniques for overcoming or compensating for lost data, report those as well.

Adverse events

For clinical studies, report all events with serious consequences or any side effects that occured.

Descriptive statistics summarize your data for the reader. Present descriptive statistics for each primary, secondary, and subgroup analysis.

Don’t provide formulas or citations for commonly used statistics (e.g., standard deviation) – but do provide them for new or rare equations.

Descriptive statistics

The exact descriptive statistics that you report depends on the types of data in your study. Categorical variables can be reported using proportions, while quantitative data can be reported using means and standard deviations . For a large set of numbers, a table is the most effective presentation format.

Include sample sizes (overall and for each group) as well as appropriate measures of central tendency and variability for the outcomes in your results section. For every point estimate , add a clearly labelled measure of variability as well.

Be sure to note how you combined data to come up with variables of interest. For every variable of interest, explain how you operationalized it.

According to APA journal standards, it’s necessary to report all relevant hypothesis tests performed, estimates of effect sizes, and confidence intervals.

When reporting statistical results, you should first address primary research questions before moving onto secondary research questions and any exploratory or subgroup analyses.

Present the results of tests in the order that you performed them—report the outcomes of main tests before post-hoc tests, for example. Don’t leave out any relevant results, even if they don’t support your hypothesis.

Inferential statistics

For each statistical test performed, first restate the hypothesis , then state whether your hypothesis was supported and provide the outcomes that led you to that conclusion.

Report the following for each hypothesis test:

• the test statistic value,
• the degrees of freedom ,
• the exact p- value (unless it is less than 0.001),
• the magnitude and direction of the effect.

When reporting complex data analyses, such as factor analysis or multivariate analysis, present the models estimated in detail, and state the statistical software used. Make sure to report any violations of statistical assumptions or problems with estimation.

Effect sizes and confidence intervals

For each hypothesis test performed, you should present confidence intervals and estimates of effect sizes .

Confidence intervals are useful for showing the variability around point estimates. They should be included whenever you report population parameter estimates.

Effect sizes indicate how impactful the outcomes of a study are. But since they are estimates, it’s recommended that you also provide confidence intervals of effect sizes.

Subgroup or exploratory analyses

Briefly report the results of any other planned or exploratory analyses you performed. These may include subgroup analyses as well.

Subgroup analyses come with a high chance of false positive results, because performing a large number of comparison or correlation tests increases the chances of finding significant results.

If you find significant results in these analyses, make sure to appropriately report them as exploratory (rather than confirmatory) results to avoid overstating their importance.

While these analyses can be reported in less detail in the main text, you can provide the full analyses in supplementary materials.

Are your APA in-text citations flawless?

The AI-powered APA Citation Checker points out every error, tells you exactly what’s wrong, and explains how to fix it. Say goodbye to losing marks on your assignment!

Get started!

To effectively present numbers, use a mix of text, tables , and figures where appropriate:

• To present three or fewer numbers, try a sentence ,
• To present between 4 and 20 numbers, try a table ,
• To present more than 20 numbers, try a figure .

Since these are general guidelines, use your own judgment and feedback from others for effective presentation of numbers.

Tables and figures should be numbered and have titles, along with relevant notes. Make sure to present data only once throughout the paper and refer to any tables and figures in the text.

Formatting statistics and numbers

It’s important to follow capitalization , italicization, and abbreviation rules when referring to statistics in your paper. There are specific format guidelines for reporting statistics in APA , as well as general rules about writing numbers .

If you are unsure of how to present specific symbols, look up the detailed APA guidelines or other papers in your field.

It’s important to provide a complete picture of your data analyses and outcomes in a concise way. For that reason, raw data and any interpretations of your results are not included in the results section.

It’s rarely appropriate to include raw data in your results section. Instead, you should always save the raw data securely and make them available and accessible to any other researchers who request them.

Making scientific research available to others is a key part of academic integrity and open science.

Interpretation or discussion of results

This belongs in your discussion section. Your results section is where you objectively report all relevant findings and leave them open for interpretation by readers.

While you should state whether the findings of statistical tests lend support to your hypotheses, refrain from forming conclusions to your research questions in the results section.

Explanation of how statistics tests work

For the sake of concise writing, you can safely assume that readers of your paper have professional knowledge of how statistical inferences work.

In an APA results section , you should generally report the following:

• Participant flow and recruitment period.
• Missing data and any adverse events.
• Descriptive statistics about your samples.
• Inferential statistics , including confidence intervals and effect sizes.
• Results of any subgroup or exploratory analyses, if applicable.

According to the APA guidelines, you should report enough detail on inferential statistics so that your readers understand your analyses.

• the test statistic value
• the degrees of freedom
• the exact p value (unless it is less than 0.001)
• the magnitude and direction of the effect

You should also present confidence intervals and estimates of effect sizes where relevant.

In APA style, statistics can be presented in the main text or as tables or figures . To decide how to present numbers, you can follow APA guidelines:

• To present three or fewer numbers, try a sentence,
• To present between 4 and 20 numbers, try a table,
• To present more than 20 numbers, try a figure.

Results are usually written in the past tense , because they are describing the outcome of completed actions.

The results chapter or section simply and objectively reports what you found, without speculating on why you found these results. The discussion interprets the meaning of the results, puts them in context, and explains why they matter.

In qualitative research , results and discussion are sometimes combined. But in quantitative research , it’s considered important to separate the objective results from your interpretation of them.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Bhandari, P. (2024, January 17). Reporting Research Results in APA Style | Tips & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved March 29, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/apa-style/results-section/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, how to write an apa methods section, how to format tables and figures in apa style, reporting statistics in apa style | guidelines & examples, unlimited academic ai-proofreading.

✔ Document error-free in 5minutes ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

alwaysresearching.com

never stop your research process

Guide on how to write results and discussion in a research paper.

The results and discussion section of a research paper document what you did in the entire research. You could call them the most important sections in a research paper, although other sections are also important. To write the results and discussion in research paper, you need to have the technical know-how of writing. We will give you practical tips on starting and writing results and discussions if you keep reading.

What is the difference between results and discussion in academic writing?

Before we get into how to write these two important sections in a research paper, let’s talk about their differences. The major difference between them is what aspect of the entire research they contain. The results section objectively reports your findings as they are; no speculations on why you found the results. On the other hand, the discussion section interprets the results, putting them in context, and explaining their importance.

Both sections are sometimes combined in research, particularly in qualitative research. In quantitative research, you are expected to separate the results from the discussion – that is, each section on different pages. An excellent place to get a good idea of how two write these sections is in a results and discussion example.

How to write discussion in research paper

In the discussion section of a research paper, you’re going in-depth with your findings, discussing their meaning, importance, and relevance. You’re not including any background research; you’re instead focusing on evaluating and explaining your results. Then, you’ll indicate how it relates to your research questions or thesis statement and literature review. Below is what to include in the discussion section of a research paper t:

• Results summary : In one paragraph, reiterate the research problem and briefly discuss your major results. Avoid repeating the data you already reported in the results section; clearly state the result that directly answers your research problem.
• Interpret your results : Your aim is to ensure your readers understand your results, how they answer the research questions, and their significance to them. This section typically covers identifying patterns and correlations among the data and discussing whether or not the results supported your thesis. It also contextualizes your results with previous research, explains unexpected results and their significance, considers possible explanations, and argues your position.
• Discussing the implications : While giving your interpretation of the results, don’t forget to relate them back to the articles you used in the literature review. This shows how your results fit with existing knowledge, the insights they contribute, and their consequences for practice or theory.
• State the limitations : Every research has its limitations, even the best ones; you need to acknowledge your research’s limitations to demonstrate your credibility. You’re not necessarily listing errors; you’re giving a realistic picture of what your study can and cannot do.
• Recommend : Use your findings to recommend further research or practical implementation; this part sometimes goes with the conclusion. Instead of stating that more studies be done, show what and how future work can build on the areas your paper couldn’t address.

Practical tips on how to start a results and discussion section

The results and discussion section of a research paper can be the easiest part to write or the hardest. It all depends on you knowing what to include and not include and how to start writing. Below are helpful tips for writing the results and discussion section of a research paper:

• Please don’t repeat the results in the discussion; start with repeating the research questions and explain how the results answer them.
• Start from the simple results to the complex; you can even start with the conclusion first, but ensure it is consistent with your objectives.
• Don’t explain your results in the result section; simply state your findings as directly and simply as possible.
• Emphasize what new, different, or important things your results add to knowledge in the discussion section.
• Understand the difference between statistical significance and clinical importance.
• The tables and graphs in the results section should stand alone, with texts highlighting their importance or meaning.
• Arbitrarily present your results, with sidelights results not receiving equal weight.

Now, you can write your paper’s results and discussion section with these tips, understanding what and what not to include. We recommend that you go online and check through an example of discussion in research paper – or samples. If you see how professionals write it, you’re a step closer to being good at writing it yourself.

You Might Also Like

What Is the Normal Research Paper Length?

Best way to organize research and write a perfect paper, term paper help guide for your perfect piece, leave a reply cancel.

We use cookies and similar technologies to improve your website experience and help us understand how you use our website. By continuing to use this website, you consent to the usage of cookies. Learn more about our Privacy Statement and Cookie Policy .

• Our Mission
• Code of Conduct
• The Consultants
• Hours and Locations
• Apply to Become a Consultant
• Make an Appointment
• Face-to-Face Appointments
• Zoom Appointments
• Written Feedback Appointments
• Support for Writers with Disabilities
• Policies and Restrictions
• Upcoming Workshops
• Class Workshops
• Meet the Consultants
• Writing Guides and Tools
• Schedule an appointment! Login or Register
• Graduate Students
• ESOL Students

IMRaD Results Discussion

Results and Discussion Sections in Scientific Research Reports (IMRaD)

After introducing the study and describing its methodology, an IMRaD* report presents and discusses the main findings of the study. In the results section, writers systematically report their findings, and in discussion , they interpret these findings. If the discussion section is not followed by a separate conclusion section, then the discussion will include elements of a conclusion as well (e.g., provide limitations, directions for future research, or other moves outlined in the handout “IMRaD Conclusions”).

* IMRaD refers to reports with the structure Introduction-Method-Results-Discussion used in empirical research in natural and social sciences. Please refer to the Writing Center quick guide “Writing an IMRaD Report” for more explanations.

Depending on the discipline, journal, and the nature of the study, the results, discussion, and even conclusion sections can be organized in varying ways:

Option 1 : Results and discussion in separate sections with conclusion moves included in the discussion section

Option 2 : Results and discussion combined; conclusion separate

Option 3 : Results , discussion , and conclusion in separate sections

Results (What did you find?): Creating a results section involves systematically presenting and describing the outcomes of the study. To summarize results, writers often use visual representations: Tables and figures are commonly included in the results sections to ensure clarity.

Discussion (What does it mean?): Discussion sections interpret the most significant results as they help shed light on the study’s research questions. While writing a discussion section, writers compare the results of their study with previous research as well as speculate on the explanations for such findings.

Common Moves in Results Sections

Below are some moves, sub-moves, and language commonly used in results and discussion sections.

The table is based on the information from University of Manchester’s Academic Phrasebank http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/reporting-results/

Common Moves in Discussion Sections

The table is based on the information from University of Manchester’s Academic Phrasebank http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/discussing-findings/

Activity to help you prepare for writing IMRaD results and discussion sections

Choose a journal in your discipline and read the results and discussion sections of a few IMRaD reports. Analyze these sections addressing the following questions:

• How are the sections organized? Are results and discussion presented together or in separate sections? Is the conclusion a separate section or a part of the discussion? Why do you think the authors decided to follow such organizational patterns?
• Which moves and sub-moves are present in the results and discussion sections of these reports?
• What language or contextual clues helped you identify these moves?
• How often are citations used in both sections? When or for which purposes do the authors use each citation?
• How often is passive voice used? Which tense(s) do the authors predominantly rely on? How can you explain this use?

Last updated 09/03/2019

The Writing Center

4400 University Drive, 2G8 Fairfax, VA 22030

• Johnson Center, Room 227E
• +1-703-993-1200
• [email protected]

Quick Links

• Register with us

© Copyright 2024 George Mason University . All Rights Reserved. Privacy Statement | Accessibility

How to Write the Discussion Section of a Research Paper

The discussion section of a research paper analyzes and interprets the findings, provides context, compares them with previous studies, identifies limitations, and suggests future research directions.

Updated on September 15, 2023

Structure your discussion section right, and you’ll be cited more often while doing a greater service to the scientific community. So, what actually goes into the discussion section? And how do you write it?

The discussion section of your research paper is where you let the reader know how your study is positioned in the literature, what to take away from your paper, and how your work helps them. It can also include your conclusions and suggestions for future studies.

First, we’ll define all the parts of your discussion paper, and then look into how to write a strong, effective discussion section for your paper or manuscript.

Discussion section: what is it, what it does

The discussion section comes later in your paper, following the introduction, methods, and results. The discussion sets up your study’s conclusions. Its main goals are to present, interpret, and provide a context for your results.

What is it?

The discussion section provides an analysis and interpretation of the findings, compares them with previous studies, identifies limitations, and suggests future directions for research.

This section combines information from the preceding parts of your paper into a coherent story. By this point, the reader already knows why you did your study (introduction), how you did it (methods), and what happened (results). In the discussion, you’ll help the reader connect the ideas from these sections.

Why is it necessary?

The discussion provides context and interpretations for the results. It also answers the questions posed in the introduction. While the results section describes your findings, the discussion explains what they say. This is also where you can describe the impact or implications of your research.

Adds context for your results

Most research studies aim to answer a question, replicate a finding, or address limitations in the literature. These goals are first described in the introduction. However, in the discussion section, the author can refer back to them to explain how the study's objective was achieved. 

Shows what your results actually mean and real-world implications

The discussion can also describe the effect of your findings on research or practice. How are your results significant for readers, other researchers, or policymakers?

What to include in your discussion (in the correct order)

A complete and effective discussion section should at least touch on the points described below.

Summary of key findings

The discussion should begin with a brief factual summary of the results. Concisely overview the main results you obtained.

Begin with key findings with supporting evidence

Your results section described a list of findings, but what message do they send when you look at them all together?

Your findings were detailed in the results section, so there’s no need to repeat them here, but do provide at least a few highlights. This will help refresh the reader’s memory and help them focus on the big picture.

Read the first paragraph of the discussion section in this article (PDF) for an example of how to start this part of your paper. Notice how the authors break down their results and follow each description sentence with an explanation of why each finding is relevant. 

State clearly and concisely

Following a clear and direct writing style is especially important in the discussion section. After all, this is where you will make some of the most impactful points in your paper. While the results section often contains technical vocabulary, such as statistical terms, the discussion section lets you describe your findings more clearly. 

Interpretation of results

Once you’ve given your reader an overview of your results, you need to interpret those results. In other words, what do your results mean? Discuss the findings’ implications and significance in relation to your research question or hypothesis.

Analyze and interpret your findings

Look into your findings and explore what’s behind them or what may have caused them. If your introduction cited theories or studies that could explain your findings, use these sources as a basis to discuss your results.

For example, look at the second paragraph in the discussion section of this article on waggling honey bees. Here, the authors explore their results based on information from the literature.

Unexpected or contradictory results

Sometimes, your findings are not what you expect. Here’s where you describe this and try to find a reason for it. Could it be because of the method you used? Does it have something to do with the variables analyzed? Comparing your methods with those of other similar studies can help with this task.

Context and comparison with previous work

Refer to related studies to place your research in a larger context and the literature. Compare and contrast your findings with existing literature, highlighting similarities, differences, and/or contradictions.

How your work compares or contrasts with previous work

Studies with similar findings to yours can be cited to show the strength of your findings. Information from these studies can also be used to help explain your results. Differences between your findings and others in the literature can also be discussed here. 

How to divide this section into subsections

If you have more than one objective in your study or many key findings, you can dedicate a separate section to each of these. Here’s an example of this approach. You can see that the discussion section is divided into topics and even has a separate heading for each of them. 

Limitations

Many journals require you to include the limitations of your study in the discussion. Even if they don’t, there are good reasons to mention these in your paper.

Why limitations don’t have a negative connotation

A study’s limitations are points to be improved upon in future research. While some of these may be flaws in your method, many may be due to factors you couldn’t predict.

Examples include time constraints or small sample sizes. Pointing this out will help future researchers avoid or address these issues. This part of the discussion can also include any attempts you have made to reduce the impact of these limitations, as in this study .

How limitations add to a researcher's credibility

Pointing out the limitations of your study demonstrates transparency. It also shows that you know your methods well and can conduct a critical assessment of them.  

Implications and significance

The final paragraph of the discussion section should contain the take-home messages for your study. It can also cite the “strong points” of your study, to contrast with the limitations section.

Restate your hypothesis

Remind the reader what your hypothesis was before you conducted the study. 

How was it proven or disproven?

Identify your main findings and describe how they relate to your hypothesis.

How your results contribute to the literature

Were you able to answer your research question? Or address a gap in the literature?

Future implications of your research

Describe the impact that your results may have on the topic of study. Your results may show, for instance, that there are still limitations in the literature for future studies to address. There may be a need for studies that extend your findings in a specific way. You also may need additional research to corroborate your findings. 

Sample discussion section

This fictitious example covers all the aspects discussed above. Your actual discussion section will probably be much longer, but you can read this to get an idea of everything your discussion should cover.

Our results showed that the presence of cats in a household is associated with higher levels of perceived happiness by its human occupants. These findings support our hypothesis and demonstrate the association between pet ownership and well-being. 

The present findings align with those of Bao and Schreer (2016) and Hardie et al. (2023), who observed greater life satisfaction in pet owners relative to non-owners. Although the present study did not directly evaluate life satisfaction, this factor may explain the association between happiness and cat ownership observed in our sample.

Our findings must be interpreted in light of some limitations, such as the focus on cat ownership only rather than pets as a whole. This may limit the generalizability of our results.

Nevertheless, this study had several strengths. These include its strict exclusion criteria and use of a standardized assessment instrument to investigate the relationships between pets and owners. These attributes bolster the accuracy of our results and reduce the influence of confounding factors, increasing the strength of our conclusions. Future studies may examine the factors that mediate the association between pet ownership and happiness to better comprehend this phenomenon.

This brief discussion begins with a quick summary of the results and hypothesis. The next paragraph cites previous research and compares its findings to those of this study. Information from previous studies is also used to help interpret the findings. After discussing the results of the study, some limitations are pointed out. The paper also explains why these limitations may influence the interpretation of results. Then, final conclusions are drawn based on the study, and directions for future research are suggested.

How to make your discussion flow naturally

If you find writing in scientific English challenging, the discussion and conclusions are often the hardest parts of the paper to write. That’s because you’re not just listing up studies, methods, and outcomes. You’re actually expressing your thoughts and interpretations in words.

• How formal should it be?
• What words should you use, or not use?
• How do you meet strict word limits, or make it longer and more informative?

Always give it your best, but sometimes a helping hand can, well, help. Getting a professional edit can help clarify your work’s importance while improving the English used to explain it. When readers know the value of your work, they’ll cite it. We’ll assign your study to an expert editor knowledgeable in your area of research. Their work will clarify your discussion, helping it to tell your story. Find out more about AJE Editing.

Adam Goulston, PsyD, MS, MBA, MISD, ELS

Science Marketing Consultant

See our "Privacy Policy"

Ensure your structure and ideas are consistent and clearly communicated

Pair your Premium Editing with our add-on service Presubmission Review for an overall assessment of your manuscript.

• LEARNING SKILLS
• Writing a Dissertation or Thesis
• Results and Discussion

Search SkillsYouNeed:

Learning Skills:

• A - Z List of Learning Skills
• What is Learning?
• Learning Approaches
• Learning Styles
• 8 Types of Learning Styles
• Understanding Your Preferences to Aid Learning
• Lifelong Learning
• Decisions to Make Before Applying to University
• Top Tips for Surviving Student Life
• Living Online: Education and Learning
• 8 Ways to Embrace Technology-Based Learning Approaches
• Critical Thinking Skills
• Critical Thinking and Fake News
• Understanding and Addressing Conspiracy Theories
• Critical Analysis
• Study Skills
• Exam Skills
• How to Write a Research Proposal
• Ethical Issues in Research
• Dissertation: The Introduction
• Researching and Writing a Literature Review
• Writing your Methodology
• Dissertation: Results and Discussion
• Dissertation: Conclusions and Extras

Writing Your Dissertation or Thesis eBook

Part of the Skills You Need Guide for Students .

• Research Methods
• Teaching, Coaching, Mentoring and Counselling
• Employability Skills for Graduates

Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day.

You'll get our 5 free 'One Minute Life Skills' and our weekly newsletter.

We'll never share your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Writing your Dissertation:  Results and Discussion

When writing a dissertation or thesis, the results and discussion sections can be both the most interesting as well as the most challenging sections to write.

You may choose to write these sections separately, or combine them into a single chapter, depending on your university’s guidelines and your own preferences.

There are advantages to both approaches.

Writing the results and discussion as separate sections allows you to focus first on what results you obtained and set out clearly what happened in your experiments and/or investigations without worrying about their implications.This can focus your mind on what the results actually show and help you to sort them in your head.

However, many people find it easier to combine the results with their implications as the two are closely connected.

Check your university’s requirements carefully before combining the results and discussions sections as some specify that they must be kept separate.

Results Section

The Results section should set out your key experimental results, including any statistical analysis and whether or not the results of these are significant.

You should cover any literature supporting your interpretation of significance. It does not have to include everything you did, particularly for a doctorate dissertation. However, for an undergraduate or master's thesis, you will probably find that you need to include most of your work.

You should write your results section in the past tense: you are describing what you have done in the past.

Every result included MUST have a method set out in the methods section. Check back to make sure that you have included all the relevant methods.

Conversely, every method should also have some results given so, if you choose to exclude certain experiments from the results, make sure that you remove mention of the method as well.

If you are unsure whether to include certain results, go back to your research questions and decide whether the results are relevant to them. It doesn’t matter whether they are supportive or not, it’s about relevance. If they are relevant, you should include them.

Having decided what to include, next decide what order to use. You could choose chronological, which should follow the methods, or in order from most to least important in the answering of your research questions, or by research question and/or hypothesis.

You also need to consider how best to present your results: tables, figures, graphs, or text. Try to use a variety of different methods of presentation, and consider your reader: 20 pages of dense tables are hard to understand, as are five pages of graphs, but a single table and well-chosen graph that illustrate your overall findings will make things much clearer.

Make sure that each table and figure has a number and a title. Number tables and figures in separate lists, but consecutively by the order in which you mention them in the text. If you have more than about two or three, it’s often helpful to provide lists of tables and figures alongside the table of contents at the start of your dissertation.

Summarise your results in the text, drawing on the figures and tables to illustrate your points.

The text and figures should be complementary, not repeat the same information. You should refer to every table or figure in the text. Any that you don’t feel the need to refer to can safely be moved to an appendix, or even removed.

Make sure that you including information about the size and direction of any changes, including percentage change if appropriate. Statistical tests should include details of p values or confidence intervals and limits.

While you don’t need to include all your primary evidence in this section, you should as a matter of good practice make it available in an appendix, to which you should refer at the relevant point.

For example:

Details of all the interview participants can be found in Appendix A, with transcripts of each interview in Appendix B.

You will, almost inevitably, find that you need to include some slight discussion of your results during this section. This discussion should evaluate the quality of the results and their reliability, but not stray too far into discussion of how far your results support your hypothesis and/or answer your research questions, as that is for the discussion section.

See our pages: Analysing Qualitative Data and Simple Statistical Analysis for more information on analysing your results.

Discussion Section

This section has four purposes, it should:

• Interpret and explain your results
• Answer your research question
• Justify your approach
• Critically evaluate your study

The discussion section therefore needs to review your findings in the context of the literature and the existing knowledge about the subject.

You also need to demonstrate that you understand the limitations of your research and the implications of your findings for policy and practice. This section should be written in the present tense.

The Discussion section needs to follow from your results and relate back to your literature review . Make sure that everything you discuss is covered in the results section.

Some universities require a separate section on recommendations for policy and practice and/or for future research, while others allow you to include this in your discussion, so check the guidelines carefully.

Starting the Task

Most people are likely to write this section best by preparing an outline, setting out the broad thrust of the argument, and how your results support it.

You may find techniques like mind mapping are helpful in making a first outline; check out our page: Creative Thinking for some ideas about how to think through your ideas. You should start by referring back to your research questions, discuss your results, then set them into the context of the literature, and then into broader theory.

This is likely to be one of the longest sections of your dissertation, and it’s a good idea to break it down into chunks with sub-headings to help your reader to navigate through the detail.

Fleshing Out the Detail

Once you have your outline in front of you, you can start to map out how your results fit into the outline.

This will help you to see whether your results are over-focused in one area, which is why writing up your research as you go along can be a helpful process. For each theme or area, you should discuss how the results help to answer your research question, and whether the results are consistent with your expectations and the literature.

The Importance of Understanding Differences

If your results are controversial and/or unexpected, you should set them fully in context and explain why you think that you obtained them.

Your explanations may include issues such as a non-representative sample for convenience purposes, a response rate skewed towards those with a particular experience, or your own involvement as a participant for sociological research.

You do not need to be apologetic about these, because you made a choice about them, which you should have justified in the methodology section. However, you do need to evaluate your own results against others’ findings, especially if they are different. A full understanding of the limitations of your research is part of a good discussion section.

At this stage, you may want to revisit your literature review, unless you submitted it as a separate submission earlier, and revise it to draw out those studies which have proven more relevant.

Conclude by summarising the implications of your findings in brief, and explain why they are important for researchers and in practice, and provide some suggestions for further work.

You may also wish to make some recommendations for practice. As before, this may be a separate section, or included in your discussion.

The results and discussion, including conclusion and recommendations, are probably the most substantial sections of your dissertation. Once completed, you can begin to relax slightly: you are on to the last stages of writing!

Continue to: Dissertation: Conclusion and Extras Writing your Methodology

See also: Writing a Literature Review Writing a Research Proposal Academic Referencing What Is the Importance of Using a Plagiarism Checker to Check Your Thesis?

• Affiliate Program

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

How to Write a Discussion Section for a Research Paper

We’ve talked about several useful writing tips that authors should consider while drafting or editing their research papers. In particular, we’ve focused on  figures and legends , as well as the Introduction ,  Methods , and  Results . Now that we’ve addressed the more technical portions of your journal manuscript, let’s turn to the analytical segments of your research article. In this article, we’ll provide tips on how to write a strong Discussion section that best portrays the significance of your research contributions.

What is the Discussion section of a research paper?

In a nutshell,  your Discussion fulfills the promise you made to readers in your Introduction . At the beginning of your paper, you tell us why we should care about your research. You then guide us through a series of intricate images and graphs that capture all the relevant data you collected during your research. We may be dazzled and impressed at first, but none of that matters if you deliver an anti-climactic conclusion in the Discussion section!

Are you feeling pressured? Don’t worry. To be honest, you will edit the Discussion section of your manuscript numerous times. After all, in as little as one to two paragraphs ( Nature ‘s suggestion  based on their 3,000-word main body text limit), you have to explain how your research moves us from point A (issues you raise in the Introduction) to point B (our new understanding of these matters). You must also recommend how we might get to point C (i.e., identify what you think is the next direction for research in this field). That’s a lot to say in two paragraphs!

So, how do you do that? Let’s take a closer look.

What should I include in the Discussion section?

As we stated above, the goal of your Discussion section is to  answer the questions you raise in your Introduction by using the results you collected during your research . The content you include in the Discussions segment should include the following information:

• Remind us why we should be interested in this research project.
• Describe the nature of the knowledge gap you were trying to fill using the results of your study.
• Don’t repeat your Introduction. Instead, focus on why  this  particular study was needed to fill the gap you noticed and why that gap needed filling in the first place.
• Mainly, you want to remind us of how your research will increase our knowledge base and inspire others to conduct further research.
• Clearly tell us what that piece of missing knowledge was.
• Answer each of the questions you asked in your Introduction and explain how your results support those conclusions.
• Make sure to factor in all results relevant to the questions (even if those results were not statistically significant).
• Focus on the significance of the most noteworthy results.
• If conflicting inferences can be drawn from your results, evaluate the merits of all of them.
• Don’t rehash what you said earlier in the Results section. Rather, discuss your findings in the context of answering your hypothesis. Instead of making statements like “[The first result] was this…,” say, “[The first result] suggests [conclusion].”
• Do your conclusions line up with existing literature?
• Discuss whether your findings agree with current knowledge and expectations.
• Keep in mind good persuasive argument skills, such as explaining the strengths of your arguments and highlighting the weaknesses of contrary opinions.
• If you discovered something unexpected, offer reasons. If your conclusions aren’t aligned with current literature, explain.
• Address any limitations of your study and how relevant they are to interpreting your results and validating your findings.
• Make sure to acknowledge any weaknesses in your conclusions and suggest room for further research concerning that aspect of your analysis.
• Make sure your suggestions aren’t ones that should have been conducted during your research! Doing so might raise questions about your initial research design and protocols.
• Similarly, maintain a critical but unapologetic tone. You want to instill confidence in your readers that you have thoroughly examined your results and have objectively assessed them in a way that would benefit the scientific community’s desire to expand our knowledge base.
• Recommend next steps.
• Your suggestions should inspire other researchers to conduct follow-up studies to build upon the knowledge you have shared with them.
• Keep the list short (no more than two).

How to Write the Discussion Section

The above list of what to include in the Discussion section gives an overall idea of what you need to focus on throughout the section. Below are some tips and general suggestions about the technical aspects of writing and organization that you might find useful as you draft or revise the contents we’ve outlined above.

Technical writing elements

• Embrace active voice because it eliminates the awkward phrasing and wordiness that accompanies passive voice.
• Use the present tense, which should also be employed in the Introduction.
• Sprinkle with first person pronouns if needed, but generally, avoid it. We want to focus on your findings.
• Maintain an objective and analytical tone.

Discussion section organization

• Keep the same flow across the Results, Methods, and Discussion sections.
• We develop a rhythm as we read and parallel structures facilitate our comprehension. When you organize information the same way in each of these related parts of your journal manuscript, we can quickly see how a certain result was interpreted and quickly verify the particular methods used to produce that result.
• Notice how using parallel structure will eliminate extra narration in the Discussion part since we can anticipate the flow of your ideas based on what we read in the Results segment. Reducing wordiness is important when you only have a few paragraphs to devote to the Discussion section!
• Within each subpart of a Discussion, the information should flow as follows: (A) conclusion first, (B) relevant results and how they relate to that conclusion and (C) relevant literature.
• End with a concise summary explaining the big-picture impact of your study on our understanding of the subject matter. At the beginning of your Discussion section, you stated why  this  particular study was needed to fill the gap you noticed and why that gap needed filling in the first place. Now, it is time to end with “how your research filled that gap.”

Discussion Part 1: Summarizing Key Findings

Begin the Discussion section by restating your  statement of the problem  and briefly summarizing the major results. Do not simply repeat your findings. Rather, try to create a concise statement of the main results that directly answer the central research question that you stated in the Introduction section . This content should not be longer than one paragraph in length.

Many researchers struggle with understanding the precise differences between a Discussion section and a Results section . The most important thing to remember here is that your Discussion section should subjectively evaluate the findings presented in the Results section, and in relatively the same order. Keep these sections distinct by making sure that you do not repeat the findings without providing an interpretation.

Phrase examples: Summarizing the results

• The findings indicate that …
• These results suggest a correlation between A and B …
• The data present here suggest that …
• An interpretation of the findings reveals a connection between…

Discussion Part 2: Interpreting the Findings

What do the results mean? It may seem obvious to you, but simply looking at the figures in the Results section will not necessarily convey to readers the importance of the findings in answering your research questions.

The exact structure of interpretations depends on the type of research being conducted. Here are some common approaches to interpreting data:

• Identifying correlations and relationships in the findings
• Explaining whether the results confirm or undermine your research hypothesis
• Giving the findings context within the history of similar research studies
• Discussing unexpected results and analyzing their significance to your study or general research
• Offering alternative explanations and arguing for your position

Organize the Discussion section around key arguments, themes, hypotheses, or research questions or problems. Again, make sure to follow the same order as you did in the Results section.

Discussion Part 3: Discussing the Implications

In addition to providing your own interpretations, show how your results fit into the wider scholarly literature you surveyed in the  literature review section. This section is called the implications of the study . Show where and how these results fit into existing knowledge, what additional insights they contribute, and any possible consequences that might arise from this knowledge, both in the specific research topic and in the wider scientific domain.

Questions to ask yourself when dealing with potential implications:

• Do your findings fall in line with existing theories, or do they challenge these theories or findings? What new information do they contribute to the literature, if any? How exactly do these findings impact or conflict with existing theories or models?
• What are the practical implications on actual subjects or demographics?
• What are the methodological implications for similar studies conducted either in the past or future?

Your purpose in giving the implications is to spell out exactly what your study has contributed and why researchers and other readers should be interested.

Phrase examples: Discussing the implications of the research

• These results confirm the existing evidence in X studies…
• The results are not in line with the foregoing theory that…
• This experiment provides new insights into the connection between…
• These findings present a more nuanced understanding of…
• While previous studies have focused on X, these results demonstrate that Y.

Step 4: Acknowledging the limitations

All research has study limitations of one sort or another. Acknowledging limitations in methodology or approach helps strengthen your credibility as a researcher. Study limitations are not simply a list of mistakes made in the study. Rather, limitations help provide a more detailed picture of what can or cannot be concluded from your findings. In essence, they help temper and qualify the study implications you listed previously.

Study limitations can relate to research design, specific methodological or material choices, or unexpected issues that emerged while you conducted the research. Mention only those limitations directly relate to your research questions, and explain what impact these limitations had on how your study was conducted and the validity of any interpretations.

Possible types of study limitations:

• Insufficient sample size for statistical measurements
• Lack of previous research studies on the topic
• Methods/instruments/techniques used to collect the data
• Limited access to data
• Time constraints in properly preparing and executing the study

After discussing the study limitations, you can also stress that your results are still valid. Give some specific reasons why the limitations do not necessarily handicap your study or narrow its scope.

Phrase examples: Limitations sentence beginners

• “There may be some possible limitations in this study.”
• “The findings of this study have to be seen in light of some limitations.”
•  “The first limitation is the…The second limitation concerns the…”
•  “The empirical results reported herein should be considered in the light of some limitations.”
• “This research, however, is subject to several limitations.”
• “The primary limitation to the generalization of these results is…”
• “Nonetheless, these results must be interpreted with caution and a number of limitations should be borne in mind.”

Discussion Part 5: Giving Recommendations for Further Research

Based on your interpretation and discussion of the findings, your recommendations can include practical changes to the study or specific further research to be conducted to clarify the research questions. Recommendations are often listed in a separate Conclusion section , but often this is just the final paragraph of the Discussion section.

Suggestions for further research often stem directly from the limitations outlined. Rather than simply stating that “further research should be conducted,” provide concrete specifics for how future can help answer questions that your research could not.

Phrase examples: Recommendation sentence beginners

• Further research is needed to establish …
• There is abundant space for further progress in analyzing…
• A further study with more focus on X should be done to investigate…
• Further studies of X that account for these variables must be undertaken.

Consider Receiving Professional Language Editing

As you edit or draft your research manuscript, we hope that you implement these guidelines to produce a more effective Discussion section. And after completing your draft, don’t forget to submit your work to a professional proofreading and English editing service like Wordvice, including our manuscript editing service for  paper editing , cover letter editing , SOP editing , and personal statement proofreading services. Language editors not only proofread and correct errors in grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and formatting but also improve terms and revise phrases so they read more naturally. Wordvice is an industry leader in providing high-quality revision for all types of academic documents.

For additional information about how to write a strong research paper, make sure to check out our full  research writing series !

Wordvice Writing Resources

• How to Write a Research Paper Introduction 
• Which Verb Tenses to Use in a Research Paper
• How to Write an Abstract for a Research Paper
• How to Write a Research Paper Title
• Useful Phrases for Academic Writing
• Common Transition Terms in Academic Papers
• Active and Passive Voice in Research Papers
• 100+ Verbs That Will Make Your Research Writing Amazing
• Tips for Paraphrasing in Research Papers

Additional Academic Resources

•   Guide for Authors.  (Elsevier)
•  How to Write the Results Section of a Research Paper.  (Bates College)
•   Structure of a Research Paper.  (University of Minnesota Biomedical Library)
•   How to Choose a Target Journal  (Springer)
•   How to Write Figures and Tables  (UNC Writing Center)

What’s Included: Discussion Template

This template covers all the core components required in the discussion/analysis chapter of a typical dissertation or thesis, including:

• The opening/overview section
• Overview of key findings
• Interpretation of the findings
• Concluding summary

The purpose of each section is explained in plain language, followed by an overview of the key elements that you need to cover. The template also includes practical examples to help you understand exactly what’s required, along with links to additional free resources (articles, videos, etc.) to help you along your research journey.

The cleanly formatted Google Doc can be downloaded as a fully editable MS Word Document (DOCX format), so you can use it as-is or convert it to LaTeX.

PS – if you’d like a high-level template for the entire thesis, you can we’ve got that too .

FAQ: Thesis Discussion Template

What types of dissertations/theses can this template be used for.

The discussion chapter template follows the standard format for academic research projects, which means it will be suitable for the majority of dissertations, theses and research projects (especially those within the sciences).

Keep in mind that the exact requirements for the discussion chapter/section will vary between universities and degree programs. For example, your university may require that the discussion chapter and conclusion chapter are merged into one, or that the results and discussion are covered together (this is often the case with qualitative research). So, be sure to double-check your university’s requirements before you finalise your structure.

Is this template for an undergrad, Master or PhD-level thesis?

This template can be used for a dissertation, thesis or research project at any level of study. Doctoral-level projects typically require the discussion chapter to be more extensive/comprehensive, but the structure will typically remain the same. Again, be sure to check your university’s requirements and norms in terms of document structure.

How long should the discussion chapter be?

This can vary a fair deal, depending on the level of study (undergrad, Master or Doctoral), the field of research, as well as your university’s specific requirements. Therefore, it’s best to check with your university or review past dissertations from your program to get an accurate estimate.

Can I share this template with my friends/colleagues?

Yes, you’re welcome to share this template in its original format (no editing allowed). If you want to post about it on your blog or social media, please reference this page as your source.

What format is the template (DOC, PDF, PPT, etc.)?

The dissertation discussion chapter template is provided as a Google Doc. You can download it in MS Word format or make a copy to your Google Drive. You’re also welcome to convert it to whatever format works best for you, such as LaTeX or PDF.

Do you have templates for the other chapters?

Yes, we do. We are constantly developing our collection of free resources to help students complete their dissertations and theses. You can view all of our template resources here .

Can Grad Coach help me with my discussion/analysis?

Yes, we can provide coaching-based assistance with your discussion chapter (or any other chapter). If you’re interested, get in touch to discuss our private coaching services .

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples

How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples

Published on 21 August 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 25 October 2022.

The discussion section is where you delve into the meaning, importance, and relevance of your results .

It should focus on explaining and evaluating what you found, showing how it relates to your literature review , and making an argument in support of your overall conclusion . It should not be a second results section .

There are different ways to write this section, but you can focus your writing around these key elements:

• Summary: A brief recap of your key results
• Interpretations: What do your results mean?
• Implications: Why do your results matter?
• Limitations: What can’t your results tell us?
• Recommendations: Avenues for further studies or analyses

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Table of contents

What not to include in your discussion section, step 1: summarise your key findings, step 2: give your interpretations, step 3: discuss the implications, step 4: acknowledge the limitations, step 5: share your recommendations, discussion section example.

There are a few common mistakes to avoid when writing the discussion section of your paper.

• Don’t introduce new results: You should only discuss the data that you have already reported in your results section .
• Don’t make inflated claims: Avoid overinterpretation and speculation that isn’t directly supported by your data.
• Don’t undermine your research: The discussion of limitations should aim to strengthen your credibility, not emphasise weaknesses or failures.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Correct my document today

Start this section by reiterating your research problem  and concisely summarising your major findings. Don’t just repeat all the data you have already reported – aim for a clear statement of the overall result that directly answers your main  research question . This should be no more than one paragraph.

Many students struggle with the differences between a discussion section and a results section . The crux of the matter is that your results sections should present your results, and your discussion section should subjectively evaluate them. Try not to blend elements of these two sections, in order to keep your paper sharp.

• The results indicate that …
• The study demonstrates a correlation between …
• This analysis supports the theory that …
• The data suggest  that …

The meaning of your results may seem obvious to you, but it’s important to spell out their significance for your reader, showing exactly how they answer your research question.

The form of your interpretations will depend on the type of research, but some typical approaches to interpreting the data include:

• Identifying correlations , patterns, and relationships among the data
• Discussing whether the results met your expectations or supported your hypotheses
• Contextualising your findings within previous research and theory
• Explaining unexpected results and evaluating their significance
• Considering possible alternative explanations and making an argument for your position

You can organise your discussion around key themes, hypotheses, or research questions, following the same structure as your results section. Alternatively, you can also begin by highlighting the most significant or unexpected results.

• In line with the hypothesis …
• Contrary to the hypothesised association …
• The results contradict the claims of Smith (2007) that …
• The results might suggest that x . However, based on the findings of similar studies, a more plausible explanation is x .

As well as giving your own interpretations, make sure to relate your results back to the scholarly work that you surveyed in the literature review . The discussion should show how your findings fit with existing knowledge, what new insights they contribute, and what consequences they have for theory or practice.

Ask yourself these questions:

• Do your results support or challenge existing theories? If they support existing theories, what new information do they contribute? If they challenge existing theories, why do you think that is?
• Are there any practical implications?

Your overall aim is to show the reader exactly what your research has contributed, and why they should care.

• These results build on existing evidence of …
• The results do not fit with the theory that …
• The experiment provides a new insight into the relationship between …
• These results should be taken into account when considering how to …
• The data contribute a clearer understanding of …
• While previous research has focused on  x , these results demonstrate that y .

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Even the best research has its limitations. Acknowledging these is important to demonstrate your credibility. Limitations aren’t about listing your errors, but about providing an accurate picture of what can and cannot be concluded from your study.

Limitations might be due to your overall research design, specific methodological choices , or unanticipated obstacles that emerged during your research process.

Here are a few common possibilities:

• If your sample size was small or limited to a specific group of people, explain how generalisability is limited.
• If you encountered problems when gathering or analysing data, explain how these influenced the results.
• If there are potential confounding variables that you were unable to control, acknowledge the effect these may have had.

After noting the limitations, you can reiterate why the results are nonetheless valid for the purpose of answering your research question.

• The generalisability of the results is limited by …
• The reliability of these data is impacted by …
• Due to the lack of data on x , the results cannot confirm …
• The methodological choices were constrained by …
• It is beyond the scope of this study to …

Based on the discussion of your results, you can make recommendations for practical implementation or further research. Sometimes, the recommendations are saved for the conclusion .

Suggestions for further research can lead directly from the limitations. Don’t just state that more studies should be done – give concrete ideas for how future work can build on areas that your own research was unable to address.

• Further research is needed to establish …
• Future studies should take into account …
• Avenues for future research include …

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, October 25). How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 25 March 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/discussion/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a results section | tips & examples, research paper appendix | example & templates, how to write a thesis or dissertation introduction.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 26 March 2024

Present-day thermal and water activity environment of the Mars Sample Return collection

• Maria-Paz Zorzano 1 ,
• Germán Martínez 2 , 3 ,
• Jouni Polkko 4 ,
• Leslie K. Tamppari 5 ,
• Claire Newman 6 ,
• Hannu Savijärvi 7 ,
• Yulia Goreva 5 ,
• Daniel Viúdez-Moreiras 1 ,
• Tanguy Bertrand 8 ,
• Michael Smith 9 ,
• Elisabeth M. Hausrath 10 ,
• Sandra Siljeström 11 ,
• Kathleen Benison 12 ,
• Tanja Bosak 13 ,
• Andrew D. Czaja 14 ,
• Vinciane Debaille 15 ,
• Christopher D. K. Herd 16 ,
• Lisa Mayhew 17 ,
• Mark A. Sephton 18 ,
• David Shuster 19 ,
• Justin I. Simon 20 ,
• Benjamin Weiss 13 ,
• Nicolas Randazzo 16 ,
• Lucia Mandon 21 ,
• Adrian Brown 22 ,
• Michael H. Hecht 23 &
• Jesús Martínez-Frías 24  

Scientific Reports volume  14 , Article number:  7175 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

348 Accesses

7 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Astrobiology
• Atmospheric dynamics
• Planetary science

The Mars Sample Return mission intends to retrieve a sealed collection of rocks, regolith, and atmosphere sampled from Jezero Crater, Mars, by the NASA Perseverance rover mission. For all life-related research, it is necessary to evaluate water availability in the samples and on Mars. Within the first Martian year, Perseverance has acquired an estimated total mass of 355 g of rocks and regolith, and 38 μmoles of Martian atmospheric gas. Using in-situ observations acquired by the Perseverance rover, we show that the present-day environmental conditions at Jezero allow for the hydration of sulfates, chlorides, and perchlorates and the occasional formation of frost as well as a diurnal atmospheric-surface water exchange of 0.5–10 g water per m 2 (assuming a well-mixed atmosphere). At night, when the temperature drops below 190 K, the surface water activity can exceed 0.5, the lowest limit for cell reproduction. During the day, when the temperature is above the cell replication limit of 245 K, water activity is less than 0.02. The environmental conditions at the surface of Jezero Crater, where these samples were acquired, are incompatible with the cell replication limits currently known on Earth.

Similar content being viewed by others

In-situ preservation of nitrogen-bearing organics in Noachian Martian carbonates

Mizuho Koike, Ryoichi Nakada, … Atsuko Kobayashi

Amagmatic hydrothermal systems on Mars from radiogenic heat

Lujendra Ojha, Suniti Karunatillake, … Jacob Buffo

Lunar soil hydration constrained by exospheric water liberated by meteoroid impacts

M. Benna, D. M. Hurley, … R. C. Elphic

Introduction

The Mars Sample Return (MSR) program is a unique space project aimed at collecting a set of up to 38 samples and 5 witness tubes (or controls) from Mars with the Perseverance rover 1 , and is currently planning to retrieve up to 30 samples back to Earth by 2033 2 , 3 . Since February 2021, when Perseverance landed on Jezero crater [18.4663° N,77.4298° E] at solar longitude Ls = 5.2°, the rover has been exploring the surface of Mars and acquiring a collection of samples 4 . After the first Martian year of surface operation, 21 of these tubes were sealed as part of the “Crater Floor Campaign” (which ended on sol 380, where a “sol” is one rotation of Mars, i.e., a Martian day) and the “Delta Front Campaign” (which began on sol 415 and ended on sol 707, around mid-February 2023). Most samples were collected in pairs so that one sample from each pair was deposited on the ground forming the Sample Depot or First Cache at Three Forks 5 . The second sample in the pair was retained in the rover main collection. As the rover continues its exploration route towards the top of the delta fan and crater rim (Fig.  1 ), the sample cache increases in size and diversity with new added samples. The rover collection will be delivered in the future to the MSR sample receiving lander, while the Sample Depot at Three Forks would be used only if the rover failed before delivering its samples to the vehicle that will bring the samples to Earth. Upon reception on Earth of the sample collection, one of the first investigations to be implemented will relate to sample safety assessment and the search for Martian life in biocontainment 2 , 6 , 7 .

(Left) Perseverance’s traverse during the first 766 sols, from the landing site, through the Crater Floor and Delta Front campaign, and towards the western delta of Jezero crater, Mars. The white line indicates the rover traverse, green dots mark the deployment sites of the First Cache, and red crosses mark the sampling sites (including the sample sealed on sol 749, acquired above the delta after the construction of the sample depot). Credit: CAMP and MRO HiRISE, The University of Arizona. (Right) Annotated landscape of the Sample Depot at Three Forks, as seen by Perseverance, with the different sealed tubes. Credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech/ASU/MSSS .

For planetary protection and life assessment purposes, there is a need to determine first the potential habitability of Jezero Crater's surface and the collection of samples that will be brought to Earth. Water is a requirement for known Earth life. On Earth, water activity, a w , is a measure of how much water (H 2 O) is free, unbound, and available for microorganisms to use for growth, and thus the habitability of an environment is restricted by the thermodynamic availability of water (i.e. the water activity, a w ) 8 , 0.6 below 200 K. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 181, 164–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2016.03.005 (2016)." href="/articles/s41598-024-57458-4#ref-CR9" id="ref-link-section-d442398323e1295">9 . The currently accepted lowest documented limit for life is a w  = 0.585 10 . This low level of water activity allows the germination of the xerophilic, osmophilic and halophilic fungus Aspergillus penicillioides . The present lower temperature limit for cell division is 255 K (− 18 °C) as reported by Collins and Buick 11 in experiments with the psychrotrophic pink yeast Rhodotorula glutinis. For planetary protection purposes, some margin is added to this limit, and it is assumed that cell replication needs water activity a w  > 0.5 and temperatures T > 245 K (− 28 °C) 12 , 13 . These physical parameters are commonly used to assess at a planetary scale the habitability of a region and to define the planetary protection protocols and restrictions that should be applied to prevent forward contamination associated with space exploration missions 14 , 15 . To determine the potential present-day habitability of the surface of Jezero Crater, we will analyse these two environmental parameters: temperature and water activity and the possible interaction of atmospheric water (H 2 O) with salts. Similar analysis has been done previously at a planetary scale using global circulation models 16 , 17 and at a local scale using in-situ environmental measurements at Gale Crater 18 and Phoenix landing site 19 , 20 .

Salts were found at Jezero Crater in the abrasion patches associated with each sample 4 . Hygroscopic salts can absorb atmospheric water vapor (H 2 O molecules in gas state) to form liquid solutions (brines) in a process called deliquescence 21 . Additionally, salts in contact with the atmosphere can hydrate (solid-state hydration) and dehydrate, capturing and releasing H 2 O molecules. The plausible existence of brines or salt hydrates on the surface or subsurface has several implications for Mars's past and current habitability. Experiments in simulation chambers have shown that for certain temperature and a w conditions, Mg, Ca, and Na perchlorates and sulfates can hydrate or deliquesce, forming stable liquid brines under present-day Martian conditions 22 , 23 , 24 . The Planetary Instrument for X-Ray Lithochemistry (PIXL) and the Scanning Habitable Environments with Raman and Luminescence for Organics and Chemicals (SHERLOC) instruments have investigated the abrasion patches and found hygroscopic and deliquescent salts such as Mg, Fe (hydrated) and Ca sulfates (anhydrite mostly), chlorides and perchlorates (Initial Reports-PDS; 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ). Also, the SuperCam (SCAM) instrument found that the visible/near infrared (VISIR) spectra of the abraded patches in the rocks of some of the sample pairs (the ones named Roubion, Montdenier, and Montagnac) are consistent with a mixture of hydrated Mg-sulfates, whereas SCAM Raman and Laser induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) and SHERLOC detected anhydrous Na perchlorate 25 , 26 , 29 . Previous Mars exploration missions have detected Mg- and Ca-perchlorates at the Phoenix 30 , 31 and Mars Science Laboratory 32 landing sites. Amongst the salts found at Jezero, and on Mars, calcium perchlorate is the deliquescent salt that has the lowest eutectic point (198 K) 16 , 33 , and thus, this is the lowest temperature limit for liquid water (brine) stability of single component brines on present-day Mars. Sulfate signatures were detected in the SCAM VISIR spectra of the abraded patch of the sample named Bellegarde 26 , 29 as well as in the Hogwallow Flats region explored in the Delta Front Campaign, which showed a hydrated sulfate-cemented siltstone 34 . Also, PIXL and SHERLOC detected sulfates in these environments. The presence of these different types of salts suggests that Jezero Crater was exposed to episodic water events, with different salt solutes that precipitated during evaporation 28 , 35 , 36 , 37 . Previous in-situ research by the Curiosity rover at Gale Crater has shown that sulfates are the main carrier of soil hydration 38 , which is consistent with orbital observations at the planetary scale 39 .

To characterize the near-surface water cycle at Jezero and the habitability of the Martian rocks that have been sampled, we need to quantify the amount of water that is available daily for exchange with outcrops and regolith, evaluate the potential hydration state of the salts that have been found on Mars and at Jezero and estimate the moles of H 2 O in the headspace gas of the sealed samples using the Mars Environmental Dynamics Analyzer (MEDA) instrument observations 40 , 41 , see Supporting Information A.

The collection of samples acquired during the first Martian year and the environmental conditions during the sealing are summarized in Table 1 .

The annual and diurnal variation of the water vapor volume mixing ratio (VMR) at Jezero crater is shown in Fig.  2 using MEDA observations 42 . Daytime MEDA Relative Humidity (RH) measurements are too low (i.e., ≤ 2%, the RH uncertainty) and thus cannot be used to estimate VMR with sufficient accuracy. MEDA relative humidity and pressure measurements at 1.45 m above the surface suggest a strong diurnal and seasonal variability of the water VMR, see Fig.  2 -Top. The water volume mixing ratio peaks at Ls = 150°, at the end of the northern hemisphere summer after the release of water vapor from the northern polar cap. Predawn MEDA measurements (when the confidence in VMR retrieval is higher) have been used to estimate the (total column) night-time precipitable amount of water. The results are compared with the daytime zonally averaged orbital observations provided by the Thermal Emission Spectrometer (TES) onboard the Mars Global Surveyor orbiter for this region in Fig.  2 -Bottom. There is coherence in the seasonal behavior, the zonally averaged orbital daytime observations and the in-situ nighttime observation differ by a factor of 2–3. According to MEDA in-situ night-time measurements, the greatest amount of nighttime precipitable water is around 10 pr-um at Jezero crater, and was reached around Ls = 150°, during the northern hemisphere summer, around the sampling time of Robine. A precipitable micrometer (pr-μm, which equals 1 g of H 2 O per m 2 ) is the thickness of the water layer that would be condensed on the surface if all the water vapor of the corresponding atmospheric column would accumulate on the surface. Orbital and in-situ measurements have been compared with a Global Circulation Model, see Supporting Information D, and the annual trends are in agreement.

(Top) Annual (sol number and Ls) and night-time (LMST) variation of the Water Volume Mixing Ratio (VMR), with error bars, at Jezero crater during the first Martian year provided by the MEDA instrument at 1.45 m above the surface. Daytime relative humidity measurements (marked in gray) fall below the 2% accuracy of the MEDA relative humidity sensor and the VMR cannot be estimated. The spring equinox starts at L s  = 0°, the summer solstice at L s  = 90°, the autumnal equinox at L s  = 180°, and the winter solstice at L s  = 270°. (Bottom) Total column of H 2 O abundance (in precipitable microns): TES zonally-averaged orbiter data for MY24 to MY27 (daytime, ~ 14 LMST) compared with MEDA (pre-dawn) in-situ surface measurements (lower data set) at Jezero Crater. For orbital data, the error bars are the 1-sigma standard deviation on the average that is plotted. MEDA error bars are derived from the MEDA reported uncertainty value in the relative humidity (RH) measurements and in the humidity sensor board temperature.

An example of the amplitude of the diurnal variability of the near-surface H 2 O content is illustrated in detail in Fig.  3 . Here we compare the nighttime H 2 O VMR values of several consecutive sols (sols 293 to 303, around the sampling sol of Robine at Ls = 146° at the end of the northern hemisphere summer) with the results of the Single Column Model (SCM). The SCM provides an estimate of the diurnal H 2 O VMR and can also be used to extrapolate the VMR value at the height of the sealing station (around 0.84 m, where two other MEDA temperature sensors are). The corresponding air temperature measurements at 1.45 m, through day and night, are also included for completeness. This example shows, for instance, a diurnal variability of H 2 O VMR of a factor of 5 or more; in this case, the H 2 O VMR ranges between 40 and 240 ppm. The lowest ground temperatures are reached just before sunrise; at this moment, the relative humidity of the ground peaks, and sometimes frost conditions can be met when saturation is reached. This is confirmed by measurements and models (see Supporting Information B).

Near-surface diurnal cycle of water Volume Mixing Ratio (VMR) and air temperature (T) as a function of LMST during the sols around the sampling time of Robine. Single-column model (SCM) VMR results—dark and light blue lines—at 1.45 m and 0.84 m, respectively, are compared to MEDA values (including the uncertainty in H 2 O VMR retrieval) at 1.45 m for sols 285 to 305 (Ls = 139°–149°). The SCM air temperature estimate—black line—for the same period compared with the Air Temperature Sensor (ATS) observations at 0.84 m (with 300 s moving average). The time of sealing is marked with a vertical dashed black line, whereas sunset and sunrise times are marked with a blue and orange line, respectively.

On the surface of Mars, there is a strong anti-correlation between water activity and temperature, as illustrated in Fig.  4 . All other factors being equal, for the same amount of water VMR, the relative humidity increases with decreasing temperature. Although MEDA surface measurements suggest a factor 5 reduction of the water VMR at night-time, the large temperature decrement overcomes this and results in an increased night-time relative humidity (and water activity). Figure  4 shows the pairs of (simultaneous) derived groundwater activity and measured ground temperature (with accuracy 0.75 K) as measured by MEDA instrument throughout the night during one full Martian year at the base of Jezero crater. This analysis is shown in the Supporting Information E, divided into four seasons. The values are compared with the known phase and hydration state changes of some of the salts reported in the abraded patches. The deliquescence curve for calcium perchlorate (the salt found on Mars with the lowest eutectic temperature, 198 K) is also included for reference.

Diurnal variation, as a function of LMST, of the derived surface water activity concerning liquid (with a w error bars) and measured ground temperature provided by MEDA during one full Martian year. For illustration, the environmental data are overlayed with the hydration lines of calcium and magnesium sulfates, and calcium perchlorate deliquescence and efflorescence lines. The water activity a w is derived assuming equilibrium, from the relative humidity (RH), with respect to liquid, as a w  = RH/100, All data points to the left of the ice saturation line (RH ice  = 100%) are saturated with respect to ice and may allow frost formation 70 . The Deliquescence RH (DRH) and hydration state lines of some perchlorates and sulfate salts are included for reference 19 , 72 .

Once the samples are sealed, they may experience changes in water activity caused by exposure to different thermal environments (either on the surface of Mars, within the rover, during the launch, cruise, entry, descent and landing phases, or during storage on Earth). For illustration we have modelled a simplified, T/ a w cycle for the gas space of a sealed sample (Fig.  5 ) assuming a range of possible temperature changes experienced by the samples on Mars, on the rover or on its way to Earth. We assume that the water VMR is constant in the tube and equal to that in the atmosphere when the samples were sealed. We take this assumption because the type and amount of salts captured within the bulk of the 3–6 cm deep drilled core is not exactly known. Therefore, it is not possible to accurately simulate how much captured water will be released from the core salts into the headspace gas when the sample tubes are heated. We compare the isobaric lines, for the higher and lower partial pressure reported in Table 1 , with the eutectic points of different salts of relevance to Mars, which may be within the sampled rocks. All isobars pass below the eutectic points of these salts, suggesting that if there are no additional water sources in the rock samples, no pure salt would deliquesce (although mixtures of salts may behave differently).

Modelled thermal-water activity curves experienced by the samples within the sealed tubes. The H 2 O partial pressure isobars (i.e., constant water vapor pressure) for the higher and lower partial pressure reported in Table 1 are compared with the eutectic points of different salts of relevance to Mars, which may be within the sampled rocks (colored symbols), the temperature-dependent deliquescence relative humidity (DRH) for calcium perchlorate (red line), and the ice liquidus line (i.e., equilibrium between water ice and liquid brine; light yellow) 17 , 70 , 73 . For comparison, the isobar for the H 2 O partial pressure values that are expected at polar regions, i.e. 0.4 Pa and 1.4 Pa 19 , is also included.

Within the first Martian year, Perseverance has acquired an estimated total mass of 355 g of rocks and regolith, and 38 μmole of Martian atmospheric gas (Table 1 ). A preliminary MSR study estimated that the atmospheric sample needed to implement volatile studies should be at least 19 μmole 43 , ideally within one single dedicated tube. The First Sample Cache, which constitutes a contingency collection formed by a set of 10 sample tubes, contains a total of 21 μmole of gas and 158 g of rock mass. The amount of gas available at the First Sample Depot meets the requirement of gas amount proposed by Swindle et al. 43 , although the gas is distributed within the headspace of different sample tubes, the witness tubes and in one dedicated “atmospheric” sample (Roubion). The water content in the sealed gas varies from sample to sample, depending on the sealing time and season.

The analysis of atmospheric data from one full Martian year suggests that the surface at Jezero crater can act as a water sink at night, with most of this water released back into the atmosphere after sunrise. The combined analysis of orbital and in-situ measurements suggests that there is a strong diurnal cycle whereby the near-surface water VMR changes by a factor of 3–5, which agrees with previous observations by Curiosity at Gale Crater, Mars 44 . Comparing day-time orbital and night-time surface observations, and assuming that the entire atmosphere participates in the interchange, we conclude that the maximum amount of water potentially available for this daily interchange is around 10 pr-µm, although a value near 0.5 pr-µm is more likely since models indicate that only the lowest ~ 200 m of the atmosphere directly exchanges with the surface on a diurnal timescale 45 , 46 , see Supporting Information D. Notice that this assumes a well-mixed atmosphere up to a certain height. This means that the diurnal cycle of water may thus allow for a daily transfer of about 0.5 g of water per m 2 (assuming H 2 O is well-mixed within the lower 200 m) with an upper limit of as much as 10 g m −2 (assuming H 2 O is well-mixed up to the scale height). Previous analysis of the vertical profile at arctic Martian regions suggests that during spring and summer, a large percentage of the water column (> 25% and up to nearly 100%) was confined below ~ 2.5 km 47 . These results are comparable to those provided by the REMS instrument package on the Curiosity rover at Gale crater 24 and are consistent with previous research based on orbital and in-situ observations and modelling 44 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 . We conclude that similarly to what happens on other sites on Mars 55 , there is a strong rock and regolith-atmosphere exchange mechanism on Mars 56 , likely owing to the combination of adsorption–desorption of water on the regolith grain surfaces and to hydration-dehydration of salts.

The present-day surface water activity and temperature cycle at the surface in Jezero does not allow the formation of deliquescent brines (although it may happen in the subsurface, should kinetics allow). During some periods of the year, the surface relative humidity is saturated with respect to ice, and frost can be transiently stable for some hours of the day when the ground temperature is below 185 K. The present-day surface environment at Jezero allows hydration and dehydration of different forms of salts on a diurnal and seasonal basis, as illustrated in Fig.  4 . Our analysis suggests that the daytime environmental conditions allow for MgSO 4 .4H 2 O stability. Indeed, the analysis of PIXL and SHERLOC data of the abraded patches has found hydration (3–5 waters) in association with the Mg sulfate salts 27 , which is in line with the analysis of Fig.  4 . The regolith at Jezero crater has been investigated by the Planetary Instrument for X-ray Lithochemistry (PIXL) and SuperCam LIBS and VISIR instruments 56 . Their analysis has demonstrated that the top surface of soils, which is the part in direct contact with the atmosphere, is enriched in water and S and Cl salts that form a crust. Some targets showed a strong correlation between S, Mg, and H, suggesting the presence of Mg sulfates, which are likely hydrated. Note that the crust hydration signature is seen even during daytime when the ambient relative humidity and water activity are below 0.02, which indicates that water is not released immediately to the atmosphere due to the slow kinetics of dehydration.

The sustained hydration/dehydration cycle of salts at Jezero, within the rock matrix, exposed to this environment for millions of years may have induced the formation of voids and cracks in the rocks and may have contributed to their mechanical erosion and disaggregation 35 . Salt hydration and dehydration can indeed cause substantial volume expansion; for example, magnesium sulfate can increase its volume by up to 70% 57 , generating substantial stresses and weakening the rock 58 . Interestingly, the first abraded patch (Roubion sample), showed voids of millimetre to centimetre size, which were not visible on the rock surface. The composition analysis of Roubion abraded patch revealed that Ca- and Mg-sulfates, Ca-phosphates, and halite were present in significant concentration. In this rock, Na-perchlorates constituted more than 60% percentage out of the total SHERLOC mineral detections 25 . The sample from Roubion rock completely disintegrated during drilling, suggesting that due to this environmental cycle salt-rich samples may be fragile and disaggregate during their future mechanical manipulation on Earth.

Documenting the water content is important for sample integrity to estimate what may happen to the samples on their way to and during manipulation on Earth. When the samples are sealed, they will equilibrate over time with their headspace gas. The hydration state of the samples within its sealed capsule depends on the temperature during storage in the rover, or on the surface, or during cruise, or entry or final storage on Earth. Most of these temperatures will have to be measured, inferred, or modelled. For instance, once on the surface of Mars, the tubes may potentially, repeatedly, be heated ocationally to up to 300 K for years. Also, their minimum night-time temperatures will presumably be similar to the surrounding regolith (about 180 K), see Supporting Information C. The sample tubes are coated in alumina (white) and titanium nitride (golden parts) 59 . These coatings can interact with the incident solar radiation during the day absorbing radiation, and at night with the atmosphere above emitting infrared radiation, resulting in local temperatures that may differ slightly from the one of the natural bedrocks and regolith Martian surface, see Supporting Information C. As for the samples within the rover they will be exposed to a different thermal history. For illustration we have modelled a simplified, T/ a w cycle for the gas space of a sealed sample (Fig.  5 ). At first order, assuming equilibrium and a well-mixed atmosphere, all the isobars pass underneath the eutectic points of single salts relevant to Mars.

Based on the currently recognized limits of known life forms on Earth, cell replication requires temperatures above 245 K (− 28 °C), and -simultaneously-water activity above 0.5 12 . During all seasons, the water activity at the ground surface at Jezero crater can frequently go above the limit for terrestrial cell reproduction of 0.5, but this happens only at night, when the temperature at the surface drops below 190 K (Fig.  5 ). Therefore, the present-day Mars surface conditions at Jezero crater are very different from the known, tolerated limits for cell replication on Earth. The limits used as reference for Planetary Protection Policies are documented in laboratory growth studies that confirmed cell reproduction. There are extremely arid subsurface natural environments on Earth, e.g., the Atacama Desert’s Maria Elena South region, where, at a depth of a few dm’s, the water activity is constantly of the order of 0.14 (i.e., 14% RH). It has been shown that in this subsurface hyper arid environment, there still is as much microbial diversity as at the surface where the mean water activity value is 0.27 60 . However, in this region but the temperature never reaches 245 K. The environmental conditions at Jezero crater are inadequate for deliquescence but allow for hydration of Ca and Mg sulfates, among other salts. On Earth, some recent studies used gypsum (CaSO 4 ·2H 2 O) samples collected in the Atacama Desert as a substrate for culture experiments with a cyanobacteria strain. This research demonstrated that cyanobacteria could extract water of hydrated salts from the rock, inducing a phase transformation from gypsum to anhydrite (CaSO 4 ), which may enable these microorganisms to sustain life in this extremely arid environment 61 . The validity of these results has been questioned 62 , which suggests that the existence of water extraction mechanisms from salts and dry rocks across other organisms needs to be further investigated to understand better the limits of life on Earth and Mars 63 .

Based on the state-of-the-art research of the limits of life tolerance on Earth, we conclude that the samples' environmental conditions at Jezero Crater are incompatible with the known cell replication requirements. If future research of life on Earth demonstrates low-temperature cell replication using the water of hydrated sulfates or water adsorbed to rock grains, then the habitability of the Martian sample collection should be reassessed, as day-time temperatures at Jezero are compatible with cell replication.

Once a sampling target was identified during the rover’s surface operations, a 5 cm diameter patch was abraded within a few tens of cm of the desired sample targets, within the same lithology, to remove surface dust and coatings. In this abraded patch, which was taken as proxy for the sample, detailed images of rock textures and maps of elemental composition, mineralogy and organic molecule distribution were acquired with the rover instruments. Samples were acquired with drills and were afterwards sealed at the rover sealing station. Prior to sealing, the length of the solid cores is estimated by Perseverance using a volume probe 59 . Each tube has an internal volume of 12 cm 3 (with a tube section of 1.4103 cm 2 ). Witness tubes are assumed to have only half of their internal volume available for gas. The Initial Reports have documented all the details of sampling acquisition and instrument observation interpretation 35 (2023).

Table 1 indicates the sealing sol (starting on the first day of Perseverance on Mars operations) for each sample. The measured sample length and MEDA atmospheric temperature at 0.84 m above the surface (Ta) (which is comparable to the height of the sealing station) and atmospheric pressure (Pa) (see supporting information A), are used to calculate the total mass of rock (M), assuming a sample density of 2.6 g/cm 3 (the same one used in the Initial Reports-PDS), and the estimated partial pressure of water and number of moles of gas (n) in the headspace above the solid sample. Local Mean Standard Time (LMST) indicates the time when the sealing was activated. The solar Longitude (Ls) marks the passage of time within a Mars year and the changes through seasons.

For consistency, in the mass calculation of Table 1 we have applied to all samples the same density used in the Sample Reports (2.6 g/cm 3 ). But the actual density of each sample may vary significantly. For instance, the bulk density of regolith granular material on Mars has been estimated to range between ∼ 1 and 1.8 g/cm 3 64 ,the density of the bedrock at Jezero through the traverse of the rover has been estimated, based on RIMFAX radar measurements, to vary between 3 and 3.4 g/cm 3 65 whereas using SuperCam mineral abundances, the densities of some of the targeted rocks on the crater floor have been inferred to vary between 3.1 and 3.7 g/cm 3 66 . As for other rock types, the density of sedimentary rocks in Gale crater have been calculated to be of the order of 2.3 ± 0.130 g/cm 3 67 . We use a single-density value of 2.6 g/cm 3 for all samples, which is an average of the densities of these three rock types (dense bedrock 3.7 g/cm 3 , sedimentary 2.3 g/cm 3 and regolith 1.8 g/cm 3 ).

The environmental information at the time of sealing is recorded by the Mars Environmental Dynamics Analyzer (MEDA) instrument package (MEDA Data; 40 ). During the sample sealing process, each tube was heated up to 40 °C (313 K) for a short period of time (minutes) as recorded by the PRT temperature sensors at the time of sealing. This does not translate to heating the sample itself to such temperature, but it is considered an upper temperature limit that the samples should not exceed. The actual temperature inside the sample tube during sealing is likely between MEDA ambient temperatures and the Platinum Resistance Thermometer (PRT) measurements. MEDA also measured the ambient pressure and temperatures (for more information on the measurement cadence, see Supporting Information A). The sample length probe is used to estimate the rock volume, and the remaining headspace volume is occupied by Martian atmosphere gas, then the temperature and pressure provided by MEDA, are used to calculate the number of moles of the sealed headspace gas. All this information is included in two main products that are uploaded to the NASA Planetary Data System (PDS): (1) the Sample Dossier, that contains all observations from the instrument payloads at the sampling site, along with relevant rover ancillary data; (2) and the Initial Report, which is an extended description of the observations of each sample prepared by the Science Team within a few weeks of sample acquisition (K.A. Farley and K.M. Stack, Mars 2020 Initial Reports—Crater Floor Campaign, 2022; K.A. Farley and K.M. Stack, Mars 2020 Initial Reports—Delta Front Campaign, 2023).

Water activity is defined as the equilibrium fugacity of water vapor over a solution (f) relative to the fugacity of water vapor over pure water (f 0 ) (a w  = f/f 0 ). At low pressures, such as on Mars, fugacities are well approximated by partial vapor pressures, leading to the more common expression a w  = e/ e s,w (T g ), where e s,w is the saturation vapor pressure over liquid water, which is equivalent to the equilibrium relative humidity (RH) divided by 100 (RH/100 = a w ) 0.6 below 200 K. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 181, 164–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2016.03.005 (2016)." href="/articles/s41598-024-57458-4#ref-CR9" id="ref-link-section-d442398323e3530">9 . We use MEDA’s Relative Humidity Sensor (HS) and Thermal Infrared Sensor (TIRS) to derive the water activity at the ground and to measure ground temperature 42 , 68 . The HS measures the relative humidity (RH) with respect to ice at 1.45 m with an uncertainty of 2%. For a detailed explanation of the RH, the retrieval procedures and error sources see 69 , and the measurements acquired during the first 410 sols of operations 42 . The HS can also be used to estimate the water vapor pressure at 1.5 m as e = RH × e s,i (T b ), where e s,I is the saturation vapor pressure over ice that can be calculated theoretically for the measured T b , the temperature of the RH sensor board from the HUMICAP ® chip. Similarly, the water vapor volume mixing ratio at 1.45 m can be estimated as VMR = e/P, where P is the atmospheric surface pressure measured by MEDA. The HS output is only reliable above 2% and thus can only be used to retrieve water contents at local times ranging from ~ 20:00 to 07:00, with some seasonal variation 42 . For a detailed explanation of the RH, the retrieval procedures, error sources, and the measurements acquired during the first 410 sols of operations see 42 . The TIRS is located on the rover sensing mast at 1.5 m above the ground, with an orientation of 75° clockwise in the horizontal plane with respect to Z-axis local frame (with + X defined along the forward direction and + Y pointing to the right of the rover). TIRS measures the surface brightness temperature (T g ) in the 8–14 µm range with a downward looking channel covering an ellipsoid area of 3–4 m 2 , and with an accuracy of 0.75 K and a resolution of 0.08 K 68 . Using TIRS and HS measurements, we calculate the water activity at the, i.e. a w  = e / e s,w (T g ), where e s,w is the saturation vapor pressure over liquid water, that is also calculated theoretically in this case as a function of the measured ground temperature T g . We note that to calculate a w , we have assumed that the water vapor pressure is uniform in the first 1.5 m. Since the ground acts as a water sink, and vapor is adsorbed onto the ground at night, water vapor pressure at 1.5 m may be larger than at the ground. Therefore, for each instant of time, the reported a w represents an upper bound of the actual water activity at the ground. We compare the temperature T and water activity a w with the phase state diagram of some salts relevant to Jezero and Mars 17 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 . A note of caution is needed: as explained above, under equilibrium conditions (e.g., when a brine or a hydrated salt has equilibrated with ambient air and is not evaporating), water activity is equivalent to the relative humidity with respect to liquid; however, it is debatable if equilibrium can be reached between the atmosphere, the regolith and rock, and the salts, under the rapidly varying Martian surface conditions. Some research suggests that brine formation on Mars may be hindered by kinetics 48 , 74 , whereas other experimental work has confirmed that hydration and deliquescence can take place within a few hours under Martian representative pressures and temperatures 20 , 22 , 23 , 24 .

The column abundances shown in Fig.  2 (Bottom) for Mars Years 24–27 are from the Thermal Emission Spectrometer (TES; 75 ) that flew on the Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft (MGS). MGS was in a near-polar orbit with a daytime LMST of ~ 14:00. The TES derived water column abundance (CA) values from the (non-normalized to constant surface pressure) climatology dataset is given in 3° latitude, 7.5° longitude, and L s  = 5° averaged bins for each Mars Year for which the TES experiment collected data. Thus, the latitudinal bin encompassing Jezero crater is 18°–21° N latitude. The CA were zonally averaged. The maximum MEDA RH values for each L s were selected and converted to the mass mixing ratio (MMR). The equivalent CA were calculated, assuming a constant MMR throughout the atmosphere, using W = [q * ΔP]/g, where W is the mass of water in a column of unit area 1 m 2 , q is the MMR, g is Mars gravity, and ΔP is the atmospheric pressure. Then, CA = W/ρ, where ρ is the density of water in its condensed phase. For non-normalized mass mixing ratios, the ratio of CA to MMR is 4.9. This provides an upper limit on the diurnal variation of column water vapor since model results indicate that only the lowest ~ 200 m of the atmosphere participates in the strong diurnal variation in water vapor VMR observed by MEDA 45 , 46 . This may also explain the discrepancy between the TES and MEDA water vapor columns shown in Fig.  2 (Bottom) since the actual water vapor VMR is likely much greater above 200 m altitude than the low pre-dawn values measured by MEDA.

A single-column model (SCM) was used to extrapolate the night-time measured VMR values to daytime near surface VMR and to calculate the estimated amount of water in the headspace gas at the time of sealing. The adsorptive single-column (SCM) model has been described in detail before and applied to other in-situ observations on Mars 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 . Derived data and SCM model data are available in the Finnish Meteorological Institute repository. The results are successfully compared with the night-time MEDA measurements. The SCM-daytime VMR model has been used to calculate the headspace gas’s water content (VMR) during the sealing time (between 16:25 and 22:16 in LMST, see Table 1 ). There were four samples in which MEDA-HS measurements were available at the time of sealing, so the observed VMR value was used with an uncertainty of about 9 ppm. For the other samples the VMR is calculated using the SCM model, which fits the measurements of nearby sols, as in Fig.  3 . The SCM gives an estimate valid as an average (lacks single sol and time precision). Thus, these values are rounded to the first significant figure. Knowing the remaining head-space volume and the water VMR, the number of moles of water can be calculated for each sample.

The annual and daily variations of the water content as measured by MEDA have been compared with predictions from the Mars Planetary Climate Model (PCM), developed at the Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique (LMD, 45 ), by using observations over the Martian Year 36 (including the dust scenario of MY36) to reconstruct the simulated spatial and vertical dust distributions (thus representative of the conditions encountered by Perseverance during its first Martian year). At solar longitude Ls = 144° and at the location of Jezero (a box of 5° × 5° in the GCM), we extracted the water vapor volume mixing ratio at 5 m above the surface (this is a limit of the model and may induce some differences concerning the MEDA-measurements at 1.5 m), and the column mass of water vapor (in pr-µm). The climatology of airborne dust for year 36 was obtained using observations of the Martian atmosphere by the Thermal Emission Imaging System (THEMIS) aboard Mars Odyssey, and the Mars Climate Sounder (MCS) aboard Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) 76 .

Data availability

Initial Reports-PDS: Archive at the Planetary Data System, Geoscience Node, for samples 1 through 10, and samples 11 through 21: https://pds-geosciences.wustl.edu/missions/mars2020/returned_sample_science.htm . K.A. Farley and K.M. Stack, Mars 2020 Initial Reports Volume 1 Crater Floor Campaign, 2022. InitialReports Vol.1 and. K.A. Farley and K.M. Stack, Mars 2020 Initial Reports—Volume 2 Delta Front Campaign, 2023. InitialReports Vol.2. MEDA data: Archive at the Planetary Data System, Geoscience Node https://pds-atmospheres.nmsu.edu/PDS/data/PDS4/Mars2020/mars2020_meda/ . Polkko, J. and Savijärvi, H. Finnish Meteorological Institute repository SCM Data: https://doi.org/10.57707/fmi-b2share.49d9d75e19c842b6b3e546ff1ae93649.

Farley, K. A. et al. Mars 2020 mission overview. Sp. Sci. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11214-020-00762-y (2020).

Article   Google Scholar  

Kminek, G., Meyer, M. A., Beaty, D. W., Carrier, B. L., Haltigin, T., & Hays, L. E. Mars sample return (MSR): Planning for returned sample science. Astrobiology S1–S4. https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2021.0198 (2022)

Meyer, M. A. et al. Final report of the mars sample return science planning group 2 (MSPG2). Astrobiology 22 (S1), S5–S26. https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2021.0121 (2022).

Article   ADS   MathSciNet   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Simon, J. et al. Samples collected from the floor of Jezero Crater with the mars 2020 perseverance rover. J. Geophys. Res. Planets. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JE007474 (2020).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Czaja, A. D. et al. Report of the science community workshop on the proposed first sample depot for the mars sample return campaign. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 1 , 1. https://doi.org/10.1111/maps.13981 (2023).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Haltigin, T. et al. Rationale and proposed design for a mars sample return (MSR) science program. Astrobiology 22 (S1), S27–S56. https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2021.0122 (2022).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Kminek, G. et al. COSPAR sample safety assessment framework (SSAF). Astrobiology 22 (S1), S186–S216. https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2022.0017 (2022).

Stevens, A. H. & Cockell, C. S. The water activity of mars-relevant multicomponent brines: The changing influence of perchlorate on habitability over time. Planet. Sci. J. 4 (1), 6. https://doi.org/10.3847/PSJ/acaa35 (2023).

Toner, J. D. & Catling, D. C. Water activities of NaClO4, Ca(ClO4)2, and Mg(ClO4)2 brines from experimental heat capacities: Water activity >0.6 below 200 K. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 181 , 164–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2016.03.005 (2016).

Article   ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Stevenson, A. et al. Aspergillus penicillioides differentiation and cell division at 0.585 water activity. Environ. Microbiol. 19 (2), 687–697. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.13597 (2017).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Collins, M. A. & Buick, R. K. Effect of temperature on the spoilage of stored peas by rhodotorula glutinis. Food Microbiol. 6 (3), 135–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0740-0020(89)80021-8 (1989).

Cospar, P. P. P. COSPAR policy on planetary protection. Space Res. Today 211 , 12–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srt.2021.07.010 (2021).

Rummel, J. D. et al. A new analysis of mars “special regions”: findings of the second MEPAG special regions science analysis group (SR-SAG2). Astrobiology 14 (11), 887–968. https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2014.1227 (2014).

Article   ADS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Olsson-Francis, K. et al. The COSPAR planetary protection policy for robotic missions to mars: A review of current scientific knowledge and future perspectives. Life Sci. Space Res. 36 , 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lssr.2022.12.001 (2023).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Zorzano, M.-P. et al. The COSPAR planetary protection requirements for space missions to venus. Life Sci. Space Res. 37 , 18–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lssr.2023.02.001 (2023).

Chevrier, V. F. et al. Global temporal and geographic stability of brines on present-day mars. Planet. Sci. J. 1 (3), 64. https://doi.org/10.3847/PSJ/abbc14 (2020).

Rivera-Valentín, E. G. et al. Distribution and habitability of (meta)stable brines on present-day mars. Nature Astronomy 4 (8), 756–761. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-020-1080-9 (2020).

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Martín-Torres, F. J. et al. Transient liquid water and water activity at gale crater on mars. Nat. Geosci. 8 (5), 357–361. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2412 (2015).

Fischer, E. et al. Relative humidity on mars: new results from the phoenix TECP sensor’. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 124 (11), 2780–2792. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JE006080 (2019).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Primm, K. M. et al. The effect of mars-relevant soil analogs on the water uptake of magnesium perchlorate and implications for the near-surface of mars. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 123 (8), 2076–2088. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JE005540 (2018).

Gough, R. V. et al. Laboratory studies of brine growth kinetics relevant to deliquescence on mars. Planet. Sci. J. 4 (3), 46. https://doi.org/10.3847/PSJ/acbd98 (2023).

Martín-Torres, J. et al. The HABIT (HabitAbility: brine irradiation and temperature) environmental instrument for the ExoMars 2022 surface platform. Planet. Sp. Sci. 190 , 104968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pss.2020.104968 (2020).

Zorzano, M.-P., Mateo-Martí, E., Prieto-Ballesteros, O., Osuna, S. & Renno, N. Stability of liquid saline water on present day Mars. Geophys. Res. Lett. 36 , L20201. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL040315 (2009).

Ramachandran, A. V. et al. Experimental investigation of the atmosphere-regolith water cycle on present-day mars. Sensors 21 (21), 7421. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21217421 (2021).

Corpolongo, A. et al. SHERLOC Raman mineral class detections of the mars 2020 crater floor campaign. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 128 , 1. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JE007455 (2023).

Meslin et al., Evidence for perchlorate and sulfate salts in Jezero crater, Mars, from Supercam observations. LPSC 2022.

Siljeström, S. et al. Evidence of sulfate-rich fluid alteration in jezero crater floor, Mars. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 129 (1), e2023JE007989. https://doi.org/10.1029/2023JE007989 (2024).

Tice, M. M. et al. Alteration history of Séítah formation rocks inferred by PIXL x-ray fluorescence, x-ray diffraction, and multispectral imaging on mars. Sci. Adv. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abp9084 (2022).

Mandon, L. et al. Reflectance of Jezero crater floor: 2. Mineralogical interpretation. J. Geophys. Res. Planets https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JE007450 (2023).

Hecht, M. H. et al. Detection of perchlorate and the soluble chemistry of Martian soil at the phoenix lander site. Science 325 (5936), 64–67. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172466 (2009).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Kounaves, S. P. et al. Identification of the perchlorate parent salts at the phoenix mars landing site and possible implications. Icarus 232 , 226–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2014.01.016 (2014).

Glavin, D. P. et al. Evidence for perchlorates and the origin of chlorinated hydrocarbons detected by SAM at the rocknest aeolian deposit in gale crater: evidence for perchlorates at rocknest. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 118 (10), 1955–1973. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgre.20144 (2013).

Toner, J. D. et al. The formation of supercooled brines, viscous liquids, and low-temperature perchlorate glasses in aqueous solutions relevant to mars. Icarus 233 , 36–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2014.01.018 (2014).

Williams et al. Exploring the Jezero Delta Front: Overview of results from the Mars 20202 Perseverance rover’s second scientific campaign. In 54th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference 2023 (LPI Contrib. No. 2806).

Farley, K. A. et al. Aqueously altered igneous rocks sampled on the floor of Jezero Crater, Mars. Science 377 (6614), eabo2196. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abo2196 (2022).

Liu, Y. et al. An olivine cumulate outcrop on the floor of Jezero crater. Mars. Sci. 377 (6614), 1513–1519. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abo2756 (2022).

Scheller, E. L. et al. Aqueous alteration processes in Jezero Crater, Mars—implications for organic geochemistry. Science 378 (6624), 1105–1110. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abo5204 (2022).

David, G. et al. Evidence for amorphous sulfates as the main carrier of soil hydration in Gale crater, Mars. Geophys. Res. Lett. 49 , 1. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GL098755 (2022).

Karunatillake, S. et al. Sulfates hydrating bulk soil in the Martian low and middle latitudes. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41 (22), 7987–7996. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014gl061136 (2014).

Rodriguez-Manfredi, J. A. et al. The mars environmental dynamics analyzer, MEDA. A suite of environmental sensors for the mars 2020 mission. Sp. Sci. Rev. 217 (3), 48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11214-021-00816-9 (2021).

Rodriguez-Manfredi, J. A. et al. The diverse meteorology of jezero crater over the first 250 sols of perseverance on mars. Nat. Geosci. 16 (1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-022-01084-0 (2023).

Polkko, J. et al. Initial results of the relative humidity observations by MEDA instrument onboard the Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover. J. Geophys. Res. Planets. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JE007447 (2023).

Swindle, T. D. et al. Scientific value of including an atmospheric sample as part of mars sample return (MSR)’. Astrobiology 22 (S1), S165–S175. https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2021.0107 (2022).

McConnochie, T. H. et al. Retrieval of water vapor column abundance and aerosol properties from ChemCam passive sky spectroscopy. Icarus 307 , 294–326 (2018).

Forget, F. et al. Improved general circulation models of the martian atmosphere from the surface to above 80 Km. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 104 (E10), 24155–24175. https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JE001025 (1999).

Millour, E., Forget, F., Spiga, A., Vals, M., Zakharov, V., Montabone, L., Lefèvre, F., Montmessin, F., Chaufray, J.-Y., López-Valverde, M.A., González-Galindo, F., Lewis, S.R., Read, P.L., Desjean, M.-C., Cipriani, F., and the MCD development team. The Mars Climate Database (Version 5.3). In Scientific workshop “From Mars express to ExoMars” , ESAC, Madrid, Spain, 2018.

Tamppari, L. K. & Lemmon, M. T. Near-surface atmospheric water vapor enhancement at the mars phoenix lander site. Icarus 343 , 113624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2020.113624 (2020).

Fischer, E., Martínez, G. M., Elliott, H. M. & Rennó, N. O. Experimental evidence for the formation of liquid saline water on Mars. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41 , 4456–4462. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL060302 (2014).

Jakosky, B. M., Zent, A. P. & Zurek, R. W. The mars water cycle: Determining the role of exchange with the regolith. Icarus 130 (1), 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1006/icar.1997.5799 (1997).

Melchiorri, R. et al. OMEGA/mars express: South pole region, water vapor daily variability. Icarus 201 (1), 102–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2008.12.018 (2009).

Savijärvi, H. I., Harri, A. M. & Kemppinen, O. Mars science laboratory diurnal moisture observations and column simulations. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 120 , 1011–1021. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JE004732 (2015).

Savijärvi, H. I. et al. Humidity observations and column simulations for a warm period at the Mars Phoenix lander site: Constraining the adsorptive properties of regolith. Icarus 343 , 113688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2020.113688 (2020).

Savijärvi, H. I. et al. The diurnal water cycle at Curiosity: Role of exchange with the regolith. Icarus 265 , 63–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2015.10.008 (2016).

Savijärvi, H. I. & Harri, A. M. Water vapor adsorption on mars. Icarus 357 , 114270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2020.114270 (2021).

Martínez, G. M. et al. The modern near-surface martian climate: A review of in-situ meteorological data from viking to curiosity. Space Sci. Rev. 212 , 295–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11214-017-0360-x (2017).

Hausrath, E. M. et al. An examination of soil crusts on the floor of Jezero crater mars. J. Geophys. Res. Planets https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JE007433 (2023).

Wilson, S. A. & Bish, D. L. Formation of Gypsum and Bassanite by Cation Exchange Reactions in the Absence of Free‐liquid H 2 O: Implications for Mars. JGRE 116 , 2011JE003853. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JE003853 (2011).

ADS   Google Scholar  

Steiger, et al. Hydration of MgSO4·H2O and generation of stress in porous materials. Crystal Growth Design 8 , 336–343. https://doi.org/10.1021/cg060688c (2008).

Moeller, R. C. et al. The sampling and caching subsystem (SCS) for the scientific exploration of jezero crater by the mars 2020 perseverance rover. Sp. Sci. Rev. 217 (1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11214-020-00783-7 (2021).

Azua-Bustos, A. et al. Discovery and microbial content of the driest site of the Hyperarid Atacama Desert, Chile: Earth driest site. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 7 (3), 388–394. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-2229.12261 (2015).

Huang, W. et al. Mechanism of water extraction from gypsum rock by desert colonizing microorganisms. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 117 (20), 10681–10687. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2001613117 (2020).

Wierzchos, J. et al. Crystalline water in gypsum is unavailable for cyanobacteria in laboratory experiments and in natural desert endolithic habitats. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 117 (45), 27786–27787. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2013134117 (2020).

Frischkorn, K. R. Water from a stone. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1 , 280. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-0065-7 (2020).

Vaughan, A. et al. Regolith of the crater floor units, Jezero Crater, Mars: Textures, composition, and implications for provenance. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 128 (3), 1. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JE007437 (2023).

Casademont, T. M. et al. RIMFAX ground penetrating radar reveals dielectric permittivity and rock density of shallow martian subsurfac. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 128 (5), 1. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JE007598 (2023).

Wiens, R. C. et al. Compositionally and density stratified igneous terrain in Jezero Crater, Mars. Sci. Adv. 8 (34), eabo3399. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abo3399 (2022).

Johnson, B. C. et al. Impact generated porosity in gale crater and implications for the density of sedimentary rocks in lower Aeolis mons. Icarus 366 , 114539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2021.114539 (2021).

Martínez, G. M. et al. Surface energy budget, albedo and thermal inertia at Jezero Crater, Mars, as observed from the Mars 2020 MEDA instrument. J. Geophys. Res. Planets e2022JE007537. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JE007537 (2023).

Hieta, M. et al. MEDA HS: Relative humidity sensor for the mars 2020 perseverance rover. Planet. Sp. Sci. 223 , 105590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pss.2022.105590 (2022).

Murphy, D. M. & Koop, T. Review of the vapour pressures of ice and supercooled water for atmospheric applications. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 131 (608), 1539–1565. https://doi.org/10.1256/qj.04.94 (2005).

Nuding, D. L. et al. Deliquescence and efflorescence of calcium perchlorate: An investigation of stable aqueous solutions relevant to mars. Icarus 243 , 420–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2014.08.036 (2014).

Chou, I.-M. & Seal, R. R. Magnesium and calcium sulfate stabilities and the water budget of mars. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 112 (E11), 1. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JE002898 (2007).

Möhlmann, D. & Thomsen, K. Properties of cryobrines on mars. Icarus 212 (1), 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2010.11.025 (2011).

Gough, R. V. et al. Solid-solid hydration and dehydration of mars-relevant chlorine salts: Implications for gale crater and RSL locations. Icarus 321 , 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icarus.2018.10.034 (2019).

Smith, M. D. The annual cycle of water vapor on mars as observed by the thermal emission spectrometer. J. Geophys. Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JE001522 (2002).

Montabone, L., Kleinboehl, A., Smith, M., Edwards, C., Forget, F., Kass, D., Millour, E., & Stcherbinine, A. Reconstructing Martian Year 36 column dust optical depth maps using EMM/EMIRS and MRO/MCS, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 24–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-10341, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-10341 , 2023.

Download references

Acknowledgements

M.-P.Z. was supported by Grant PID2019-104205GB-C21 funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and by Grant PID2022-140180OB-C21 funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033/FEDER, UE., UE. G. M wants to acknowledge JPL funding from USRA Contract Number 1638782. C.D.K.H was supported by Canadian Space Agency Mars 2020 Participating Scientist Grant CSA CGCPU 20EXPMARS. S.S. acknowledges funding from the Swedish National Space Agency (Contracts 2021-00092 and 137/19). V.D. thanks the FRS-FNRS for support. Part of this research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NM0018D0004). K.C.B. was funded by NASA Mars 2020 Grant 80NSSC20K0235. J.M.F. was supported by the Spanish Agency for Research, Contract PID2022-142750OB-I00. E.M.H. acknowledges funding from NASA RSS PS 80NSSC20K0239. A.D.C. was funded by NASA Mars 2020 Returned Sample Science Participating Scientist Program Grant 80NSSC20K0237. V.D. thanks the FRS-FNRS and PDR 35284099 for support.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centro de Astrobiología (CAB), CSIC-INTA, 28850, Torrejón de Ardoz, Madrid, Spain

Maria-Paz Zorzano & Daniel Viúdez-Moreiras

Lunar and Planetary Institute, Universities Space Research Association, Houston, TX, USA

Germán Martínez

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland

Jouni Polkko

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove Dr., Pasadena, CA, 91109, USA

Leslie K. Tamppari & Yulia Goreva

Aeolis Research, Chandler, AZ, USA

Claire Newman

University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

Hannu Savijärvi

Laboratoire d’Etudes Spatiales et d’Instrumentation en Astrophysique (LESIA), Observatoire de Paris, Université PSL, CNRS, Sorbonne Université, Univ. Paris Diderot, Sorbonne, France

Tanguy Bertrand

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA

Michael Smith

Department of Geoscience, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, USA

Elisabeth M. Hausrath

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, Stockholm, Sweden

Sandra Siljeström

West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA

Kathleen Benison

Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

Tanja Bosak & Benjamin Weiss

Department of Geosciences, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA

Andrew D. Czaja

Laboratoire G-Time, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium

Vinciane Debaille

Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada

Christopher D. K. Herd & Nicolas Randazzo

Department of Geological Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA

Lisa Mayhew

Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK

Mark A. Sephton

University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA

David Shuster

Center for Isotope Cosmochemistry and Geochronology, Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science, NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX, USA

Justin I. Simon

Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA

Lucia Mandon

Plancius Research, Severna Park, MD, USA

Adrian Brown

MIT Haystack Observatory, Westford, MA, 01886, USA

Michael H. Hecht

Instituto de Geociencias (CSIC-UCM, Madrid, Spain

Jesús Martínez-Frías

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

M.-P.Z. conceived the research and led the writing; M.P.Z., G.M., J.P., L.K.T., C.N., H.S., D.V.-M., M.S., analyzed data, developed and applied models to compare with the measurements, M.P.Z., G.M., J.P., L.K.T., C.N., H.S., Y.G., D.V.-M., T.B., M.S., E.M.H., S.S., K.B., T.B., A.C., V.D., C.D.K.H., L.M., M.A.S., D.S., J.I.S., B.W., N.R., L.M., A.B., M.H.H., J.M.F. contributed to the scientific background and interpretation and performed the in-situ measurements with Perseverance. All authors contributed to the writing of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria-Paz Zorzano .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary information., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Zorzano, MP., Martínez, G., Polkko, J. et al. Present-day thermal and water activity environment of the Mars Sample Return collection. Sci Rep 14 , 7175 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-57458-4

Download citation

Received : 04 December 2023

Accepted : 18 March 2024

Published : 26 March 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-57458-4

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Mars sample return
• Water activity
• Temperature
• Habitability
• Environment

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Convergence and Contrast: An Investigation into the Psychological Attributes of Budding Entrepreneurs

• Published: 01 April 2024

Cite this article

• Parwinder Singh 1 &
• Ankita Mishra 1  

While promoting entrepreneurship to address unemployment among educated youth, states have predominantly emphasized physical resources, neglecting the crucial focus on psychological attributes, especially in India. Entrepreneurial intention (EI) is acknowledged as a vital psychological factor in entrepreneurial behavior, but previous research has primarily examined EI among students, leaving a gap in understanding its dynamics among a more relevant sample—entrepreneurs or aspiring entrepreneurs. Motivated by this gap, the present study explores the association of psychological attributes influencing EI in budding entrepreneurs and examines the differences in attributes between budding entrepreneurs and students not inclined towards entrepreneurship. This cross-sectional study included a sample of 83 budding entrepreneurs and 769 students (not inclined towards entrepreneurship) selected from various engineering colleges in Punjab, India. The study used standardized questionnaires to measure various attributes of interest such as EI, entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE), emotional intelligence, cognitive flexibility, internal locus of control, risk-propensity (RP), conscientiousness, and mindset. The collected data underwent analysis through correlation, t -tests, and regression analysis. The results revealed a significant association of EI with all identified variables among budding entrepreneurs. However, differences in mean scores between budding entrepreneurs and students were observed only on questionnaires related to RP, ESE, EI, and prevention-focus. In regression analysis, taking RP, ESE, and prevention focus as predictors of EI, the results revealed that 38% of the variance in EI could be attributed to these factors, with ESE emerging as the most significant predictor. This study underscores the importance of fostering ESE among students, suggesting its significant contribution to the development of higher EI. Policymakers in the field of entrepreneurship promotion may find these outcomes valuable, explore them further, and advocate for interventions targeting ESE among students.

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

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Data Availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Antončič, B., & Auer Antončič, J. (2023). Psychological and sociological determinants of entrepreneurial intentions and behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 14 , 1076768. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1076768

Article   Google Scholar  

Arkorful, H., & Hilton, S. K. (2022). Locus of control and entrepreneurial intention: A study in a developing economy. Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 38 (2), 333–344. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEAS-04-2020-0051

Asante, E. A., & Affum-Osei, E. (2019). Entrepreneurship as a career choice: The impact of locus of control on aspiring entrepreneurs’ opportunity recognition. Journal of Business Research, 98 , 227–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.02.006

Auna, M. S. S. (2020). Locus of control and self-Efficacy on entrepreneurial intentions in the Digital Age. Proceedings of the 5th ASEAN Conference on Psychology, Counselling, and Humanities (ACPCH 2019). https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200120.061

Awwad, M. S., & Al-Aseer, R. M. N. (2021). Big five personality traits impact on entrepreneurial intention: The mediating role of entrepreneurial alertness. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 15 (1), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-09-2020-0136

Bakry, D. S., Daim, T., Dabic, M., & Yesilada, B. (2022). An evaluation of the effectiveness of innovation ecosystems in facilitating the adoption of sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management , 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2022.2088775 .

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory . Prentice-Hall.

Google Scholar  

Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of personality. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 154–196). Guilford Press.

Basuroy, T. (2022). Unemployment rate across India in 2021, by maximum education level . Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1001039/india-unemployment-rate-by-education-level/

Belchior, R. F., & Lyons, R. (2021). Explaining entrepreneurial intentions, nascent entrepreneurial behavior and new business creation with social cognitive career theory–A 5-year longitudinal analysis. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 17 (4), 1945–1972. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-021-00745-7

Biraglia, A., & Kadile, V. (2017). The role of entrepreneurial passion and creativity in developing entrepreneurial intentions: Insights from American homebrewers. Journal of Small Business Management, 55 (1), 170–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12242

Biswas, A., & Verma, R. K. (2021). Engine of entrepreneurial intentions: Revisiting personality traits with entrepreneurial education. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 29 (6), 2019–2044. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-11-2020-0607

Brandstätter, H. (2011). Personality aspects of entrepreneurship: A look at five meta-analyses. Personality and Individual Differences, 51 (3), 222–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.007

Brockner, J., Higgins, E. T., & Low, M. B. (2004). Regulatory focus theory and the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing, 19 (2), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00007-7

Burnette, J. L., Pollack, J. M., Forsyth, R. B., Hoyt, C. L., Babij, A. D., Thomas, F. N., & Coy, A. E. (2020). A growth mindset intervention: Enhancing students’ entrepreneurial self-efficacy and career development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44 (5), 878–908. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258719864293

Caliendo, M., Fossen, F., & Kritikos, A. S. (2014). Personality characteristics and the decisions to become and stay self-employed. Small Business Economics, 42 , 787–814. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9514-8

Canas, J. J., Fajardo, I., & Salmeron, L. (2006). Cognitive flexibility. International encyclopedia of ergonomics and human factors, 1 (3), 297–301. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4439.6326

Chhabra, S., Raghunathan, R., & Rao, N. M. (2020). The antecedents of entrepreneurial intention among women entrepreneurs in India. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 14 (1), 76–92.

Conejo, F. J., Khuntia, J., & Parthasarathy, M. (2023). Towards more specific personality research in entrepreneurship: Relating conscientiousness facets to venture performance.  Revista Nacional de Administración ,  14 (1). https://doi.org/10.22458/rna.v14i1.4783

Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). The five-factor model of personality and its relevance to personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 6 (4), 343–359. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1992.6.4.343

De Noble, A. F., Jung, D., & Ehrlich, S. B. (1999). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy: The development of a measure and its relationship to entrepreneurial action. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 1999 (1), 73–87. https://fusionmx.babson.edu/entrep/fer/papers99/I/I_C/IC.html

Dennis, J. P., & Vander Wal, J. S. (2010). The cognitive flexibility inventory: Instrument development and estimates of reliability and validity. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 34 , 241–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-009-9276-4

Dheer, R. J., & Lenartowicz, T. (2019). Cognitive flexibility: Impact on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 115 , 103339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103339

Engle, D. E., Mah, J. J., & Sadri, G. (1997). An empirical comparison of entrepreneurs and employees: Implications for innovation. Creativity Research Journal, 10 (1), 45–49. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1001_5

Fernández-Pérez, V., Montes-Merino, A., Rodríguez-Ariza, L., & Galicia, P. E. A. (2019). Emotional competencies and cognitive antecedents in shaping student’s entrepreneurial intention: The moderating role of entrepreneurship education. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 15 , 281–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0438-7

Gao, S. Y., & Huang, J. (2022). Effect of narcissistic personality on entrepreneurial intention among college students: Mediation role of entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 , 774510. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.774510

George, J. M. (2000). Emotions and leadership: The role of emotional intelligence. Human Relations, 53 (8), 1027–1055.

Gill, S. A., Bencheva, N., Karayel, S., & Usman, M. (2021). Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy moderate effects of cognitive flexibility and entrepreneurial alertness on entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 9 (3), 25–41. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2021.090302

Gist, M. E., & Mitchell, T. R. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Academy of Management Review, 17 (2), 183–211. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1992.4279530

González-López, M. J., Pérez-López, M. C., & Rodríguez-Ariza, L. (2021). From potential to early nascent entrepreneurship: The role of entrepreneurial competencies. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 17 (3), 1387–1417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00658-x

Gu, J., Hu, L., Wu, J., & Lado, A. A. (2018). Risk propensity, self-regulation, and entrepreneurial intention: Empirical evidence from China. Current Psychology, 37 , 648–660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-016-9547-7

Gupta, M., & Pushkar. (2019). Why India should worry about its educated, but unemployed, youth . https://thewire.in/labour/why-india-should-worry-about-itseducated-but-unemployed-youth

Gurel, E., Altinay, L., & Daniele, R. (2010). Tourism students’ entrepreneurial intentions. Annals of Tourism Research, 37 (3), 646–669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2009.12.003

Gürol, Y., & Atsan, N. (2006). Entrepreneurial characteristics amongst university students: Some insights for entrepreneurship education and training in Turkey.  Education+ training ,  48 (1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910610645716

Haws, K. L., Dholakia, U. M., & Bearden, W. O. (2010). An assessment of chronic regulatory focus measures. Journal of Marketing Research, 47 (5), 967–982. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.47.5.967

Higgins, E. T., & Silberman, I. (1998). Development of regulatory focus: Promotion and prevention as ways of living. In J. Hechhausen & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulation across the life span (pp. 78–113). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527869.005

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Higgins, E. T., Friedman, R., Harlow, R. E., Idson, L. C., Ayduk, Ö., & Taylor, A. (2001). Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success: Promotion pride versus prevention pride. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31 (1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.27

Hisrich, R. D. (1986). The woman entrepreneur: A comparative analysis. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 7 (2), 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb053593

Hisrich, R. D., Langan-Fox, J., & Grant, S. (2007). Entrepreneurship research and practice: A call to action for psychology. American Psychologist, 62 (6), 575–589. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.62.6.575

Hmieleski, K. M., & Baron, R. A. (2008). When does entrepreneurial self-efficacy enhance versus reduce firm performance? Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 2 (1), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.42

Humphrey, R. H. (2013). The benefits of emotional intelligence and empathy to entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 3 (3), 287–294. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2013-0057

Jiatong, W., Murad, M., Li, C., Gill, S. A., & Ashraf, S. F. (2021). Linking cognitive flexibility to entrepreneurial alertness and entrepreneurial intention among medical students with the moderating role of entrepreneurial self-efficacy: A second-order moderated mediation model. PLoS ONE, 16 (9), e0256420. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259491

Karimi, S., Biemans, H. J., Lans, T., Chizari, M., & Mulder, M. (2016). The impact of entrepreneurship education: A study of Iranian students’ entrepreneurial intentions and opportunity identification. Journal of Small Business Management, 54 (1), 187–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12137

Karoly, P. (1993). Mechanisms of self-regulation: A systems view. Annual Review of Psychology, 44 , 23–52. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.44.020193.000323

Khalid, A., Bashir, M., & Saqib, S. (2018). Collective impact of entrepreneurial self-efficacy and risk propensity on entrepreneurial intentions; Mediating role of perceived social support. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7 (3.21), 24–30. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i3.21.17087

Kong, F., Zhao, L., & Tsai, C. H. (2020). The relationship between entrepreneurial intention and action: The effects of fear of failure and role model. Frontiers in Psychology, 11 , 229. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00229

Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49 (1), 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01790.x

Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person–job, person–organization, person–group, and person–supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58 (2), 281–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x

Krueger, N. F., Jr., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15 (5/6), 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00033-0

Kumar, V. (2018). Impact of emotional intelligence and gender on job satisfaction: An empirical study amongst the employees of HDFC banks in Chandigarh Trinity, India. International Journal of Innovation and Economic Development, 4 (2), 24–31. https://doi.org/10.18775/ijied.1849-7551-7020.2015.42.2002

Kung, F. Y., Kim, Y. H., Yang, D. Y. J., & Cheng, S. Y. (2016). The role of regulatory fit in framing effective negative feedback across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 47 (5), 696–712. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022116638172

Kurman, J., & Hui, C. M. (2012). Cultural regulatory fit and strategies for coping with unsuccessful outcomes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42 (4), 482–489. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1838

Lee, S., & Klein, H. J. (2002). Relationships between conscientiousness, self-efficacy, self-deception, and learning over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (6), 1175–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.6.1175

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2000). Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 47 (1), 36. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.47.1.36

Li, L. N., Huang, J. H., & Gao, S. Y. (2022). The relationship between personality traits and entrepreneurial intention among college students: The mediating role of creativity. Frontiers in Psychology, 13 , 822206. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.822206

Liao, Y. K., Nguyen, V. H. A., Chi, H. K., & Nguyen, H. H. (2022). Unraveling the direct and indirect effects of entrepreneurial education and mindset on entrepreneurial intention: The moderating role of entrepreneurial passion. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 41 (3), 23–40.

Linan, F., & Chen, Y. W. (2009). Development and cross–cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33 (3), 593–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00318.x

Luo, Y. F., Huang, J., & Gao, S. (2022). Relationship between proactive personality and entrepreneurial intentions in college students: Mediation effects of social capital and human capital. Frontiers in Psychology, 13 , 861447. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.861447

Lüthje, C., & Franke, N. (2003). The ‘making’of an entrepreneur: Testing a model of entrepreneurial intent among engineering students at MIT. R&D Management, 33 (2), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9310.00288

Markman, G. D., & Baron, R. A. (2003). Person–entrepreneurship fit: Why some people are more successful as entrepreneurs than others. Human Resource Management Review, 13 (2), 281–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-4822(03)00018-4

Martin, M. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1995). A new measure of cognitive flexibility. Psychological Reports, 76 (2), 623–626. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1995.76.2.623

Martinez, M. A., & Aldrich, H. E. (2011). Networking strategies for entrepreneurs: balancing cohesion and diversity. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 17 (1), 7–38. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552551111107499

McClelland, D. C. (1961). Achieving Society, 92051 . Simon and Schuster.

Book   Google Scholar  

Mei, H., Ma, Z., Zhan, Z., Ning, W., Zuo, H., Wang, J., & Huang, Y. (2022). University students’ successive development from entrepreneurial intention to behavior: The mediating role of commitment and moderating role of family support. Frontiers in Psychology, 13 , 859210. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.859210

Miao, C., Qian, S., & Ma, D. (2017). The relationship between entrepreneurial self-efficacy and firm performance: A meta-analysis of main and moderator effects. Journal of Small Business Management, 55 (1), 87–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12240

Miner, J. B., & Raju, N. S. (2004). Risk propensity differences between managers and entrepreneurs and between low- and high-growth entrepreneurs: A reply in a more conservative vein. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.3

Mishra, A., & Singh, P. (2022a). Effect of emotional intelligence and cognitive flexibility on entrepreneurial intention: Mediating role of entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies . https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-05-2022-0142

Mishra, A., & Singh, P. (2022b). Attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control as predictors of entrepreneurial intentions among engineering students. Prabandhan: Indian Journal of Management, 15 (5), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.17010/pijom/2022/v15i5/169580

Moriano, J. A., Gorgievski, M., Laguna, M., Stephan, U., & Zarafshani, K. (2012). A cross-cultural approach to understanding entrepreneurial intention. Journal of Career Development, 39 (2), 162–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845310384481

Mortan, R. A., Ripoll, P., Carvalho, C., & Bernal, M. C. (2014). Effects of emotional intelligence on entrepreneurial intention and self-efficacy. Revista De Psicología Del Trabajo y De Las Organizaciones, 30 (3), 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpto.2014.11.004

Mueller, S. L., & Thomas, A. S. (2001). Culture and entrepreneurial potential: A nine-country study of locus of control and innovativeness. Journal of Business Venturing, 16 (1), 51–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(99)00039-7

Mukesh, H. V., Prabhu, N., Koodamara, N. K., Chakraborty, S., & Kamath, P. (2021). Entrepreneurial potential of students of MBA and engineering schools in the Indian context: Roles of leadership and achievement motivation. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 13 (3), 782–810. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-01-2020-0025

Naktiyok, A., Nur Karabey, C., & Caglar Gulluce, A. (2010). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention: The Turkish case. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6 , 419–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-009-0123-6

Ndofirepi, T. M. (2020). Relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial goal intentions: Psychological traits as mediators. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 9 (1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-020-0115-x

Newman, A., Obschonka, M., Schwarz, S., Cohen, M., & Nielsen, I. (2019). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy: A systematic review of the literature on its theoretical foundations, measurement, antecedents, and outcomes, and an agenda for future research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 110 , 403–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.05.012

Ng, K. M., Wang, C., Zalaquett, C. P., & Bodenhorn, N. (2007). A confirmatory factor analysis of the Wong and law emotional intelligence scale in a sample of international college students. International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 29 (3/4), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10447-008-9051-3

Nicolaou, N., Shane, S., Cherkas, L., & Spector, T. D. (2009). Opportunity recognition and the tendency to be an entrepreneur: A bivariate genetics perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110 (2), 108–117.

Nungsari, M., Ngu, K., Chin, J. W., & Flanders, S. (2023). The formation of youth entrepreneurial intention in an emerging economy: The interaction between psychological traits and socioeconomic factors. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 15 (2), 333–359. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-08-2021-0312

Opoku-Antwi, G. L., Amofah, K., Nyamaah-Koffuor, K., & Yakubu, A. (2012). Entrepreneurial intention among senior high school students in the Sunyani Municipality, International Review of Management and Marketing , 2 (4), 210–219. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/irmm/issue/32073/355008?publisher=http-www-cag-edu-tr-ilhan-ozturk

Pihie, Z. A. L., & Bagheri, A. (2013). Self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention: The mediation effect of self-regulation. Vocations and Learning, 6 , 385–401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-013-9101-9

Pinto, S., Pinto, P., Hawaldar, I. T., & Darwish, S. Z. (2020). Entrepreneurial skills and intention of graduate students for business start-ups: A survey from India.  International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change ,  14 (3), 951–970. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3689247

Ram, D., Chandran, S., Sadar, A., & Gowdappa, B. (2019). Correlation of cognitive resilience, cognitive flexibility and impulsivity in attempted suicide. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 41 (4), 362–367. https://doi.org/10.4103/IJPSYM.IJPSYM_189_18

Rauch, A., & Frese, M. (2007). Let’s put the person back into entrepreneurship research: A meta-analysis on the relationship between business owners’ personality traits, business creation, and success. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 16 (4), 353–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320701595438

Roy, R., & Das, N. (2022). Exploring entrepreneurial intention among engineering students in India: A multiple basket approach.  International Journal of Technology and Design Education , 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09596-9

Salameh, A. A., Akhtar, H., Gul, R., Omar, A. B., & Hanif, S. (2022). Personality traits and entrepreneurial intentions: Financial risk-taking as mediator. Frontiers in Psychology, 13 , 927718. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.927718

Samydevan, V., Mohd Amin, M. R. B., & Piaralal, S. K. (2020). Determinants of entrepreneurial intention among school students in Malaysia: An empirical study. Journal of Education for Business, 96 (6), 359–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2020.1837057

Sánchez, J. C., & Hernández-Sánchez, B. (2014). Gender, personal traits, and entrepreneurial intentions.  Business and Management Research ,  3 (1). https://doi.org/10.5430/bmr.v3n1p31

Segal, G., Borgia, D., & Schoenfeld, J. (2005). The motivation to become an entrepreneur. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 11 (1), 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552550510580834

Setiawan, J. L. (2014). Examining entrepreneurial self-efficacy among students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 115 , 235–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.431

Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25 (1), 217–226.

Shook, C. L., Priem, R. L., & McGee, J. E. (2003). Venture creation and the enterprising individual: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 29 (3), 379–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(03)00016-3

Sitkin, S. B., & Weingart, L. R. (1995). Determinants of risky decision-making behavior: A test of the mediating role of risk perceptions and propensity. Academy of Management Journal, 38 (6), 1573–1592. https://doi.org/10.5465/256844

Slovic, P. (1972). Psychological study of human judgment: Implications for investment decision making. The Journal of Finance, 27 (4), 779–799. https://doi.org/10.2307/2978668

Srivastava, S., & Misra, R. (2017). Exploring antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions of young women in India: A multi-method analysis. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 9 (2), 181–206. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-04-2016-0012

Sumathi, I. (2020). Investigating the impact of motivations in entrepreneurial intention among women entrepreneurs in Tamil Nadu. International Journal of Management (IJM), 11 (12), 4302–4309. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/S475B

Summerville, A., & Roese, N. J. (2008). Self-report measures of individual differences in regulatory focus: A cautionary note. Journal of Research in Personality, 42 (1), 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.05.005

Thompson, E. R. (2009). Individual entrepreneurial intent: Construct clarification and development of some an internationally reliable metric. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33 (3), 669–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00321.x

Tiwari, P., Bhat, A. K., & Jyoti. (2020). The effect of emotional intelligence, empathy and perceived social pressure on predicting social entrepreneurial intention: A field research. In S. Majumdar, & E. Reji (Eds.), Methodological Issues in Social Entrepreneurship Knowledge and Practice (pp. 137–158). Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9769-1_8

Tiwari, P., Bhat, A. K., & Tikoria, J. (2017). An empirical analysis of the factors affecting social entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 7 , 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-017-0067-1

Tumasjan, A., & Braun, R. (2012). In the eye of the beholder: How regulatory focus and self-efficacy interact in influencing opportunity recognition. Journal of Business Venturing, 27 (6), 622–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.08.001

Voda, A. I., & Florea, N. (2019). Impact of personality traits and entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial intentions of business and engineering students. Sustainability, 11 (4), 1192. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041192

Wei, J., Chen, Y., Zhang, Y., & Zhang, J. (2020). How does entrepreneurial self-efficacy influence innovation behavior? Exploring the mechanism of job satisfaction and Zhongyong thinking. Frontiers in Psychology, 11 , 708. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00708

Wong, C.-S., & Law, K. S. (2002). Wong and law emotional intelligence scale. The Leadership Quarterly, 13 (3). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00099-1

Yangailo, T., & Qutieshat, A. (2022). Uncovering dominant characteristics for entrepreneurial intention and success in the last decade: Systematic literature review. Entrepreneurship Education, 5 (2), 145–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41959-022-00073-z

Zampetakis, L. A., Kafetsios, K., Bouranta, N., Dewett, T., & Moustakis, V. S. (2009). On the relationship between emotional intelligence and entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 15 (6), 595–618. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552550910995452

Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., & Hills, G. E. (2005). The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90 (6), 1265. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1265

Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2010). The relationship of personality to entrepreneurial intentions and performance: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36 (2), 381–404. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309335187

Download references

No funding was received for the present study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Indian Institute of Technology Ropar, Rupnagar, Punjab, India

Parwinder Singh & Ankita Mishra

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Parwinder Singh .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval.

The study was approved by the Institute Ethics Committee of the Indian Institute of Technology Ropar. The research reported in the manuscript was conducted in accordance with general ethical guidelines in psychology. Ethics clearance was provided by the Institute’s Ethics Committee (Human).

Ethical Consideration

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and has been approved by the Institute ethics committee (Approval number- P/08/2021-I/IIT/IEC).

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Consent for Publication

No identifying information is included in the manuscript.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Singh, P., Mishra, A. Convergence and Contrast: An Investigation into the Psychological Attributes of Budding Entrepreneurs. J Knowl Econ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-01921-0

Download citation

Received : 21 August 2023

Accepted : 18 March 2024

Published : 01 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-01921-0

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Entrepreneurship behavior
• Entrepreneurial intentions
• Entrepreneurial self-efficacy
• Psychological attributes
• Budding entrepreneurs
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

1. Introduction

2. materials and methods, 3. results and discussion, 4. conclusions, 5. data and program availability, supporting information.

research papers \(\def\hfill{\hskip 5em}\def\hfil{\hskip 3em}\def\eqno#1{\hfil {#1}}\)

A correction procedure for secondary scattering contributions from windows in small-angle X-ray scattering and ultra-small-angle X-ray scattering

a ESRF – The European Synchrotron, 71 Avenue des Martyrs, 38043 Grenoble, France * Correspondence e-mail: [email protected]

This article describes a correction procedure for the removal of indirect background contributions to measured small-angle X-ray scattering patterns. The high scattering power of a sample in the ultra-small-angle region may serve as a secondary source for a window placed in front of the detector. The resulting secondary scattering appears as a sample-dependent background in the measured pattern that cannot be directly subtracted. This is an intricate problem in measurements at ultra-low angles, which can significantly reduce the useful dynamic range of detection. Two different procedures are presented to retrieve the real scattering profile of the sample.

Keywords: secondary scattering ; SAXS ; small-angle X-ray scattering ; USAXS ; ultra-small-angle X-ray scattering ; sample-dependent background .

This article presents a convolution procedure by which the secondary scattering contribution in the measured 2D pattern can be estimated. Then the excess contribution can be subtracted in two dimensions prior to intensity normalization. This approach yields satisfactory results down to the level allowed by the noise in the data. A good agreement is obtained with the practical approach that involves the physical masking of the intense region.

2.1. Model systems

2.2. x-ray scattering, 2.3. origin of the secondary scattering.

In the present case, the origin of the secondary scattering is WAXS from the fibrous carbon window. Although the direct beam is blocked by a beamstop, the intense region of the scattering pattern serves as a secondary source. The secondary scattering is inherent when a window is present anywhere in front of the detector and it becomes detectable when the scattering profile decays sharply as in the case of Porod behavior ( q −4 ). The low-angle instrument background and associated secondary scattering can be subtracted out, but the secondary scattering originating from the strong sample scattering manifests as a sample-dependent background that cannot be measured independently and deducted.

3.1. WAXS from window materials

3.2. calibration and correction procedures.

where matrices C [], W [] and S [] are the convoluted, window and sample scattering patterns, respectively. W i , j are the subsets of W of size ( K ,  M ). S [] is supposed to be 0 if x > K or y > M . This implies that most of the intensity that contributes to the secondary scattering needs to be included in the subregion used for convolution. A good threshold has been found to be 10 −3 of the maximum intensity.

3.3. Application to colloidal suspensions

All window materials scatter both in the WAXS and more strongly in the USAXS range. The ideal option is to have the detector installed in vacuum without an intervening window. However, that comes with the risk of damaging the detector by shock waves in the case of an uncontrolled rupture of the vacuum.

A correction procedure for secondary scattering contributions emanating from a window placed between the detector and primary beamstop is presented. The correction restores the useful dynamic range of the measurement down to 10 −7 of the maximum intensity. This procedure is applicable to both isotropic and anisotropic scattering patterns as the key operation of convolution is done in two dimensions. The method was validated using the scattering patterns from colloidal suspensions, which exhibit a large number of oscillations from the spherical form factor and whose intensity profiles decay sharply. Very good agreement is obtained between the corrected and calculated scattering profiles. This correction can improve the overlap between normalized intensity profiles measured at two different sample-to-detector distances farther apart. It will be useful to perform this correction even when the measured profiles do not directly manifest the secondary scattering contribution, especially when operations such as division of two intensities are involved, e.g. for deriving an experimental structure factor of interactions from the measured intensities or when performing advanced ab initio modeling of the SAXS data. This correction could also improve the accuracy of image reconstruction in CDI involving a strongly scattering specimen.

Supporting information containing additional examples and model used for the analysis. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600576724001997/uz5008sup1.pdf

Acknowledgements

ID02 beamline staff are thanked for technical support and the ESRF is acknowledged for the provision of synchrotron beam time.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) Licence , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are cited.