discussion of the results in thesis

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

Search SkillsYouNeed:

Learning Skills:

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

Writing Your Dissertation or Thesis eBook

Part of the Skills You Need Guide for Students .

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

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

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

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

Writing your Dissertation:  Results and Discussion

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

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

There are advantages to both approaches.

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

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

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

Results Section

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

For example:

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

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

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

Discussion Section

This section has four purposes, it should:

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

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

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

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

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

Starting the Task

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

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

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

Fleshing Out the Detail

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

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

The Importance of Understanding Differences

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue to: Dissertation: Conclusion and Extras Writing your Methodology

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

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

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

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

What makes an effective discussion?

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

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

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

Tip: Not all journals share the same naming conventions.

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

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

Questions to ask yourself:

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

How to structure a discussion

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

Writing Tips

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

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

Don’t

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

Snippets of Effective Discussions:

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

Identifying reliable indicators of fitness in polar bears

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

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

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

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

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

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

The purpose of the discussion section is to interpret and describe the significance of your findings in relation to what was already known about the research problem being investigated and to explain any new understanding or insights that emerged as a result of your research. The discussion will always connect to the introduction by way of the research questions or hypotheses you posed and the literature you reviewed, but the discussion does not simply repeat or rearrange the first parts of your paper; the discussion clearly explains how your study advanced the reader's understanding of the research problem from where you left them at the end of your review of prior research.

Annesley, Thomas M. “The Discussion Section: Your Closing Argument.” Clinical Chemistry 56 (November 2010): 1671-1674; Peacock, Matthew. “Communicative Moves in the Discussion Section of Research Articles.” System 30 (December 2002): 479-497.

Importance of a Good Discussion

The discussion section is often considered the most important part of your research paper because it:

• Most effectively demonstrates your ability as a researcher to think critically about an issue, to develop creative solutions to problems based upon a logical synthesis of the findings, and to formulate a deeper, more profound understanding of the research problem under investigation;
• Presents the underlying meaning of your research, notes possible implications in other areas of study, and explores possible improvements that can be made in order to further develop the concerns of your research;
• Highlights the importance of your study and how it can contribute to understanding the research problem within the field of study;
• Presents how the findings from your study revealed and helped fill gaps in the literature that had not been previously exposed or adequately described; and,
• Engages the reader in thinking critically about issues based on an evidence-based interpretation of findings; it is not governed strictly by objective reporting of information.

Annesley Thomas M. “The Discussion Section: Your Closing Argument.” Clinical Chemistry 56 (November 2010): 1671-1674; Bitchener, John and Helen Basturkmen. “Perceptions of the Difficulties of Postgraduate L2 Thesis Students Writing the Discussion Section.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5 (January 2006): 4-18; Kretchmer, Paul. Fourteen Steps to Writing an Effective Discussion Section. San Francisco Edit, 2003-2008.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  General Rules

These are the general rules you should adopt when composing your discussion of the results :

• Do not be verbose or repetitive; be concise and make your points clearly
• Avoid the use of jargon or undefined technical language
• Follow a logical stream of thought; in general, interpret and discuss the significance of your findings in the same sequence you described them in your results section [a notable exception is to begin by highlighting an unexpected result or a finding that can grab the reader's attention]
• Use the present verb tense, especially for established facts; however, refer to specific works or prior studies in the past tense
• If needed, use subheadings to help organize your discussion or to categorize your interpretations into themes

II.  The Content

The content of the discussion section of your paper most often includes :

• Explanation of results : Comment on whether or not the results were expected for each set of findings; go into greater depth to explain findings that were unexpected or especially profound. If appropriate, note any unusual or unanticipated patterns or trends that emerged from your results and explain their meaning in relation to the research problem.
• References to previous research : Either compare your results with the findings from other studies or use the studies to support a claim. This can include re-visiting key sources already cited in your literature review section, or, save them to cite later in the discussion section if they are more important to compare with your results instead of being a part of the general literature review of prior research used to provide context and background information. Note that you can make this decision to highlight specific studies after you have begun writing the discussion section.
• Deduction : A claim for how the results can be applied more generally. For example, describing lessons learned, proposing recommendations that can help improve a situation, or highlighting best practices.
• Hypothesis : A more general claim or possible conclusion arising from the results [which may be proved or disproved in subsequent research]. This can be framed as new research questions that emerged as a consequence of your analysis.

III.  Organization and Structure

Keep the following sequential points in mind as you organize and write the discussion section of your paper:

• Think of your discussion as an inverted pyramid. Organize the discussion from the general to the specific, linking your findings to the literature, then to theory, then to practice [if appropriate].
• Use the same key terms, narrative style, and verb tense [present] that you used when describing the research problem in your introduction.
• Begin by briefly re-stating the research problem you were investigating and answer all of the research questions underpinning the problem that you posed in the introduction.
• Describe the patterns, principles, and relationships shown by each major findings and place them in proper perspective. The sequence of this information is important; first state the answer, then the relevant results, then cite the work of others. If appropriate, refer the reader to a figure or table to help enhance the interpretation of the data [either within the text or as an appendix].
• Regardless of where it's mentioned, a good discussion section includes analysis of any unexpected findings. This part of the discussion should begin with a description of the unanticipated finding, followed by a brief interpretation as to why you believe it appeared and, if necessary, its possible significance in relation to the overall study. If more than one unexpected finding emerged during the study, describe each of them in the order they appeared as you gathered or analyzed the data. As noted, the exception to discussing findings in the same order you described them in the results section would be to begin by highlighting the implications of a particularly unexpected or significant finding that emerged from the study, followed by a discussion of the remaining findings.
• Before concluding the discussion, identify potential limitations and weaknesses if you do not plan to do so in the conclusion of the paper. Comment on their relative importance in relation to your overall interpretation of the results and, if necessary, note how they may affect the validity of your findings. Avoid using an apologetic tone; however, be honest and self-critical [e.g., in retrospect, had you included a particular question in a survey instrument, additional data could have been revealed].
• The discussion section should end with a concise summary of the principal implications of the findings regardless of their significance. Give a brief explanation about why you believe the findings and conclusions of your study are important and how they support broader knowledge or understanding of the research problem. This can be followed by any recommendations for further research. However, do not offer recommendations which could have been easily addressed within the study. This would demonstrate to the reader that you have inadequately examined and interpreted the data.

IV.  Overall Objectives

The objectives of your discussion section should include the following: I.  Reiterate the Research Problem/State the Major Findings

Briefly reiterate the research problem or problems you are investigating and the methods you used to investigate them, then move quickly to describe the major findings of the study. You should write a direct, declarative, and succinct proclamation of the study results, usually in one paragraph.

II.  Explain the Meaning of the Findings and Why They are Important

No one has thought as long and hard about your study as you have. Systematically explain the underlying meaning of your findings and state why you believe they are significant. After reading the discussion section, you want the reader to think critically about the results and why they are important. You don’t want to force the reader to go through the paper multiple times to figure out what it all means. If applicable, begin this part of the section by repeating what you consider to be your most significant or unanticipated finding first, then systematically review each finding. Otherwise, follow the general order you reported the findings presented in the results section.

III.  Relate the Findings to Similar Studies

No study in the social sciences is so novel or possesses such a restricted focus that it has absolutely no relation to previously published research. The discussion section should relate your results to those found in other studies, particularly if questions raised from prior studies served as the motivation for your research. This is important because comparing and contrasting the findings of other studies helps to support the overall importance of your results and it highlights how and in what ways your study differs from other research about the topic. Note that any significant or unanticipated finding is often because there was no prior research to indicate the finding could occur. If there is prior research to indicate this, you need to explain why it was significant or unanticipated. IV.  Consider Alternative Explanations of the Findings

It is important to remember that the purpose of research in the social sciences is to discover and not to prove . When writing the discussion section, you should carefully consider all possible explanations for the study results, rather than just those that fit your hypothesis or prior assumptions and biases. This is especially important when describing the discovery of significant or unanticipated findings.

V.  Acknowledge the Study’s Limitations

It is far better for you to identify and acknowledge your study’s limitations than to have them pointed out by your professor! Note any unanswered questions or issues your study could not address and describe the generalizability of your results to other situations. If a limitation is applicable to the method chosen to gather information, then describe in detail the problems you encountered and why. VI.  Make Suggestions for Further Research

You may choose to conclude the discussion section by making suggestions for further research [as opposed to offering suggestions in the conclusion of your paper]. Although your study can offer important insights about the research problem, this is where you can address other questions related to the problem that remain unanswered or highlight hidden issues that were revealed as a result of conducting your research. You should frame your suggestions by linking the need for further research to the limitations of your study [e.g., in future studies, the survey instrument should include more questions that ask..."] or linking to critical issues revealed from the data that were not considered initially in your research.

NOTE: Besides the literature review section, the preponderance of references to sources is usually found in the discussion section . A few historical references may be helpful for perspective, but most of the references should be relatively recent and included to aid in the interpretation of your results, to support the significance of a finding, and/or to place a finding within a particular context. If a study that you cited does not support your findings, don't ignore it--clearly explain why your research findings differ from theirs.

V.  Problems to Avoid

• Do not waste time restating your results . Should you need to remind the reader of a finding to be discussed, use "bridge sentences" that relate the result to the interpretation. An example would be: “In the case of determining available housing to single women with children in rural areas of Texas, the findings suggest that access to good schools is important...," then move on to further explaining this finding and its implications.
• As noted, recommendations for further research can be included in either the discussion or conclusion of your paper, but do not repeat your recommendations in the both sections. Think about the overall narrative flow of your paper to determine where best to locate this information. However, if your findings raise a lot of new questions or issues, consider including suggestions for further research in the discussion section.
• Do not introduce new results in the discussion section. Be wary of mistaking the reiteration of a specific finding for an interpretation because it may confuse the reader. The description of findings [results section] and the interpretation of their significance [discussion section] should be distinct parts of your paper. If you choose to combine the results section and the discussion section into a single narrative, you must be clear in how you report the information discovered and your own interpretation of each finding. This approach is not recommended if you lack experience writing college-level research papers.
• Use of the first person pronoun is generally acceptable. Using first person singular pronouns can help emphasize a point or illustrate a contrasting finding. However, keep in mind that too much use of the first person can actually distract the reader from the main points [i.e., I know you're telling me this--just tell me!].

Analyzing vs. Summarizing. Department of English Writing Guide. George Mason University; Discussion. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College; Hess, Dean R. "How to Write an Effective Discussion." Respiratory Care 49 (October 2004); Kretchmer, Paul. Fourteen Steps to Writing to Writing an Effective Discussion Section. San Francisco Edit, 2003-2008; The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Sauaia, A. et al. "The Anatomy of an Article: The Discussion Section: "How Does the Article I Read Today Change What I Will Recommend to my Patients Tomorrow?” The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 74 (June 2013): 1599-1602; Research Limitations & Future Research . Lund Research Ltd., 2012; Summary: Using it Wisely. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Schafer, Mickey S. Writing the Discussion. Writing in Psychology course syllabus. University of Florida; Yellin, Linda L. A Sociology Writer's Guide . Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 2009.

Writing Tip

Don’t Over-Interpret the Results!

Interpretation is a subjective exercise. As such, you should always approach the selection and interpretation of your findings introspectively and to think critically about the possibility of judgmental biases unintentionally entering into discussions about the significance of your work. With this in mind, be careful that you do not read more into the findings than can be supported by the evidence you have gathered. Remember that the data are the data: nothing more, nothing less.

MacCoun, Robert J. "Biases in the Interpretation and Use of Research Results." Annual Review of Psychology 49 (February 1998): 259-287; Ward, Paulet al, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Expertise . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2018.

Another Writing Tip

Don't Write Two Results Sections!

One of the most common mistakes that you can make when discussing the results of your study is to present a superficial interpretation of the findings that more or less re-states the results section of your paper. Obviously, you must refer to your results when discussing them, but focus on the interpretation of those results and their significance in relation to the research problem, not the data itself.

Azar, Beth. "Discussing Your Findings."  American Psychological Association gradPSYCH Magazine (January 2006).

Yet Another Writing Tip

Avoid Unwarranted Speculation!

The discussion section should remain focused on the findings of your study. For example, if the purpose of your research was to measure the impact of foreign aid on increasing access to education among disadvantaged children in Bangladesh, it would not be appropriate to speculate about how your findings might apply to populations in other countries without drawing from existing studies to support your claim or if analysis of other countries was not a part of your original research design. If you feel compelled to speculate, do so in the form of describing possible implications or explaining possible impacts. Be certain that you clearly identify your comments as speculation or as a suggestion for where further research is needed. Sometimes your professor will encourage you to expand your discussion of the results in this way, while others don’t care what your opinion is beyond your effort to interpret the data in relation to the research problem.

• << Previous: Using Non-Textual Elements
• Next: Limitations of the Study >>
• Last Updated: May 22, 2024 12:03 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

How Do I Write the Discussion Chapter?

Reflecting on and Comparing Your Data, Recognising the Strengths and Limitations

• First Online: 19 October 2023

Cite this chapter

• Sue Reeves   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3017-0559 3 &
• Bartek Buczkowski   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4146-3664 4  

403 Accesses

The Discussion chapter brings an opportunity to write an academic argument that contains a detailed critical evaluation and analysis of your research findings. This chapter addresses the purpose and critical nature of the discussion, contains a guide to selecting key results to discuss, and details how best to structure the discussion with subsections and paragraphs. We also present a list of points to do and avoid when writing the discussion together with a Discussion chapter checklist.

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

Access this chapter

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight 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

Braun V, Clarke V (2013) Successful qualitative research: a practical guide for beginners. SAGE Publications, London

Google Scholar  

McGregor SLT (2018) Understanding and evaluating research: a critical guide. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, CA

Book   Google Scholar  

PLOS (2023) Author resources. How to write discussions and conclusions. Accessed Mar 3, 2023, from https://plos.org/resource/how-to-write-conclusions/ . Accessed 3 Mar 2023

Further Reading

Cottrell S (2017) Critical thinking skills: effective analysis, argument and reflection, 3rd edn. Palgrave, London

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Roehampton, London, UK

Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK

Bartek Buczkowski

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Reeves, S., Buczkowski, B. (2023). How Do I Write the Discussion Chapter?. In: Mastering Your Dissertation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41911-9_9

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41911-9_9

Published : 19 October 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-41910-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-41911-9

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

How to Write Your Thesis Discussion Section

The discussion section is the most critical aspect of your thesis. It is written after presenting your data in the results section. This article explains how to structure your thesis discussion section and what content is required.

What is the thesis discussion section?

The thesis discussion includes explanations and interpretations of your results in the context of your thesis question and  literature review , discusses their implications, acknowledges their limitations, and gives recommendations. In doing so, you make an argument to support your conclusion .

What should the thesis discussion section include?

• A summary of your key findings

This analysis does not support the theory that…

• The answer to your thesis question

These findings confirm our hypothesis that…

• An interpretation of your findings

Our findings agree with the theory proposed by Jones (2019)…

• The implications of your findings

The data provide new evidence of…

• The limitations of your findings (i.e., what can’t the results tell us)

This study only included individuals living in urban areas, and the results may not be generalizable to populations in rural areas…

• Suggestions of practical applications of your findings

X should be taken into consideration when…

• Recommendations for further scientific investigations

Further studies are necessary to…

What should the thesis discussion section not include?

• A restatement of all your results
• The introduction of new results . All results in the discussion section must have been presented in the results section.
• Speculations that can’t be supported by your data
• Results that do not directly relate to your thesis question or hypothesis
• Tables and figures (these are usually included in the results section)

How does the discussion overlap with other thesis sections?

The content in the thesis discussion section overlaps with the results section — the results section presents the data, and the discussion section interprets it. The structure of the discussion section differs according to the type of research ( quantitative vs. qualitative ). In qualitative research, such as in the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) domain, the discussion and results from sections are often combined. In thesis studies involving quantitative research, such as in the Sciences domain, these sections are usually written separately.

The content in the thesis discussion section also overlaps with the conclusion section — the discussion section presents a detailed analysis and interpretation of the data, and the conclusion section summarizes the main findings of the discussion. The discussion and conclusion sections may also be combined into a single section in some fields of study. If you are unsure of which structure to use, ask your supervisor for guidance and check the requirements of your academic institution.

How to write a thesis discussion

The discussion section of a thesis starts with an interpretation of the results and then places the findings in the general context of the field of study.

The discussion section is the most critical section of your thesis and will probably be the hardest to write. The discussion section of a thesis starts with an interpretation of the results and then places the findings in the general context of the field of study. This section also demonstrates your ability to think critically and develop innovative solutions to problems based on your findings, resulting in a deeper understanding of the research problem.

Because it can be daunting to write the thesis discussion section in one go, first prepare a draft according to the following steps:

• Prepare an outline that broadly states your argument and how your results support it.
• Strengthen your argument by mapping out how your results fit into the outline.
• Place unexpected or controversial results in context and describe what may have caused them.
• Go back to your literature review to identify any studies that you might want to delve into in greater detail given the findings of your study.
• Identify study limitations.
• Briefly summarize the importance and implications of your findings.
• Recommend any practical applications of your study findings.
• Suggest future work that could build on your findings or address study limitations.

Once you are happy with your draft, it’s time to finalize the thesis discussion section. Use the steps below as a guideline:

• First, restate your thesis question and hypothesis that were stated in the introduction.
• Then, use your findings to support the answer to your thesis question.
• Defend your answers by discussing other studies with correlating results.
• Explain how your findings consistently fit in with the current literature and mention how they address knowledge gaps in the field.
• Mention studies that conflict with your findings, and try to explain possible causes of these contradictions (e.g., population size, inclusion and excision criteria, differences in data collection and analysis methods).
• Address any unexpected findings. Describe what happened and then discuss the potential causes (e.g., a skewed response rate, sampling bias, or changes in the equipment used). Because they could have been caused by a flawed sampling method or an incorrect choice of methodology, carefully check that you have adequately justified your methodological approach. In extreme cases, you may need to restructure your hypothesis or rewrite your introduction.
• Research studies are expected to have limitations and weaknesses. Mention all of them and how they may have impacted the interpretation and validity of your findings. Some limitations could highlight areas that require further study.
• Summarize the practical applications and theoretical implications of your findings.
• Recommend potential areas for future research.

How do I interpret my results?

The thesis discussion section must concisely interpret the results and assign importance to them. This is achieved by:

• Identifying relationships, patterns, and correlations in the data
• Discussing whether the findings support your hypothesis
• Considering alternative explanations while also justifying your chosen explanation
• Emphasizing novel results and explaining how they fill knowledge gaps
• Explaining unexpected results and determining their significance

How do I discuss the implications of my results?

The discussion section of your thesis explains how your findings fit in with and contribute to the existing literature. This refers back to the literature review section of your thesis. The following questions should be addressed:

• Are your findings supported by other studies, and do they add to the body of knowledge or address a gap?
• Do your findings disagree with other studies? If so, determine or suggest the reason(s) why.
• Do your findings challenge or support existing theories?
• What are the practical implications of your findings?

How do I acknowledge the limitations of my study?

It is expected that all studies will have limitations. When discussing your study limitations, don’t undermine your findings . A good discussion of the limitations will strengthen your study’s credibility.

Examples of study limitations: sample size, differences in methods used for data collection or analysis, study type (e.g., retrospective vs. prospective), inclusion/exclusion criteria of the study population, effects of confounders, researcher bias, and robustness of the data collection method.

How do I make recommendations for future research?

Recommendations should either be included in the discussion or the conclusion section of your thesis, but not in both. This could include:

• Addressing questions related to your study that remain unanswered
• Suggesting a logical progression of your research study using concrete ideas
• Suggesting future work based on the study limitations you have identified

Example: Future studies using a larger sample size from multiple sites are recommended to confirm the generalizability of our findings. Example: We suggest that the participants are re-interviewed after 5 years to determine how their perception of this traumatic experience has changed.

Tips for writing the thesis discussion section

• Use subheadings to break down the discussion into smaller sections that identify key points.
• Maintain consistency with the introduction  and  literature review sections. Use the same point of view, tone, and terminology.
• Be concise .
• Be logical. Present the discussion in the same sequence as the results unless there is an unexpected or novel finding that should be emphasized first.
• Do not use jargon, and define all technical terms and abbreviations/acronyms.
• Cite all sources. The majority of references cited in the thesis discussion section should be recent (i.e., published within the past 10 years).
• Avoid plagiarism .

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

Are your  key findings summarized in the thesis discussion section?

Have you  interpreted your findings in the context of your thesis question?

Have you shown how your findings fit in by  discussing differences and similarities with current literature as well as any gaps in the literature that your findings address?

Have you  explained the significance of your findings?

Have you  contemplated alternative explanations for your findings?

Have you  explained the practical and/or theoretical implications of your findings?

Have you identified and  evaluated the limitations of your study?

Have you  recommended practical actions or areas that require further studies based on your findings?

What tense is used to write the thesis discussion section? +

Use the present tense when referring to established facts. Use the past tense when referring to previous studies.

What is the difference between the discussion and conclusion sections of a thesis? +

The  discussion section is a detailed analysis and interpretation of the study results that place them in context with the associated literature. The  conclusion section is much shorter than the discussion section. It mentions the main points of the discussion section, tells the reader why your research is important, and makes recommendations based on your study findings.

What is the difference between the results and discussion sections of a thesis? +

The results section objectively reports the study findings without speculation. The discussion section interprets the findings, puts them into context, and assigns importance to them.

• How it works

How to Write a Dissertation Discussion Chapter – A Quick Guide with Examples

Published by Alvin Nicolas at August 12th, 2021 , Revised On September 20, 2023

Dissertation discussion is the chapter where you explore the relevance, significance, and meanings of your findings  – allowing you to showcase your talents in describing and analyzing the results of your study.

Here, you will be expected to demonstrate how your research findings  answer the  research questions  established or test the  hypothesis .

The arguments you assert in the dissertation analysis and discussions chapter lay the foundations of your conclusion . It is critically important to discuss the results in a precise manner.

To help you understand how to write a dissertation discussion chapter, here is the list of the main elements of this section so you stay on the right track when writing:

• Summary: Start by providing a summary of your key research findings
• Interpretations: What is the significance of your findings?
• Implications: Why are your findings important to academic and scientific communities, and what purpose would they serve?
• Limitations: When and where will your results have no implications?
• Future Recommendations : Advice for other researchers and scientists who explore the topic further in future.

The dissertation discussion chapter should be carefully drafted to ensure that the results mentioned in your research align with your research question, aims, and objectives.

Considering the importance of this chapter for all students working on their dissertations, we have comprehensive guidelines on how to write a dissertation discussion chapter.

The discussion and  conclusion  chapters often overlap. Depending on your university, you may be asked to group these two sections in one chapter – Discussion and Conclusion.

In some cases, the results and discussion are put together under the Results and Discussion chapter. Here are some dissertation examples of working out the best structure for your dissertation.

Alternatively, you can look for the required  dissertation structure in your handbook  or consult your supervisor.

Steps of How to Write Dissertation Discussion Chapter

1. provide a summary of your findings.

Start your discussion by summarising the key findings of your research questions. Avoid repeating the information you have already stated in the previous chapters.

You will be expected to clearly express your interpretation of results to answer the research questions established initially in one or two paragraphs.

Here are some  examples of how to present the summary of your findings ;

• “The data suggests that”,
• “The results confirm that”,
• “The analysis indicates that”,
• “The research shows a relationship between”, etc.

2. Interpretations of Results

Your audience will expect you to provide meanings of the results, although they might seem obvious to you. The results and their interpretations should be linked to the research questions so the reader can understand the value your research has added to the literature.

There are many ways of interpreting the data, but your chosen approach to interpreting the data will depend on the  type of research involved . Some of the most common strategies employed include;

• Describing how and why you ended up with unexpected findings and explaining their importance in detail
• Relating your findings with previous studies conducted
• Explaining your position with logical arguments when/if any alternative explanations are suggested
• An in-depth discussion around whether or not the findings answered your research questions and successfully tested the hypothesis

Examples of how you can start your interpretation in the Discussion chapter are –

• “Findings of this study contradict those of Allen et al. (2014) that”,
• “Contrary to the hypothesized association,” “Confirming the hypothesis…”,
• “The findings confirm that A is….. even though Allen et al. (2014) and Michael (2012) suggested B was …..”

3. Implications of your Study

What practical and theoretical implications will your study have for other researchers and the scientific community as a whole?

It is vital to relate your results to the knowledge in the existing literature so the readers can establish how your research will contribute to the existing data.

When thinking of the possible consequences of your findings, you should ask yourself these;

• Are your findings in line with previous studies? What contribution did your research make to them?
• Why are your results entirely different from other studies on the same topic?
• Did your findings approve or contradict existing knowledge?
• What are the practical implications of your study?

Remember that as the researcher, you should aim to let your readers know why your study will contribute to the existing literature. Possible ways of starting this particular section are;

• “The findings show that A….. whereas Lee (2017) and John (2013) suggested that B”, “The results of this study completely contradict the claims made in theories”,
• “These results are not in line with the theoretical perspectives”,
• “The statistical analysis provides a new understanding of the relationship between A and B”,
• “Future studies should take into consideration the findings of this study because”

“Improve your work’s language, structure, style, and overall quality. Get help from our experienced dissertation editors to improve the quality of your paper to First Class Standard. Click here to learn more about our Dissertation, Editing, and Improvement Services .

Looking for dissertation help?

Researchprospect to the rescue, then.

We have expert writers on our team who are skilled at helping students with dissertations across various disciplines. Guaranteeing 100% satisfaction!

4. Recognise the Limitations of your Research

Almost every academic research has some limitations. Acknowledging them will only add to your credibility as a scientific researcher.

In addition to the possible human errors, it’s important to take into account other factors that might have influenced the results of your study, including but not limited to unexpected research obstacles, specific methodological choices , and the overall research design.

Avoid mentioning any limitations that may not be relevant to your research aim, but clearly state the limitations that may have affected your results.

For example, if you used a sample size that included a tiny population, you may not generalise your results.

Similarly, obstacles faced in collecting data from the participants can influence the findings of your study. Make a note of all such  research limitations , but explain to the reader why your results are still authentic.

• The small sample size limited the generalisability of the results.
• The authenticity of the findings may have been influenced by….
• The obstacles in collecting data resulted in…
• It is beyond the framework of this research…

5. Provide Recommendations for Future Research

The limitations of your research work directly result in future recommendations. However, it should be noted that your recommendations for future research work should include the areas that your own work could not report so other researchers can build on them.

Sometimes the recommendations are a part of the  conclusion chapter . Some examples;

• More research is needed to be performed….

The Purpose of Dissertation Discussion Chapter 

Remember that the discussion section of a dissertation is the heart of your research because a) it will indicate your stance on the topic of research, and b) it answers the research questions initially established in the Introduction chapter .

Every piece of information you present here will add value to the existing literature within your field of study. How you structured your findings in the preceding chapter will help you determine the best structure for your dissertation discussion section.

For example, it might be logical to structure your analysis/discussions by theme if you chose the pattern in your findings section.

But generally, discussion based on research questions is the more widely used  structure  in academia because this pattern clearly indicates how you have addressed the aim of your research.

Most UK universities require the supervisor or committee members to comment on the extent to which each research question has been answered. You will be doing them a great favour if you structure your discussion so that each research question is laid out separately.

Irrespective of whether you are  writing an essay, dissertation, or  chapter of a dissertation , all pieces of writing should start with an  introduction .

Once your readers have read through your study results, you might want to highlight the contents of the subsequent discussion as an introduction paragraph (summary of your results – as explained above).

Likewise, the discussion chapter is expected to end with a concluding paragraph – allowing you the opportunity to summarise your interpretations.

The dissertation analysis & discussion chapter is usually very long, so it will make sense to emphasise the critical points in a concluding paragraph so the reader can grasp the essential information. This will also help to make sure the reader understands your analysis.

Also Read:   Research Discussion Of Findings

Useful Tips 

Presentation of graphs, tables, and figures.

In the 1990s and early 2000s, students spent days creating graphs and charts for their  statistical analysis work . Thanks to technology, you can produce even more accurate graphs and figures today in a shorter period.

Using  Microsoft Word, STATA, SPSS, Microsoft Excel  and other statistical analysis software, we can now draw  beautiful-looking figures, tables , and graphs with just a few clicks and make them appear in our document at the desired place. But there are downsides to being too dependent on technology.

Many students make the common mistake of using colours to represent variables when really they have to print their dissertation paper final copy in black and white.

Any colours on graphs and figures will eventually be viewed in the grayscale presentation. Recognizing different shades of grey on the same chart or graph can sometimes be a little confusing.

For example, green and purple appear as pretty much the same shade of grey on a line chat, meaning your chart will become unreadable to the marker.

Another trap you may fall into is the unintentional stuffing   of the dissertation chapter with graphs and figures. Even though it is essential to show numbers and statistics, you don’t want to overwhelm your readers with too many.

It may not be necessary to have a graph/table under each sub-heading. Only you can best judge whether or not you need to have a graph/table under a particular sub-heading as the writer.

Relating to Previous Chapters  

As a student, it can be challenging to develop your own analysis and discussion of results. One of the excellent discussion chapter requirements is to showcase your ability to relate previous research to your research results.

Avoid repeating the same information over and over. Many students fall into this trap which negatively affects the mark of their overall dissertation paper .

Concise and to-the-point information will help you effectively convey your point to the readers.

Although you must demonstrate how your findings relate to previous research, it is equally important to ensure you are not simply rewriting what has already been said in the introduction  and  literature review  chapters.

The best strategy is to use examples from previous sections to postulate an argument.

Hyperlinks are recommended to take the reader from one section to another. This is especially important for submitting electronic documents as .word or .pdf files. Hyperlinking is tedious and time-consuming, so you should allow for this in your dissertation timeline to avoid rushing in the closing stages.

Also read: How to Write the Abstract for the Dissertation.

Using Subsections and Subheadings

You might want to reflect on the structure of the discussion in your organizstion of the dissertation discussion chapter, and for that, you will need to create sub-sections.

It is essential to keep subsections to the point and as short as possible. Use a layer of subheadings if possible.

For example

Subsection 4.1 of Chapter 4- Discussion can be further divided into sections 4.1.1 and 4.2.2. After three numerical layers (4.1.1, 4.2.2, and 4.2.3), any subheadings need not appear in the contents table.

The titles of all subsections will appear on your table of contents  so choose the wordings carefully. A title too long or too short might confuse the reader. A one or two-word subheading will not give the reader enough information to understand the section.

Likewise, using a research question or long sentences in the subheading is not recommended. It might help to examine how other researchers and writers create these subheadings.

Critical Thinking

Your critical thinking skills are the crux of your dissertation discussion chapter. You will do yourself a great disservice if you fail to put the critical thinking element into the equation.

After all, this exercise aims to showcase clarity in your thoughts and arguments. Markers of the dissertation give more importance to the analysis  and discussion chapter. But you could be marked negatively if this particular chapter lacks critical thinking.

Many students struggle to distinguish between fundamental descriptive analysis and critical thinking with their opinions on the research topic.

Critical thinking is a skill developed over time, and it might be daunting for you to come to terms with the idea of critical thinking and its use in your analysis. But even if you are no expert, you must try your best.

“Still unsure about  how to write a dissertation discussion chapter ? Why not take advantage of our  UK-based dissertation writing service ? Your dissertation is essential to your degree, so you cannot risk failing it.

With our custom writing service , you are guaranteed to have all your dissertation paper elements put into the right place. Our expert academics can help you with your full dissertation paper or a part of it.  Click here to learn more about our dissertation services.

Duplication of Content

Another critical error students make reaffirming the point the graph/chart was supposed to make. Writing out the same information as presented in the graph defeats the whole purpose of having them in the first place.

You will be expected to form your opinions and arguments based on the findings (as presented by the graphs), so keep an eye on this mistake. Finally, avoid simply inserting a graph without any explanation whatsoever.

It should be noted that there is no correct or incorrect number of charts/figures one can use in the dissertation findings and discussion chapter. A balance must be struck.

Avoid Over Interpretation

This is a major no-no when writing a dissertation discussion. Do not make an argument that isn’t backed by your collected data.

The results and interpretations that cannot be supported should not be mentioned. Your research will be deemed unauthentic and will also be questioned by your supervisor if you do so. Results should be interpreted without any bias.

How to Write the Findings of a Dissertation.

Do not Speculate

Speculation in the  discussion chapter of your dissertation is discouraged. Your dissertation’s discussion is based on your collected data and how it relates to your research questions. Thus, speculating here will undoubtedly undermine your research’s credibility.

Also, try not to generalise your findings. If your research is based on a specific population, do not state that the same findings might apply in every case. As indicated previously, it is essential to acknowledge the limitations of your research.

On the other hand, if you think your discussion needs to address other populations as well, start your sentence like this ‘We speculate that..’ or ‘It is speculated that..’ This will keep you from getting into any trouble.

What are the elements of the Dissertation Discussion?

The list of the main elements of the discussion chapter are:

• Implications : Why are your findings important to academic and scientific communities, and what purpose would they serve?
• Future Recommendations: Advice for other researchers and scientists who explore the topic further in future.

What are the steps of writing a Dissertation Discussion Chapter?

• Write a summary of the findings
• Provide a summary of your findings
• Interpretations of Results
• Recognise the Limitations of your research
• Provide Recommendations for Future Research.

Can we use graphs and charts in the Dissertation Discussion Chapter?

Yes, using graphs to aid your statistical results and enhance presentation is essential, but do not overwhelm it with a lot of graphs in multiple colours. 

You May Also Like

Have you failed dissertation, assignment, exam or coursework? Don’t panic because you are not alone. Get help from our professional UK qualified writers!

Your dissertation introduction chapter provides detailed information on the research problem, significance of research, and research aim & objectives.

Not sure how to start your dissertation and get it right the first time? Here are some tips and guidelines for you to kick start your dissertation project.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

Thesis Helpers

Find the best tips and advice to improve your writing. Or, have a top expert write your paper.

Thesis Discussion Writing Guide For All Levels

A thesis discussion is the framing section of this paper. When writing this section, the author delves into the importance, meaning, and relevance of the results. The focus of this section should be on the explanation and evaluation of the findings. Here, you should show how your findings relate to the research questions and literature review. Your discussion should also make an argument that supports the overall conclusion.

The results and discussion in thesis form one of the most difficult parts to write. That’s because this section requires the author to think about the meaning and implication of their research. To be effective, the discussion chapter of a thesis should tell readers more about the meaning of the study and its importance. It should be well-written and organized to make it easier to read and understand.

Importance of Thesis Discussion

A discussion in thesis writing is a section that includes the interpretations and declaration of the writer’s opinions. It’s also the section where the writer explains the effects of their findings while making predictions and suggestions for future research. Here are some of the major reasons why the discussion section is important:

• It answers the questions posed in the thesis introduction
• It shows how the results of your research supported the answers to these questions
• It explains how those answers fit in the existing knowledge body about your research subject

A Ph.D. thesis discussion chapter can be maybe considered very important. Therefore, you might have to make several attempts when writing this chapter. Our thesis writers can help you out if you got stuck.

How to Write a Discussion Chapter in a Thesis

There are different ways of writing discussion for thesis. But, this chapter should start with the reiteration of the research problem and a summary of the major findings. All reported data should not be repeated in this section. However, the section should include a statement of the results that answers the research question. This introduction should not exceed a paragraph.

When writing a discussion, make sure that the introduction of your discussion chapter in thesis tells the readers what the results indicate or demonstrate. You can also tell your readers what the findings suggest or whether they support a certain theory. The discussion section of a thesis should essentially be focused on the following key elements.

• Identify patterns, correlations, and relationships of the data
• Discuss whether the findings supported the expectations you had or your hypothesis
• Contextualize the results within the existing theory or research
• Consider alternative explanations while arguing for your stance
• Explain the unexpected results and evaluate their significance
• Do your findings agree with the previous research and what addition do they have?
• Are your results different from those of previous studies and if so, why?
• Do the findings challenge or support the existing theories?
• What are the practical implications of your study?

The methodologies and research design that you use can cause limitations to your study. Unanticipated obstacles can also limit your study. Nevertheless, mention limitations only if they have direct relevance to the objectives of your research. Also, evaluate the impact of those limitations on the achievement of your research goals.

Good results and discussion thesis example can highlight a limited or small sample size as a limitation. This is a relevant limitation because it hinders the generalization of the findings.

Similarly, a discussion section can explain the problems encountered when analyzing or gathering data and how this influenced the findings. The effects of possible confounding variables that can’t be controlled should also be acknowledged in this section.

• Recommendations In some cases, the results and discussion sample thesis can feature recommendations for further research or practical implementation. However, there are cases where recommendations are featured in the conclusion.But, you can suggest further research immediately after stating the limitations of your study and their impact. Instead of just stating that further research is necessary, provide concrete ideas for future work. Show the readers how future studies can be built on the areas that your study couldn’t address.

What to Discuss in Discussion Thesis Chapter

Many learners want to know how to write discussion chapter in Ph.D. thesis because they don’t know what to discuss. Some learners are even confused between the discussion and conclusion chapters of a thesis. But, these chapters are different and they should have varying content.

Here’s what the discussion chapter should cover:

Interpretation of the research results Comparison of the results with those of the previous studies Contributions of your research to the existing knowledge body Limitations of the study Unexpected results How the results support or refute a certain theory or findings of the previous studies

On the other hand, a conclusion should mainly restate the hypothesis and the most important results. It should also highlight the limitations and significance of the study while suggesting a future direction.

How to Make Your Discussion More Effective? Avoid These Things!

Your discussion chapter should look like an inverted pyramid. Ideally, you should start from a general perspective and then narrow down to the specifics. But, make sure that your findings are linked to the literature, theory, and practice if possible. However, many learners don’t know how to do this. This is one of the major reasons why they want to learn how to write discussion thesis section.

For even better discussions, follow these tips to help with dissertation or thesis and to make it the best it can be:

• Restating your findings If you must remind your readers of the results of your study, use bridge sentences. For instance, tell your readers what a certain finding suggests instead of just re-stating it.
• Repeating recommendations Do not include recommendations in both the discussion and the conclusion parts of your paper. Instead, include recommendations either in the conclusion or discussion section of your thesis.
• Introducing new results Be careful to avoid introducing new results or information when trying to interpret a finding.
• Over-using first person This is one of the most important things to note when learning how to write a thesis discussion. You can use the first person in your thesis. However, using it excessively will distract your readers from your major points.

Learning how to write discussion section of thesis can make all the difference in terms of the grade that you graduate with from college or university. Stylistically, this section should read like bulleted points that have been written in paragraph form. Subheadings can be used if that makes sense. And, the length of this section should also depend on the scope of the study.

Get Thesis Discussion Help Right Now

Now that you got all the rules, you have to write your thesis discussion. It might take awhile, and perhaps you have a lot of other things to take care of. Let us help you! Our professional custom dissertation services include some of the best writers in the biz. They are experts in their respective fields and help you succeed in your thesis writing. Research, editing, writing, whatever you might need, we can help you.

Make PhD experience your own

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

• Translators
• Graphic Designers

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

How to Write an Effective Thesis Discussion

Writing an effective thesis discussion can be challenging because it is so open ended. The purpose of the discussion is to (1) interpret your results, (2) discuss the significance of your results, (3) place your work in the context of previous work, (4) discuss the limitations of your study, and (5) suggest next steps to advance understanding and/or to improve real-world situations. The discussion section should expand upon ideas presented in the introduction, literature review, and results, and sometimes even the materials and methods. It should convince the reader that your work was worthwhile.

General considerations

Throughout a thesis or other scholarly manuscript, the results of completed studies should be described in the past tense (e.g. "36 of 43 patients showed improvement with treatment A, while only 25 of 44 patients showed improvement with treatment B"). In contrast, present tense is used to describe ideas that currently appear to be true based on available evidence (e.g. "treatment A is more effective than treatment B for most patients"). A good thesis discussion will typically progress from discussing specific results to discussing broader concepts that currently appear to be true.

You should include citations and modifying statements as needed (e.g. "Previous work by Lee et al. (2017) found no difference in the effectiveness of treatment A compared to treatment B. However , their study was limited to patients in advanced stages of the disease."). You will also need to include suggestions for further research, which can be described in present tense (e.g. "Additional studies are needed to determine. . .") or future tense (e.g. "Future studies will determine . . .").

I will now move into more detailed suggestions for each part of the discussion. Notice the occasional use of first-person pronouns (e.g. "I suggest. . ." or "We believe. . ."), which is now generally acceptable in many fields if used sparingly. Check the specific guidelines provided by your graduate program (and target journal). Also notice the use of subheadings to break the text into shorter sections on specific topics, which is recommended for any long manuscript.

Discussion part 1: Interpret your results

Your discussion should relate directly to the research question(s) you presented in the introduction, so a good way to start the discussion is to clearly restate your research question(s) (e.g. "The current study aimed to determine whether treatment A or treatment B was better for patients with condition X.") The discussion section follows the results section, so the next obvious step is to state what you can conclude from your results (e.g. "We found that a higher percentage of patients showed improvement with treatment A than with treatment B, and therefore conclude that treatment A is more effective than treatment B for most patients with condition X").

There are two general strategies for structuring the discussion of results. The first strategy is to discuss the results in the same order as they were presented in the results section. Alternatively, you can discuss your most interesting or surprising results first. This second strategy is most effective when the results are especially novel. As with any manuscript, the goal is to keep your reader engaged.

In some fields, the thesis discussion is expected to include comments on all of the results, even minor results that may not be statistically significant (e.g. "Treatments C, D, and E produced results that were statistically indistinguishable from placebo, leading to the conclusion that they were ineffective at the concentrations tested."). Note that you should not just state the results (e.g. "Treatments C, D, and E produced results that were statistically indistinguishable from placebo"), but should also state a conclusion (e.g. "they were ineffective at the concentrations tested").

In some other fields, brief comments on minor results are typically included in the results section, and the discussion section is used to elaborate on the most noteworthy results. In some cases, it may be appropriate to write a combined "results and discussion" section, where results are presented alongside initial conclusions, and broader implications are discussed toward the end. Check the requirements for your graduate program (and target journal).

Discussion part 2: Discuss the significance of your results

Clearly explain what is gained from your research. Sometimes a study is very significant (e.g. These results are among the first to show that treatment A is more effective than treatment B for condition X."). Other times—especially for undergraduate or master's theses based on a few months of data collection—the results primarily provide information about what doesn't work (e.g. "These results indicate that treatments C, D, and E are ineffective at physiologically relevant concentrations.)

Discuss some of the possibilities that your research opens up (e.g. "These results raise the possibility that early treatment could improve daily life for patients with mild cases of condition X, and might even delay disease progression.) but do not overstate (e.g. "These results prove that early treatment will improve daily life for patients with mild cases of condition X, and will delay disease progression."). Be optimistic but realistic, whether your results are highly significant or not (e.g. "These results suggest that the solubility of molecules like C, D, and E need to be improved before they can be effective.").

Discussing the significance of your results (part 2 of this essay) is a natural extension of discussing what your results mean (part 1 in this essay), and may not require a separate section.

Discussion part 3: Place your work in the context of previous work

Put your work into a broader context. Here you should revisit some of the previously published work that was described in your introduction and literature review, and clarify how your work expands upon or challenges that work. Most importantly, you should discuss how your work advances understanding in your research field.

For a thesis based on disappointing data, your ability to effectively discuss previous work and potential future work can support the argument that you have developed the necessary skills to move forward in research. These skills are further demonstrated by many other aspects of a well-researched and well-written thesis.

In some cases, your results may reveal unexpected connections. This may require you to discuss additional bodies of work in the discussion section, which can become a second literature review section. As you may be starting to see, there are many different topics you can include in your discussion section. You need to choose your topics carefully, and cover them in sufficient but not overwhelming detail. You want your discussion to cover all essential information, remain a manageable length, and retain the reader's interest. All of the different possibilities can make writing your discussion section very challenging.

If your results contradict previous work, you need to provide some possible explanations. As a rationale scholar, it is especially important to consider all reasonable options. It could be that (1) the earlier work was flawed, incomplete, or not exactly comparable to your work, or (2) your work is flawed, incomplete, or not exactly comparable to the earlier work. You might not be able to determine the exact cause of the discrepancy, but contradictions provide an obvious way to transition into the next section.

Discussion part 4: Discuss the limitations of your study

Every study has limitations, and here you should discuss the major limitations of your research. What can't the results tell us? In what situations are the findings not relevant or well supported? There may be limitations due to your sample population, experimental techniques, data analysis, etc. Discuss these limitations honestly, but then explain why your study is useful despite these limitations. You might point out that your study included multiple different populations, different experimental techniques, alternative methods of data analysis, etc. You might also emphasize that your conclusions are limited to a subset of a larger population, and that additional work needs to be done to determine whether the same conclusions apply to a larger population. This brings us to our next point.

Discussion part 5: Suggest next steps to advance understanding and/or to improve real-world situations

Once you've placed your work into a broader context, you can imagine the future possibilities. Here you might discuss questions that remain to be answered, or questions that have been newly raised by your work. There might be specific studies that would be an obvious extension of your work, and/or exploratory studies that would shed light on promising areas for novel research. Alternatively, you might suggest ways in which your research could be applied to real-world situations to improve outcomes.

Many manuscripts and presentations end with a discussion of possible next steps. I tend to like this type of ending for discussions of basic research, such as which genes are activated in which cells. However, other people recommend always ending with conclusions, where you restate the main findings of your research in a compact form. This might involve a separate "conclusions" section or as a final paragraph in the "discussion" section. Ending with conclusions makes a lot of sense for studies that might directly impact real-world situations (e.g. Treatment A it more effective than treatment B for condition X.).

In any event, you should follow departmental recommendations, and end with a compelling and memorable message for your readers.

Related Posts

Qualitative and Quantitative Research: Differences and Similarities

The Fundamental Elements of a Literary Analysis

• Academic Writing Advice
• All Blog Posts
• Writing Advice
• Admissions Writing Advice
• Book Writing Advice
• Short Story Advice
• Employment Writing Advice
• Business Writing Advice
• Web Content Advice
• Article Writing Advice
• Magazine Writing Advice
• Grammar Advice
• Dialect Advice
• Editing Advice
• Freelance Advice
• Legal Writing Advice
• Poetry Advice
• Graphic Design Advice
• Logo Design Advice
• Translation Advice
• Blog Reviews
• Short Story Award Winners
• Scholarship Winners

Need an academic editor before submitting your work?

How to Write the Discussion Section of a Research Paper

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

Updated on September 15, 2023

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

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

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

Discussion section: what is it, what it does

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

What is it?

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

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

Why is it necessary?

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

Adds context for your results

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

Shows what your results actually mean and real-world implications

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

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

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

Summary of key findings

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

Begin with key findings with supporting evidence

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

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

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

State clearly and concisely

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

Interpretation of results

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

Analyze and interpret your findings

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

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

Unexpected or contradictory results

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

Context and comparison with previous work

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

How your work compares or contrasts with previous work

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

How to divide this section into subsections

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

Limitations

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

Why limitations don’t have a negative connotation

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

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

How limitations add to a researcher's credibility

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

Implications and significance

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

Restate your hypothesis

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

How was it proven or disproven?

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

How your results contribute to the literature

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

Future implications of your research

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

Sample discussion section

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to make your discussion flow naturally

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

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

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

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

Science Marketing Consultant

See our "Privacy Policy"

Ensure your structure and ideas are consistent and clearly communicated

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

• Dissertation & Thesis Guides
• Basics of Dissertation & Thesis Writing
• How to Write a Dissertation Discussion Chapter: Guide & Examples
• Speech Topics
• Basics of Essay Writing
• Essay Topics
• Other Essays
• Main Academic Essays
• Research Paper Topics
• Basics of Research Paper Writing
• Miscellaneous
• Chicago/ Turabian
• Data & Statistics
• Methodology
• Admission Writing Tips
• Admission Advice
• Other Guides
• Student Life
• Studying Tips
• Understanding Plagiarism
• Academic Writing Tips

• Essay Guides
• Research Paper Guides
• Formatting Guides
• Basics of Research Process
• Admission Guides

How to Write a Dissertation Discussion Chapter: Guide & Examples

Table of contents

Use our free Readability checker

Dissertation discussion section is a chapter that interprets the results obtained from research and offers an in-depth analysis of findings. In this section, students need to analyze the outcomes, evaluate their significance, and compare them to previous research. The discussion section may also explore the limitations of the study and suggest further research perspectives.

If you are stuck with your thesis or dissertation discussion chapter, you are in the right place to complete this section successfully. This article will outline our best solutions and methods on how to write the discussion of a dissertation or thesis. We also will share advanced dissertation discussion examples to help you finalize your PhD work.  Feel like academic writing gives you hassles? Remember that you can always rely on academic experts qualified in your field to get professional dissertation help online .

What Is a Dissertation Discussion?

First and foremost, students need to have a clear understanding of what dissertation discussion is. This is not the same as your results section , where you share data from your research. You are going deeper into the explanation of the existing data in your thesis or dissertation discussion section. In other words, you illustrate practical implications of your research and how the data can be used, researched further, or limited.  What will make your discussion section of a dissertation excellent:

• clear structure
• practical implication
• elaboration on future work on this topic.

This section should go after research methodology and before the dissertation conclusion . It should be directly relevant to questions posed in your introduction.  The biggest mistake you can make is to rewrite your result chapter with other words and add some limitations and recommendation paragraphs. However, this is an entirely different type of writing you need to complete.

Purpose of a Dissertation Discussion Chapter

A dissertation discussion section is critical to explaining students’ findings and the application of data to real-life cases. As we mentioned before, this section will often be read right after the dissertation methods . It evaluates and elaborates on findings and helps to understand the importance of your performed thesis research.  A dissertation discussion opens a new perspective on further research on the same field or topic. It also outlines critical data to consider in subsequent studies. In a nutshell, this is the section where you explain your work to a broad audience.

Structure of a Dissertation Discussion Section

Let’s start your writing journey of this research part with a clear delineation of what it should include and then briefly discuss each component. Here are some basic things you need to consider for an excellent discussion chapter of dissertation :

• Brief summary It does not mean copying an introduction section. However, the first few paragraphs will make an overview of your findings and topic.
• Interpretations This is a critical component of your work — elaborate on your results and explain possible ways of using them.
• Implication Research work is not just 100+ pages of text. Students should explain and illustrate how it could be used for solving practical problems.
• Constraints This is where you outline your limitations. For instance, your research was done only on students, and it may have different results with elderly people.
• Recommendations You can also define possible ways of future research on the exact topic when writing a discussion for your thesis or dissertation. Tell readers, for example, that it would be helpful to run similar research in other specific circumstances.

How to Write a Dissertation Discussion Chapter?

One of the most commonly asked questions for our experts is how to write the discussion section of a dissertation or thesis. We understand why it can be complicated to get a clear answer. Students often think that this section is similar to the result chapter and just retells it in other words. But it is not so. Let’s go through all steps to writing a discussion in a dissertation, and share our best examples from academic papers.

1. Remind Your Research Questions & Objectives

Writing the discussion chapter of a dissertation is not a big deal if you understand its aim and each component in a text structure. First of all, you need to evaluate how your results help to answer research questions you defined in the beginning. It is not about repeating the result, you did it in previous paragraphs.  However, dissertation or thesis discussion should underline how your findings help to answer the research problem. Start writing from a brief intro by recalling research questions or hypotheses . Then, show how your results answer them or support a hypothesis in your work.

2. Sum Up Key Findings

Next part of your discussion for dissertation is to provide a short summary of previous data. But do not respite the same summary paragraphs from results or introduction of a dissertation . Here researchers should be more thoughtful and go deeper into the work’s aims.  Try to explain in a few sentences what you get from running research. For instance, starters usually write the statement that “our data proves that…” or “survey results illustrate a clear correlation between a and b that is critical for proving our working hypothesis…”.  A discussion chapter of your dissertation is not just a fixation on results but a more profound summary connected to research goals and purpose. Here is an example: Summary of Findings Example

3. Interpret the Results

The most critical part of a discussion section is to explain and enact the results you’ve got. It is the most significant part of any text. Students should be clear about what to include in these paragraphs. Here is some advice to make this elaboration structured:

• Identify correlations or patterns in the data for dissertation discussion.
• Underline how results can answer research questions or prove your hypothesis.
• Emphasize how your findings are connected to the previous topic studies.
• Point out essential statements you can use in future research.
• Evaluate the significance of your results and any unexpected data you have.
• What others can learn from your research and how this work contributes to the field.
• Consider any possible additional or unique explanation of your findings.
• Go deeper with options of how results can be applied in practice.

Writing a dissertation discussion chapter can be tough, but here is a great sample to learn from. Example of Interpretations in Disssertation Discussion

4. Discuss How Your Findings Relate to the Literature

Here we came to the implications of your findings for the dissertation discussion. In other words, this is a few sentences on how your work is connected to other studies on the same research topic or what literature gap you are going to fill with the data and research you launched. Remember to mention how your study address the limitations you have discovered while writing a literature review .  First, outline how your hypothesis relates to theories or previous works in the field. Maybe, you challenged some theories or tried to define your own. Be specific in this section. Second, define a practical implementation of your work. Maybe, it can support recommendations or change legislation.  Discussion chapter of a thesis is a place where you explain your work, make it valuable, and incorporate additional meaning for some specific data.  Example of Implications in Disssertation Discussion

5. Mention Possible Limitations

It is pretty tricky to conduct research without limitations. You will always have some, which does not mean that your work is not good. When you write a discussion chapter in a thesis or dissertation, focus on what may influence your results and how changing independent variables can affect your data collection methods and final outcomes.  Here are some points to consider when you structure your dissertation discussion limitation part:

• If results can change in case you change the reference group?
• What will happen with data if it changes circumstances?
• What could influence results?

Critical thinking and analysis can help you to outline possible limitations. It can be the age of the reference group, change of questionnaire in a survey, or specific use of data extraction equipment. Be transparent about what could affect your results.  Example of Complications

6. Provide Recommendations for Further Research

Writing a dissertation discussion also makes a connection to possible future research. So, other scientists may complete that. While elaborating on possible implementations of your study, you may also estimate future approaches in topic research.  Here are some points to consider while your discussion in thesis writing:

• Outline questions related to your topic that you did not answer in defined study or did not outline as research questions. There are other possible gaps to research.
• Suggest future research based on limitations. For example, if you define surveyed people’s age as a limitation, recommend running another survey for older or younger recipients.

Example of Recommendations

7. Conclude Your Thesis/ Dissertation Discussion

You are almost done, the last step is to provide a brief summary of a section. It is not the same as a conclusion for whole research. However, you need to briefly outline key points from the dissertation discussion.  To finalize writing the discussion section of a dissertation, go through the text and check if there is no unimportant information. Do not overload the text with relevant data you did not present in the result section. Be specific in your summary paragraphs. It is a holistic view of everything you pointed out. Provide a few sentences to systemize all you outlined in the text. Example of a Concluding Summary in a Dissertation Discussion Section

Dissertation Discussion Example

If we need to share one piece of practical advice, it would be to use thesis or dissertation discussion examples when writing your own copy. StudyCrumb provides the best samples from real students' work to help you understand the stylistic and possible structure of this part. It does not mean you need to copy and paste them into your work.  However, you can use a  dissertation discussion example for inspiration and brainstorming ideas for breaking writing blocks. Here’s a doctoral thesis discussion chapter example.

Dissertation Discussion Writing Tips

Before reading this blog, you should already know how to write a thesis discussion. However, we would share some essential tips you need to have in mind while working on the document. 

• Be consistent Your dissertation discussion chapter is a part of bigger research, and it should be in line with your whole work.
• Understand your reader You are writing an academic text that will be analyzed by professionals and experts in the same field. Be sure that you are not trying to simplify your discussion.
• Be logical Do not jump into a new line of discussion if you did not delineate it as a research question at the beginning.
• Be clear Do not include any data that was not presented in the result section.
• Consider word choice Use such terms as “our data indicate…” or “our data suggests…” instead of “the data proves.”
• Use proper format Follow the formatting rules specified by a specific paper style (e.g., APA style format , MLA format , or Chicago format ) or provided by your instructor.

Bottom Line on Writing a Dissertation Discussion Chapter

At this stage, it should not be a question for you on how to write a discussion chapter in a PhD thesis or dissertation. Let’s make it clear. It is not a result section but still a place to elaborate on data and go deeper with explanations. Dissertation discussion section includes some intro, result interpretations, limitations, and recommendations for future research. Our team encourages you to use examples before starting your own piece of writing. It will help you to realize the purpose and structure of this chapter and inspire better texts! If you have other questions regarding the PhD writing process, check our blog for more insights. From detailed instruction on how to write a dissertation or guide on formatting a dissertation appendix , we’ve got you covered.

Order dissertation discussion from our proficient writers. They will take a significant burden off of you. Instead, they will carry out high-level academic work in a short time.

FAQ About Dissertation Discussion Chapter

1. where does a discussion section go in a dissertation.

Dissertation discussion section is used to go right after the result chapter. The logic is simple — you share your data and then go to the elaboration and explanation of it. Check the sample thesis we provide to students for details on structure.

2. How long should a dissertation discussion chapter be?

It is not a surprise that dissertation discussion chapter is extremely significant for the research. Here you will go into the details of your study and interpret results to prove or not your hypothesis. It should take almost 25% of your work. 

3. What tense should I use in a dissertation discussion?

Thesis or dissertation discussion used to have some rules on using tenses. You need to use the present tense when referring to established facts and use the past tense when referring to previous studies. And check your text before submission to ensure that you did not miss something.

4. What not to include in a dissertation discussion section?

The answer is easy. Discussion section of a dissertation should not include any new findings or describe some unsupported claims. Also, do not try to feel all possible gaps with one research. It may be better to outline your ideas for future studies in recommendations.

Joe Eckel is an expert on Dissertations writing. He makes sure that each student gets precious insights on composing A-grade academic writing.

You may also like

According to the data, implementing the co-orientation theory was successful and can be used for the same circumstances in the future. As we found, most participants agreed with the importance of those theses on the five fundamental reforms. It means that the results identified a successful government work in choosing the messages to communicate about examined reforms. At the same time, the situation is not so favorable with implementing the principles of two-way symmetrical communications. According to the results, people did not feel that the government had a mutual, open, and equal dialogue with the public about the reforms.

Our study underlines the importance of future research on using TikTok for political communication. As discussed above, TikTok is the most commonly used social media platform for many young voters. This means that political discussion will also move to this platform. Our research and typology of political communication content can be used in the future planning of effective political campaigns. For example, we can assume that “play videos” have enormous potential to facilitate complicated topics and provide specific agenda settings. We also identified additional affordances of TikTok used for political communication, such as built-in video editors, playlists for specific topics, a green screen for news explainers, and duets for reflection on news and discussion. It means that these features make TikTok suitable for efficient political communications.

As we pointed out in the literature review, there are few works on using TikTok affordances for political communications, and this topic can be expanded in the future. Government institutions have already understood the importance of this platform for efficient communication with younger audiences, and we will see more political projects on TikTok. That is why expanding research on using TikTok for political communication will be enormous in the following years. Our work is one of the first research on the role of emerging media in war communication and can be used as a practical guide for government's strategic planning in times of emergencies.

Although this study has provided critical first insights into the effects of multimodal disinformation and rebuttals, there are some limitations. First and most importantly, the effects of multimodal disinformation and rebuttals partially depend on the topic of the message. Although fact-checkers reduce credibility of disinformation in both settings, and attitudinal congruence plays a consistent role in conditioning responses to multimodal disinformation, visuals do not have the same impact on affecting the credibility of news on school shootings and refugees.

As we mentioned before, our study has some limitations, as the research was conducted based on data from United State citizens. However, for a better understanding of government communication practices, it would be productive to implement the same research in other countries. Some cultural differences can influence the communication strategies the government uses in times of emergency. Another possible way to examine this topic is to conduct research using a specific period of time. For future studies, it will be beneficial to expand the number of survey recipients. 

To summarize, Airbnb has expertise in communicating CSR and CSA campaigns. We defined their communication strategy about the program for Ukrainian refugees as quite successful. They applied all the principles of CSR communication best practices, used dialogic theory to engage with the public on social media, and created clear messaging on applying for the program. Airbnb examples of CSR communication can be used by other businesses to create a communication strategy for unplanned CSR campaigns. Moreover, it can be further researched how Airbnb's CSR campaign influenced the organizational reputation in the future. 

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

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

How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples

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

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

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

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

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

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

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

Table of contents

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

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

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

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

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

Correct my document today

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ask yourself these questions:

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

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

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

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

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

Here are a few common possibilities:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2022, October 25). How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 21 May 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/discussion/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

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

Research Writing and Analysis

• NVivo Group and Study Sessions
• SPSS This link opens in a new window
• Statistical Analysis Group sessions
• Using Qualtrics
• Dissertation and Data Analysis Group Sessions
• Defense Schedule - Commons Calendar This link opens in a new window
• Research Process Flow Chart
• Research Alignment Chapter 1 This link opens in a new window
• Step 1: Seek Out Evidence
• Step 2: Explain
• Step 3: The Big Picture
• Step 4: Own It
• Step 5: Illustrate
• Annotated Bibliography
• Literature Review This link opens in a new window
• Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses
• How to Synthesize and Analyze
• Synthesis and Analysis Practice
• Synthesis and Analysis Group Sessions
• Problem Statement
• Purpose Statement
• Conceptual Framework
• Theoretical Framework
• Quantitative Research Questions
• Qualitative Research Questions
• Trustworthiness of Qualitative Data
• Analysis and Coding Example- Qualitative Data
• Thematic Data Analysis in Qualitative Design
• Dissertation to Journal Article This link opens in a new window
• International Journal of Online Graduate Education (IJOGE) This link opens in a new window
• Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning (JRIT&L) This link opens in a new window

Jump to DSE Guide

Purpose statement overview.

The purpose statement succinctly explains (on no more than 1 page) the objectives of the research study. These objectives must directly address the problem and help close the stated gap. Expressed as a formula:

Good purpose statements:

• Flow from the problem statement and actually address the proposed problem
• Are concise and clear
• Answer the question ‘Why are you doing this research?’
• Match the methodology (similar to research questions)
• Have a ‘hook’ to get the reader’s attention
• Set the stage by clearly stating, “The purpose of this (qualitative or quantitative) study is to ...

In PhD studies, the purpose usually involves applying a theory to solve the problem. In other words, the purpose tells the reader what the goal of the study is, and what your study will accomplish, through which theoretical lens. The purpose statement also includes brief information about direction, scope, and where the data will come from.

A problem and gap in combination can lead to different research objectives, and hence, different purpose statements. In the example from above where the problem was severe underrepresentation of female CEOs in Fortune 500 companies and the identified gap related to lack of research of male-dominated boards; one purpose might be to explore implicit biases in male-dominated boards through the lens of feminist theory. Another purpose may be to determine how board members rated female and male candidates on scales of competency, professionalism, and experience to predict which candidate will be selected for the CEO position. The first purpose may involve a qualitative ethnographic study in which the researcher observes board meetings and hiring interviews; the second may involve a quantitative regression analysis. The outcomes will be very different, so it’s important that you find out exactly how you want to address a problem and help close a gap!

The purpose of the study must not only align with the problem and address a gap; it must also align with the chosen research method. In fact, the DP/DM template requires you to name the  research method at the very beginning of the purpose statement. The research verb must match the chosen method. In general, quantitative studies involve “closed-ended” research verbs such as determine , measure , correlate , explain , compare , validate , identify , or examine ; whereas qualitative studies involve “open-ended” research verbs such as explore , understand , narrate , articulate [meanings], discover , or develop .

A qualitative purpose statement following the color-coded problem statement (assumed here to be low well-being among financial sector employees) + gap (lack of research on followers of mid-level managers), might start like this:

In response to declining levels of employee well-being, the purpose of the qualitative phenomenology was to explore and understand the lived experiences related to the well-being of the followers of novice mid-level managers in the financial services industry. The levels of follower well-being have been shown to correlate to employee morale, turnover intention, and customer orientation (Eren et al., 2013). A combined framework of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory and the employee well-being concept informed the research questions and supported the inquiry, analysis, and interpretation of the experiences of followers of novice managers in the financial services industry.

A quantitative purpose statement for the same problem and gap might start like this:

In response to declining levels of employee well-being, the purpose of the quantitative correlational study was to determine which leadership factors predict employee well-being of the followers of novice mid-level managers in the financial services industry. Leadership factors were measured by the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) assessment framework  by Mantlekow (2015), and employee well-being was conceptualized as a compound variable consisting of self-reported turnover-intent and psychological test scores from the Mental Health Survey (MHS) developed by Johns Hopkins University researchers.

Both of these purpose statements reflect viable research strategies and both align with the problem and gap so it’s up to the researcher to design a study in a manner that reflects personal preferences and desired study outcomes. Note that the quantitative research purpose incorporates operationalized concepts  or variables ; that reflect the way the researcher intends to measure the key concepts under study; whereas the qualitative purpose statement isn’t about translating the concepts under study as variables but instead aim to explore and understand the core research phenomenon.  

Best Practices for Writing your Purpose Statement

Always keep in mind that the dissertation process is iterative, and your writing, over time, will be refined as clarity is gradually achieved. Most of the time, greater clarity for the purpose statement and other components of the Dissertation is the result of a growing understanding of the literature in the field. As you increasingly master the literature you will also increasingly clarify the purpose of your study.

The purpose statement should flow directly from the problem statement. There should be clear and obvious alignment between the two and that alignment will get tighter and more pronounced as your work progresses.

The purpose statement should specifically address the reason for conducting the study, with emphasis on the word specifically. There should not be any doubt in your readers’ minds as to the purpose of your study. To achieve this level of clarity you will need to also insure there is no doubt in your mind as to the purpose of your study.

Many researchers benefit from stopping your work during the research process when insight strikes you and write about it while it is still fresh in your mind. This can help you clarify all aspects of a dissertation, including clarifying its purpose.

Your Chair and your committee members can help you to clarify your study’s purpose so carefully attend to any feedback they offer.

The purpose statement should reflect the research questions and vice versa. The chain of alignment that began with the research problem description and continues on to the research purpose, research questions, and methodology must be respected at all times during dissertation development. You are to succinctly describe the overarching goal of the study that reflects the research questions. Each research question narrows and focuses the purpose statement. Conversely, the purpose statement encompasses all of the research questions.

Identify in the purpose statement the research method as quantitative, qualitative or mixed (i.e., “The purpose of this [qualitative/quantitative/mixed] study is to ...)

Avoid the use of the phrase “research study” since the two words together are redundant.

Follow the initial declaration of purpose with a brief overview of how, with what instruments/data, with whom and where (as applicable) the study will be conducted. Identify variables/constructs and/or phenomenon/concept/idea. Since this section is to be a concise paragraph, emphasis must be placed on the word brief. However, adding these details will give your readers a very clear picture of the purpose of your research.

Developing the purpose section of your dissertation is usually not achieved in a single flash of insight. The process involves a great deal of reading to find out what other scholars have done to address the research topic and problem you have identified. The purpose section of your dissertation could well be the most important paragraph you write during your academic career, and every word should be carefully selected. Think of it as the DNA of your dissertation. Everything else you write should emerge directly and clearly from your purpose statement. In turn, your purpose statement should emerge directly and clearly from your research problem description. It is good practice to print out your problem statement and purpose statement and keep them in front of you as you work on each part of your dissertation in order to insure alignment.

It is helpful to collect several dissertations similar to the one you envision creating. Extract the problem descriptions and purpose statements of other dissertation authors and compare them in order to sharpen your thinking about your own work.  Comparing how other dissertation authors have handled the many challenges you are facing can be an invaluable exercise. Keep in mind that individual universities use their own tailored protocols for presenting key components of the dissertation so your review of these purpose statements should focus on content rather than form.

Once your purpose statement is set it must be consistently presented throughout the dissertation. This may require some recursive editing because the way you articulate your purpose may evolve as you work on various aspects of your dissertation. Whenever you make an adjustment to your purpose statement you should carefully follow up on the editing and conceptual ramifications throughout the entire document.

In establishing your purpose you should NOT advocate for a particular outcome. Research should be done to answer questions not prove a point. As a researcher, you are to inquire with an open mind, and even when you come to the work with clear assumptions, your job is to prove the validity of the conclusions reached. For example, you would not say the purpose of your research project is to demonstrate that there is a relationship between two variables. Such a statement presupposes you know the answer before your research is conducted and promotes or supports (advocates on behalf of) a particular outcome. A more appropriate purpose statement would be to examine or explore the relationship between two variables.

Your purpose statement should not imply that you are going to prove something. You may be surprised to learn that we cannot prove anything in scholarly research for two reasons. First, in quantitative analyses, statistical tests calculate the probability that something is true rather than establishing it as true. Second, in qualitative research, the study can only purport to describe what is occurring from the perspective of the participants. Whether or not the phenomenon they are describing is true in a larger context is not knowable. We cannot observe the phenomenon in all settings and in all circumstances.

Writing your Purpose Statement

It is important to distinguish in your mind the differences between the Problem Statement and Purpose Statement.

The Problem Statement is why I am doing the research

The Purpose Statement is what type of research I am doing to fit or address the problem

The Purpose Statement includes:

• Method of Study
• Specific Population

Remember, as you are contemplating what to include in your purpose statement and then when you are writing it, the purpose statement is a concise paragraph that describes the intent of the study, and it should flow directly from the problem statement.  It should specifically address the reason for conducting the study, and reflect the research questions.  Further, it should identify the research method as qualitative, quantitative, or mixed.  Then provide a brief overview of how the study will be conducted, with what instruments/data collection methods, and with whom (subjects) and where (as applicable). Finally, you should identify variables/constructs and/or phenomenon/concept/idea.

Qualitative Purpose Statement

Creswell (2002) suggested for writing purpose statements in qualitative research include using deliberate phrasing to alert the reader to the purpose statement. Verbs that indicate what will take place in the research and the use of non-directional language that do not suggest an outcome are key. A purpose statement should focus on a single idea or concept, with a broad definition of the idea or concept. How the concept was investigated should also be included, as well as participants in the study and locations for the research to give the reader a sense of with whom and where the study took place. 

Creswell (2003) advised the following script for purpose statements in qualitative research:

“The purpose of this qualitative_________________ (strategy of inquiry, such as ethnography, case study, or other type) study is (was? will be?) to ________________ (understand? describe? develop? discover?) the _________________(central phenomenon being studied) for ______________ (the participants, such as the individual, groups, organization) at __________(research site). At this stage in the research, the __________ (central phenomenon being studied) will be generally defined as ___________________ (provide a general definition)” (pg. 90).

Quantitative Purpose Statement

Creswell (2003) offers vast differences between the purpose statements written for qualitative research and those written for quantitative research, particularly with respect to language and the inclusion of variables. The comparison of variables is often a focus of quantitative research, with the variables distinguishable by either the temporal order or how they are measured. As with qualitative research purpose statements, Creswell (2003) recommends the use of deliberate language to alert the reader to the purpose of the study, but quantitative purpose statements also include the theory or conceptual framework guiding the study and the variables that are being studied and how they are related. 

Creswell (2003) suggests the following script for drafting purpose statements in quantitative research:

“The purpose of this _____________________ (experiment? survey?) study is (was? will be?) to test the theory of _________________that _________________ (compares? relates?) the ___________(independent variable) to _________________________(dependent variable), controlling for _______________________ (control variables) for ___________________ (participants) at _________________________ (the research site). The independent variable(s) _____________________ will be generally defined as _______________________ (provide a general definition). The dependent variable(s) will be generally defined as _____________________ (provide a general definition), and the control and intervening variables(s), _________________ (identify the control and intervening variables) will be statistically controlled in this study” (pg. 97).

Sample Purpose Statements

• The purpose of this qualitative study was to determine how participation in service-learning in an alternative school impacted students academically, civically, and personally.  There is ample evidence demonstrating the failure of schools for students at-risk; however, there is still a need to demonstrate why these students are successful in non-traditional educational programs like the service-learning model used at TDS.  This study was unique in that it examined one alternative school’s approach to service-learning in a setting where students not only serve, but faculty serve as volunteer teachers.  The use of a constructivist approach in service-learning in an alternative school setting was examined in an effort to determine whether service-learning participation contributes positively to academic, personal, and civic gain for students, and to examine student and teacher views regarding the overall outcomes of service-learning.  This study was completed using an ethnographic approach that included observations, content analysis, and interviews with teachers at The David School.
• The purpose of this quantitative non-experimental cross-sectional linear multiple regression design was to investigate the relationship among early childhood teachers’ self-reported assessment of multicultural awareness as measured by responses from the Teacher Multicultural Attitude Survey (TMAS) and supervisors’ observed assessment of teachers’ multicultural competency skills as measured by the Multicultural Teaching Competency Scale (MTCS) survey. Demographic data such as number of multicultural training hours, years teaching in Dubai, curriculum program at current school, and age were also examined and their relationship to multicultural teaching competency. The study took place in the emirate of Dubai where there were 14,333 expatriate teachers employed in private schools (KHDA, 2013b).
• The purpose of this quantitative, non-experimental study is to examine the degree to which stages of change, gender, acculturation level and trauma types predicts the reluctance of Arab refugees, aged 18 and over, in the Dearborn, MI area, to seek professional help for their mental health needs. This study will utilize four instruments to measure these variables: University of Rhode Island Change Assessment (URICA: DiClemente & Hughes, 1990); Cumulative Trauma Scale (Kira, 2012); Acculturation Rating Scale for Arabic Americans-II Arabic and English (ARSAA-IIA, ARSAA-IIE: Jadalla & Lee, 2013), and a demographic survey. This study will examine 1) the relationship between stages of change, gender, acculturation levels, and trauma types and Arab refugees’ help-seeking behavior, 2) the degree to which any of these variables can predict Arab refugee help-seeking behavior.  Additionally, the outcome of this study could provide researchers and clinicians with a stage-based model, TTM, for measuring Arab refugees’ help-seeking behavior and lay a foundation for how TTM can help target the clinical needs of Arab refugees. Lastly, this attempt to apply the TTM model to Arab refugees’ condition could lay the foundation for future research to investigate the application of TTM to clinical work among refugee populations.
• The purpose of this qualitative, phenomenological study is to describe the lived experiences of LLM for 10 EFL learners in rural Guatemala and to utilize that data to determine how it conforms to, or possibly challenges, current theoretical conceptions of LLM. In accordance with Morse’s (1994) suggestion that a phenomenological study should utilize at least six participants, this study utilized semi-structured interviews with 10 EFL learners to explore why and how they have experienced the motivation to learn English throughout their lives. The methodology of horizontalization was used to break the interview protocols into individual units of meaning before analyzing these units to extract the overarching themes (Moustakas, 1994). These themes were then interpreted into a detailed description of LLM as experienced by EFL students in this context. Finally, the resulting description was analyzed to discover how these learners’ lived experiences with LLM conformed with and/or diverged from current theories of LLM.
• The purpose of this qualitative, embedded, multiple case study was to examine how both parent-child attachment relationships are impacted by the quality of the paternal and maternal caregiver-child interactions that occur throughout a maternal deployment, within the context of dual-military couples. In order to examine this phenomenon, an embedded, multiple case study was conducted, utilizing an attachment systems metatheory perspective. The study included four dual-military couples who experienced a maternal deployment to Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) or Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) when they had at least one child between 8 weeks-old to 5 years-old.  Each member of the couple participated in an individual, semi-structured interview with the researcher and completed the Parenting Relationship Questionnaire (PRQ). “The PRQ is designed to capture a parent’s perspective on the parent-child relationship” (Pearson, 2012, para. 1) and was used within the proposed study for this purpose. The PRQ was utilized to triangulate the data (Bekhet & Zauszniewski, 2012) as well as to provide some additional information on the parents’ perspective of the quality of the parent-child attachment relationship in regards to communication, discipline, parenting confidence, relationship satisfaction, and time spent together (Pearson, 2012). The researcher utilized the semi-structured interview to collect information regarding the parents' perspectives of the quality of their parental caregiver behaviors during the deployment cycle, the mother's parent-child interactions while deployed, the behavior of the child or children at time of reunification, and the strategies or behaviors the parents believe may have contributed to their child's behavior at the time of reunification. The results of this study may be utilized by the military, and by civilian providers, to develop proactive and preventive measures that both providers and parents can implement, to address any potential adverse effects on the parent-child attachment relationship, identified through the proposed study. The results of this study may also be utilized to further refine and understand the integration of attachment theory and systems theory, in both clinical and research settings, within the field of marriage and family therapy.

Was this resource helpful?

• << Previous: Problem Statement
• Next: Conceptual Framework >>
• Last Updated: May 16, 2024 8:25 AM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/researchtools

What’s Included: Discussion Template

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

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

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

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

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

FAQ: Thesis Discussion Template

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

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

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

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

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

How long should the discussion chapter be?

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

Can I share this template with my friends/colleagues?

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

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

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

Do you have templates for the other chapters?

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

Can Grad Coach help me with my discussion/analysis?

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

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

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 15 May 2024

Arresting failure propagation in buildings through collapse isolation

• Nirvan Makoond   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5203-6318 1 ,
• Andri Setiawan   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2791-6118 1 ,
• Manuel Buitrago   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5561-5104 1 &
• Jose M. Adam   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9205-8458 1  

Nature volume  629 ,  pages 592–596 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

11k Accesses

228 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Civil engineering
• Mechanical engineering

Several catastrophic building collapses 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 occur because of the propagation of local-initial failures 6 , 7 . Current design methods attempt to completely prevent collapse after initial failures by improving connectivity between building components. These measures ensure that the loads supported by the failed components are redistributed to the rest of the structural system 8 , 9 . However, increased connectivity can contribute to collapsing elements pulling down parts of a building that would otherwise be unaffected 10 . This risk is particularly important when large initial failures occur, as tends to be the case in the most disastrous collapses 6 . Here we present an original design approach to arrest collapse propagation after major initial failures. When a collapse initiates, the approach ensures that specific elements fail before the failure of the most critical components for global stability. The structural system thus separates into different parts and isolates collapse when its propagation would otherwise be inevitable. The effectiveness of the approach is proved through unique experimental tests on a purposely built full-scale building. We also demonstrate that large initial failures would lead to total collapse of the test building if increased connectivity was implemented as recommended by present guidelines. Our proposed approach enables incorporating a last line of defence for more resilient buildings.

Similar content being viewed by others

Design principles for strong and tough hydrogels

Superlative mechanical energy absorbing efficiency discovered through self-driving lab-human partnership

Modulate stress distribution with bio-inspired irregular architected materials towards optimal tissue support

Disasters recorded from 2000 to 2019 are estimated to have caused economic losses of US$2.97 trillion and claimed approximately 1.23 million lives 11 . Most of these losses can be attributed to building collapses 12 , which are often characterized by the propagation of local-initial failures 13 that can arise because of extreme or abnormal events such as earthquakes 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , floods 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , storms 21 , 22 , landslides 23 , 24 , explosions 25 , vehicle impacts 26 and even construction or design errors 6 , 26 . As the world faces increasing trends in the frequency and intensity of extreme events 27 , 28 , it is arguably now more important than ever to design robust structures that are insensitive to initial damage 13 , 29 , irrespective of the underlying threat causing it.

Most robustness design approaches used at present 8 , 9 , 30 , 31 aim to completely prevent collapse initiation after a local failure by providing extensive connectivity within a structural system. Although these measures can ensure that the load supported by a failed component is redistributed to the rest of the structure, they are neither viable nor sustainable when considering larger initial failures 13 , 25 , 32 . In these situations, the implementation of these approaches can even result in collapsing parts of the building pulling down the rest of the structure 10 . The fact that several major collapses have occurred because of large initial failures 6 raises serious concerns about the inadequacy of the current robustness measures.

Traditionally, research in this area has focused on preventing collapse initiation after initial failures rather than on preventing collapse propagation. This trend dates back to the first impactful studies in the field of structural robustness, which were performed after a lack of connectivity enabled the progressive collapse of part of the Ronan Point tower in 1968 (ref.  33 ). Although completely preventing any collapse is certainly preferable to limiting the extent of a collapse, the occurrence of unforeseeable incidents is inevitable 34 and major building collapses keep occurring 1 , 2 , 3 .

Here we present an original approach for designing buildings to isolate the collapse triggered by a large initial failure. The approach, which is based on controlling the hierarchy of failures in a structural system, is inspired by how lizards shed their tails to escape predators 35 . The proposed hierarchy-based collapse isolation design ensures sufficient connectivity for operational conditions and after local-initial failures for which collapse initiation can be completely prevented through load redistribution. These local-initial failures can even be greater than those considered by building codes. Simultaneously, the structural system is also designed to separate into different parts and isolate a collapse when its propagation would otherwise be inevitable. As in the case of lizard tail autotomy 35 , this is achieved by promoting controlled fracture along predefined segment borders to limit failure propagation. In this work, hierarchy-based collapse isolation is applied to framed building structures. Developing this approach required a precise characterization of the collapse propagation mechanisms that need to be controlled. This was achieved using computational simulations that were validated through a specifically designed partial collapse test of a full-scale building. The obtained results demonstrate the viability of incorporating hierarchy-based collapse isolation in building design.

Hierarchy-based collapse isolation

Hierarchy-based collapse isolation design makes an important distinction between two types of initial failures. The first, referred to as small initial failures, includes all failures for which it is feasible to completely prevent the initiation of collapse by redistributing loads to the remaining structural system. The second type of initial failure, referred to as large initial failures, includes more severe failures that inevitably trigger at least a partial collapse.

The proposed design approach aims to (1) arrest unimpeded collapse propagation caused by large initial failures and (2) ensure the ability of a building to develop alternative load paths (ALPs) to prevent collapse initiation after small initial failures. This is achieved by prioritizing a specific hierarchy of failures among the components on the boundary of a moving collapse front.

Buildings are complex three-dimensional structural systems consisting of different components with very specific functions for transferring loads to the ground. Among these, vertical load-bearing components such as columns are the most important for ensuring global structural stability and integrity. Therefore, hierarchy-based collapse isolation design prevents the successive failure of columns, which would otherwise lead to catastrophic collapse. Although the exact magnitude of dynamic forces transmitted to columns during a collapse process is difficult to predict, these forces are eventually limited by the connections between columns and floor systems. In the proposed approach, partial-strength connections are designed to limit the magnitude of transmitted forces to values that are lower than the capacity of columns to resist unbalanced forces (see section ‘ Building design ’). This requirement guarantees a specific hierarchy of failures during collapse, whereby connection failures always occur before column failures. As a result, the collapse following a large initial failure is always restricted to components immediately adjacent to those directly involved in the initial failure. However, it is still necessary to ensure a lower bound on connection strengths to activate ALPs after small initial failures. Therefore, cost-effective implementation of hierarchy-based collapse isolation design requires finding an optimal balance between reducing the strength of connections and increasing the capacity of columns.

To test and verify the application of our proposed approach, we designed a real 15 m × 12 m precast reinforced concrete building with two 2.6-m-high floors. This basic geometry represents a building size that can be built and tested at full-scale while still being representative of current practices in the construction sector. The structural type was selected because of the increasing use of prefabricated construction for erecting high-occupancy buildings such as hospitals and malls because of several advantages in terms of quality, efficiency and sustainability 36 .

The collapse behaviour of possible design options (Extended Data Fig. 1 ) subjected to both small and large initial failures was investigated using high-fidelity collapse simulations (Fig. 1 ) based on the applied element method (AEM; see section ‘ Modelling strategy ’). The ability of these simulations to accurately represent collapse phenomena for the type of building being studied was later validated by comparing its predictions to the structural response observed during a purposely designed collapse test of a full-scale building (Extended Data Fig. 2 and Supplementary Video  7 ).

a , Partial-strength beam–column connection optimized for hierarchy-based collapse isolation. b , Partial collapse of a building designed for hierarchy-based collapse isolation (design H) after the loss of a corner column and two penultimate-edge columns. c , Total collapse of conventional building design (design C) after the same large initial failure scenario.

Following the preliminary design of a structure to resist loads suitable for office buildings, two building design options considering different robustness criteria were further investigated (see section ‘ Building design ’). The first option, design H (hierarchy-based), uses optimized partial-strength connections and enhanced columns (Fig. 1a ) to fulfil the requirements of hierarchy-based collapse isolation design. The second option, design C (conventional), is strictly based on code requirements and provides a benchmark comparison for evaluating the effectiveness of the proposed approach. It uses full-strength connections to improve robustness as recommended in current guidelines 37 and building codes 8 , 9 .

Simulations predicted that both design H and design C could develop stable ALPs that are able to completely prevent the initiation of collapse after small initial failure scenarios that are more severe than those considered in building codes 8 , 9 (Extended Data Fig. 3 ).

When subjected to a larger initial failure, simulations predict that design H can isolate the collapse to only the region directly affected by the initial failure (Fig. 1b ). By contrast, design C, with increased connectivity, causes collapsing elements to pull down the rest of the structure, leading to total collapse (Fig. 1c ). These two distinct outcomes demonstrate that the prevention of unimpeded collapse propagation can only be ensured when hierarchy-based collapse isolation is implemented (Extended Data Fig. 4 and Supplementary Video  1 ).

Testing a full-scale precast building

To confirm the expected performance improvement that can be achieved with the hierarchy-based collapse isolation design, a full-scale building specimen corresponding to design H was purposely built and subjected to two phases of testing as part of this work (Fig. 2a and Supplementary Information  Sections 1 and 2 ). The precast structure was constructed with continuous columns cast together with corbels (Supplementary Video  4 ). The columns were cast with prepared dowel bars and sleeves for placing continuous top beam reinforcement bars through columns (Fig. 2b,c ). The bars used for these two types of reinforcing element (Fig. 1a ) were specifically selected to produce partial-strength connections. These connections are strong enough for the development of ALPs after small initial failures but weak enough to enable hierarchy-based collapse isolation after large initial failures.

a , Full-scale precast concrete structure and columns removed in different testing phases. The label used for each column is shown. The location of beams connecting the different columns is indicated by the dotted lines above the second-floor level. The expected collapse area in the second phase of testing is indicated. b , Typical first-floor connection before placement of beams during construction. c , Typical second-floor connection after placement of precast beams during construction. Both b and c show columns with two straight precast beams on either side (C2, C3, C6, C7, C10 and C11). d , Device used for quasi-static removal of two columns in the first phase of testing. e , Three-hinged mechanism used for dynamic removal of corner column in the second phase of testing.

After investigating different column-removal scenarios from different regions of the test building (see section ‘ Experiment and monitoring design ’, Extended Data Fig. 5 and Supplementary Video  2 ), two phases of testing were defined to capture relevant collapse-related phenomena and validate the effectiveness of hierarchy-based collapse isolation. Separating the test into two phases allowed two different aspects to be analysed: (1) the prevention of collapse initiation after small initial failures and (2) the isolation of collapse after large initial failures.

Phase 1 involved the quasi-static removal of two penultimate-edge columns using specifically designed removable supports (Fig. 2d and Extended Data Fig. 6 ). This testing phase corresponds to a small initial failure scenario for which design H was able to develop ALPs to prevent collapse initiation. Phase 2 reproduced a large initial failure through the dynamic removal of the corner column found between the two previously removed columns using a three-hinged collapsible column (Fig. 2e ).

During both testing phases, a distributed load (11.8 kN m −2 ) corresponding to almost twice the magnitude specified in Eurocodes 38 for accidental design situations (6 kN m −2 ) was imposed on bays expected to collapse in phase 2 (Fig. 2a and Supplementary Video  5 ). Predictive simulations indicated that the failure mode and overall collapse would be almost identical when comparing this partial loading configuration with that in which the entire building is loaded (Supplementary Video  3 ). However, the partial loading configuration turns out to be more demanding for the part of the structure expected to remain upright as evidenced by the greater drifts it produces during collapse (see section ‘ Experiment and monitoring design ’ and Extended Data Fig. 7 ). The structural response during all phases of testing was extensively monitored with an array of different sensors (see section ‘ Experiment and monitoring design ’ and Supplementary Information Section 3 ) that provided the information used as a basis for the analyses presented in the following sections.

Preventing collapse initiation

Collapse initiation was completely prevented after the removal of two penultimate-edge columns in phase 1 of testing (Fig. 3a ), demonstrating that design H complies with the robustness requirements included in current building standards 8 , 9 , 39 . As this initial failure scenario is more severe than those considered by standardized design methods 8 , 9 , 30 , it represents an extreme case for which ALPs are still effective. As such, the outcome of phase 1 demonstrates that implementing hierarchy-based collapse isolation design does not impair the ability of this structure to prevent collapse initiation.

a , Test building during phase 1 of testing after removal of columns C8 and C11. The beam depth ( h ) used to compute the ratio plotted in b is shown and the location of the strain measurement plotted in c is indicated. b , Evolution of beam deflection expressed as a ratio of beam depth at the location of removed column C11. The chord rotation of the beams bridging over this removed column is also indicated using a secondary vertical axis. c , Strain increase in continuity reinforcement in the second-floor beam between C12 and C11.

Source Data

Analysis of the structural response during phase 1 (Supplementary Information Section 4 ) shows that collapse was prevented because of the redistribution of loads through the beams (Fig. 3b,c ), columns (Extended Data Fig. 8 ) and slabs (Supplementary Report 4 ) adjacent to the removed columns. The beams bridging over the removed columns sustained loads through flexural action, as evidenced by the magnitude of the vertical displacement recorded at the removal locations (Fig. 3b ). These values were far too small to allow the development of catenary forces, which only begin to appear when displacements exceed the depth of the beam 40 .

The flexural response of the structure after the loss of two penultimate-edge columns was only able to develop because of the specific reinforcement detailing introduced in the design. This was verified by the increase in tensile strains recorded in the continuous beam reinforcement close to the removed column (Fig. 3c ) and in ties placed between the precast hollow-core planks in the floor system close to column C7 (Supplementary Information Section 4 ). The latter also proves that the slabs contributed notably to load redistribution after column removal.

In general, the structure experienced only small movements and suffered very little permanent damage during phase 1 (Supplementary Information Section 4 ), despite the high imposed loads used for testing. The only reinforcement bars showing some signs of yielding were the continuous reinforcement bars of beams close to the removed columns (Fig. 3c ).

Arresting collapse propagation

Following the removal of two penultimate-edge columns in phase 1, the sudden removal of the C12 corner column in phase 2 triggered a collapse that was arrested along the border delineated by columns C3, C7, C6 and C10 (Fig. 4a–d and Supplementary Video  6 ). Thus, the viability of hierarchy-based collapse isolation design is confirmed.

a , Collapse sequence during phase 2 of testing. b , Partial collapse of full-scale test building (design H) after the removal of three columns. The segment border in which collapse propagation was arrested is indicated. The axes shown at column C9 correspond to those used in f to indicate the changing direction of the resultant drift measured at this location. c , Failure of beam–column connections at collapse border. d , Debonding of reinforcement in the floor at collapse border. e , Change in average axial strains measured in column C7. A negative change represents an increase in compressive strains. f , Magnitude of resultant drift measured at C9. g , Change in direction of resultant drift measured at C9. The initial drift after phase 1 of testing and the residual drift after the upright part of the building stabilized are also shown in the plot.

During the initial stages following the removal of C12, the collapsing bays next to this column pulled up the columns on the opposite corner of the building (columns C1, C3 and C6). During this process, column C7 behaves like a pivot point, experiencing a significant increase in compressive forces (Fig. 4e and Supplementary Information Section 5 ). This phenomenon was enabled by the connectivity between collapsing parts and the rest of the structure. If allowed to continue, this could have led to successive column failures and unimpeded collapse propagation. However, during the test, the rupture of continuous reinforcement bars (Fig. 4c ) occurred as the connections failed and halted the transmission of forces to columns. These connection failures occurred before any column failures, as intended by the hierarchy-based collapse isolation design of the structural system. Specifically, this type of connection failure occurred at the junctions with the two columns (C7 and C10) immediately adjacent to the failure origin (around C8, C11 and C12), effectively segmenting the structure along the border shown in Fig. 4b . Segmentation along this border was completed by the total separation of the floor system, which was enabled by the debonding of slab reinforcements at the segment border (Fig. 4d and Supplementary Video  8 ).

Observing the building drift measured at the top of column C9 (Fig. 4f ) enabled us to better understand the nature of forces acting on the building further away from the collapsing region. The initial motion shows the direction of pulling forces generated by the collapsing elements (Fig. 4g ). This drift peaks very shortly after the point in time when separation of the collapsing parts occurs (Fig. 4f ). After this peak, the upright part of the structure recoiled backwards and experienced an attenuated oscillatory motion before finding a new stable equilibrium (Fig. 4g ). The magnitude of the measured peak drift is comparable to the drift limits considered in seismic regions when designing against earthquakes with a 2,500-year return period 41 (Supplementary Information Section 5 ). This indicates that the upright part of the structure was subjected to strong dynamic horizontal forces as it was effectively tugged by the collapsing elements falling to the ground. The building would have failed because of these unbalanced forces had hierarchy-based collapse isolation design not been implemented.

The upright building segment suffered permanent damages as evidenced by the residual drift recorded at the top of column C9 (Fig. 4g ). This is further corroborated by the fact that several reinforcement bars in this part of the structure yielded, particularly in areas close to the segment border (Supplementary Report 5 ). Despite the observed level of damage, safe evacuation and rescue of people from this building segment would still be possible after an extreme event, saving lives that would have been lost had a more conventional robustness design (design C) been used instead.

Discussion and future outlook

Our results demonstrate that the extensive connectivity adopted in conventional robustness design can lead to catastrophic collapse after large initial failures. To address this risk, we have developed and tested a collapse isolation design approach based on controlling the hierarchy of failures occurring during the collapse. Specifically, it is ensured that connection failures occur before column failures, mitigating the risk of collapse propagation throughout the rest of the structural system. The proposed approach has been validated through the partial collapse test of a full-scale precast building, showing that propagating collapses can be arrested at low cost without impairing the ability of the structure to completely prevent collapse initiation after small initial failures.

The reported findings show a last line of defence against major building collapses due to extreme events. This paves the way for the proposed solution to be developed, tested and implemented in different building types with different building elements. This discovery opens opportunities for robustness design that will lead to a new generation of solutions for avoiding catastrophic building collapses.

Building design

Our hierarchy-based collapse isolation approach ensures buildings have sufficient connectivity for operational conditions and small initial failures, yet separate into different parts and isolate a collapse after large initial failures. We chose a precast construction as our main structural system for our case study. A notable particularity of precast systems compared with cast-in-place buildings is that the required construction details can be implemented more precisely. We designed and systematically investigated two precast building designs: designs H and C.

Design H is our building design in which the hierarchy-based collapse isolation approach is applied. Design H was achieved after several preliminary iterations by evaluating various connections and construction details commonly adopted in precast structures. The final design comprises precast columns with corbels connected to a floor system (partially precast beams and hollow-core slabs) through partial-strength beam–column connections (Extended Data Fig. 1 and Supplementary Information Section 1 ). This partial-strength connection was achieved by (1) connecting the bottom part of the beam (precast) to optimally designed dowel bars anchored to the column corbels and (2) passing continuous top beam bars through the columns. With this partial-strength connection, we have more direct control over the magnitude of forces being transferred from the floor system to the columns, which is a key aspect for achieving hierarchy-based collapse isolation. The hierarchy of failures was initially implemented through the beam–column connections (local level) and later verified at the system (global) level.

At the local level, three main components are designed according to the hierarchy-based concept: (1) top continuity bars of the beams; (2) dowel bars connecting beams to corbels; and (3) columns.

Top continuity bars of beams: To allow the structural system to redistribute the loads after small initial failures, top reinforcement bars in all beams were specifically designed to fulfil structural robustness requirements (Extended Data Fig. 3 ). Particularly, we adopted the prescriptive tying rules (referred to as Tie Forces) of UFC 4-023-03 (ref.  9 ) to perform the design of the ties. The required tie strength F i in both the longitudinal and transverse directions for the internal beams is expressed as

For the peripheral beams, the required tie strength F P is expressed as

where  w F  = floor load (in kN m −2 );  D  = dead load (in kN m −2 );  L  = live load (in kN m −2 );  L 1  = greater of the distances between the centres of the columns, frames or walls supporting any two adjacent floor spaces in the direction under consideration (in m);  L P  = 1.0 m; and  W C  = 1.2 times dead load of cladding (neglected in this design).

These required tie strengths are fulfilled with three bars (20 mm diameter) for the peripheral beams and three bars (25 mm diameter) for the internal beams. These required reinforcement dimensions were implemented through the top bars of the beam and installed continuously (lap-spliced, internally, and anchored with couplers at the ends) throughout the building (Extended Data Fig. 1 ).

Dowel bars connecting the beam and corbel of the column: The design of the dowel bars is one of the key aspects in achieving partial-strength connections that fail at a specific threshold to enable segmentation. These dowel bars would control the magnitude of the internal forces between the floor system and column while allowing for some degree of rotational movement. The dowels were designed to resist possible failure modes using expressions proposed in the fib guidelines 37 . Several possible failure modes were checked: splitting of concrete around the dowel bars, shear failure of the dowel bars and forming a plastic hinge in the dowel. The shear capacity of a dowel bar loaded in pure shear can be determined according to the Von Mises yield criterion:

where f yd is the design yield strength of the dowel bar and A s is the cross-sectional area of the dowel bar. In case of concrete splitting failure, the highly concentrated reaction transferred from the dowel bar shall be designed to be safely spread to the surrounding concrete. The strut and tie method is recommended to perform such a design 42 . If shear failure and splitting of concrete do not occur prematurely, the dowel bar will normally yield in bending, indicated by the formation of a plastic hinge. This failure mode is associated with a significant tensile strain at the plastic hinge location of the dowel bar and the crushing of concrete around the compression part of the dowel. The shear resistance achieved at this state for dowel (ribbed) bars across a joint of a certain width (that is, the neoprene bearing) can be expressed as

where α 0 is a coefficient that considers the bearing strength of concrete and can be taken as 1.0 for design purposes, α e is a coefficient that considers the eccentricity, e is the load eccentricity and shall be computed as the half of the joint width (half of the neoprene bearing thickness), Φ and A s are the diameter and the cross-sectional area of the dowel bar, respectively, f cd,max is the design concrete compressive strength at the stronger side, σ sn is the local axial stress of the dowel bar at the interface location, \({f}_{{\rm{yd}},{\rm{red}}}={f}_{{\rm{yd}}}-{\sigma }_{{\rm{sn}}}\) is the design yield strength available for dowel action, f yd is the yield strength of the dowel bar and μ is the coefficient of friction between the concrete and neoprene bearing. By performing the checks on these three possible failure modes, we selected the final (optimum) design with a two dowel bars (20 mm diameter) configuration.

Columns: The proposed hierarchy-based approach requires columns to have adequate capacity to resist the internal forces transmitted by the floor system during a collapse. By fulfilling this strength hierarchy, we can ensure and control that failure happens at the connections first before the columns fail, thus preventing collapse propagation. The columns were initially designed according to the general procedure prescribed by building standards. Then, the resulting capacity was verified using the modified compression field theory (MCFT) 43 to ensure that it was higher than the maximum expected forces transmitted by the connection to the floor system. MCFT was derived to consistently fulfil three main aspects: equilibrium of forces, compatibility and rational stress–strain relationships of cracked concrete expressed as average stresses and strains. The principal compressive stress in the concrete f c 2 is expressed not only as a function of the principal compressive strain ε 2 but also of the co-existing principal tensile strain ε 1 , known as the compression softening effect:

where f c 2max is the peak concrete compressive strength considering the perpendicular tensile strain, \({f}_{c}^{{\prime} }\) is the uniaxial compressive strength, and \({\varepsilon }_{{c}^{{\prime} }}\) is the peak uniaxial concrete compressive strain and can be taken as −0.002. In tension, concrete is assumed to behave linearly until the tensile strength is achieved, followed by a specific decaying function 43 . Regarding aggregate interlock, the shear stress that can be transmitted across cracks v ci is expressed as a function of the crack width w , and the required compressive stress on the crack f ci (ref.  44 ):

where a refers to the maximum aggregate size in mm and the stresses are expressed in MPa. The MCFT analytical model was implemented to solve the sectional and full-member response of beams and columns subjected to axial, bending and shear in Response 2000 software (open access) 45 , 46 . In Response 2000, we input key information, including the geometries of the columns, reinforcement configuration and the material definition for the concrete and the reinforcing bars. Based on this information, we computed the M – V (moment and shear interaction envelope) and M – N (moment and axial interaction envelope) diagrams that represent the capacity of the columns. The results shown in Extended Data Fig. 4 about the verification of the demand and capacity envelopes were obtained using the analytical procedure described here.

At the global level, the initially collapsing regions of the building generate a significant magnitude of dynamic unbalanced forces. The rest of the building system must collectively resist these unbalanced forces to achieve a new equilibrium state. Depending on the design of the structure, this phenomenon can lead to two possible scenarios: (1) major collapse due to failure propagation or (2) partial collapse only of the initially affected regions. The complex interaction between the three-dimensional structural system and its components must be accounted for to evaluate the structural response during collapse accurately. Advanced computational simulations, described in the ‘ Modelling strategy ’ section, were adopted to analyse the global building to verify that major collapse can be prevented. The final design obtained from the local-level analysis (top continuity bars, dowel bars and columns) was used as an input for performing the global computational simulations. Certain large initial failures deemed suitable for evaluating the performance of this building were simulated. In case failure propagation occurs, the original hierarchy-based design must be further adapted. An iterative process is typically required involving several simulations with various building designs to achieve an optimum result that balances the cost and desired collapse performance. The final iteration of design H, which fulfils both the local and global hierarchy checks, is provided in Extended Data Fig. 1 .

Design C is a conventional building design that complies with current robustness standards but does not explicitly fulfil our hierarchy-based approach. The same continuity bars used in design H were used in design C. We adopted a full-strength connection as recommended by the fib guideline 37 . The guideline promotes full connectivity to enhance the development of alternative load paths for preventing collapse initiation. In design C, we used a two dowel bars (32 mm diameter) configuration to ensure full connectivity when the beams are working at their maximum flexural capacity. Another main difference was that the columns in design C were designed according to codes and current practice (optimal solution) without explicitly checking that hierarchy-based collapse isolation criteria are fulfilled. The final design of the columns and connections adopted in design C is provided in Extended Data Fig. 1 .

Modelling strategy

We used the AEM implemented in the Extreme Loading for Structures software to perform all the computational simulations presented in this study 47 (Extended Data Figs. 2 – 5 and 7 and Supplementary Videos  1 , 2 , 3 and 7 ). We chose the AEM for its ability to represent all phases of a structural collapse efficiently and accurately, including element separation (fracture), contact and collision 47 . The method discretizes a continuum into small, finite-size elements (rigid bodies) connected using multiple normal and shear springs distributed across each element face. Each element has six degrees of freedom, three translational and three rotational, at its centre, whereas the behaviour of the springs represents all material constitutive models, contact and collision response. Despite the simplifying assumptions in its formulation 48 , its ability to accurately account for large displacements 49 , cyclic loading 50 , as well as the effects of element separation, contact and collision 51 has been demonstrated through many comparisons with experimental and theoretical results 47 .

Geometric and physical representations

We modelled each of the main structural components of the building separately, including the columns, beams, corbels and hollow-core slabs. We adopted a consistent mesh size with an average (representative) size of 150 mm. Adopting this mesh configuration resulted in a total number of 98,611 elements. We defined a specialized interface with no tensile or shear strength between the precast and cast-in-situ parts to allow for localized deformations that occur at these locations. The behaviour of the interface was mainly governed by a friction coefficient of 0.6, which was defined according to concrete design guidelines 52 , 53 , 54 . The normal stiffness of these interfaces corresponded to the stiffness of the concrete cast-in-situ topping. The elastomeric bearing pads supporting the precast beams on top of the corbels were also modelled with a similar interface having a coefficient of friction of 0.5 (ref.  55 ).

Element type and constitutive models

We adopted an eight-node hexahedron (cube) element with the so-called matrix-springs connecting adjacent cubes to model the concrete parts. We adopted the compression model in refs.  56 , 57 to simulate the behaviour of concrete under compression. Three specific parameters are required to define the response envelope: the initial elastic modulus, the fracture parameter and the compressive plastic strain. For the behaviour in tension, the spring stiffness is assumed to be linear (with the initial elastic modulus) until reaching the cracking point. The shear behaviour is considered to remain linear up to the cracking of the concrete. The interaction between normal compressive and shear stress follows the Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion. After reaching the peak, the shear stress is assumed to drop to a certain residual value affected by the aggregate interlock and friction at the cracked surface. By contrast, under tension, both normal and shear stresses drop to zero after the cracking point. The steel reinforcement bars were simulated as a discrete spring element with three force components: the normal spring takes the principal/normal forces parallel to the rebar, and two other springs represent the reinforcement bar in shear (dowelling). Three distinct stages are considered: elastic, yield plateau and strain hardening. A perfect bond behaviour between the concrete and the reinforcement bars was adopted. We assigned the material properties based on the results of the laboratory tests performed on reinforcement bars and concrete cylinders (Supplementary Information Section 2 ).

Boundary conditions and loading protocol

We assumed that all the ground floor columns are fully restrained in all six degrees of freedom at the base location. This assumption is reasonable, as we expected that the footing would provide sufficient rigidity to constrain any significant deformations. We assigned the reflecting domain boundaries to allow a realistic representation of the collapsing elements (debris) that might fall and rebound after hitting the ground. The ground level was assumed to be at the same elevation at which the column bases are restrained. We applied the additional imposed uniform distributed load as an extra volume of mass assigned to the slabs. To perform the column removal, we used the element removal feature that allows some specific designated elements to be immediately removed at the beginning of the loading stage. This represents a dynamic (sudden) removal, as we expected from the actual test.

Extended Data Tables 1 and 2 summarize all key parameters and assumptions adopted in the modelling process. To validate these assumptions for simulating the precast building designs described previously, it was ensured that the full-scale test performed as part of this work captured all relevant phenomena influencing collapse (large displacements, fracture, contact and collision).

Experiment and monitoring design

We used computational simulations of design H subjected to different initial failure scenarios to define a suitable testing sequence and protocol. The geometry, reinforcement configurations, connection system and construction details of the purpose-built specimen representing design H are provided in Supplementary Information Section 1 and Supplementary Video  4 .

Initial failure scenarios

Initial failure scenarios occurring in edge and corner regions of the building were prioritized for this study because they are usually exposed to a wider range of external threats 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 . After performing a systematic sensitivity study, we identified three critical scenarios (Extended Data Fig. 5 and Supplementary Video  2 ):

Scenario 1: a scenario involving a two-column failure—a corner column and the adjacent edge column. We determined that the required gravity loads to induce collapse equal 11.5 kN m −2 and that partial collapse would occur locally.

Scenario 2: a scenario involving a three-column failure—two corner columns and the edge column in between the two corner columns. We determined that the required gravity loads to induce collapse equal 8.5 kN m −2 and that segmentation (partially collapsing two bays) would take place only across one principal axis of the building.

Scenario 3: a scenario involving a three-column failure: one corner column and two edge columns on both sides of the corner column. We determined that the required gravity loads to induce collapse equal 7.0 kN m −2 and that segmentation (partially collapsing three bays) would take place across both principal axes of the building.

Scenario 3 was ultimately chosen after considering three main aspects: (1) it requires the lowest gravity loads to trigger partial collapse; (2) the failure mode involves activating segmentation mechanisms in two principal axes of the building (more realistic collapse pattern); and (3) the ratio of the area of the intact part and the collapsed part was predicted to be 50:50, leading to the largest collapse area among the three scenarios.

Testing phases

To allow us to investigate the behaviour of the building specimen under small and large initial failures in only one building specimen, we decided to perform two separate testing phases. Phase 1 involved the quasi-static (gradual) removal of two edge columns (C8 and C11), whereas phase 2 involved the sudden removal of the corner column (C12) found between the columns removed in phase 1. A uniformly distributed load of 11.8  kN m −2 was applied only on the bays directly adjacent to these three columns without loading the remaining bays (Supplementary Video  5 ). This was achieved by placing more than 8,000 sandbags in the designated bays on the two floors (the first- and second-floor slabs). We performed additional computational simulations to compare this partial loading configuration and loading of the entire building. The simulations indicated that both would have resulted in almost identical final collapse states (Extended Data Fig. 7 and Supplementary Video  3 ). However, the partial loading configuration introduced a higher magnitude of unbalanced moment to surrounding columns, which induces more demanding bending and shear in columns. Simulations confirmed that the lateral drift of the remaining part of the building would be higher when only three bays are loaded, indicating that its stability would be tested to a greater extent with this loading configuration (Extended Data Fig. 7 ).

Specially designed elements to trigger initial failures

We designed special devices to perform the column removal (Extended Data Fig. 6 ). For phase 1, we constructed two hanging concrete columns (C8 and C11) supported only on a vertical hydraulic jack. The pressure in the jack could be gradually released from a safe distance to remove the vertical reaction supporting the column. In phase 2, a three-steel-hinged column was used as the corner column. The middle part of the column represents a central hinge that was able to rotate if unlocked. During the second testing phase, we unlocked the hinge by pulling the column from outside the building using a forklift to induce a slight destabilization. This resulted in a sudden removal of the corner column C12 and the initiation of the collapse.

Monitoring plan

To monitor the structural behaviour, we heavily instrumented the building specimen with multiple sensors. A total of 57 embedded strain gauges, 17 displacement transducers and 5 accelerometers were placed at key locations in different parts of the structure (Extended Data Fig. 8 and Supplementary Information Section 3 ) during all phases of testing. The data from these sensors (Supplementary Information Sections 4 and 5 ) were complemented by the pictures and videos of the structural response captured by five high-resolution cameras and two drones (Supplementary Videos  6 and 8 ).

Data availability

All experimental data recorded during testing of the full-scale building are available from Zenodo ( https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10698030 ) 62 . Source data are provided with this paper.

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Champlain Towers South collapse. NIST https://www.nist.gov/disaster-failure-studies/champlain-towers-south-collapse-ncst-investigation (2022).

Jones, M. Nigeria’s Ikoyi building collapse: anger and frustration grows. BBC News (4 November 2021).

Berg, R. Iran building collapse death toll jumps to 26. BBC News (27 May 2022).

Corres Peiretti, H. & Romero Rey, E. Reconstrucción “Módulo D” aparcamiento Madrid Barajas T-4. In IV Congreso de Asociación científico-técnica del hormigón estructural (ACHE) (2008).

Manik, J. A. & Yardley, J. Building collapse in Bangladesh leaves scores dead. The New York Times (24 April 2013).

Caredda, G. et al. Learning from the progressive collapse of buildings. Dev. Built Environ. 15 , 100194 (2023).

Article   Google Scholar  

Adam, J. M., Parisi, F., Sagaseta, J. & Lu, X. Research and practice on progressive collapse and robustness of building structures in the 21st century. Eng. Struct. 173 , 122–149 (2018).

European Committee for Standardization (CEN). EN 1991-1-7:2006: Eurocode 1 - Actions on Structures - Part 1-7: General Actions - Accidental Actions (CEN, 2006).

Department of Defense (DoD). UFC 4-023-03. Design of Buildings to Resist Progressive Collapse , 34–37 (2016).

Loizeaux, M. & Osborn, A. E. Progressive collapse—an implosion contractor’s stock in trade. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 20 , 391–402 (2006).

United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR). The Human Cost of Disasters: An Overview of the Last 20 Years (2000–2019) . (UNDRR, 2020).

Wake, B. Buildings at risk. Nat. Clim. Change   11 , 642 (2021).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Starossek, U. Progressive Collapse of Structures (ICE, 2017).

Moehle, J. P., Elwood, K. J. & Sezen, H. Gravity load collapse of building frames during earthquakes. in SP-197: S.M. Uzumeri Symposium - Behavior and Design of Concrete Structures for Seismic Performance (American Concrete Institute, 2002).

Gurley, C. Progressive collapse and earthquake resistance. Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr. 13 , 19–23 (2008).

Lu, X., Lu, X., Guan, H. & Ye, L. Collapse simulation of reinforced concrete high-rise building induced by extreme earthquakes. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 42 , 705–723 (2013).

Tellman, B. et al. Satellite imaging reveals increased proportion of population exposed to floods. Nature 596 , 80–86 (2021).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Rentschler, J. et al. Global evidence of rapid urban growth in flood zones since 1985. Nature 622 , 87–92 (2023).

Cantelmo, C. & Cuomo, G. Hydrodynamic loads on buildings in floods. J. Hydraul. Res. 59 , 61–74 (2021).

Lonetti, P. & Maletta, R. Dynamic impact analysis of masonry buildings subjected to flood actions. Eng. Struct. 167 , 445–458 (2018).

Li, Y. & Ellingwood, B. R. Hurricane damage to residential construction in the US: Importance of uncertainty modeling in risk assessment. Eng. Struct. 28 , 1009–1018 (2006).

Khanduri, A. & Morrow, G. Vulnerability of buildings to windstorms and insurance loss estimation. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 , 455–467 (2003).

Ozturk, U. et al. How climate change and unplanned urban sprawl bring more landslides. Nature 608 , 262–265 (2022).

Luo, H. Y., Zhang, L. L. & Zhang, L. M. Progressive failure of buildings under landslide impact. Landslides 16 , 1327–1340 (2019).

Thöns, S. & Stewart, M. G. On the cost-efficiency, significance and effectiveness of terrorism risk reduction strategies for buildings. Struct. Saf. 85 , 101957 (2020).

Ellingwood, B. et al. NISTIR 7396: Best Practices for Reducing the Potential for Progressive Collapse in Buildings (National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2007).

Rockström, J. et al. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461 , 472–475 (2009).

Article   ADS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Steffen, W. et al. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347 , 1259855 (2015).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR). Principles for Resilient Infrastructure (UNDRR, 2022).

General Services Administration (GSA). Alternate Path Analysis & Design Guidelines for Progressive Collapse Resistance (GSA, 2016).

Izzuddin, B. A. & Sio, J. Rational horizontal tying force method for practical robustness design of building structures. Eng. Struct. 252 , 113676 (2022).

Starossek, U. & Wolff, M. Design of collapse-resistant structures. In JCSS and IABSE Workshop on Robustness of Structures (2005).

Russell, J. M., Sagaseta, J., Cormie, D. & Jones, A. E. K. Historical review of prescriptive design rules for robustness after the collapse of Ronan Point. Structures 20 , 365–373 (2019).

Cormie, D. Manual for the Systematic Risk Assessment of High-Risk Structures Against Disproportionate Collapse (The Institution of Structural Engineers, 2013).

Baban, N. S., Orozaliev, A., Kirchhof, S., Stubbs, C. J. & Song, Y.-A. Biomimetic fracture model of lizard tail autotomy. Science 375 , 770–774 (2022).

Article   ADS   MathSciNet   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Chen, Y., Okudan, G. E. & Riley, D. R. Sustainable performance criteria for construction method selection in concrete buildings. Autom. Constr. 19 , 235–244 (2010).

fib Commission 6. Guide to Good Practice: Structural Connections for Precast Concrete Buildings, Bulletin 43 (fib, 2008).

European Committee for Standardization (CEN). EN 1990:2002: Eurocode 0 - Basis of Structural Design (CEN, 2002).

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). Standard for Mitigation of Disproportionate Collapse Potential in Buildings and Other Structures (American Society of Civil Engineers, 2023).

Lew, H. S. et al . NIST Technical Note 1720: An Experimental and Computational Study of Reinforcd Concrete Assemblies Under a Column Removal Scenario (NIST, 2011).

American Society of Civil Engineers. ASCE 7-2002: Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (American Society of Civil Engineers, 2002).

fib Commission 2. Design and Assessment With Strut-and-Tie Models and Stress Fields: From Simple Calculations to Detailed Numerical Analysis, Bulletin 100 (fib, 2021).

Vecchio, F. J. & Collins, M. P. The modified compression-field theory for reinforced concrete elements subjected to shear. ACI Struct. J. 83 , 219–231 (1986).

Google Scholar  

Walraven, J. C. Fundamental analysis of aggregate interlock. J. Struct. Div. 107 , 2245–2270 (1981).

Bentz, E. C. Response Manual https://www.hadrianworks.com/about-programs.html (2019).

Bentz, E. C. Sectional Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Members . Doctoral dissertation, Univ. Toronto (2000).

Extreme Loading for Structures. Extreme Loading ® for Structures Theoretical Manual v.9 www.extremeloading.com/wp-content/uploads/els-v9-theoretical-manual.pdf (ASI, 2004).

Meguro, K. & Tagel-Din, H. Applied element method for structural analysis. Doboku Gakkai Ronbunshu 2000 , 31–45 (2000).

Tagel-Din, H. & Meguro, K. Applied element method for dynamic large deformation analysis of structures. Doboku Gakkai Ronbunshu 2000 , 1–10 (2000).

Tagel-Din, H. & Meguro, K. Analysis of a small scale RC building subjected to shaking table tests using applied element method. In 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand (2000).

Tagel-Din, H. & Meguro, K. Applied element simulation for collapse analysis of structures. Bull. Earthq. Resist. Struct. 32 , 113–123 (1999).

European Committee for Standardization (CEN). EN 1992-1-1: Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures - Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings (CEN, 2004).

Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute. PCI Design Handbook: Precast and Prestressed Concrete 7th edn (2010).

ACI Committee 318. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-08) and Commentary (ACI, 2008).

Jun, X., Zhang, Y. & Shan, C. Compressive behavior of laminated neoprene bridge bearing pads under thermal aging condition. AIP Conf. Proc. 1890 , 040018 (2017).

Maekawa, K. The Deformational Behavior and Constitutive Equation of Concrete Based on the Elasto-Plastic and Fracture Model . Doctoral dissertation, Univ. Tokyo (1985).

Okamura, H. & Maekawa, K. Non-linear analysis and constitutive models of reinforced concrete. In Conf. Computer-Aided Analysis and Design of Concrete Structures, Austria (1990).

Makoond, N., Shahnazi, G., Buitrago, M. & Adam, J. M. Corner-column failure scenarios in building structures: current knowledge and future prospects. Structures 49 , 958–982 (2023).

Adam, J. M., Buitrago, M., Bertolesi, E., Sagaseta, J. & Moragues, J. J. Dynamic performance of a real-scale reinforced concrete building test under a corner-column failure scenario. Eng. Struct. 210 , 110414 (2020).

Starossek, U. Progressive Collapse of Structures 2nd edn (ICE, 2017).

Zhao, Z., Guan, H., Li, Y., Xue, H. & Gilbert, B. P. Collapse-resistant mechanisms induced by various perimeter column damage scenarios in RC flat plate structures. Structures 59 , 105716 (2024).

Makoond, N., Setiawan, A., Buitrago, M. & Adam, J. M. Arresting failure propagation in buildings through collapse isolation—experimental dataset. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10698030 (2024).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This article is part of a project (Endure) that has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme of the European Union (grant agreement no. 101000396). We acknowledge the assistance of the following colleagues from the ICITECH-UPV institute in preparing and executing the full-scale building tests: J. J. Moragues, P. Calderón, D. Tasquer, G. Caredda, D. Cetina, M. L. Gerbaudo, L. Marín, M. Oliver and G. Sempértegui. We are also grateful to the Levantina, Ingeniería y Construcción S.L. (LIC) company for providing human resources and access to their facilities for testing. Finally, we thank A. Elfouly and Applied Science International for their support in performing simulations.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

ICITECH, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain

Nirvan Makoond, Andri Setiawan, Manuel Buitrago & Jose M. Adam

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

N.M. prepared the main text, performed the computational simulations and validated the test results. A.S. analysed the experimental data, performed data curation and prepared the Methods section. M.B. contributed to the design of the building specimen, the design of the test and data curation. J.M.A. contributed to the design of the research methodology, supervised the research and was responsible for funding acquisition. N.M., A.S. and M.B. contributed to the execution of the experimental test and to preparing figures, extended data and supplementary information. All authors interpreted the test and simulation results and edited the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jose M. Adam .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature thanks Valerio De Biagi and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.

Additional information

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

Extended data figures and tables

Extended data fig. 1 summary of building designs..

General building layout, connection details, and reinforcement configurations of Design H (“Hierarchy-based”) and Design C (“Conventional”).

Extended Data Fig. 2 Comparison of measured experimental data and simulation predictions.

a, Location of shown comparisons. All data shown in panels b to d refer to the change in structural response following the sudden removal of column C12 (after having removed columns C8 and C11 in a previous phase). b, Change in axial load in lower part of column C7. c, Change in axial load in lower part of column C9. d , Change in drift measured in both directions parallel to each building side.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Computational simulations of Design H and Design C subjected to small initial failures.

Principal strains and relative vertical displacement at the location of column C11 after removal of columns C8 and C11 from Design H ( a ) and Design C ( b ).

Extended Data Fig. 4 Demand and capacity envelopes of internal forces in Designs H and C subjected to large initial failures.

Evolution of axial loads, bending moments, and shear forces in column C7 compared to lower and upper bounds of its capacity after the removal of columns C8, C11, and C12 from Design H ( a ) and Design C ( b ).

Extended Data Fig. 5 Initial failure scenarios considered for testing.

Simulation of three different initial failure scenarios that were considered for testing. Scenario 3 was selected for the experimental test.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Specially designed removable supports to perform column removals.

Removable supports designed for quasi-static column removals in phase 1 and sudden column removal in phase 2.

Extended Data Fig. 7 Comparison of simulations of fully loaded and partially loaded building specimen.

a, Loaded bays, deformed shape, and principal normal strains following the sudden removal of column C12 (after having removed columns C8 and C11 in a previous phase). b, Horizontal displacement in the east-west and north-south directions at the top of columns C1 and C9 (2nd floor).

Extended Data Fig. 8 Measured redistribution of column axial forces during phase 1.

Maximum change in axial load of columns during phase 1 of testing based on recorded strain measurements.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information.

This file contains a supplementary test report that covers as-built building design, material properties, monitoring plan, structural response in phase 1 of testing and structural response in phase 2 of testing.

Peer Review File

Supplementary video 1.

Structural response of designs H and C.

Supplementary Video 2

Initial failure scenarios.

Supplementary Video 3

Comparison of partial and full loading.

Supplementary Video 4

Construction of the building.

Supplementary Video 5

An aerial view of the building before the test.

Supplementary Video 6

Multiple perspectives of the partial collapse of the building specimen in testing phase 2.

Supplementary Video 7

Experimental and simulation comparison of the partial collapse in testing phase 2.

Supplementary Video 8

Post-collapse inspection drone video.

Source data

Source data fig. 3, source data fig. 4, source data extended data fig. 2, source data extended data fig. 3, source data extended data fig. 4, rights and permissions.

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Makoond, N., Setiawan, A., Buitrago, M. et al. Arresting failure propagation in buildings through collapse isolation. Nature 629 , 592–596 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07268-5

Download citation

Received : 07 December 2023

Accepted : 05 March 2024

Published : 15 May 2024

Issue Date : 16 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07268-5

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

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

Quick links

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

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

Thesis Middle High German Intensifiers

Reason: Publishing.

until file(s) become available

TTHE SYSTEM OF GERMAN INTENSIFIERS IN A CORPUS OF MIDDLE HIGH GERMAN

The present thesis presents a study conducted using corpus linguistics and variationist methods in order to explore the system of intensifiers in a corpus of Middle High German. The data consisted of a sample of adjectives from different texts from the Middle High German period (1050-1350). The study of intensifiers (e.g. sehr ‘ very ’, wirkick ‘ really ’, ganz ‘ quite ’ ) has been a topic of much discussion, mainly in English. On the contrary, there is little research on the system of German intensifiers (e.g. sehr, wirklich, ganz ). The analysis of data resulted in amplifiers being the most frequent type of intensifiers. Besides the thesis drew the distribution of the most frequent variants found in the sample, and the overall occurrence of intensifiers among different text types. Furthermore, the results suggest that the rate of intensification is relatively low and remains low throughout most of the Middle High German period, but is higher in courtly texts and religious legends than in other types of texts. These findings were comparable to the previous research done, suggesting that intensification of adjectives in German behaved similarly to what have been observed in English. 

Degree Type

• Master of Arts
• Linguistics

Campus location

• West Lafayette

Advisor/Supervisor/Committee Chair

Additional committee member 2, additional committee member 3, usage metrics.

• Corpus linguistics
• Historical, comparative and typological linguistics