writing materials and methods in thesis

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

4 Writing the Materials and Methods (Methodology) Section

The Materials and Methods section briefly describes how you did your research. In other words, what did you do to answer your research question? If there were materials used for the research or materials experimented on you list them in this section. You also describe how you did the research or experiment. The key to a methodology is that another person must be able to replicate your research—follow the steps you take. For example if you used the internet to do a search it is not enough to say you “searched the internet.” A reader would need to know which search engine and what key words you used.

Open this section by describing the overall approach you took or the materials used. Then describe to the readers step-by-step the methods you used including any data analysis performed. See Fig. 2.5 below for an example of materials and methods section.

Writing tips:

• Explain procedures, materials, and equipment used
• Example: “We used an x-ray fluorescence spectrometer to analyze major and trace elements in the mystery mineral samples.”
• Order events chronologically, perhaps with subheadings (Field work, Lab Analysis, Statistical Models)
• Use past tense (you did X, Y, Z)
• Quantify measurements
• Include results in the methods! It’s easy to make this mistake!
• Example: “W e turned on the machine and loaded in our samples, then calibrated the instrument and pushed the start button and waited one hour. . . .”

Technical Writing @ SLCC Copyright © 2020 by Department of English, Linguistics, and Writing Studies at SLCC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Turk J Urol
• v.39(Suppl 1); 2013 Sep

How to write a materials and methods section of a scientific article?

In contrast to past centuries, scientific researchers have been currently conducted systematically in all countries as part of an education strategy. As a consequence, scientists have published thousands of reports. Writing an effective article is generally a significant problem for researchers. All parts of an article, specifically the abstract, material and methods, results, discussion and references sections should contain certain features that should always be considered before sending a manuscript to a journal for publication. It is generally known that the material and methods section is a relatively easy section of an article to write. Therefore, it is often a good idea to begin by writing the materials and methods section, which is also a crucial part of an article. Because “reproducible results” are very important in science, a detailed account of the study should be given in this section. If the authors provide sufficient detail, other scientists can repeat their experiments to verify their findings. It is generally recommended that the materials and methods should be written in the past tense, either in active or passive voice. In this section, ethical approval, study dates, number of subjects, groups, evaluation criteria, exclusion criteria and statistical methods should be described sequentially. It should be noted that a well-written materials and methods section markedly enhances the chances of an article being published.

How to Write a Materials and Methods Section of a Scientific Article?

Up to the 18 th Century scientific researches were performed on a voluntary basis by certain scientists. However from the second half of the 19 th century, scientific development has gained momentum with the contributions of numerous scientists including Edison, Fleming, and Koch. In parallel with these developments, apparently each scientific field, and even their branches made, and still making magnificent progressions from the end of the 18 th century. Secondary to these developments, scientific researches have been implemented systematically by universities, and various institutions in every part of the world as an integral component of national strategies. Naturally, the number of researchers who performed scientific investigations or sponsored by various institutions increased considerably. Also, as is known very well, all over the world scientists, and researchers move from one place to another to disseminate scientific knowledge. All of these scientific efforts, and activities reflect on clinical practice, and hundreds of thousands, and millions scientific articles which we can currently gain access into all of them online. As indicated by the investigator Gerard Piel, “Without publication, science is dead” which explains the importance of publication. In other words, if you don’t share your investigation and knowledge, they don’t mean anything by themselves. Although sharing the knowledge is essential for writing a scientific paper, nowadays writing a scientific article is mostly learnt as a master-apprentice relationship, and therefore certain standards have not been established. This phenomenon creates serious stress especially for young investigators in their early stage of writing scientific papers. Indeed investigators receiving their residency training confront this reality finally during writing of their dissertations. Though sharing knowledge is known as a fundamental principle in writing a scientific paper, it creates difficulties in the whole world. Relevant to this issue, in the whole world investigations have been performed, and books have been written on the subject of how to write a scientific paper. Accordingly, in our country mostly local meetings, and courses have been organized. These organizations, and investigations should be performed. Indeed, nowadays, in the first assessments, the rejection rate of the journals by internationally acknowledged scientific indexes as “Science Citation İndex (SCI)” and “Science Citation İndex Expanded (SCI-extended” which have certain scientific standards, increases to 62 percent. As a matter of fact only 25% of Class A journals have been included in the lists of SCI, and SCI-extended.

As we all know very well, scientific articles consist of sections of summary, introduction, material, and methods, discussion, and references. Among them, conventionally Materials and Methods section has been reported as the most easily written or will be written section. Although it is known as the most easily written section, nearly 30% of the reasons for rejection are related to this section per se. Therefore due care, and attention should be given to the writing of this section. In the writing process of the ‘Material and Methods’ section, all achievements performed throughout the study period should be dealt with in consideration of certain criteria in a specific sequence. Since as a globally anticipated viewpoint, ‘Materials and Methods’ section can be written quite easily, it has been indicated that if difficulties are encountered in writing a manuscript, then one should start writing from this section. In writing this section, study design describing the type of the article, study subjects to be investigated, methods, and procedures of measurements should be provided under four main headings. [ 1 , 2 ] Accordingly, in brief, we can emphasize the importance of providing clear-cut, adequate, and detailed information in the ‘Materials and Methods’ section to the scientists who will read this scientific article. Meeting these criteria carries great importance with respect to the evaluation of reliability of the investigation by the readers, and reviewers, and also informing them about procedural method, design, data collection, and assessment methods of the investigation, Priorly, as is the case in all scientific investigations, one should be reminded about the importance, and indispensability of compliance with certain standard writing rules. Accordingly, rules of grammar should be obeyed, and if possible passive voice of simple past tense should be used. Related to these rules, use of verbs ‘investigated’, ‘evaluated’ or ‘performed’ will be appropriate. Recently, expressions showing the ownership of the investigation as ‘we performed’, ‘we evaluated’, ‘we implemented’ have taken priority. Since the important point is communication of the message contained in the scientific study, the message should be clearly comprehensible. While ensuring clarity of the message, use of flourishing, and irrelevant sentences should be avoided. [ 1 , 3 ] According to another approach, since our article will be read by professionals of other disciplines, it is important to comply with certain rules of writing. To that end, standard units of measurements, and international abbreviations should be used. Abbreviations should be explained within parentheses at their first mention in the manuscript. For instance let’s analyze the following sentence” The patients were evaluated with detailed medical history, physical examination, complete urinalysis, PSA, and urinary system ultrasound” The abbreviation PSA is very well known by the urologist. However we shouldn’t forget that this article will be read by the professionals in other medical disciplines. Similarly this sentence should not be written as: “The patients were evaluated with detailed medical history, physical examination, complete urinalysis PSA (prostate-specific antigen), and urinary system ultrasound.” Indeed the abbreviation should follow the explanation of this abbreviation. Then the appropriate expression of the sentence should be. “The patients were evaluated with detailed medical history, physical examination, complete urinalysis, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and urinary system ultrasound.”

In addition to the abovementioned information, in the beginning paragraphs of ‘Materials and Methods’ section of a clinical study the answers to the following questions should be absolutely provided:

• The beginning, and termination dates of the study period.
• Number of subjects/patients/experimental animals etc. enrolled in the study,
• Has the approval of the ethics committee been obtained?
• Study design (prospective, retrospective or other). [ 1 , 2 , 4 – 7 ]

Still additional features of the study design (cross-sectional) should be indicated. Apart from this, other types of study designs (randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled or double-blind, parallel control etc.) should be revealed.

The heading of the section “Materials and Methods” can be changed to “Patients and the Method” in accordance with writing rules of the journal in question. Indication of starting, and termination dates of a clinical study will facilitate scientific interpretation of the article. Accordingly, outcomes obtained during development phase of a newly implemented method might be considered differently from those acquired during conventional use of this method. Besides, incidence of the diseases, and number of affected people might vary under the impact of social fluctuations, and environmental factors. Therefore with this justification study period should be specified. Number of cases included in the study should be absolutely indicated in the ‘Materials and Methods’ section. It will be appropriate to determine study population after consultation to a statistician-and if required-following “power analysis” Accordingly, the need for a control group will be indicated based on the study design. Nowadays, as a requirement of patient rights, obtainment of approval from ethics committee should be indicated with its registration number. In addition, acquirement of informed consent forms from patients should be indicated. Ethics Committee approval should be obtained in prospective studies performed with study drugs. Otherwise in case of occurrence of adverse effects, it should be acknowledged that in compliance with Article #90 of the Turkish Criminal Law, a 3-year prison sentence is given to the guilty parties. [ 8 ] Since issues related to the Ethics Committee are the subject of another manuscript, they won’t be handled herein.

The following paragraph exemplifies clearly the aforementioned arguments: “After approval of the local ethics committee (BADK-22), informed consent forms from the patients were obtained, and a total of 176 cases with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) were retrospectively evaluated between January 2011, and December 2012.” In a prospectively designed study, methods used to communicate with the cases including face-to-face interviews, phone calls and/or e-mail should be indicated. [ 1 , 2 ] Each paragraph or subheading in the ‘Materials and Methods’ section should be in accordance with the related ones in the ‘Results’ section. In other words, the sequence of paragraphs, and subheadings in the ‘Results’ section should be the same in the ‘Materials and Methods’ section.

As a next step, names of the groups, and distribution of the cases in these groups should be indicated. For instance: the statement “Cases were divided into 3 groups based on their LUTS scores as. Groups 1 (0–9; n=91), 2 (10–18; n=66), and 3 (≥19; n=20)” clearly delineates the scope of the study at baseline.. In the ‘Materials and Methods’ section the number of study subjects should be absolutely documented. Herein, after assignment of names to groups, in the rest of the manuscript, these names should be used. For example instead of saying: “Mean ages of the cases with LUTS scores between 0–9, 10–18, and ≥19 were determined to be 63.2±2.1, 62.8±4.5, and 65.7±3.9 years, respectively” it will be more comprehensible to use the expression: “Mean ages of the Groups 1, 2, and 3 were specified as 63.2±2.1, 62.8±4.5, and 65.7±3.9 years.” (p=0.478). Expressions indicated in the ‘Materials and Methods’ section should not be repeated in the “Results” section. Thus, errors of repetition will be precluded. Following the abovementioned information, the evaluation method of the cases enrolled in the study should be indicated. Hence, results of medical history, physical examination, and if performed laboratory or radiological evaluations-in that order-should be indicated. The application of survey study-if any-should be investigated, and documented. Therefore, the following sentences encompass all the information stated above: “The cases were evaluated with detailed medical history, physical examination, measurements of serum follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), testosterone (T) levels, complete urinalysis, urinary flow rate, direct urinary system roentgenograms, urinary system ultrasound, and if required cyctoscopy. Lower urinary system complaints, and erectile dysfunction were evaluated using International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and International Erectile Function Scale (IIEF), respectively.” Apparently, questionnaire forms were used in the above-cited study. However, methods used for the evaluation of questionnaire forms, and significance of the results obtained, and if possible, the first performer of this survey should be written with accompanying references. In relation to the abovementioned questionnaires the following statements constitute standard expressions for the ‘Materials and Methods’ section: “International Prostate Symptom Score (IPPS) was used in the determination of the severity of prostatic symptoms. IPSS used to determine the severity of the disease, evaluate treatment response, and ascertain the symptomatic progression, is the most optimal scoring system recommended by European Association of Urology (EAU) which classifies the severity of the disease based on IPSS scores as mild (0–7), moderate (8–19), and severe symptomatic (20–35) disease. In the evaluation of sexual function International Erectile Function Scale (IIEF) was used. IIEF is one of the most prevalently used form for the patients who consulted for the complaints of sexual dysfunction Based on IIEF scores, the severity of the disease was classified as severe (1–10), moderate (11–16), mild to moderate (17–21), mild (22–25), and no ED (26–30).”

Whether the institutions of the authors working for should be written in the ‘Materials and Methods’ section can be a subject of debate, generally viewpoints favour provision of this information. However, in compliance with their writing rules, some journals do not favour open-label studies where name of the study site is indicated, and this principle is communicated to the author during editorial evaluation Besides, in the ‘Materials and Methods’ section, the brand of the study object, and its country of origin should be indicated. (ie. if radiological methods are used, then the brand of radiological equipment, and its manufacturing country should be specified. In a study entitled ‘The Impact of Computed Tomography in the Prediction of Post-Radical Nephrectomy Stage in Renal Tumours’ since the main topic of the study is computed tomography, the specifications of the equipment used should be explicitely indicated. On the other hand, the details of the medical method which can effect the outcomes of the study should be also recorded. Accordingly, the methods applied for percutaneous nephrolithotomy, ureterorenoscopy, varicocelectomy, transurethral prostatectomy, radical prostatectomy (perineal, open, laparoscopic or robotic should be absolutely indicated. Then inclusion, and exclusion criteria, and if used control group, and its characteristics should be documented. Thus the following paragraph about exclusion criteria will be appropriate: Patients with a history of neurogenic bladder, prostatic or abdominal operation, and transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (within the previous 6 months), those aged <40 or >70 years, individuals with a peak urine flow rate below 10 ml/sec, and residual urine more than 150 cc were not included in the study.” [ 1 – 3 , 9 ]

Some diseases mentioned in the “Materials and Methods” section require special monitorization procedures. In these cases the procedure of monitorization should be documented for the sake of the validity of the study in question. Accordingly, in conditions such as “nephrectomy, prostatectomy, orchidectomy, pyeloplasty, varicocelectomy, drug therapies, penile prosthesis, and urethral stricture” clinical follow-up protocols should be provided.

The abovementioned rules, and recommendations are most frequently valid for a clinical study, and some points indicated in experimental studies should be also considered. Types, weights, gender, and number of the animals used in animal studies should be absolutely specified. Besides condition of evaluation of experimental animals should be noted. Then as is the case with clinical studies, approval of the ethics committee should be obtained, and documented. Accordingly, the beginning paragraphs of the ‘Materials and Methods’ can be expressed as follows:

“In the study, 40 Wistar-Albino 6-month-old rats each weighing 350–400 g were used. After approval of the ethics committee (HADYEK-41) the study was performed within the frame of rules specified by the National Institute for animal experiments. The rats were divided into 3 groups. Hence, Group 1 (n=7) was accepted as the control group. The rats subjected to partial ureteral obstruction with or without oral carvedilol therapy at daily doses of 2 mg/kg maintained for 7 days constituted Groups 3 (n=8), and 2 (n=8), respectively. Each group of 4 rats was housed in standard cages with an area of 40×60 cm. The animals were fed with standard 8 mm food pellets, and fresh daily tap water. The rats were kept in the cages under 12 hours of light, and 12 hours of dark. Ambient temperature, and humidity were set at 22±2°C, and 50±10%, respectively.”

Herein, the method, and agent of anesthesia used (local or general anesthesia) in surgical procedures, and then the experimental method applied should be clearly indicated. For example the following sentences explain our abovementioned arguments; “All surgical procedures were performed under xylazine-ketamine anesthesia. In all groups, ureters were approached through midline abdominal incision. In Group 1, ureters were manipulated without causing obstruction. Results of biochemical, and pathological evaluations performed in Group 1 were considered as baseline values.”

“Through a midline abdominal incision partial ureteral obstruction was achieved by embedding two-thirds of the distal part of the left ureter into psoas muscle using 4/0 silk sutures as described formerly by Wen et al. [ 10 ] ( Figure 1 ). [ 11 ] All rats were subjected to left nephrectomies at the end of the experimental study.” As formulated by the above paragraph, if the method used is not widely utilized, then the first researcher who describes the method should be indicated with relevant references. One or more than one figures with a good resolution, and easily comprehensible legends should be also included in the explanation of the experimental model. For very prevalently used experimental models as torsion models cited in the “Materials and Methods” section, there is no need to include figures in the manuscript.

Partial ureteral obstruction model [ 11 ]

Appropriate signs, and marks placed on the figure will facilitate comprehension of the legends ( Figure 2 ).

Ureteral segments (black arrows) seen in a rat partial ureteral obstruction model [ 11 ]

The signs used will also improve intelligibility of the target. The figures should be indicated within parentheses in their first mention in the “Materials and Methods” section. Headings and as a prevalent convention legends of the figures should be indicated at the end of the manuscript.

If a different method is used in the study, this should be explained in detail. For instance, in a study where the effect of smoking on testes was investigated, the method, and the applicator used to expose rats to cigarette smoke should be indicated in the ‘Methods’ section following classical description. Relevant to the study in question, the following paragraph explaining the study method should be written: “A glass chamber with dimensions of 75 × 50 × 50 cm was prepared, and divided into 4 compartments with wire fences. The rats in the 2., and 4. cages were placed in these compartments. Each compartment contained 4 rats. Cigarette smoke was produced using one cigarette per hour, and smoke coming from the tip, and the filter of the lighted cigarette was pumped into the gas chamber with a pneumatic motor. The rats were exposed to smoke of 6 cigarettes for 6 hours. The compartments of the rats were changed every day so as to achieve balanced exposure of the rats to cigarette smoke.” [ 12 ]

Meanwhile, chemical names, doses, and routes of administration of the substances used in experimental studies should be indicated. If the substance used is a solution or an antibody, then manufacturing firm, and its country should be indicated in parenthesis. This approach can be exemplified as “Animals used in experiments were randomized into 4 groups of 8 animals. Each group was housed in 2 cages each containing 4 animals. The first group did not undergo any additional procedure (Group 1). The second group was exposed to cigarette smoke (Group 2). The third (Group 3), and the fourth (Group 4) groups received daily intraperitoneal injectable doses of 10 mg/kg resveratrol (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA). The Group 4 was also exposed to cigarette smoke. [ 12 ]

After all of these procedures, method, and analytical procedure of histopathological examination used should be described-if possible-by a pathologist Similarly, biochemical method used should be referenced, and written by the department of clinical chemistry. It can be inferred that each division should describe its own method. In other words, histopathological, microbiological, and pharmacological method should be described in detail by respective divisions.

If we summarize all the information stated above, understandably sharing of the scientific knowledge is essential.. Since reproducibility of a study demonstrates the robustness of a study, with the detailed approaches indicated above, reproducibility of our study is provided, and the relevant questions of “How?”, and “How much?” are answered. Besides, since ‘Materials, and Methods’, and ‘Results’ sections will constitute a meaningful whole, explanations of all information related to the data mentioned in the ‘Results’ section should be provided. As an important point not to be forgotten, evaluation or measurement method used for each parameter indicated in the ‘Results’ section should be expounded in the “Materials and Methods” section. For example if you used an expression in the” Results” section like “median body mass index (BMI) of the patients was 27.42 kg/m 2 ”, then you should beforehand indicate that comparative evaluation of BMIs will be done in the “Materials and Methods” section. In addition, the description, and significance of the values expressed in the “Results” section should be indicated in the “Materials and Methods” section. In other words, it should be stated that the patients were evaluated based on their BMIs as normal (18–24.9 kg/m 2 ), overweight (25 kg/m 2 –40 kg/m 2 ), and morbid obesity (>40 kg/m 2 ). If you encounter difficulties in writing “Materials and Methods” section, also a valid approach for other sections, firstly simple headings can be written, then you can go into details. In brief, for every parameter, the reader should get clear-cut answers to the questions such as “How did they evaluate this parameter, and which criteria were used?”. [ 1 , 3 , 13 – 15 ]

The last paragraph of the ‘Materials, and Methods’ section should naturally involve statistical evaluations. This section should be written by statisticians. Accordingly, the preferred statistical method, and the justifications for this preference should be indicated. In conventional statistical evaluations, provision of details is not required. In information indicated above, the statement “For statistical analysis, ANOVA test, chi-square test, T test, Kruskal-Wallis test have been used.” is not required very much. Instead, more appropriate expression will be a statement indicating that recommendations of a knowledgeable, and an experienced statistician were taken into consideration or advanced statistical information was reflected on the statistical evaluations as follows: “Chi-square tests were used in intergroup comparisons of categorical variables, and categorical variables were expressed as numbers, and percentages. In comparisons between LUTS, and ED as for age, independent two samples t-test was used. In the evaluation of the factors effective on erectile dysfunction multivariate logistic regresssion test was used. P values lower than 0.05 were considered as statistically significant The calculations were performed using a statistical package program (PASW v18, SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL).” Herein, the type of statistical package used for statistical methods should be emphasized.

How to write materials and method section in scientific writing

Easiest. That's what has been said about the materials and methods section in thesis.

Is it really that easy?

Only if you do it right.

You may think that you don't have to think a lot when you write this section.

You may think that it is just a matter of compiling all materials that you used in your research.

You may think you just have to write all the methods that you used in your research.

Sounds simple right?

Not really.

Let's have a look at the nitty-gritty of materials and methods.

So in this blog post, I will cover these commonly asked questions on materials and methods:

What is the materials and method section?

What is the purpose of materials and methods, why is the material and method section important.

What tense is used in the materials and method section?

What is the difference between materials and methodology in the thesis and methodology in the manuscript?

How do you write a MATERIALS section for a dissertation/thesis?

How do you write a good method section for a dissertation/thesis.

The materials are simply the raw materials, tools, subject and/or important chemicals used in your experiments. Basically, it is the important details of WHAT you use in your research.  

The methods section is HOW you conduct the research. Here, you describe all the steps or procedures you've done in order to achieve the research objectives, including the experimental design and data analysis.

 To provide a precise description of (1) WHAT are used in the experiments, and (2) WHAT experiments are used and HOW the experiments are conducted to ensure you meet the research objectives.

 To ensure the credibility of your research. In other words, whatever materials/chemicals and procedures that you choose should be suitable and valid to answer your research questions.

To ensure the reproducibility of your methods so that other research may repeat your research.

To guide your readers on how the research is conducted and organized to tell a compelling story of your research. You may wonder what guidance has to do with your writing. I'll share with you more after this.

What tense is used in materials and method section?

Simple past tense because you're telling readers what you have done in the past. Normally, passive voice is used to focus on the action, not on the doer.

What is the difference between materials and methodology in the thesis and in the manuscript?

The methodology in the thesis is very detailed and thorough.

Depending on the thesis format of your university, you may add pictures or illustrations in flow charts to further describe or simplify your methods.

Or else, these illustrations can be placed in your appendices if your readers need further reference.  

Methodology in a manuscript is simpler but with an emphasis on the reference so that the readers can refer to the original source.

It can be so simple like, "Method A was carried out based on the method by Clark, Teo and Li (2007)". This is practiced because a manuscript often has word limits.

However, if your sample preparations or method has not been cited anywhere and is newly developed, then by all means, please write it in detail.

In this part, you provide the details of your samples. Depending on your samples, the details should be thorough enough to describe your samples. If it’s animals or plants, provide the scientific name too. You can refer to previous thesis or publications closely related to your research for a better understanding. The examples are as below:

Provide where samples are purchased/obtained/harvested

Animals – age, after weaning, maturity

Plants – Maturity stage

Processed food – Provide brand, place of manufacture

You also capture the important chemicals used in your research. This information will provide accurate referrals for other researchers to repeat the experiments. Examples of information needed for chemicals:

Place of manufacture

Food or chemical grade

Molarity of chemicals

Concentration and activity of enzymes

1) Organization

The method needs to be organized in a way that best tells your research story in the results and discussion. That means, your results and discussion should be in sync with the order of your written methodology.

 Example of an organized method:

Preparation of sample

Experimental Design

Chemical properties

Physical properties

Thermal properties

Morphological property

Statistical Analysis

This simple example shows that the material section was written first, followed by the sample preparation and experimental design. Then, the experiments were properly categorized in chemical, physical and thermal properties; and lastly morphological property.

In this case, I prefer to organize the chemical section first because, in my discussion, I find it easier to relate the chemical properties with the physical and thermal properties.

Also, the physical properties are best placed before morphological properties because normally, the physical properties (and chemical properties for that matter) can be the explanation of why the morphology of the sample behaves in a certain way.

If I organize the morphological property after sample preparation, I will have a hard time explaining and linking the other results later in my discussion. See how important this is?

The best way is to look at examples in related journals or thesis; write it and get your supervisor's feedback.

2) Get your experimental design right

How to design a good experimental design you ask? This should be solved in your proposal stage, but I do want to highlight this a bit because it is super important.

 If you need to design experiments yourself, refer to the previous thesis or well-published manuscripts.

 Then, get feedback from your supervisor to check if your study covers the needed scopes and is designed correctly.

 Finally, consult the statisticians for confirmation and get additional advice on how to further improve your experimental design.

 One of the common mistakes that I see from students is that the experimental design is written without mentioning the control. This is a big NO-NO. You need control as a baseline to compare your samples. Without control, your experiment design is doomed.

 Another common mistake is to have inconsistent variables. For example:

Group A: Control sample

Group B: Sample irradiated at 8 kGy for 10 minutes

Group C: Sample irradiated at 20 kGy for 5 minutes

Group D: Sample irradiated at 1000 kGy for 1 minute

Unless you have a really good explanation of why the irradiation power and exposure time differed so much, this experimental design is sooooo wrong.

 An improvised version of the experimental design would be:

Group B: Sample irradiated at 8 kGy for 2 minutes

Group C: Sample irradiated at 8 kGy for 4 minutes

Group D: Sample irradiated at 8 kGy for 6 minutes

OR, if the design needs to be more thorough and requires a range of irradiation variable, the improvised version would be:

Group E: Sample irradiated at 16 kGy for 2 minutes

Group F: Sample irradiated at 16 kGy for 4 minutes

Group G: Sample irradiated at 16 kGy for 6 minutes

Group H: Sample irradiated at 24 kGy for 2 minutes

Group I: Sample irradiated at 24 kGy for 4 minutes

Group J: Sample irradiated at 24 kGy for 6 minutes

That's much better! I bet it can still be improvised.

 The question now is; how do you write your experimental design in a good way? Should it be in a table? Should it be in paragraphs?

The answer is, it depends on your field. Also, try to write in the easiest form for the readers to understand. You can do multiple drafts of different versions to get a good feel of what’s best for your readers. Then, get feedback.

3) Determine your abbreviations for samples wisely

 If your samples have long names, treatments or whatever categories, make sure to create abbreviations that are easy for your readers to identify in your thesis.

 Some experimental design has multifactorial designs that are so complicated that it confuses readers, especially if you give a loooonnngggg gibberish abbreviation.

 So, please, please, please...... help your readers to easily follow your story by giving simple abbreviations.

For example, let say you have 7 groups of rats (let's name it Sprague Dawley rats) treated with a new herb (let's name it QYZRS457, just for the sake of making it look complicated) to lower blood sugar level. So you might have your experimental design to be something like this:

Group 1: Control healthy Sprague Dawley rats untreated

Group 2: Control diabetic Sprague Dawley rats untreated

Group 3: Control diabetic Sprague Dawley rats treated with Metformin

Group 4: Healthy Sprague Dawley rats given herb QYZRS457 at 2%

Group 5: Healthy Sprague Dawley rats given herb QYZRS457 at 4%

Group 6: Diabetic Sprague Dawley rats given herb QYZRS457 at 2%

Group 7: Diabetic Sprague Dawley rats given herb QYZRS457 at 4%

Bad abbreviation for the 7 groups may look something like this:

Group 1: “ CHSDRU” (As in Control Healthy Sprague Dawley Rats Untreated )

Group 2: “ CDSDRU “(As in Control Diabetic Sprague Dawley Rats Untreated )

Group 3: “ CDSDRM” (As in Control Diabetic Sprague Dawley Rats given Metformin )

Group 4: “ HSDRQYZRS457-2%” (As in Healthy Sprague Dawley rats given QYZRS457 at 2% )

Group 5: “ HSDRQYZRS457-4%” (As in Healthy Sprague Dawley rats given QYZRS457 at 4% )

Group 6: “ DSDRQYZRS457-2%” (As in Diabetic Sprague Dawley rats given QYZRS457 at 2% )

Group 7: “ DSDRQYZRS457-4%” (As in Diabetic Sprague Dawley rats given QYZRS457 at 4% )

Notice how confusing the abbreviations are! These abbreviations are created based on the first letter of bolded words. To make it worst, groups 4, 5, 6 and 7 have the abbreviations with the full code of the new herb!

You may think that I made up a ridiculous example. But believe me when I tell you it exists. I've seen it and I'm also the living proof that made this mistake before.

Now, let's try to make it simpler and better.

Group 1: “ CH” (As in Control Healthy Sprague Dawley Rats Untreated )

Group 2: “ CD” (As in Control Diabetic Sprague Dawley Rats Untreated )

Group 3: “ CDM” (As in Control Diabetic Sprague Dawley Rats given Metformin )

Group 4: “ H2” (As in Healthy Sprague Dawley rats given QYZRS457 at 2% )

Group 5: “ H4” (As in Healthy Sprague Dawley rats given QYZRS457 at 4% )

Group 6: “ D2” (As in Diabetic Sprague Dawley rats given QYZRS457 at 2% )

Group 7: “ D4” (As in Diabetic Sprague Dawley rats given QYZRS457 at 4% )

Now the abbreviations are created based on the first words of the relevant keywords. I omitted "Sprague Dawley rats" because all of the subjects are known to be rats. I also omitted "untreated" because based on common sense, control will be untreated. 

 But I included the first word of "Metformin" in group 3 to differentiate the treated control group with a common drug. Then, I omitted "QYZRS457" because it will definitely be mentioned in the details of materials as the plant used. After all, the plant is the main cast of my research story. Finally, I included the concentrations in the abbreviation to differ the groups 4, 5, 6 and 7.

See if you can make a better abbreviation than this. I bet there are better options.

If your samples have short or simple common names, I suggest avoiding using abbreviations altogether and just stick to the word. It definitely will be less hassle for the readers.

4) Give the details in your method modifications

 This is a common flaw made in thesis and manuscripts.

 Often, modified methods will be written like this, "Method Z was carried out according to Yi et al. (2009) with a slight modification."

 Is it wrong? No, but it is not accurate enough. 

 The best way to write it is to state what step/procedure/equipment/setting modified so that people know the changes. You might want to justify the reason why it is being modified too.

 For example, "Method Z was carried out according to Yi et al. (2009) with a slight modification to the radiation power where 20 kGy was used instead of 25 kGy. The modification was done because the starch colour remained unchanged at 20 kGy as opposed to radiation power of 25kGy, where starch colour drastically changed to dark yellow."

Now the modifications are clear.

 This is very crucial, especially if other researchers want to use the same method you've conducted.

5) Provide the details of your method

Write ALL the details of your method before the experiment is conducted. Then, double-check during and after the experiment. Finally, put it in a written form.

Examples are as below:

duration of study

temperature

oscillation

replicates used

size of population/samples

6) Highlight critical steps or precaution

My PhD work includes developing a method. After 2 years of multiple experiments, nothing worked. I almost gave up.

So, my supervisor asked his post-doc to help me out.

She did everything exactly the same as I did, except for one small step.

One of the steps requires the cooling of samples from 100°C to 50°C. I kept doing shock cooling by placing the hot samples into room temperature tap water in a beaker, then I placed the cooled sample into a 50°C water bath. Turns out, the shock cooling was the reason why I did not get the expected result.

The post-doc discovered that the cooling step to cool the sample from 100°C to 50°C by placing the hot sample into a 50°C water bath was the best procedure to get the expected result.

So, please learn from my mistake. I totally understand how important to highlight the crucial steps or precautions because even the tiniest, unexpected step may change the results.

7) Provide the references

 This one may sound preeeettty obvious.

 BUT, this is among the many mistakes my students made. If you don't write the references, it's as close as claiming the method as yours. Basically, it's plagiarism.

 So, unless you develop your own method, please please make notes of your references for all the methods that you referred to and write it according to the format of your thesis.

 I know that the referencing tool is pretty handy nowadays but always double-check to see if the format is right and the references in the text tallies with your list of references.

8) Provide the model, brand, manufacturer and the place manufactured for your main equipment/instrument used

 As the title indicates, the main equipment or instruments should have all those details. I suggest that you have a table that compiles all the information so you can easily refer to it later.

9) Mind your units

 As simple as it may seem, missing units or the wrong unit is what I always emphasize on my students.

 In food processing research, students tend to use cups instead of grams or mL. And this might be the case for other fields too.

 So always check whether your units are the valid ones. Always use SI units, unless there’s a special unit for the parameter.

10) Details of statistical analysis

Provide the statistical analysis software and the version used. Also, specify the type of analysis (ex: t-test, 2-way ANOVA, etc.) and the setting (ex: p-value). Your number of samples generally taken for each analysis (unless mentioned otherwise for some methods) is good to specify. 

Looks easy right?

If. Done. Right.

Just as a recap, these are the things that you should be alert of when you’re writing the materials and methods section in scientific writing:

Provide the details of your materials and chemicals

Organize your methodology that bests tell your discussion.

Get your experimental design right

Determine your abbreviations for samples wisely

Give the details in your method modifications

Provide the details of your method

Highlight critical steps or precaution

Provide the model, brand, manufacturer and the place manufactured for your main equipment/instrument used

Mind your units

Details of statistical analysis

Let the readers know you care for them.

So, always write with your readers in mind!

Do you have other tips on how to write a good materials and methods section? Or any burning questions to ask? Feel free to share or ask in the comment section.

Radhiah Shukri

Generate accurate APA citations for free

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

How to Write an APA Methods Section | With Examples

Published on February 5, 2021 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on June 22, 2023.

The methods section of an APA style paper is where you report in detail how you performed your study. Research papers in the social and natural sciences often follow APA style. This article focuses on reporting quantitative research methods .

In your APA methods section, you should report enough information to understand and replicate your study, including detailed information on the sample , measures, and procedures used.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Structuring an apa methods section.

Participants

Example of an APA methods section

Other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about writing an apa methods section.

The main heading of “Methods” should be centered, boldfaced, and capitalized. Subheadings within this section are left-aligned, boldfaced, and in title case. You can also add lower level headings within these subsections, as long as they follow APA heading styles .

To structure your methods section, you can use the subheadings of “Participants,” “Materials,” and “Procedures.” These headings are not mandatory—aim to organize your methods section using subheadings that make sense for your specific study.

Note that not all of these topics will necessarily be relevant for your study. For example, if you didn’t need to consider outlier removal or ways of assigning participants to different conditions, you don’t have to report these steps.

The APA also provides specific reporting guidelines for different types of research design. These tell you exactly what you need to report for longitudinal designs , replication studies, experimental designs , and so on. If your study uses a combination design, consult APA guidelines for mixed methods studies.

Detailed descriptions of procedures that don’t fit into your main text can be placed in supplemental materials (for example, the exact instructions and tasks given to participants, the full analytical strategy including software code, or additional figures and tables).

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

• Missing commas and periods
• Incorrect usage of “et al.”
• Ampersands (&) in narrative citations
• Missing reference entries

Begin the methods section by reporting sample characteristics, sampling procedures, and the sample size.

Participant or subject characteristics

When discussing people who participate in research, descriptive terms like “participants,” “subjects” and “respondents” can be used. For non-human animal research, “subjects” is more appropriate.

Specify all relevant demographic characteristics of your participants. This may include their age, sex, ethnic or racial group, gender identity, education level, and socioeconomic status. Depending on your study topic, other characteristics like educational or immigration status or language preference may also be relevant.

Be sure to report these characteristics as precisely as possible. This helps the reader understand how far your results may be generalized to other people.

The APA guidelines emphasize writing about participants using bias-free language , so it’s necessary to use inclusive and appropriate terms.

Sampling procedures

Outline how the participants were selected and all inclusion and exclusion criteria applied. Appropriately identify the sampling procedure used. For example, you should only label a sample as random  if you had access to every member of the relevant population.

Of all the people invited to participate in your study, note the percentage that actually did (if you have this data). Additionally, report whether participants were self-selected, either by themselves or by their institutions (e.g., schools may submit student data for research purposes).

Identify any compensation (e.g., course credits or money) that was provided to participants, and mention any institutional review board approvals and ethical standards followed.

Sample size and power

Detail the sample size (per condition) and statistical power that you hoped to achieve, as well as any analyses you performed to determine these numbers.

It’s important to show that your study had enough statistical power to find effects if there were any to be found.

Additionally, state whether your final sample differed from the intended sample. Your interpretations of the study outcomes should be based only on your final sample rather than your intended sample.

Write up the tools and techniques that you used to measure relevant variables. Be as thorough as possible for a complete picture of your techniques.

Primary and secondary measures

Define the primary and secondary outcome measures that will help you answer your primary and secondary research questions.

Specify all instruments used in gathering these measurements and the construct that they measure. These instruments may include hardware, software, or tests, scales, and inventories.

• To cite hardware, indicate the model number and manufacturer.
• To cite common software (e.g., Qualtrics), state the full name along with the version number or the website URL .
• To cite tests, scales or inventories, reference its manual or the article it was published in. It’s also helpful to state the number of items and provide one or two example items.

Make sure to report the settings of (e.g., screen resolution) any specialized apparatus used.

For each instrument used, report measures of the following:

• Reliability : how consistently the method measures something, in terms of internal consistency or test-retest reliability.
• Validity : how precisely the method measures something, in terms of construct validity  or criterion validity .

Giving an example item or two for tests, questionnaires , and interviews is also helpful.

Describe any covariates—these are any additional variables that may explain or predict the outcomes.

Quality of measurements

Review all methods you used to assure the quality of your measurements.

These may include:

• training researchers to collect data reliably,
• using multiple people to assess (e.g., observe or code) the data,
• translation and back-translation of research materials,
• using pilot studies to test your materials on unrelated samples.

For data that’s subjectively coded (for example, classifying open-ended responses), report interrater reliability scores. This tells the reader how similarly each response was rated by multiple raters.

Report all of the procedures applied for administering the study, processing the data, and for planned data analyses.

Data collection methods and research design

Data collection methods refers to the general mode of the instruments: surveys, interviews, observations, focus groups, neuroimaging, cognitive tests, and so on. Summarize exactly how you collected the necessary data.

Describe all procedures you applied in administering surveys, tests, physical recordings, or imaging devices, with enough detail so that someone else can replicate your techniques. If your procedures are very complicated and require long descriptions (e.g., in neuroimaging studies), place these details in supplementary materials.

To report research design, note your overall framework for data collection and analysis. State whether you used an experimental, quasi-experimental, descriptive (observational), correlational, and/or longitudinal design. Also note whether a between-subjects or a within-subjects design was used.

For multi-group studies, report the following design and procedural details as well:

• how participants were assigned to different conditions (e.g., randomization),
• instructions given to the participants in each group,
• interventions for each group,
• the setting and length of each session(s).

Describe whether any masking was used to hide the condition assignment (e.g., placebo or medication condition) from participants or research administrators. Using masking in a multi-group study ensures internal validity by reducing research bias . Explain how this masking was applied and whether its effectiveness was assessed.

Participants were randomly assigned to a control or experimental condition. The survey was administered using Qualtrics (https://www.qualtrics.com). To begin, all participants were given the AAI and a demographics questionnaire to complete, followed by an unrelated filler task. In the control condition , participants completed a short general knowledge test immediately after the filler task. In the experimental condition, participants were asked to visualize themselves taking the test for 3 minutes before they actually did. For more details on the exact instructions and tasks given, see supplementary materials.

Data diagnostics

Outline all steps taken to scrutinize or process the data after collection.

This includes the following:

• Procedures for identifying and removing outliers
• Data transformations to normalize distributions
• Compensation strategies for overcoming missing values

To ensure high validity, you should provide enough detail for your reader to understand how and why you processed or transformed your raw data in these specific ways.

Analytic strategies

The methods section is also where you describe your statistical analysis procedures, but not their outcomes. Their outcomes are reported in the results section.

These procedures should be stated for all primary, secondary, and exploratory hypotheses. While primary and secondary hypotheses are based on a theoretical framework or past studies, exploratory hypotheses are guided by the data you’ve just collected.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

This annotated example reports methods for a descriptive correlational survey on the relationship between religiosity and trust in science in the US. Hover over each part for explanation of what is included.

The sample included 879 adults aged between 18 and 28. More than half of the participants were women (56%), and all participants had completed at least 12 years of education. Ethics approval was obtained from the university board before recruitment began. Participants were recruited online through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk; www.mturk.com). We selected for a geographically diverse sample within the Midwest of the US through an initial screening survey. Participants were paid USD $5 upon completion of the study.

A sample size of at least 783 was deemed necessary for detecting a correlation coefficient of ±.1, with a power level of 80% and a significance level of .05, using a sample size calculator (www.sample-size.net/correlation-sample-size/).

The primary outcome measures were the levels of religiosity and trust in science. Religiosity refers to involvement and belief in religious traditions, while trust in science represents confidence in scientists and scientific research outcomes. The secondary outcome measures were gender and parental education levels of participants and whether these characteristics predicted religiosity levels.

Religiosity

Religiosity was measured using the Centrality of Religiosity scale (Huber, 2003). The Likert scale is made up of 15 questions with five subscales of ideology, experience, intellect, public practice, and private practice. An example item is “How often do you experience situations in which you have the feeling that God or something divine intervenes in your life?” Participants were asked to indicate frequency of occurrence by selecting a response ranging from 1 (very often) to 5 (never). The internal consistency of the instrument is .83 (Huber & Huber, 2012).

Trust in Science

Trust in science was assessed using the General Trust in Science index (McCright, Dentzman, Charters & Dietz, 2013). Four Likert scale items were assessed on a scale from 1 (completely distrust) to 5 (completely trust). An example question asks “How much do you distrust or trust scientists to create knowledge that is unbiased and accurate?” Internal consistency was .8.

Potential participants were invited to participate in the survey online using Qualtrics (www.qualtrics.com). The survey consisted of multiple choice questions regarding demographic characteristics, the Centrality of Religiosity scale, an unrelated filler anagram task, and finally the General Trust in Science index. The filler task was included to avoid priming or demand characteristics, and an attention check was embedded within the religiosity scale. For full instructions and details of tasks, see supplementary materials.

For this correlational study , we assessed our primary hypothesis of a relationship between religiosity and trust in science using Pearson moment correlation coefficient. The statistical significance of the correlation coefficient was assessed using a t test. To test our secondary hypothesis of parental education levels and gender as predictors of religiosity, multiple linear regression analysis was used.

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

• Normal distribution
• Measures of central tendency
• Chi square tests
• Confidence interval
• Quartiles & Quantiles

Methodology

• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Thematic analysis
• Cohort study
• Peer review
• Ethnography

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Conformity bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Availability heuristic
• Attrition bias
• Social desirability bias

In your APA methods section , you should report detailed information on the participants, materials, and procedures used.

• Describe all relevant participant or subject characteristics, the sampling procedures used and the sample size and power .
• Define all primary and secondary measures and discuss the quality of measurements.
• Specify the data collection methods, the research design and data analysis strategy, including any steps taken to transform the data and statistical analyses.

You should report methods using the past tense , even if you haven’t completed your study at the time of writing. That’s because the methods section is intended to describe completed actions or research.

In a scientific paper, the methodology always comes after the introduction and before the results , discussion and conclusion . The same basic structure also applies to a thesis, dissertation , or research proposal .

Depending on the length and type of document, you might also include a literature review or theoretical framework before the methodology.

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. (2023, June 22). How to Write an APA Methods Section | With Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 9, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/apa-style/methods-section/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, how to write an apa results section, apa format for academic papers and essays, apa headings and subheadings, unlimited academic ai-proofreading.

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

Editorial Manager, our manuscript submissions site will be unavailable between 12pm April 5, 2024 and 12pm April 8 2024 (Pacific Standard Time). We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.

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 Your Methods

Ensure understanding, reproducibility and replicability

What should you include in your methods section, and how much detail is appropriate?

Why Methods Matter

The methods section was once the most likely part of a paper to be unfairly abbreviated, overly summarized, or even relegated to hard-to-find sections of a publisher’s website. While some journals may responsibly include more detailed elements of methods in supplementary sections, the movement for increased reproducibility and rigor in science has reinstated the importance of the methods section. Methods are now viewed as a key element in establishing the credibility of the research being reported, alongside the open availability of data and results.

A clear methods section impacts editorial evaluation and readers’ understanding, and is also the backbone of transparency and replicability.

For example, the Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology project set out in 2013 to replicate experiments from 50 high profile cancer papers, but revised their target to 18 papers once they understood how much methodological detail was not contained in the original papers.

What to include in your methods section

What you include in your methods sections depends on what field you are in and what experiments you are performing. However, the general principle in place at the majority of journals is summarized well by the guidelines at PLOS ONE : “The Materials and Methods section should provide enough detail to allow suitably skilled investigators to fully replicate your study. ” The emphases here are deliberate: the methods should enable readers to understand your paper, and replicate your study. However, there is no need to go into the level of detail that a lay-person would require—the focus is on the reader who is also trained in your field, with the suitable skills and knowledge to attempt a replication.

A constant principle of rigorous science

A methods section that enables other researchers to understand and replicate your results is a constant principle of rigorous, transparent, and Open Science. Aim to be thorough, even if a particular journal doesn’t require the same level of detail . Reproducibility is all of our responsibility. You cannot create any problems by exceeding a minimum standard of information. If a journal still has word-limits—either for the overall article or specific sections—and requires some methodological details to be in a supplemental section, that is OK as long as the extra details are searchable and findable .

Imagine replicating your own work, years in the future

As part of PLOS’ presentation on Reproducibility and Open Publishing (part of UCSF’s Reproducibility Series ) we recommend planning the level of detail in your methods section by imagining you are writing for your future self, replicating your own work. When you consider that you might be at a different institution, with different account logins, applications, resources, and access levels—you can help yourself imagine the level of specificity that you yourself would require to redo the exact experiment. Consider:

• Which details would you need to be reminded of? 
• Which cell line, or antibody, or software, or reagent did you use, and does it have a Research Resource ID (RRID) that you can cite?
• Which version of a questionnaire did you use in your survey? 
• Exactly which visual stimulus did you show participants, and is it publicly available? 
• What participants did you decide to exclude? 
• What process did you adjust, during your work? 

Tip: Be sure to capture any changes to your protocols

You yourself would want to know about any adjustments, if you ever replicate the work, so you can surmise that anyone else would want to as well. Even if a necessary adjustment you made was not ideal, transparency is the key to ensuring this is not regarded as an issue in the future. It is far better to transparently convey any non-optimal methods, or methodological constraints, than to conceal them, which could result in reproducibility or ethical issues downstream.

Visual aids for methods help when reading the whole paper

Consider whether a visual representation of your methods could be appropriate or aid understanding your process. A visual reference readers can easily return to, like a flow-diagram, decision-tree, or checklist, can help readers to better understand the complete article, not just the methods section.

Ethical Considerations

In addition to describing what you did, it is just as important to assure readers that you also followed all relevant ethical guidelines when conducting your research. While ethical standards and reporting guidelines are often presented in a separate section of a paper, ensure that your methods and protocols actually follow these guidelines. Read more about ethics .

Existing standards, checklists, guidelines, partners

While the level of detail contained in a methods section should be guided by the universal principles of rigorous science outlined above, various disciplines, fields, and projects have worked hard to design and develop consistent standards, guidelines, and tools to help with reporting all types of experiment. Below, you’ll find some of the key initiatives. Ensure you read the submission guidelines for the specific journal you are submitting to, in order to discover any further journal- or field-specific policies to follow, or initiatives/tools to utilize.

Tip: Keep your paper moving forward by providing the proper paperwork up front

Be sure to check the journal guidelines and provide the necessary documents with your manuscript submission. Collecting the necessary documentation can greatly slow the first round of peer review, or cause delays when you submit your revision.

Randomized Controlled Trials – CONSORT The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) project covers various initiatives intended to prevent the problems of  inadequate reporting of randomized controlled trials. The primary initiative is an evidence-based minimum set of recommendations for reporting randomized trials known as the CONSORT Statement . 

Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses – PRISMA The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses ( PRISMA ) is an evidence-based minimum set of items focusing  on the reporting of  reviews evaluating randomized trials and other types of research.

Research using Animals – ARRIVE The Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments ( ARRIVE ) guidelines encourage maximizing the information reported in research using animals thereby minimizing unnecessary studies. (Original study and proposal , and updated guidelines , in PLOS Biology .) 

Laboratory Protocols Protocols.io has developed a platform specifically for the sharing and updating of laboratory protocols , which are assigned their own DOI and can be linked from methods sections of papers to enhance reproducibility. Contextualize your protocol and improve discovery with an accompanying Lab Protocol article in PLOS ONE .

Consistent reporting of Materials, Design, and Analysis – the MDAR checklist A cross-publisher group of editors and experts have developed, tested, and rolled out a checklist to help establish and harmonize reporting standards in the Life Sciences . The checklist , which is available for use by authors to compile their methods, and editors/reviewers to check methods, establishes a minimum set of requirements in transparent reporting and is adaptable to any discipline within the Life Sciences, by covering a breadth of potentially relevant methodological items and considerations. If you are in the Life Sciences and writing up your methods section, try working through the MDAR checklist and see whether it helps you include all relevant details into your methods, and whether it reminded you of anything you might have missed otherwise.

Summary Writing tips

The main challenge you may find when writing your methods is keeping it readable AND covering all the details needed for reproducibility and replicability. While this is difficult, do not compromise on rigorous standards for credibility!

• Keep in mind future replicability, alongside understanding and readability.
• Follow checklists, and field- and journal-specific guidelines.
• Consider a commitment to rigorous and transparent science a personal responsibility, and not just adhering to journal guidelines.
• Establish whether there are persistent identifiers for any research resources you use that can be specifically cited in your methods section.
• Deposit your laboratory protocols in Protocols.io, establishing a permanent link to them. You can update your protocols later if you improve on them, as can future scientists who follow your protocols.
• Consider visual aids like flow-diagrams, lists, to help with reading other sections of the paper.
• Be specific about all decisions made during the experiments that someone reproducing your work would need to know.

Don’t

• Summarize or abbreviate methods without giving full details in a discoverable supplemental section.
• Presume you will always be able to remember how you performed the experiments, or have access to private or institutional notebooks and resources.
• Attempt to hide constraints or non-optimal decisions you had to make–transparency is the key to ensuring the credibility of your research.
• How to Write a Great Title
• How to Write an Abstract
• How to Report Statistics
• How to Write Discussions and Conclusions
• 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…

LaNts and Laminins

The Hamill lab blog

Materials and Methods sections (full)

Materials and Methods or “Experimental Procedures” should be the easiest part to write of any scientific report, thesis, or dissertation – you know what you did ! That said, in my experience of marking MRes reports and even doctoral theses, there are a lot of common mistakes that can be fixed and simple improvements that can be made to make this important section work more effectively.

Obviously, I am preaching to the converted as you have already clicked on this link! So, I am going to make this as painless as possible. I’ll highlight the important stuff with some examples and then you can bash out your methods sections with confidence.

Structure of this guide :

General comments and big tips first then links to a collection of specific details with examples of commonly used molecular biology techniques. Scroll to the end if you are looking to write a specific section (or via our quick tips page, here )

Big Tip #1 – Keep a good lab book!

This isn’t so much a tip but rather an  absolute requiremen t for working in a lab!!

Usually the lab book is kept for the benefit of others and as a permanent record of your work. However, when it comes to writing methods, the lab book is key. Lack of details and you will struggle, especially if you ignore big tip #3!

PhD student Thanos wrote a blog post recently reviewing some of the electronic lab books that might help you improve your lab books. – available here .

Big tip #2 – Remember the key rules

• Write in prose, no bullet points!
• Write in the past tense throughout
• Write in the third person (don’t use I or we!)
• Use the correct form for units / measurements – (non italics, space between number and unit, no . after the unit. Not sure which units are correct:  ukma-style-guide )
• Include all the details required to perform and interpret your experiment!
• Avoid repetition
• Reference where protocols came from
• Provide supplier information for all reagents
• Include full details of analytical techniques
• Define your statistical approaches
• Big tip #3 – Write your methods as close to the time you are doing your experiments as possible!

Two simple reasons for this

• You will find it easier as you will remember precisely what you have done and not have to solely rely on the quality of your lab book! Surely making things easier is reason enough!
• You need the details , all of them. If you have forgotten to record the batch or clone number of some key reagent it’s much easier to nip down to the fridge and find it than try and work it out later.

• Big tip #4: Use published work for examples – you don’t need to overthink this!
• Big tip #4.1: Cite well. Don’t send your readers down a rabbit hole

For most experiments, what you are doing is very similar or at least heavily based on  something that has been published in the past. So start there! Use those publications to help you! This is especially true when it’s something that your supervisor has published before.

Provide the reference but don’t skip any of the experimental details that the reader would need to interpret the data. Don’t copy directly; carefully check all the details and change anything that needs changed.

As the next generation of writer, you should be doing things better than the generation before – so make sure you remove any ambiguities, tighten up phrasing add experimental specifics that were missed and generally do a better job!

If you are using a reference instead of writing out a part in full, make sure the paper you are referring to contains the whole methods and doesn’t send your reader down a rabbit hole of searching for data. In a thesis, you don’t have space limitations to the same extent so I would expect full details to be included and references there will cover where the original method came from and/or why you chose it.

• Big tip #5 Methods are not the same as a protocol
• Big tip #5.1 Understand the purpose of your materials and methods section and how it differs from results sections.

One of the most common mistakes I have encountered when marking projects is that there is a whole bunch of stuff that comes directly from the protocol but isn’t necessary to be defined in the methods. While the details are important, things like  how the tubes were labelled, which well had which sample in it etc don’t need to be in there unless they actually impact the outcomes. Note that the order you processed the samples  might  be relevant (should be randomised and you should detail what method of randomisation your used!)

Standard techniques don’t need to be expanded. For example you can say “samples were centrifuged at 5000 x g for 5 min” rather than “samples were placed in a centrifuge and balanced then spun in the centrifuge for 5 mins at 5000 x g”

You shouldn’t be talking about data in your methods  and your discussion of methods should be pretty minimal in your results (I use short “how” sentences/clauses to set up experiments but the main methods are in the methods! Results writing guide )

Sometimes, you might need to justify some of your decisions you made along the way but this is something that you should be cautious with and only do where it is truly necessary and beneficial. Some of these justification type observations are more powerful in your results section.

• Big tip #6: the details matter

This sounds like a contradiction to the protocols point but it’s not! The details of the experiment are the things that make the differences. At every step along the way you have made a decision on what to do/use, these decisions influence the data and they should be clear for all to see!

I’d like to emphasise something you many not have considered; you are not only writing this section so that other people can repeat your experiments but also you are writing so that academics can critically evaluate what you’ve done. Your readers/reviewers want to identify how robust your data is and where any limitations are so that they can come to their own conclusion about the data presented. They want to have enough information to decide if the claims you have made are appropriate. Importantly, this  includes everything before data collection and  everything after; knowing that your analysis was approached in the correct way, that you chose the right sample size and defined independence appropriately, and used the right statistical tests are all key to deciding if it was appropriate for you to come to the conclusions you did (don’t worry, I’ll cover stats below).

If you don’t write your methods effectively and comprehensively enough then your reader, reviewer or marker will have to make assumptions. Scientists are a critical bunch, if you leave them to make assumptions then they will assume the worst. I certainly do!

Just to hammer it home – in case you aren’t already convinced – think about when you come to defending your work during your thesis defence / PhD viva. Any place in your methods where you have been incomplete or ambiguous you are likely to be asked questions. Will you be able to remember the details of a series of experiments you did 2+ years ago whilst under the pressure of your exam?

• Big tip #7 – Follow a logical structure that will minimise the risk of repetition

Write the big, general stuff first

Start with the things that relate to multiple parts of your study. Things like antibodies, cell culture conditions, patient recruitment, mouse lines, construct generation etc. Get these down first and you’ll only need to mention them once.

Your goal is to deliver your methods in as clear and succinct a way as possible. Repetition is your enemy!

If you used the same plating or treatment strategy for your cells across multiple experiments then describe this once in a general section rather than repeat it. If you used multiple lines for the same experiment describe the consistent things once and highlight the specific details rather than writing out the whole experiment more than once.

As with other sections, it’s better to use forward references than backward – so make it clear when you first describe a set up that it will refer to multiple downstream applications rather than backward reference from the secondary experiments.

Regarding repetition. I once examined a PhD viva where the student had literally copied and pasted (with the same grammatical error) a two paragraph section 5 times in different places in their thesis. All within a few pages of each other. When I was reading it, I thought I was going mad. It was only when I asked him why he felt the need to say  exactly  the same thing 5 times that he realised how ridiculous that was. Don’t do this, nobody benefits!! 

Next write the rest of your experiments!

I’m sure this surprised you! Seriously though, usually the best order is to arrange these next subsections in the order that you have decided to present the data. This isn’t a hard and fast rule, if you can make the methods shorter/easier to digest by doing it in a different order do that. But usually, it will help the reader if they know roughly where to look.

• Big tip #8 – Nail down the stats and analysis section

Right this is important! I’ve marked lots of MRes and undergraduate project reports and the data analysis and statistics section(s) of the methods are usually the areas with the biggest problems! I’ll deal with them separately:

Stats and analyses

How did you go from raw data to numbers? No use showing the reader a graph if they don’t know where the numbers came from!

For example, what did you use to normalise your data (dCt or ddCt? geometric mean? single reference transcript?). If you did experiments to justify your decision make sure to include that justification. How did you analyse your images? Include details on software used as well as the steps in post acquisition analysis.

For your stats, what you need depends on the type of your study. Here are some general tips:

• Include a clear description of the type of your study  E.g. observational human study, animal experiment with full factorial design…
• Clear description of the variables measured –  How you measured them, what their names are. In a human confirmatory study you need to say which variable is primary outcome.
• Clear description of statistical methods , How? This depends on the type of study you did but here are some general tips for statistical methods.
• Provide what simple descriptive methods you use (means and standard deviations for symmetric distributions, but medians, min and max for asymmetric distributions).
• Provide the names of all the statistical analysis methods used.
• Describe how you  checked the assumptions of your tests (and what methods you used when the assumptions were not satisfied).
• If you use a more advanced stats method,  provide reference to a book or a paper.
• Provide the  level at which you defined as threshold for significance (p<0.05 etc. Also remember that p values above your threshold do not automatically imply that the null hypothesis is true, rather that you have insufficient evidence to reject)/
• Provide approaches you used to avoid bias: randomisation, blinding…
• Provide sample size statement – for confirmatory studies, i.e. studies with hypothesis.

Useful stats links:

• Experimental Animal studies – NC3R checklist .  Tip; check your home office licence, power analyses and sample size calculations will have been defined for any hypothesis testing
• Observational studies – STROBE checklist
• Clinical trial s – CONSORT checklist

Some journals require that the relevant guidelines/checklist be uploaded with your manuscript – check the instructions for authors – but irrespective if it is required or not you should still have a look as these are current best practice.

• Big tip #9 – Don’t go crazy with tables! 

The general rules used by most journal is that “if you can deliver table contents in 4 lines of prose or less then you should write it out rather than use a table.” Simple as that. In a thesis you probably have a bit more flexibility but I would still follow the same general plan – unnecessary tables can be quite disruptive.

Usually you don’t use a table for a buffer mix or PCR conditions .

If you have loads of buffers that you want documented, you can use an appendix for that. Generally a ~6 component recipe fits perfectly well in brackets.

If you do use a table, make sure you format it appropriately and maximise it’s value by including all the details you need to deliver (eg for PCR primers include sequence, Tm, amplicon size and location not just the sequence).

Appendixes are more of a thesis thing. Consider for things that aren’t directly part of your key story. Things like cell line validation, buffer lists and product number lists or extensive data sets that should be included but would disrupt you results description.

• Big tip #10 – If you need figs, try to put them alongside the data rather than in the methods

This is bit more of a personal preference thing but I find that if you need a figure to explain your experiment then it works best directly alongside the actual data – usually adjacent to the primary data that came from the experiment.

You must describe your data figures in order of presentation so, in order to include a experimental schematic, you can work in a sentence to your results description in the “how” part of the appropriate results subsection.

Don’t use figures for standard set ups of common experiments (eg you don’t need the diagram of blotting apparatus from your protocol book.

Specific examples

I thought it would make sense to highlight some of the stuff and things that you should include and examples of how I have dealt with this in the past.

This page has got quite long so the links below will take you to a separate page about that technique/approach. I recommend bookmarking them so you can have them open as your write.

• Writing about antibodies
• Writing about cell lines / cell culture .
• Writing about patient or participant recruitment
• Writing about RNA isolation RT-PCR, qPCR and endpoint PCR
• Writing about western blotting / immunoblotting
• Writing about microscopy data, immunohistochemistry and tissue processing 

Share this:

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Setting the Scene: Best Practices for Writing Materials and Methods

• Peer Review
• Research Process

This free white paper tackles the best ways to write the Materials and Methods section of a scientific manuscript.

Updated on March 3, 2014

The Materials and Methods (or “Methods section”) is the section of a research paper that provides the reader

with all the information needed to understand your work and how the reported results were produced. Having read

the Introduction, the reader already knows why your work is important, so the next step is to connect that section to

the experimental design used to address your research questions.

Below is a preview of our free white paper tackling the best way to write the Materials and Methods section of a scientific manuscript. It covers the following topics:

Purpose and Structure

• Key Information
• Notation and Terminology
• Equipment and Materials Citations
• Acquisition and Definition of the Results
• Statistical Methods
• Concluding Statements

Depending on the type of paper, the Methods section can encompass anything from the parameters of a literature search to the methods employed in a field study to the details of bench work in the lab. The common feature is that the information needs to be presented in a way that is clear and familiar to the reader. It is important to note that the purpose of the Methods section is not just to convey what you did; a thorough and well-organized Methods section reflects your knowledge and understanding of appropriate research techniques and increases the reader's confidence in your work.

The Methods section is easiest to follow when it begins by providing a clear context for the detailed descriptions of the methods and materials used in the study. This context is best achieved by beginning with general characteristics and parameters (e.g., identification of sample sources or populations, descriptions of geographic areas, or characterizations of study participants). A reader who understands the foundation of your experiments will more easily understand the procedures that follow.

The underlying principle for what information to provide in the Methods section is that the reader should be able to replicate your study. This section must explain the methods used with enough detail to answer any of the reader's questions about how the study was performed. Because the Methods section is meant to convey how the research was conducted, conforming to the accepted conventions of the field is extremely important.

Generally, the Methods section should assemble familiar concepts and research activities into a logical series of events. Terminology and sentence structure should be consistent within the paper and conform to the conventions of the field, and repetition is accepted or even expected. Because Methods sections often rely on lists of information, consistency - i.e., the presentation of like elements using the same terminology, notation, and sentence structure - is especially important.

The information in the Methods section should follow the order of execution as closely as possible, although similar procedures should be presented together. For example, descriptions of sample or data collection should be described together, even if these are performed at different times or with intervening analysis, because a purely chronological account would mean switching back and forth between procedures.

Continue reading "Setting the Scene: Best Practices for Writing Materials and Methods" by downloading the full white paper here .

Check out our other "Best Practices for Writing" white papers to get tips for other sections of your research manuscript:

Getting a Strong Start: Best Practices for Writing an Introduction

Reaping the Rewards: Best Practices for Writing a Results Section

Michael Bendiksby, PhD

See our "Privacy Policy"

Open Book Publishers

• Language and Literature
• History and Culture
• Economics and Politics

Writing and Publishing Scientific Papers

Part ii. writing the paper.

10. How to Write the Material and Methods Section

Texte intégral.

1 Although traditionally, this section is only called “Material and Methods” (rarely: Study Site, Material and Methods), it can be composed of the following parts: study site, study organism, material, methods, statistical evaluation.

2 The aim of this section in scientific papers is to enable readers to assess the reliability of your work, and to be able to repeat it for verification if they want to do so. Science is about unearthing nature’s laws, and the cornerstone of the scientific method requires that experiments are repeatable: if the experiment is repeated under the same conditions, the same result should be obtained. A material and methods section should give enough detail to evaluate and, if needed, to repeat the experiments reported in the article.

3 You should carefully consider your potential readership. This allows you to provide enough, but not superfluous, information. Once you have reflected on what can be assumed as known by this readership about your setting, organisms, methods, etc., you can give detail accordingly: not too little, and not too much.

4 During peer review, this section is closely scrutinised. If the reviewer is in any doubt that the experiments are repeatable, or that the methods are appropriate, the manuscript will be rejected as unreliable, no matter how wonderful the findings are.

5 When describing your study site, consider your potential readership and give details accordingly (geographical particulars, history of the site, location, co-ordinates, maps). The aim is not to enable the reader to find your sampling plot, but to give a general understanding, a “feel” for the environment you worked in. Information on habitat, with photos, maps, drawings, is often useful, or wholly necessary.

Study Organism

6 Here, you should name all the species, strains, cultivars or races that were used in the experiments. You should also give precise information on their origin, storage or husbandry, including temperatures, photoperiod, feeding regimes, control, etc. Depending on the readership, you should consider giving other background information on life history, and the organism’s distribution in nature. If there is a long list of organisms or strains, consider preparing a table with this information.

7 Here, you should list all the materials necessary for your experiments. Give exact names, not generic or trade names, of chemicals used. Give a source (manufacturer with location) if the chemical in question is delicate (e.g. an enzyme), or rare, or its quality is critical. This would give additional information to the reader. This is, however, neither advertisement nor endorsement (for legal reasons, this should often be made explicit in the paper — see, e.g. the US public organisation policy: disclaimer: “The mention of any trade name does not constitute endorsement by XXX organisation”). For equipment used, give the name, specification/type, manufacturer, and conditions of use.

Sampling Methods and Measurements

8 Here, you should detail the procedures: how did you perform the observations, measurements, experiments? How many times, under what conditions? If you use a new method, give all the details necessary so that the reader can repeat your experiment from reading this section. If you used a published method, a reference to the original publication, preferably the one that first published the method, is usually sufficient with minimum description. If you modified a published method, detail the modification only. If the method is published, you should cite it — but consider where it was published? Is it a frequently used method? When was it published? A rarely-used method, published long ago in an obscure journal, needs a more detailed description than a much-used, current one. If the original publication is not widely available, you will have to provide detailed description. Editors often welcome more detail, especially if the published method is not in very wide use (with the appropriate reference, naturally). If you modified a published method that is widely available, detail the modification only.

9 When describing the procedure, be aware that only SI (Système International) units of measurement are allowed. A few units in common use are not official SI measurements and they cannot be used. Also, be aware of the precise use of measurement units — for example, in common use, weight is often given as grams, kilograms, etc., but these are units of mass, not of weight.

10 Any larger set of samples, measurements, or experiments will have the occasional error, a missing sample, a lost or mislaid tube. Do not keep silent about them. Indicate, clearly, how you dealt with errors, missing data, missing traps. This will not decrease your credibility — on the contrary.

Evaluation Methods/Statistics

11 Data will mostly be evaluated by using a statistical program. In most cases, a reference to the program (indicate the version used) is sufficient; give detail only if the method used is new. However, avoid the neophyte description: what’s new for you may not be new for readers. An experienced colleague can give advice on this matter. In general, it is always a good idea to discuss your chosen statistical method with others. Here, you should give a reason for the choice of statistical test, as well as stating how you tested the eventual conditions for using the chosen test (testing for assumptions for a given statistical test). The mention of the use of a commercial statistical program naturally assumes that you have valid access to the program in question. It is not unheard of program developers to search for the mention of their product in the literature to find out about illegal use.

12 Be careful with details when writing a material and methods section — your reputation is on the line! The reader was not by your side when the studies were done, so she will use the detail and clarity of this section as an indirect indication of your reliability and thoroughness.

13 A common error in this section is not offering enough detail. This does not happen because of the authors’ desire to hide anything — it is simply a mark of routine: many parts of the experimental protocol may become almost routine, and the small details are forgotten as they never change and are taken for granted. When the description is prepared, these details, vital for others, are often not included. A good test is whether a colleague, on reading the section, thinks she can repeat the experiment based on the given description of methods. Such a check is useful, because the writer often is too close to the methods, having done them countless times during the experimental process and, thus, omits some obvious but important, detail.

14 Specifically, take care with numbers, spelling, and punctuation. In this section, many “strange” names will occur: of chemicals, organisms, strains; concentrations, times and units of measurement are important. Meticulousness is the key word here: if you cannot be trusted to do simple things well, such as describing a method that you used hundreds of times, can you expect the readers to trust you when it comes to more significant and complicated aspects of reporting your research?

15 The order of description should be chronological; the description of what was done first should precede the later actions. However, you have to first mention all study sites, then all organisms, followed by a full list of all materials used, experiment-by-experiment and so on. Thus, if someone is only interested in all the details of, for example, your second experiment, she will have to jump from one part of this section to another. This seems a small price to pay for a consistent structure, which is followed by most journals.

16 This section describes your own work and, thus, the past tense is used, mostly, in this section. When describing the details, beware of the syntax. The following description is taken from Day and Gastel’s book (Day and Gastel, 2006), who, tongue-in-cheek, called it “the painful method”: “After standing in hot water for an hour, the flasks were examined”. I hope this was not performed as the sentence implies — probably the flasks, and not the researchers, were standing in hot water that long.

When to Write this Section?

17 It is best to start writing this section first, possibly even while working on the experiments. Otherwise, many details will be lost. Details and precision are vital here, and they are much easier to document during the work, or soon after, than weeks or months later. Additionally, there is often a practical reason, too. Most scientific work is done in teams; it is much easier to convince the team members to write their respective methods section while they are doing the work, or soon afterwards. Once the experiments are completed, and the team moves on to further projects, writing a complete methods section will take longer, and be done less satisfactorily.

18 Meticulousness pays, because, as stated above, reviewers are often of the opinion that if you cannot be trusted in doing simple things, you cannot expect trust in significant and complicated aspects of research. Science, in the view of many of its eminent practitioners is, after all, “99 % perspiration and 1 % inspiration”, so precise work, and the ability to describe things accurately, is a necessary condition of credibility. Science may well comprise a lot of precise work and fewer grand ideas; you prove your mastery of the methods applied by being able to describe them with clarity, in sufficient detail.

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY 4.0 . Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

A Primer for the Non-English Speaker

Vérifiez si votre institution a déjà acquis ce livre : authentifiez-vous à OpenEdition Freemium for Books. Vous pouvez suggérer à votre bibliothèque/établissement d’acquérir un ou plusieurs livres publié(s) sur OpenEdition Books. N'hésitez pas à lui indiquer nos coordonnées : OpenEdition - Service Freemium [email protected] 22 rue John Maynard Keynes Bat. C - 13013 Marseille France Vous pouvez également nous indiquer à l'aide du formulaire suivant les coordonnées de votre institution ou de votre bibliothèque afin que nous les contactions pour leur suggérer l’achat de ce livre.

Merci, nous transmettrons rapidement votre demande à votre bibliothèque.

Volume papier

Référence électronique du chapitre, référence électronique du livre, collez le code html suivant pour intégrer ce livre sur votre site..

OpenEdition est un portail de ressources électroniques en sciences humaines et sociales.

• OpenEdition Journals
• OpenEdition Books
• OpenEdition Freemium
• Mentions légales
• Politique de confidentialité
• Gestion des cookies
• Signaler un problème

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search

Writing the Research Methodology Section of Your Thesis

This article explains the meaning of research methodology and the purpose and importance of writing a research methodology section or chapter for your thesis paper. It discusses what to include and not include in a research methodology section, the different approaches to research methodology that can be used, and the steps involved in writing a robust research methodology section.

What is a thesis research methodology?

A thesis research methodology explains the type of research performed, justifies the methods that you chose   by linking back to the literature review , and describes the data collection and analysis procedures. It is included in your thesis after the Introduction section . Most importantly, this is the section where the readers of your study evaluate its validity and reliability.

What should the research methodology section in your thesis include?

• The aim of your thesis
• An outline of the research methods chosen (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods)
• Background and rationale for the methods chosen, explaining why one method was chosen over another
• Methods used for data collection and data analysis
• Materials and equipment used—keep this brief
• Difficulties encountered during data collection and analysis. It is expected that problems will occur during your research process. Use this as an opportunity to demonstrate your problem-solving abilities by explaining how you overcame all obstacles. This builds your readers’ confidence in your study findings.
• A brief evaluation of your research explaining whether your results were conclusive and whether your choice of methodology was effective in practice

What should not be included in the research methodology section of your thesis?

• Irrelevant details, for example, an extensive review of methodologies (this belongs in the literature review section) or information that does not contribute to the readers’ understanding of your chosen methods
• A description of basic procedures
• Excessive details about materials and equipment used. If an extremely long and detailed list is necessary, add it as an appendix

Types of methodological approaches

The choice of which methodological approach to use depends on your field of research and your thesis question. Your methodology should establish a clear relationship with your thesis question and must also be supported by your  literature review . Types of methodological approaches include quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods. 

Quantitative studies generate data in the form of numbers   to count, classify, measure, or identify relationships or patterns. Information may be collected by performing experiments and tests, conducting surveys, or using existing data. The data are analyzed using  statistical tests and presented as charts or graphs. Quantitative data are typically used in the Sciences domain.

For example, analyzing the effect of a change, such as alterations in electricity consumption by municipalities after installing LED streetlights.

The raw data will need to be prepared for statistical analysis by identifying variables and checking for missing data and outliers. Details of the statistical software program used (name of the package, version number, and supplier name and location) must also be mentioned.

Qualitative studies gather non-numerical data using, for example, observations, focus groups, and in-depth interviews.   Open-ended questions are often posed. This yields rich, detailed, and descriptive results. Qualitative studies are usually   subjective and are helpful for investigating social and cultural phenomena, which are difficult to quantify. Qualitative studies are typically used in the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) domain.

For example, determining customer perceptions on the extension of a range of baking utensils to include silicone muffin trays.

The raw data will need to be prepared for analysis by coding and categorizing ideas and themes to interpret the meaning behind the responses given.

Mixed methods use a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches to present multiple findings about a single phenomenon. T his enables triangulation: verification of the data from two or more sources.

Data collection

Explain the rationale behind the sampling procedure you have chosen. This could involve probability sampling (a random sample from the study population) or non-probability sampling (does not use a random sample).

For quantitative studies, describe the sampling procedure and whether statistical tests were used to determine the  sample size .

Following our example of analyzing the changes in electricity consumption by municipalities after installing LED streetlights, you will need to determine which municipal areas will be sampled and how the information will be gathered (e.g., a physical survey of the streetlights or reviewing purchase orders).

For qualitative research, describe how the participants were chosen and how the data is going to be collected.

Following our example about determining customer perceptions on the extension of a range of baking utensils to include silicone muffin trays, you will need to decide the criteria for inclusion as a study participant (e.g., women aged 20–70 years, bakeries, and bakery supply shops) and how the information will be collected (e.g., interviews, focus groups, online or in-person questionnaires, or video recordings) .

Data analysis

For quantitative research, describe what tests you plan to perform and why you have chosen them. Popular data analysis methods in quantitative research include:

• Descriptive statistics (e.g., means, medians, modes)
• Inferential statistics (e.g., correlation, regression, structural equation modeling)

For qualitative research, describe how the data is going to be analyzed and justify your choice. Popular data analysis methods in qualitative research include:

• Qualitative content analysis
• Thematic analysis
• Discourse analysis
• Narrative analysis
• Grounded theory
• Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA)

Evaluate and justify your methodological choices

You need to convince the reader that you have made the correct methodological choices. Once again, this ties back to your thesis question and  literature review . Write using a persuasive tone, and use  rhetoric to convince the reader of the quality, reliability, and validity of your research.

Ethical considerations

• The young researcher should maintain objectivity at all times
• All participants have the right to privacy and anonymity
• Research participation must be voluntary
• All subjects have the right to withdraw from the research at any time
• Consent must be obtained from all participants before starting the research
• Confidentiality of data provided by individuals must be maintained
• Consider how the interpretation and reporting of the data will affect the participants

Tips for writing a robust thesis research methodology

• Determine what kind of knowledge you are trying to uncover. For example, subjective or objective, experimental or interpretive.
• A thorough literature review is the best starting point for choosing your methods.
• Ensure that there is continuity throughout the research process. The authenticity of your research depends upon the validity of the research data, the reliability of your data measurements, and the time taken to conduct the analysis.
• Choose a research method that is achievable. Consider the time and funds available, feasibility, ethics, and access and availability of equipment to measure the phenomenon or answer your thesis question correctly.
• If you are struggling with a concept, ask for help from your supervisor, academic staff members, or fellow students.

A thesis methodology justifies why you have chosen a specific approach to address your thesis question. It explains how you will collect the data and analyze it. Above all, it allows the readers of your study to evaluate its validity and reliability.

A thesis is the most crucial document that you will write during your academic studies. For professional thesis editing and thesis proofreading services, visit  Enago Thesis Editing for more information.

Editor’s pick

Get free updates.

Subscribe to our newsletter for regular insights from the research and publishing industry!

Review Checklist

Introduce your methodological approach , for example, quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods.

Explain why your chosen approach is relevant to the overall research design and how it links with your  thesis question.

Justify your chosen method and why it is more appropriate than others.

Provide background information on methods that may be unfamiliar to readers of your thesis.

Introduce the tools that you will use for data collection , and explain how you plan to use them (e.g., surveys, interviews, experiments, or existing data).

Explain how you will analyze your results. The type of analysis used depends on the methods you chose. For example, exploring theoretical perspectives to support your explanation of observed behaviors in a qualitative study or using statistical analyses in a quantitative study.

Mention any research limitations. All studies are expected to have limitations, such as the sample size, data collection method, or equipment. Discussing the limitations justifies your choice of methodology despite the risks. It also explains under which conditions the results should be interpreted and shows that you have taken a holistic approach to your study.

What is the difference between methodology and methods? +

Methodology  refers to the overall rationale and strategy of your thesis project. It involves studying the theories or principles behind the methods used in your field so that you can explain why you chose a particular method for your research approach.  Methods , on the other hand, refer to how the data were collected and analyzed (e.g., experiments, surveys, observations, interviews, and statistical tests).

What is the difference between reliability and validity? +

Reliability refers to whether a measurement is consistent (i.e., the results can be reproduced under the same conditions).  Validity refers to whether a measurement is accurate (i.e., the results represent what was supposed to be measured). For example, when investigating linguistic and cultural guidelines for administration of the Preschool Language Scales, Fifth Edition (PLS5) in Arab-American preschool children, the normative sample curves should show the same distribution as a monolingual population, which would indicate that the test is valid. The test would be considered reliable if the results obtained were consistent across different sampling sites.

What tense is used to write the methods section? +

The methods section is written in the past tense because it describes what was done.

What software programs are recommended for statistical analysis? +

Recommended programs include Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) ,  Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) ,  JMP ,  R software,  MATLAB , Microsoft Excel,  GraphPad Prism , and  Minitab .

Writing a Postgraduate or Doctoral Thesis: A Step-by-Step Approach

• First Online: 01 October 2023

Cite this chapter

• Usha Y. Nayak 4 ,
• Praveen Hoogar 5 ,
• Srinivas Mutalik 4 &
• N. Udupa 6  

640 Accesses

1 Citations

A key characteristic looked after by postgraduate or doctoral students is how they communicate and defend their knowledge. Many candidates believe that there is insufficient instruction on constructing strong arguments. The thesis writing procedure must be meticulously followed to achieve outstanding results. It should be well organized, simple to read, and provide detailed explanations of the core research concepts. Each section in a thesis should be carefully written to make sure that it transitions logically from one to the next in a smooth way and is free of any unclear, cluttered, or redundant elements that make it difficult for the reader to understand what is being tried to convey. In this regard, students must acquire the information and skills to successfully create a strong and effective thesis. A step-by-step description of the thesis/dissertation writing process is provided in this chapter.

• Dissertation
• Postgraduate
• SMART objectives

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

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Carter S, Guerin C, Aitchison C (2020) Doctoral writing: practices, processes and pleasures. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1808-9

Book   Google Scholar  

Odena O, Burgess H (2017) How doctoral students and graduates describe facilitating experiences and strategies for their thesis writing learning process: a qualitative approach. Stud High Educ 42:572–590. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1063598

Article   Google Scholar  

Stefan R (2022) How to write a good PhD thesis and survive the viva, pp 1–33. http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk/stefan/thesis-writing.pdf

Google Scholar  

Barrett D, Rodriguez A, Smith J (2021) Producing a successful PhD thesis. Evid Based Nurs 24:1–2. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebnurs-2020-103376

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Murray R, Newton M (2009) Writing retreat as structured intervention: margin or mainstream? High Educ Res Dev 28:541–553. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360903154126

Thompson P (2012) Thesis and dissertation writing. In: Paltridge B, Starfield S (eds) The handbook of english for specific purposes. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Hoboken, NJ, pp 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118339855.ch15

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Faryadi Q (2018) PhD thesis writing process: a systematic approach—how to write your introduction. Creat Educ 09:2534–2545. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2018.915192

Faryadi Q (2019) PhD thesis writing process: a systematic approach—how to write your methodology, results and conclusion. Creat Educ 10:766–783. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.104057

Fisher CM, Colin M, Buglear J (2010) Researching and writing a dissertation: an essential guide for business students, 3rd edn. Financial Times/Prentice Hall, Harlow, pp 133–164

Ahmad HR (2016) How to write a doctoral thesis. Pak J Med Sci 32:270–273. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.322.10181

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Gosling P, Noordam LD (2011) Mastering your PhD, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 12–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15847-6

Cunningham SJ (2004) How to write a thesis. J Orthod 31:144–148. https://doi.org/10.1179/146531204225020445

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Azadeh F, Vaez R (2013) The accuracy of references in PhD theses: a case study. Health Info Libr J 30:232–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12026

Williams RB (2011) Citation systems in the biosciences: a history, classification and descriptive terminology. J Doc 67:995–1014. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411111183564

Bahadoran Z, Mirmiran P, Kashfi K, Ghasemi A (2020) The principles of biomedical scientific writing: citation. Int J Endocrinol Metab 18:e102622. https://doi.org/10.5812/ijem.102622

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Yaseen NY, Salman HD (2013) Writing scientific thesis/dissertation in biology field: knowledge in reference style writing. Iraqi J Cancer Med Genet 6:5–12

Gorraiz J, Melero-Fuentes D, Gumpenberger C, Valderrama-Zurián J-C (2016) Availability of digital object identifiers (DOIs) in web of science and scopus. J Informet 10:98–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.008

Khedmatgozar HR, Alipour-Hafezi M, Hanafizadeh P (2015) Digital identifier systems: comparative evaluation. Iran J Inf Process Manag 30:529–552

Kaur S, Dhindsa KS (2017) Comparative study of citation and reference management tools: mendeley, zotero and read cube. In: Sheikh R, Mishra DKJS (eds) Proceeding of 2016 International conference on ICT in business industry & government (ICTBIG). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTBIG.2016.7892715

Kratochvíl J (2017) Comparison of the accuracy of bibliographical references generated for medical citation styles by endnote, mendeley, refworks and zotero. J Acad Librariansh 43:57–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2016.09.001

Zhang Y (2012) Comparison of select reference management tools. Med Ref Serv Q 31:45–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2012.641841

Hupe M (2019) EndNote X9. J Electron Resour Med Libr 16:117–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/15424065.2019.1691963

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Pharmaceutics, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India

Usha Y. Nayak & Srinivas Mutalik

Centre for Bio Cultural Studies, Directorate of Research, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India

Praveen Hoogar

Shri Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara University, Dharwad, Karnataka, India

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. Udupa .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Retired Senior Expert Pharmacologist at the Office of Cardiology, Hematology, Endocrinology, and Nephrology, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA

Gowraganahalli Jagadeesh

Professor & Director, Research Training and Publications, The Office of Research and Development, Periyar Maniammai Institute of Science & Technology (Deemed to be University), Vallam, Tamil Nadu, India

Pitchai Balakumar

Division Cardiology & Nephrology, Office of Cardiology, Hematology, Endocrinology and Nephrology, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA

Fortunato Senatore

Ethics declarations

No conflict of interest exists.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Nayak, U.Y., Hoogar, P., Mutalik, S., Udupa, N. (2023). Writing a Postgraduate or Doctoral Thesis: A Step-by-Step Approach. In: Jagadeesh, G., Balakumar, P., Senatore, F. (eds) The Quintessence of Basic and Clinical Research and Scientific Publishing. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-1284-1_48

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-1284-1_48

Published : 01 October 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-99-1283-4

Online ISBN : 978-981-99-1284-1

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

Share this chapter

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Training videos   |   Faqs

Materials and Methods Examples and Writing Tips

Abstract | Introduction | Literature Review | Research question | Materials & Methods | Results | Discussion | Conclusion

In this blog, we look at how to write the materials and methods section of a research paper. In most research papers, the materials and methods section follows the literature review section. This is generally the easiest section to write because you are simply reproducing what you did in your experiments. It is always a good idea to start writing your research paper with the materials and methods section.

1. What is the purpose of the materials and methods section?

Materials and methods should describe how you did your research and detail the experimental procedure. One of the most important things to bear in mind while writing the materials and methods section is that it should have enough detail so that other researchers in your field can replicate your experiments and reproduce your results.  You should provide all the steps in a logical order so that your readers can follow your description easily.

2. Materials and Methods Examples

The structure of the methods section will very much depend on your discipline. If you are not sure about the structure, then the best place to start will be to go through the methods section of some previously published papers from your chosen journal. We will look at some examples of materials and methods structure in different disciplines. 

2.1. Materials & methods example #1 (Engineering paper)

If you are writing an engineering sciences research paper in which you are introducing a new method, your materials and methods section would typically include the following information.

You can start with the top-level summary of the method. You can try to answer these questions. Are you proposing a new method? Or,  Are you using a standard method from the literature?  Or, Are you extending a previously published method? If so, is it your previous work? or work published by a different author?

Then you can talk about the reasons for choosing this method. You can quote previous papers that have used this method successfully to support your arguments. Then, you can talk about the actual implementation details of the methods.

Then you can talk about how the methods were validated to confirm that they are suitable for your research. You can also include information about any pilot or preliminary studies you conducted before the full study. Then you can explain how you propose to test and evaluate the methods to prove that they are better than the existing methods. Here, you can talk about metrics and statistical tests you will be using to evaluate your method.

2.2. Materials & methods example #2 (Measurement paper)

If you are writing a paper that deals with measurements, you would typically include the following information in your materials and methods section.

You can start by talking about the experimental setup. You can try to answer these questions. What equipment was used to perform the measurements? What was the make and the model of the equipment?  How many technicians took the measurements?  How experienced were the technicians?

Then you can talk about the parameters that were measured during the experiment. Then you can talk about the actual measurement procedure. How were the samples prepared for the measurements?  How many measurements were taken? Were the measurements repeated for consistency? Was there a time interval between successive measurements?

Then you can talk about measurement conditions and constraints. Were the measurements performed at room temperature or under special conditions? Were there any practical difficulties while performing the measurements, if so, how did you overcome them?

Most importantly, you must list all the calculations in the form of detailed equations and formulas so that readers know exactly how the data was produced.

2.3. Materials & methods example #3 (Survey questionnaire paper)

If you are writing a survey questionnaire paper , you would typically include the following information in your materials and methods section.

You can start by talking about your participants. Who is your target population? What are their demographics? How did you recruit them?  How did participants provide consent for your study? What sampling method did you use to select the participants?

Then you can talk about the survey type. Was it a phone interview? Was it a personal interview? Was it an online survey? Or, Was it a written survey?

Then you can talk about the questionnaire design. How did you choose the questions? How many questions were there? What type of questions were they? Were they open ended questions, or close ended questions, or rating scale questions, or a mixture of different types of questions?

Then you can talk about how the questionnaire was administered. If it is an online survey, how did you get the questionnaire to the participants? Did you email them? Or did you post the survey forms?

If you are doing a personal interview. How did you conduct the interviews? Was it one to one interview, or was it done in batches, or did you use focus groups? How did the participants behave during the interview?

Then you can talk about questionnaire testing. Did you test your questionnaire before the main study? Did you have to make any changes after initial testing?  Did you have to translate the questionnaire into multiple languages? Then finally you can talk about different types of statistical tests you used to analyze the survey responses.

2.4. Materials & methods example #4 (Medical clinical trial paper)

If you are writing a medical research paper , your materials and methods section would typically include the following information.

You can start by providing information about the study design. Was it a randomized trial, or an observational trial? Was it a prospective study, or a retrospective study? Was the study double-blinded, or single-blinded?

Then, you can talk about how the ethical approval was obtained for the study and clarify if the clinical trial was registered. if so, then provide the registration number.

Then, you can talk about how the participants were recruited for the study, and explain the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Then, you can talk about how the participants were grouped into control and placebo groups, and explain how the medication was administered.

Then, you can talk about what outcomes were measured. What was the primary outcome? What was the secondary outcome? What was the follow up period? You can try to answer these questions. Then you can finish off with some information about the statistical tests you used to analyze the data.

3. Frequently Asked Questions

One of the common mistakes people make is using vague language in materials and methods. Reviewers won’t like it, and they will reject the paper on the basis that the section is not elaborate enough for other researchers to reproduce your experiments.

Make sure you write the materials and methods section in past tense, since you are reporting something that has already happened.

Acronyms & Abbrevations: Try to use acronyms and abbreviations for long method names. Abbreviations and acronyms are a great way to make your writing concise and save time. Define the acronyms and abbreviations during their first occurrence then use the short form in the rest of the text. The common practice is to put the acronym and abbreviations in parentheses after the full term.

Use different layouts: Another problem you are likely to face is that your methods section can sound like manual if you have too much text in it. In particular, if you are dealing with a very complex procedure, the readers might find it dry and tedious. So try to provide some variety to the layout. Try to use bullet points and numberings instead of long paragraphs to make it easy for the readers to understand the procedure. You can use flow diagrams to illustrate the process rather than describing it.

When you are using a standard method that is well described in literature, the standard practice is to reference the paper rather than repeating the entire procedure. You can also provide a brief summary of the procedure in your own words.

For example, you can say something like this, “The details of the procedure have been reported previously in…”, and reference the previous paper. And then, you can follow it up with a brief summary of the method from the previous paper.

If you are extending a previous method, then you can do something like this. You can say that, “Some minor modifications were made to the method described in…” and reference the previous paper.  And then, you can follow it up with the list of refinements you made to the previous method in order to adapt it to your work.

Similar Posts

Formulating Strong Research Questions: Examples and Writing Tips

In this blog, we will go through many research question examples and understand how to construct a strong research question for your paper.

How to Write a Research Paper? A Beginners Guide with Useful Academic Phrases

This blog explains how to write a research paper and provides writing ideas in the form of academic phrases.

Useful Phrases and Sentences for Academic & Research Paper Writing

In this blog, we explain various sections of a research paper and give you an overview of what these sections should contain.

Research Paper Structure – Main Sections and Parts of a Research Paper

In this blog, we explain various topics and sub-topics to be included under each section of a research paper via word cloud diagrams.

Discussion Section Examples and Writing Tips

In this blog, we will go through many discussion examples and understand how to write a great discussion for your research paper.

Writing a Questionnaire Survey Research Paper – Example & Format

In this blog, we will explain how to write a survey questionnaire paper and discuss all the important points to consider while writing the research paper.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• 3 Share Facebook
• 1 Share Twitter
• 5 Share LinkedIn
• 2 Share Email

How to write a materials and methods section of a scientific article?

Affiliation.

• 1 Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Gaziosmanpaşa University, Tokat, Turkey.
• PMID: 26328129
• PMCID: PMC4548564
• DOI: 10.5152/tud.2013.047

In contrast to past centuries, scientific researchers have been currently conducted systematically in all countries as part of an education strategy. As a consequence, scientists have published thousands of reports. Writing an effective article is generally a significant problem for researchers. All parts of an article, specifically the abstract, material and methods, results, discussion and references sections should contain certain features that should always be considered before sending a manuscript to a journal for publication. It is generally known that the material and methods section is a relatively easy section of an article to write. Therefore, it is often a good idea to begin by writing the materials and methods section, which is also a crucial part of an article. Because "reproducible results" are very important in science, a detailed account of the study should be given in this section. If the authors provide sufficient detail, other scientists can repeat their experiments to verify their findings. It is generally recommended that the materials and methods should be written in the past tense, either in active or passive voice. In this section, ethical approval, study dates, number of subjects, groups, evaluation criteria, exclusion criteria and statistical methods should be described sequentially. It should be noted that a well-written materials and methods section markedly enhances the chances of an article being published.

Keywords: Article; material; methods; publication.

Writing the Materials and Methods and Summarizing the Thesis

One of the most important steps of performing a thesis is “ PLANNING ” for it. The plan comes after the rationale for the study has been established and existing literature reviewed thoroughly. Executing the plan is easier said than done and requires rigor at every step to accumulate high-quality data. The document containing this “PLAN” is called the “Manual of Operations” ( MOP ) and represents all the procedural details essential to ensure the smooth performance of each and every step of the study.

While writing a scientific manuscript, it is not only important to report the results of the study but also to enumerate the steps followed to arrive at the results. The latter is referred to as the “ Materials and Methods ” or simply methods section of the scientific manuscript. It should be described in sufficient detail to allow easy replication by a competent fellow researcher, but the authors should guard against overzealous description and avoid unnecessary technical details. If the MOP is written in great detail, writing the methods section can be a simple exercise and can be considered a precis of the MOP . The MOP/methods section is probably the most important part of a manuscript because it provides vital information on which the quality and validity of the article are judged.

This chapter is aimed at helping one write the methods sections of the resultant scientific manuscript. Though it is not an exhaustive tutorial, it will provide a blueprint to help authors describe what was done, how it was done, how the data was collected, and how it was analyzed. Summarizing the thesis refers to writing the results and we will consider some basics of presenting results at the end of this chapter

Basic understanding of terminologies:

Before learning to write the MOP and methods section, one must understand a few basic terminologies that will be used repeatedly during the study design, execution, and statistical analysis. With respect to the methods section, the two most important terminologies are 1) Variable and 2) Validity.

What is meant by the term Variable?

A scientific study is aimed at establishing “ cause and effect relationship” between objects and in scientific literature, these objects are referred to as variables. Everything that is measured (e.g. visual acuity, age, intraocular pressure, etc) in a particular study is a variable. For the purpose of cause-effect relationship studies, variables are classified as independent, dependent, and confounding variables.

An independent variable is the one, that when manipulated, causes a change in another variable. A dependent variable is the one which changes values depending on the manipulations performed on the independent variables. A confounding variable is any other variable other than the independent variable which can influence change in the dependent variable.

For example, change in axial length and/or keratometric value results in a change in intraocular lens (IOL) power according to the SRK IOL power calculation formula. Here the axial length and keratometric value are the independent variables and the IOL power is the dependent variable.

Another example, consider a study designed to determine the incidence of pseudophakic cystoid macular edema (CME) in phacoemulsification vs. manual small incision cataract surgery (SICS). Here, the type of surgery is the independent variable, and the occurrence of CME is the dependent variable. The presence of diabetes and coexistent diabetic retinopathy can be considered as a confounding variable as diabetics are known to experience greater pseudophakic CME compared to non – diabetics.

A cause and effect relationship between independent and dependent variables is established by developing of appropriate study design. A study design is simply a strategy to manipulate variables to answer the study question.

What is meant by Validity?

Internal Validity : Minimizing the influence of confounding variables is key to having a study that actually measures the influence of manipulations of independent variables over the dependent variable and therefore, results in high internal validity. External validity refers to the degree to which the results can be applied to the general population of interest. External validity can be improved by reducing selection bias using processes like randomization and masking.

For e.g., in the above-mentioned scenario of pseudophakic CME, either excluding diabetics (omitting the confounder) or measuring the blood glucose/HbA1c and lipid profile (controlling the confounder) of all diabetics will improve the validity of the study. The latter approach will improve the applicability of the study as well as keep the validity high.

Writing Materials and Methods:

This section should provide detailed information on the materials used to conduct the study and the methods used to measure variables in the study. The term “ Materials ” refers to study participants (e.g. humans, animals, laboratory experiments, etc) and also to various instruments (e.g. applanation tonometry, optical coherence tomography, etc.) and treatments (e.g. drug1 vs. drug2 OR phacoemulsification vs. SICS) used in the study.

The term “ Methods ” refers to how various procedures were performed on the study participants, how measurements were made, how data was collected and stored, and finally how data was analyzed. In general, it is advisable to use questions like what, when, why, how much, and how often to guide your explanations. The methods should always be written in the past tense.

Ethical considerations Study period, location and type Describe the Subjects in detail Describe how the subjects were prepared Describe the study design and protocol Explain how measurements were made and how calculations were performed Describe statistical tests in sufficient detail

It is important to maintain a systematic and logical chronology in the writing so that it is easily comprehended by reviewers and readers alike. The following chronology can be followed in most instances:

We will consider the salient points of each of the above to make the Materials and Methods section of the manuscript succinct yet comprehensive.

Ethical considerations

When the study involves manipulations on human or animal subjects, it is essential that the methods section begins with a statement stating that the study was approved by the institutional review board, informed consent was obtained from all the participants and the study protocol adhered to the tenets of the declaration of Helsinki. For animal experiments, including a statement regarding approval by the institutional animal care committee or appropriate body.

Declaration of Helsinki The World Medical Association (WMA) has developed the Declaration of Helsinki as a statement of ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects, including research on identifiable human material and data. It has 37 guiding principles under various classifications such as Scientific Requirements of Research Protocols, Research Ethics Committees, patient Privacy and Confidentiality, informed consent process and use of placebo.

Study period, location and type

Specify the duration of the study with the start and end dates (month/year) followed by the location of the study. If the journal does not allow disclosure of the institute’s name to maintain anonymity during the review process, then mention whether it’s a primary, secondary, or tertiary care eye center and from which part of the country (south, north, etc.). It is essential to mention the type of study such as a randomized controlled trial, prospective/retrospective cohort study, case?control study, or cross?sectional survey. The following points can be considered before choosing a prospective or retrospective study design:

Can the study question be answered by a retrospective study? Are medical records maintained meticulously by MRD staff? How good is documentation of findings in the case sheets? How common is the disease?

If findings are routinely documented well and case records are preserved properly, most studies can be done both prospectively and retrospectively.

If your study does not fit a particular definition you may describe the key design components, e.g. an interventional and/or observational study and whether data were collected longitudinally or cross?sectionally.

It is of utmost importance to explicitly describe who the study participants were and how they were chosen for the study. It is useful to use words such as volunteers, patients, controls, lab animals, etc. “ Inclusion and exclusion criteria” should be described in great detail as these will help in establishing the limits set by the authors and thereby help in generalizing the study results to the population (i.e. to whom the study results will be applicable). For the purpose of the study, it is important to “ define the disease” in measurable terms. For e.g. for a glaucoma study, how glaucoma was defined should be explained using credible references. In case of controls, explain how they were selected and how they relate to the study group, e.g. matching by age, gender, ethnicity, clinical condition, etc. Also, describe in brief the sampling methods used . Randomization and masking should be described in detail in case the manuscript is describing a randomized controlled trial. The randomization/masking details should be highly descriptive in the MOP but lesser so in the methods section.

Preparation of Subjects

In studies involving human subjects, steps taken to prepare the participants prior to the actual study should be described briefly. For e.g., how dilatation of pupils was achieved or what type of anesthesia was used prior to the actual surgical procedure or how OCT (optical coherence tomography) was performed prior to injecting intravitreal anti VEGF agents etc. In animal experiments and mechanical models, the setting up of the animals and models is very important and should be described explicitly.

Study design and Protocol

The research protocol is the exact sequence of manipulations and measurements performed to answer the study question. It should be described in precisely the same chronology as the steps performed in the study. Typically, this first involves a description of baseline measurements, followed by the sequence of events to manipulate the independent variable and the subsequent measurement of changes in the dependent variable. It is advisable to provide a flow plan especially in case of prospective studies to help readers understand the protocol easily.

Measurement of variables

All the tools and instruments used to manipulate the independent variable and measure changes in the dependent variable should be mentioned including the name and location of the manufacturer. For e.g., the central foveal thickness was measured using the spectral-domain OCT (Spectralis, Heidelberg Engineering GmbH, Heidelberg, Germany) or IOP was measured using Goldmann applanation tonometry. Additionally, describe in detail any modifications made to the equipment or any equipment that was constructed specifically for the study and, if necessary, provide illustrations or photographs of the modifications.

It is important to remember that any new method employed for measuring a variable will require additional validation either in the form of a previous publication that can be referenced or by providing proof of the concept of the new measurement technique used. The former is the better approach. This is especially true in studies where questionnaires are used. The questionnaires must be developed in a systematic manner and should have been used previously to prove its validity.

While describing the measurement of multiple variables in the same paper, it is advisable to have subheadings for each. For e.g., in a paper studying ASOCT characteristics of eyes with angle closure, it may be worthwhile having separate subheadings on the clinical examination, biometry (axial length, AC depth, pachymetry, etc.) and ASOCT details to segregate the methods and provide clarity. The description of the primary outcome variable is a good way to clarify exactly how it was recorded. For e.g., IOP of <18mmHg may be considered as a success for a study on trabeculectomy for glaucoma or central foveal thickness less than 275 microns may be considered as a successful resolution for diabetic macular edema. These should be defined with precision to make interpretations and future comparisons easy.

Statistical tests and Data Analysis

A statistician should be involved in the study from the beginning and his/her help can be sought to write this section. This section describes how the data will be presented in the results section (e.g., mean vs. median), which statistical tests will used for the inferential data, and what p value is deemed to be a statistically significant difference between groups. While using regression analysis, it is important to mention a rationale for the covariates used in the multivariable models. For survival analysis, one must explain how the event and time to the event was calculated. While using specialized or unusual statistical methods (e.g. negative binominal regression), one must provide a reference. Also, it is good practice to mention the name and version of the statistical package used for the analysis (for e.g. Stata13 I/C, College Station, TX).

Summarizing the thesis

Once the methods are written and the experiment is performed, the results should be presented in a particular order as follows:

Mention sample size over the study period (months) Demographics of the study population can be presented as a table and mention the important ones in words. For comparative study, mention whether the 2 groups were comparable in terms of the parameters studied before the intervention. Results of the primary outcome measure Results of the secondary outcome measures Other results. E.g., Complications of a procedure

It is advisable to describe results from the primary outcome measure before the other results. Additionally, it is important to first plan which results answer the questions that have been posed in the research and which results may be left out.

Using Tables to summarize results:

Summarizing complex data with absolute values (not percentages) in the form of tables is a good practice. The tables should be labeled appropriately and should be stand – alone such that readers will be able to interpret it without having to reference the text repeatedly. The tables should be cited in the manuscript, the tabular data should agree to those mentioned in the manuscript text, and information in tables should never be duplicated in text and graphs

Using graphs and figures to summarize results:

One may consider using graphs when there is a clear relation between variables or when pronounced trends are seen in the results. Choosing the appropriate graph type is essential to best convey the results. Box and whisker plots display continuous variables with 25 th and 75 th percentile and outlier values and can be used to show distribution of the variable. If there is a relationship between two numerical variables (for e.g. IOP and ocular perfusion pressure, both in mmHg), using a scatter diagram with a LOWESS curve is most appropriate. Pie diagrams help in displaying proportions and bar diagrams (with standard error or 95% confidence intervals) can be used to display numerical data as well as comparative proportions. Labeling the graph and citing it in the text is also extremely important. Design, provide legends and label the graphs carefully so that they are clear and easy to understand. If the study warrants clinical illustrations of the human or animal study such as clinical photographs or microscopic structures, these should be prepared according to the requirements of the journal of choice. Commonly, color illustrations require 300 dpi resolution and CMYK color format for most journals.

Summarizing the results section of the thesis is a difficult task but one that is fulfilling. The ability to effectively communicate ones own findings to the scientific community is critical to get your manuscript accepted by a reputed journal.

Writing the manual of operations, executing the thesis protocol well, and converting it into the methods and results in sections of a scientific manuscript are probably the most important tasks that lead to eventual acceptance and publication of the manuscript. Writing these can be a daunting task, especially for the novice. However, following a stepwise approach as mentioned in this chapter and breaking down the task into smaller steps goes a long way in alleviating the fear associated with this process. We hope that the guidelines provided herein will help future residents in ophthalmology to plan, perform and execute their thesis in a precise and orderly fashion as well as write it up in a clear and lucid manner.

The author isthe director of Sengupta's Research Academy and offers online lectures and clinical research training that had garnered more than 1100 enrollments from more than 70 countries. Click here to visit his online lecture series

Share with your friends !

• Pearls in the Diagnosis and Management of Rhino-Orbito-Cerebral-Mucormycosis
• Computer Vision Syndrome
• A (VAST)IN Saga
• Retina Case Presentation in Practical Exam: 10 Tips
• Top Ten Tips - Shaping and Sharpening a Clinical Survey
• Peripheral Ulcerative Keratitis
• Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Made Simple
• Iris Repair Techniques
• Drug Induced Maculopathy: A Quick Look
• Pediatric and Strabismus Short Term Fellowship
• Ten Pearls for Phacoemulsification in a Soft Cataract
• How to Publish Your Thesis
• In Vivo Confocal Microscopy
• Ophthalmoscopy
• Lasers in ophthalmology-I
• Orbital Apex Syndrome
• Antimetabolities Used In Trabeculectomy
• Retinal Detachment And Predisposing Lesions
• External Eye Diseases Of The Eye In Children
• Trecher collins syndrome case report
• Herpes Simplex Viral Keratitis
• Subluxated Lens
• The Day My Patient Died
• What Does an Average Ophthalmologist Do During the COVID Lockdown?
• "Dream big and chase it. You will reach your destination. ": Dr GN Rao
• Its back to ABC, as we ReBOOT post COVID-19
• 5 Tips To Achieve Ideal Rhexis

Mohammadpur, Dhaka | [email protected]

Materials And Methods: A Key Component of a Successful Dissertation

Dr Ahsanur Rahman, PHD

January 21, 2023

The materials and methods section of a dissertation is a key component to a successful paper. This section outlines the procedures used in conducting the research and provides details on the materials used in the study. It is important to be clear and concise in this section, as it will allow readers to replicate the study if they so choose.

The materials and methods section of a dissertation is often considered the most important part of the document. This is because it contains the information that will be used to support the research conducted in the study. In order for a dissertation to be successful, the materials and methods section must be well-written and complete. There are several things that should be included in the materials and methods section of a dissertation. First, there should be a description of the research design used in the study. This should include an explanation of how data was collected and analyzed. Second, there should be a discussion of the population studied. This should include information on who was included in the study and how they were selected. Third, there should be a description of the measures used in the study. This includes both quantitative and qualitative measures. Finally, there should be a discussion of any limitations or problems that were encountered during the course of conducting the research. Writing a strong materials and methods section is essential to ensuring that your dissertation is successful. By including all of the necessary information, you can provide readers with a clear understanding of your research process and ensure that your findings are accurate and reliable.

Materials And Methods Thesis Example

When it comes to writing a thesis, one of the most important sections is the materials and methods section. This is where you will provide a detailed account of the procedures you used in your research. It is essential that you take care to write this section clearly and concisely so that readers can follow your work and understand your results. To help you get started, we have provided an example materials and methods section below. This example is based on a study investigating the effect of different types of music on memory recall in young adults. As you read through it, pay attention to the level of detail provided and the way in which the information is presented. You may also want to refer back to this example when drafting your own materials and methods section. Materials The participants in this study were 60 young adults between the ages of 18 and 25 years old. They were all enrolled in an introductory psychology course at a large university in the United States. The participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: control, classical music, or popular music. Each participant was given a list of 20 words to remember immediately after hearing either no music (control group), 10 minutes of classical music (Mozart’sSonata for Two Pianosin D Major), or 10 minutes of popular music (“I Will Always Love You” by Whitney Houston). After 24 hours had passed, each participant was asked to recall as many words from the list as possible. The data were collected via self-report and analyzed using ANOVA tests. Methods Participants

Material And Methods in Research Example

In any research paper, the first thing that you want to do is introduce your topic. After that, you want to provide a brief overview of your material and methods. For example, if you are researching the best way to teach English as a second language, you would want to briefly outline what methods and materials you will be using in your study. In this section, it is also important to note any limitations that you may have in your study. For instance, if you are only studying a small group of students, you would want to mention that in this section. By providing this information upfront, readers will be able to better understand the findings of your study.

Materials And Methods Example Pdf

In most scientific papers, the Materials and Methods section is where you describe in detail how you carried out your experiment. This usually includes a description of the materials you used (reagents, equipment, etc.), as well as the methods you used to carry out the experiment. The goal of this section is to provide enough information that someone else could replicate your experiment. For example, let’s say you were investigating the effect of different concentrations of salt on the boiling point of water. In your Materials and Methods section, you would need to include information on what type and concentration of salt you used, as well as how much water you used and what temperature it was at when you started boiling it. You would also need to describe exactly how you added the salt to the water (e.g., measured it out with a measuring spoon) and how long you boiled it for (e.g., 2 minutes). If your study involved human participants, then this section would also include information on how many participants there were, what inclusion/exclusion criteria were used, how they were recruited, and so forth. For animal studies, this section would include information on species, strain/breed, sex/age/weight range, housing conditions, diet details, etc. In short, theMaterials and Methodssection should provide enough detail that someone reading your paper could replicate your study if they wanted to.

Materials And Methods in Research

The materials and methods section of a research paper provides detailed information about the materials used in your study and the methods employed to collect and analyze data. This information is important for other researchers who may wish to replicate your study or build upon your work. The materials and methods section should be concise and straightforward, but it must also provide enough detail so that readers can understand how you conducted your research. When writing the materials and methods section, keep in mind that readers will want to know: -What materials (e.g., reagents, equipment) did you use? -How did you use these materials? -Why did you use these particular materials and methods? -What controls did you employ? -What steps did you take during each stage of your experiment(s)? -How did you analyze your data? Be sure to answer all of these questions in your materials and methods section. You can do this by providing a brief description of each material or method, followed by a more detailed explanation of how it was used in your study. Be sure to include any pertinent information about controls, experimental design, data analysis, etc.

Dissertation Methodology

The methodology section of a dissertation is where you will outline the methods you used to collect and analyze data for your study. This includes the research design, participants, instruments, and procedures. This is an important section of your dissertation as it will give readers an understanding of how you conducted your research and what data you collected. It is important to be clear and concise in your writing, as well as providing enough detail so that readers can understand your methods.

Dissertation Examples

If you’re looking for dissertation examples, then you’ve come to the right place. In this blog post, we’ll provide a detailed overview of what a dissertation is, why it’s important, and how to go about finding examples that can help you with your own work. A dissertation is simply an extended piece of academic writing, typically undertaken as part of a course of study at university. Its purpose is to enable students to conduct independent research on a topic of their choice, and to present their findings in a form that demonstrates both their knowledge and understanding of the subject matter. Dissertations are usually structured around three main sections: an introduction, main body, and conclusion. The introduction sets out the aims and objectives of the research; the main body presents the findings; and the conclusion draws together the threads of the argument and offers some recommendations for further study or action. Finding good quality dissertation examples can be tricky – there are so many sources available online (and offline) that it can be hard to know where to start. However, there are some tried-and-tested methods that can help you track down relevant and useful examples: • Talk to your supervisor or tutor – they may have some good leads for you. • Look for dedicated databases or repositories of dissertations (such as those held by universities), which will usually make them easier to find than if they’re scattered across different websites. This link takes you straight to Leeds University Library’s collection . • Use your library’s search engine – most libraries subscribe to large academic databases such as JSTOR , which will contain full-text versions of many dissertations. If yours doesn’t offer access to these resources, ask a librarian how best to proceed. Once you’ve found some potential examples, it’s important to evaluate them carefully before using them as models for your own work. Here are some key criteria to bear in mind: Relevance : Is the example directly relevant to your topic? If not, it might still provide valuable insights but don’t assume that everything will translate directly into your context. Quality : How well does the example measure up in terms of methodological rigour , clarity , critical engagement etc.? These are all important considerations regardless of whether you’re using quantitative or qualitative methods . Accessibility : Is the full text easily accessible , or do you only have abstracts?

Sample Dissertation Pdf

If you are looking for a sample dissertation pdf, then you have come to the right place. In this blog post, we will provide you with all the information you need to know about dissertation pdfs. A dissertation pdf is simply a document that contains all of the necessary information about your research project. This includes your research question, literature review, methodology, results, and discussion. One of the most important things to remember when creating a dissertation pdf is that it should be well organized and easy to read. If your dissertation pdf is difficult to follow or understand, it will likely not be used by potential employers or graduate programs. Therefore, it is essential that you take the time to create a clear and concise document. Additionally, make sure to proofread your work carefully before sending it off!

How to Write Materials And Methods in Research Paper

There is no one answer to this question because it depends on the specific research paper you are writing. However, there are some general tips that can help you write a clear and effective Materials and Methods section. Here are a few things to keep in mind: 1. Be clear and concise. The Materials and Methods section should be written in plain language that can be easily understood by anyone reading your paper. Avoid jargon and technical terms whenever possible. 2. Include all relevant information. Make sure to include all details about the materials you used in your study, as well as the methods you used to collect data or conduct experiments. This section should be thorough enough that someone could replicate your study based on the information provided. 3. Organize your information logically. The Materials and Methods section should be organized chronologically, starting with the first step of your experiment or study and ending with the last step. This will make it easier for readers to follow along and understand what you did. 4. Proofread carefully.

Credit: www.elsevier.com

What are the Components of Dissertation?

There are a few key components that every dissertation will have. These components include: An abstract: This is a brief summary of your dissertation, typically ranging from 150-250 words. In this section, you will provide an overview of your research topic, methodology, and findings. A literature review: This section provides a detailed analysis of the existing literature on your topic. You will critically evaluate previous research and identify gaps in the existing knowledge base. Your methodology: In this section, you will describe how you conducted your research. This includes information on your participants, data collection methods, and data analysis procedures. Your results: Here you will present the findings of your study. This can be presented in a variety of formats (e.g., text, tables, figures). Be sure to interpret and discuss the implications of your results in this section. Your discussion/conclusion: In this final section, you will reflect on the overall significance of your findings and discuss their implications for practice or future research.

What Makes a Successful Dissertation?

There is no one answer to this question as each field and each committee will have different standards for what they deem a successful dissertation. However, there are some general tips that may help you produce a successful dissertation. First, it is important to choose a topic that you are passionate about and that will interest your committee. It can be helpful to narrow your focus to a specific aspect of your chosen topic in order to make your research more manageable. Once you have settled on a topic, it is important to develop a clear research question that your dissertation will seek to answer. This question should be specific enough that it can be addressed within the scope of your project, but broad enough that it will allow you to produce original and significant research. In order to conduct effective research, it is essential that you become familiar with the existing literature on your topic. This will help you situate your own work within the larger conversation and identify potential gaps in the existing scholarship. As you read through the literature, take detailed notes and organize them in a way that will make sense when you begin writing up your results. Once you have done all of the necessary background research, it is time to start collecting data (if applicable). This process will vary depending on your field and methodology, but it is important to collect high-quality data that is relevant to your research question. Once again, taking detailed and organized notes throughout this process will be crucial in ensuring smooth writing later on. After completing your data collection (or if data collection is not applicable), you can begin writing up your findings. Start by organizing your thoughts and materials into an outline; this will help keep things clear and concise as you write. When drafting each section of your dissertation, be sure to back up any claims or arguments with evidence from the literature or data collected duringyour research process . In addition , pay close attention toproofreadingand editingto ensurethatyour final productis freeof any errorsor typos . By followingthese tips ,you can give yourselfa good chance at producinga successfuldissertation .

What are the Components of Materials And Methods?

In a scientific paper, the Materials and Methods section is where you describe in detail how you conducted your experiment. This includes providing information on what materials you used (e.g., reagents, equipment), what methods you followed (e.g., procedures, data collection), and any statistical analyses that were performed. The goal of this section is to allow other researchers to replicate your study exactly as you did it, so that they can verify your results. There are four main components to a Materials and Methods section: 1. Study design: You will need to explain how your study was designed, including the type of experimental design (e.g., randomized controlled trial, case-control study) and any randomization or blinding that was used. 2. Subjects: If human subjects were involved in your study, you will need to provide information on who they were (e.g., age, gender, health status) and how they were recruited for the study. If animal subjects were used, you will need to provide species, strain/breed information, as well as details on housing and diets. 3.Materials: This is where you list all of the materials used in your study, including any chemicals or reagents (and their suppliers), equipment (and its model number), software programs employed etc.. 4 Data collection methods: Describe in detail how data was collected during the course of the study – this might include measurements taken from participants at different time points or observation protocols followed during experiments etc..

How Do You Write Materials And Methods for a Dissertation?

In a dissertation, the Materials and Methods section is where you explain how you carried out your research. This includes providing details of your research design, participants, data collection methods, and analysis procedures. The aim of this section is to allow other researchers to replicate your study if they so wish. As such, it is important that you provide enough detail for others to be able to do this. However, you also need to strike a balance between providing too much information (which would make the section overly long and cumbersome) and not enough information (which would make it impossible for others to replicate your study). When writing the Materials and Methods section, it is important to use clear and concise language. You should also avoid using jargon wherever possible. The aim is for other researchers to be able to understand what you did without having to struggle through complex language or terminology. In terms of structure, a good way to approach this section is by breaking it down into subsections based on different aspects of your research (e.g., participants, data collection methods, etc.). Within each subsection, you can then provide more specific details about what you did. Overall, the key thing to remember when writing the Materials and Methods section of a dissertation is that accuracy and clarity are essential. Providing too much or too little information can both hamper attempts by others to replicate your study; so strike a balance and aim for clear and concise prose throughout.

Key Elements of a Dissertation Prospectus

If you’re working on a dissertation, the “Materials and Methods” section is a key component of your success. This section outlines the research you’ve done and the methodology you’ve used to gather information. It’s important to be as clear and concise as possible in this section, as your readers will need to understand exactly what you did in order to replicate your work. Here are some tips for writing a successful “Materials and Methods” section: 1. Be sure to include an overview of your research design. This should include the type of study you conducted (e.g., experimental, observational, etc.), the participants involved, and the methods you used to collect data. 2. Clearly explain any materials or equipment you used in your study. Your readers should be able to easily understand and replicate your work if they have access to the same materials and equipment. 3. Describe your data collection procedures in detail. Again, it’s important that your readers can understand and replicate your work, so be as clear as possible when describing how you collected data. 4. Finally, provide a brief discussion of your data analysis methods.