how to write policy recommendations in thesis

Advertisement

• Previous Article

Why Scholars Should Consider Policy Recommendations

Understanding the policymakers’ dilemma, how to begin developing policy recommendations, questions to ponder, yes, you can, writing policy recommendations for academic journals: a guide for the perplexed.

Professor in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow in the Transnational Threats Project at the Center for Strategic & International Studies.

• Cite Icon Cite
• Open the PDF for in another window
• Permissions
• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• Search Site

Daniel Byman; Writing Policy Recommendations for Academic Journals: A Guide for the Perplexed. International Security 2024; 48 (4): 137–166. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00485

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

Academic research can inform decision-makers on what actions to take or to avoid to make the world safer, more peaceful, and more equitable. There are many good works on bridging the gap between policymakers and academics but few on how scholars writing in academic journals can influence the policy process. In contrast to most policy-focused research, academic journals have long shelf lives and provide space for scholars to present heavily researched empirical evidence, theories, and analyses. Long, well-researched articles can, over time, shape the broader narrative for how to think about complex issues. Scholars also tend to be more objective and less partisan than policymakers. Despite the potential importance of academic work to the policy debate, many scholars receive little training on why and how to make policy recommendations. To remedy this problem, steps are offered to guide scholars as they begin developing policy recommendations for their articles. These include recognizing the dilemmas that policymakers themselves face, considering the audience before starting to write, identifying and using policy option menus, among others. When crafting recommendations, scholars should consider the long-term implications of their research on current policy as well as recommendations that might lead to more effective approaches. At the same time, scholars should consider the costs and limits of their recommendations.

Climate change. The rise of China and the U.S. response. The dangers posed by ISIS and other terrorist groups. The ability of the United Nations, the IAEA, the NPT, and other institutions to manage nuclear proliferation. Civil unrest and the potential for peaceful change. Globalization's benefits and perils. These are among the most important security issues facing the world today—and they are issues that scholars can, and do, speak to regularly. Thomas Homer-Dixon's “Environmental Scarcities and Violent Conflict,” John Mearsheimer's “The False Promise of International Institutions,” Andrew Kydd and Barbara Walter's “The Strategies of Terrorism,” Maria Stephan and Erica Chenoweth's “Why Civil Resistance Works,” and Henry Farrell and Abraham Newman's “Weaponized Interdependence” are among the most-cited articles ever published in International Security , and their scholarly impact is considerable. 1 Beyond their theoretical contributions, these articles illustrate the potential that International Security and other academic journals have for speaking to policy issues. All of them contain important ideas proposing what decision-makers should consider, do, and not do to make the world a better place.

Despite the potential importance of academic work to the policy debate, new scholars receive little training on why and how to make policy recommendations. Some academic journals only pay lip service to policymaking or ignore it altogether. There are many insightful works on the gap between policymakers and academics and why it should be bridged, and a host of training workshops, government funding programs, and other efforts push in this direction, often with valuable results. 2 Other articles stress how to craft relevant recommendations in general. 3 Yet almost all these efforts focus on activities outside publishing in top academic journals, ignoring the important role that scholarly journals should play in shaping thinking on policy. This article seeks to fill this gap, advising contributors on how to write policy recommendations for articles in both International Security and, I hope, other high-quality academic publications that seek to inform the policy debate.

Providing helpful commentary on policy is challenging—as difficult as the academic research that leads to publication in a top journal—and it is doubly difficult when doing so for an academic journal. Publication time is measured in months or even years, in contrast to blogs and current affairs journals that offer more immediate turnaround. Policymakers rarely have time to read long articles, which are the staples of journals like International Security , and indeed “rarely have time to read what's not urgent in their inbox,” as one senior policymaker noted. 4 Perhaps most important, it is often difficult for academics to understand a policy, let alone the pressures that policymakers face and the conflicting objectives that they try to juggle.

Yet it is vital for scholars to learn the dilemmas that policymakers face and to be relevant to public and private policy debates so that their research can help make the world a better place. Engaging policy also makes for better research. By focusing on questions important to the policy world, scholars avoid the trap of scholasticism—that is, when they concentrate on internal debates rather than on the original problems that first inspired academic research. But writing serious policy recommendations requires considerable modesty: crafting effective policy is hard, and academics should recognize the limits of their findings and the difficulties of moving the policy needle.

When crafting recommendations, scholars should take advantage of their objectivity and ability to challenge the prevailing wisdom. They are also well-placed to use history to learn lessons and to draw insights from large datasets. Academic journals, for their part, endure: they have long shelf lives and allow deep dives, providing space for scholars to present heavily researched empirical evidence, theories, and analyses. Long, well-researched articles can, over time, shape the broader narrative for how to think about a complex issue such as the potentially peaceful nature of democracy or how to make deterrence more robust. 5 They may also help provide context when unexpected events occur and the policy community has little to draw on but theory and analogy.

As scholars begin crafting their articles, they should try to determine their policy audience—including leaders outside government in industry and civil society—to identify who might read their work and who might act on it. They should consider their variables, identifying ways to maximize better outcomes or minimize worse ones. To help academics think of ways to use their findings to influence policy, one strategy is to create or draw on existing menus of policy instruments (“What can diplomats do?” “How might financial tools assist with coercion or another goal?” and so on). At the same time, scholars should consider the costs and limits of their arguments, conveying enabling conditions and the level of certainty of their findings as well as their overall recommendations. Finally, they should use their academic journal work as a springboard for writing shorter pieces in policy journals, blogs, and opinion pages.

The remainder of this article has five sections. The first section explains why academic authors should speak to policy issues and why offering policy recommendations contributes to better scholarship. It also highlights the unique role of academic publications like International Security . The second section describes the dilemmas that policymakers themselves face—difficulties that scholars must recognize even if their ultimate advice criticizes or transcends these dilemmas. In section three, the heart of the article, I explain how an academic author might begin thinking about policy relevance. For some scholars, this process may involve identifying steps to take from the start of their research project. For others, it may involve considering how work undertaken with an academic audience in mind might also speak to policymakers. Section four poses a set of questions that scholars should consider as they craft their recommendations. It also illustrates how to apply the article's framework. The article concludes with a brief exhortation for scholars to engage the policy world in their academic research.

Policy-relevant scholarship is intended to produce findings that feature in the deliberations of government officials and others involved in policy decisions. This section makes three arguments. First, journals like International Security value policy relevance, as do most of the scholars who work on international security, and policy-relevant research can improve scholarship as well as inform policy. Second, academics have much to contribute to the broader policy debate. Third, academic journals have their own niche in the broader policy analysis ecosystem, complementing blogs, the opinion pages of major newspapers, and policy journals like Foreign Affairs .

the so what of the so what

Not every International Security article should be policy relevant, but most should. Scholarship seeks to expand human knowledge, but for international security, much of that knowledge is interwoven with policy challenges. 6 The vast majority of articles that appear in International Security speak to some aspect of policy, ranging from avoiding international and civil wars to improving alliances to the nature of the international system. 7

The editors of International Security consider the “so what” hurdle when they evaluate a submission—Why should a reader bother with your article when there are so many other ones to read instead? 8 This hurdle is much easier to clear if the author makes the policy connection unambiguous. If an article's central question matters to those responsible for waging war, preserving the peace, maintaining fiscal stability, improving governance, and otherwise trying to promote security, then that article—and its recommendations for avoiding dangerous outcomes and increasing the chances of positive ones—is worth considering for inclusion in a journal.

Aside from this important question regarding publication, many scholars seek to do relevant research. 9 It is likely that a policy question or world event piqued a scholar's interest in international relations. Many scholars believe (rightly!) that they can contribute to both internal government debates and broader, more public discussions of complex policy issues.

what scholars bring to the policy table

Scholars have much to offer the policy debate. Although scholars may be removed from the policymaking fray, that distance gives them a chance to present new ways of thinking about a problem and to take the long view. Unlike some policymakers, scholars are not driven by their inbox. This flexibility allows scholars to set long-term agendas. As the policy community celebrated the fall of the Soviet Union, for example, Graham Allison, Owen Cote, Richard Falkenrath, and Steven Miller presciently identified the threat of loose nuclear weapons and material from the former Soviet Union. Their evidence spurred policy attention and eventually action. 10

In the near term, scholars can challenge prevailing wisdoms. In 2002, John Mueller questioned the post-9/11 consensus that Al Qaeda would continue to conduct numerous mass-casualty attacks like 9/11 or even more destructive ones. As time went on, Mueller built on his research and proved his initial argument that 9/11 was an outlier for U.S. casualties. 11

Scholars have time to dig deep: research for an article can take many years, a luxury the policy community lacks. Scholars can also create large datasets and survey significant amounts of open-source material. Some of this analysis occurs within the intelligence community, but scholars often create better-designed datasets and have more time to read and digest publicly available material.

In addition, scholars are bureaucratically (though not politically) neutral. 12 They do not have a vested interest in whether the State Department or the Defense Department oversees a peacekeeping operation, for example. Policymakers often reason by analogy, whereas scholars are trained to thoroughly research particular cases in an unbiased way and draw conclusions across cases, both of which add more insight than using a simple analogy. 13 Perhaps most important, International Security and other leading journals publish rigorous, peer-reviewed articles that use precise and careful research methods and analyses to answer questions, challenge the conventional wisdom, validate empirical findings, and advance understanding about complex topics.

This reasoning may seem Pollyannaish, but imagine if scholars rejected policy contributions in their writing. There would be less work that is deeply informed, methodologically rigorous, and carefully reviewed. Daniel Drezner points out that many nonacademic public intellectuals are more partisan and less open to criticism than their academic counterparts. Such partisanship decreases the quality of public intellectuals’ work though not their influence. 14

More focus on policy can also lead to better scholarship. Making policy is difficult, and making good policy is even harder. By speaking to these challenges, scholars are forced to ask themselves knotty questions and to better understand what they study and the data on which they rely for their analyses. For example, an academic who engages policy seriously may recognize that the paper trail of memoranda and strategy documents is often more spin than substance. 15 With policy concerns in mind, scholars are less likely to emphasize elegant scholarship that elides real-world difficulties. As Rebecca Adler-Nissen argues, “Part of the reason why ‘bad ideas’ are allowed to develop in the first place is that we have established a hierarchy of prestige that values ‘clean’ and ‘elegant’ scholarly ideas over the ‘messy’ ones of practitioners.” 16 She adds that policy engagement forces scholars to “begin to develop ideas that acknowledge the complexities, paradoxes, and hidden politics of ‘policy.’ We become curious about what practitioners find appropriate, shameful, or important.” 17

Policy recommendations can be dangerous things. Policymakers might take them out of context to “prove” that their desired outcome is the best option. Work on the democratic peace, for example, was used to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq. But this justification overlooked important context: many findings that extol the benefits of the peace do not focus on forced regime change. 18 Paul Musgrave warns of “lab leaks” in political science, whereby magazines like the Atlantic and Foreign Policy present concepts with little context and fewer caveats, making them more likely to be misused. 19 Scholars may also fear being labeled as activists if they promote particular policies. They are also taught to avoid normative language—a luxury that policymakers do not share.

The cures for these potential ills, however, are not to avoid policy engagement but to take it more seriously. Scholars cannot control the conclusions that people draw from reading their work. But clear writing and speaking directly to policy concerns make it more difficult for others to misuse a scholar's ideas for their misguided policies. As Erica De Bruin argues, “If irresponsible public scholarship is the issue, then developing a more rigorous ethic of public engagement is vital.” 20 Similarly, activism is a good thing when it reduces the risk of war, improves human rights, and otherwise makes the world a better place. In addition, as Charli Carpenter points out, engaging with advocacy organizations often helps researchers overcome academic biases because it requires them to consider different issues and learn about new problems. 21 The key for scholars is to ensure that their work remains rigorous and objective, which at times means recognizing that their preferred approach has flaws and limits.

the unique role of academic journals in the policy debate

Academic journals like International Security are part of a vast ecosystem of outlets that all claim to speak to policy issues. These include foreign-policy-oriented long-form journals like Foreign Affairs and Survival , general media outlets such as the New York Times , Yomiuri Shimbun , and the Economist , podcasts like those featured at War on the Rocks , specialized outlets like Arms Control Wonk and Lawfare , and numerous others. As articles on policy relevance argue, scholars should publish in these outlets—and many do! These platforms publish articles more quickly than academic ones, enabling scholars to speak directly to the issues of the day.

Academic journals have their niche as well. In some cases, particularly when the danger is possible but not imminent (e.g., if China were to invade Taiwan), an academic journal might be an ideal outlet for in-depth work. Michael O'Hanlon wrote such a piece in 2000, and its findings remained relevant for years even as the international environment and China's military capabilities changed. 22 Scholars can try to provide general guidance on a more specific problem. A 2020 piece explaining the sources of Russian bellicosity, for example, would still be helpful to policymakers in 2022, though it would need to be updated with insights on the invasion of Ukraine.

The longer length of an academic article also has trade-offs. A typical International Security article has 10,000–15,000 words, and some are even longer. For Foreign Affairs , the recommended length is 2,000–5,000 words, and for the New York Times it is 800–1,200 words. 23 Shorter pieces are more likely to be read, especially by more senior policymakers with crammed schedules. Conversely, it is harder to go into depth in a short piece.

The flip side of a long review process and longer length is a long shelf life. 24 Articles for International Security deliberately speak to broader issues and long-term problems. Consequently, they may remain relevant for many years. Twenty years after publication, Andrew Kydd and Barbara Walter's work on the strategies of terrorism still speaks to terrorist groups’ goals and methods. 25 Similarly, Caitlin Talmadge's focused study on Iran's possible blocking of the Strait of Hormuz remains highly relevant almost fifteen years later, identifying the many challenges to Iran, the possible responses for the United States, and so on. 26 Additional scholarly work, technological advances, and geopolitical change may affect the issues discussed in both articles, but the authors provide a set of concepts that create a valuable foundation on which to build policy.

In addition, the long shelf life changes the readership and value of the piece, allowing scholars to shape worldviews that inform a host of decisions. An International Security article may be on a syllabus for years or even decades after publication, framing how an issue is thought of for years to come, as RAND research on nuclear strategy did in the 1950s and 1960s. 27 It is plausible that a twenty-year-old student who reads an academic piece may retain its concepts and arguments as a mid-level policymaker two decades later. In the words of John Maynard Keynes, “practical men, who believe themselves quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.” 28 Be that defunct economist.

Journals like International Security are also more open to historical deep dives and reinterpretations. Because analogical reasoning is so prevalent, changing an understanding of an important historical event, such as the outbreak of World War I or the Cuban missile crisis, can inform how to think about what to do in the present. Keir Lieber points out that historians and policymakers like Henry Kissinger misunderstood World War I as an inadvertent conflict. This misreading has profound implications for how to gauge the likelihood of small great power disagreements accidentally spiraling into major war. 29

In some cases, rare ones but with high impact, a discontinuous event takes an article off the shelf. Should China invade Taiwan in 2025, an in-depth piece written in 2020 in a journal like International Security might be among the most comprehensive external guides to a policy challenge that would consume world attention, even if it does not discuss this specific crisis. Naazneen Barma and James Goldgeier note that Swedish Nobel laureate Gunnar Myrdal's The American Dilemma , a masterful 1944 study of race in the United States, was largely ignored when published, and its sponsors disowned it for years. In 1956, however, its findings helped shape the Brown v. Board of Education decision, one of the most consequential Supreme Court rulings in U.S. history. 30

Because academic articles are often explicitly theoretical, they also offer insights into new or related but distinct situations. For example, the 2011 Arab Spring upended long-standing policies toward area regimes. Even though pre-2011 articles on democratic transitions, the impact of military coup-proofing, civil war resolution, and similar topics that are common in security-related academic journals do not necessarily focus on the conditions in Egypt, Tunisia, or other affected countries, they nevertheless offered many potential insights during the turbulence. 31 Policymakers might have learned ways to promote successful elections, avoid (or predict) coups, prepare for civil violence, and so on. The key concepts endure, even if the dates and places are different.

Bureaucracies often amass considerable knowledge on complex issues, and policymakers are rarely stupid. Yet many policies seem foolish and ill-informed, especially in hindsight. To understand why the policy outcome often differs from the ideal, it is vital to understand the many pressures and restrictions that policymakers face. Academics should not treat these difficulties as immutable or even excusable, but recommendations should reflect an understanding of the policy itself and how to improve outcomes. Identifying the actual policy is a difficult aspect of research that should accompany the broader academic research process. Perhaps most important, academics should approach policy influence with considerable humility: in providing advice to smart, knowledgeable people, often the academic is not aware of all, or even most, of the challenges confronting the policy community.

policy constraints

Policymakers make their own policies, but they do not make them just as they please. Some factors, such as geography or the polarity of the international system, are invariable. Although many elements that constrain decision-making and agency are malleable, these constraints are often tight, making it hard for policymakers to break out of a narrow set of options.

Policymakers are beholden to their publics and to elites. These limits apply in both democratic and authoritarian systems, albeit in different ways and to different degrees. 32 It is tempting to urge “leadership” as a recommendation, and at times policymakers do go against the preferences of their constituents and supporters. But leaders are understandably wary of jeopardizing their political status.

Competing priorities and limited resources also constrain policymakers. The many issues that scholars examine—civil wars in sub-Saharan Africa, refugee flows in Southeast Asia, the destabilizing effects of new weapons systems, and problems with security assistance, to name only a few—compete with one another and with numerous other concerns. For the most senior policymakers, they also compete with domestic priorities, which are usually more salient. Recommendations that call for more aid to a region, more training to an ally's military, and so on all come at a cost, with other priorities receiving less money and attention as a result.

Policymakers also must act with only limited information. Colin Powell recalled that if he waited for enough facts to be 100 percent right, it meant it was too late to act. 33 Although U.S. intelligence proved remarkably prescient about the likelihood of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Joe Biden administration did not know if Ukrainian forces would hold out, how key allies in Europe would respond, or how a then-unpopular leader like Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky would respond when greatness was thrust upon him. 34 Policymakers also had to worry about less probable but potentially catastrophic concerns like nuclear escalation. Recommendations must recognize the many uncertainties and scenarios that policymakers are likely to face after a terrorist attack, as a civil war is breaking out, or when a peaceful movement seeks to overthrow a dictatorial regime.

In short, policymakers are in a proverbial box, constrained by politics, resources, competing priorities, and limited information. For academics to think outside this box, they must understand why policymakers are in it, which parameters are possible to shift, and which are likely to hold firm.

the difficulties of understanding policy

Understanding policy takes time, and it is easy to get wrong or caricature. First, policies often embody multiple strategic, bureaucratic, and political interests. Second, an administration may provide conflicting or confusing signals as to what its true policy is. Third, the resulting complexity makes coding difficult. Fourth, policies are often bad because alternative policies are worse; criticism should recognize this reality.

One barrier to understanding policy is that a single issue may be interwoven with a wide array of interests. Take, for example, negotiations with Iran as embodied in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. In this instance, U.S. policymakers balance a range of goals, including: stopping Iran's nuclear weapons program altogether; pausing the program for several years; shoring up international regimes like the 1968 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT); leading allies in Europe and elsewhere that also oppose Iran's nuclear program but are more eager for commercial ties to Tehran; reassuring regional allies that are suspicious of Iran; condemning Iran's support for militant and terrorist groups in the greater Middle East; supporting Iranian demonstrators seeking regime change; and winning over a domestic population that is highly suspicious of any relationship perceived as forgiving to Iran. 35 Judging success is difficult, as some of these goals are incompatible. Policymakers maximize some interests, satisfice others, and “fail” on still others. 36 A recommendation that improves the odds for success in one area may hinder it in others. For example, the Barack Obama administration succeeded in nuclear negotiations with Iran in part because U.S. policymakers avoided entangling the nuclear discussions with demands regarding Iran's support for terrorist groups.

Multiple signals from an administration make determining the actual policy difficult. Governments issue public strategy documents but engage in private and even covert diplomacy that can be more consequential. Diplomats may join treaty negotiations but have private instructions to ensure that negotiations fail. Officials use public statements not only to delineate a policy but also to close off rival approaches. For example, an administration publicly condemning the assassination of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi on one day would find it more difficult to sell Riyadh weapons the next. At times, the public statement is virtue signaling, staking the moral high ground even as most administration policies either do not follow through on lofty goals such as promoting human rights or opposing aggression or even go in the opposite direction. Western leaders, for example, called for Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad's ouster but did not provide the Syrian opposition with sufficient military support to make it happen. 37 Was regime change truly their goal?

The many interests involved in policy decisions, the multiplicity of signals coming out of governments, and the possibility of virtue signaling all pose coding problems. It is challenging for scholars to determine success or failure or to assign values to other binary measures of policy that are often used in large datasets. Similarly, the signaling confusion makes it hard to for researchers to know which coding they should use.

For academics, the many interests and confusing signaling also pose a data problem. Official strategy documents can be great sources, but they can also be misleading. President Donald Trump's 2017 National Security Strategy seemed to bear little relationship to his administration's overall foreign policy. Indeed, in some ways actual policy contradicted the guidance, with the strategy embracing a strong role for U.S. leadership in the face of great power competition when President Trump was highly critical of traditional U.S. allies and was cozying up to Moscow. 38 Often deliberations occur in private before a formal meeting. The meeting record is thus a ratification, not a reflection of discourse. Understandably, scholars often have a bias toward the written word, whereas it is the briefing or private conversation that matters the most to many policymakers. Some written policy documents may accurately reflect the authors’ views. But policymakers are less likely to document their political and bureaucratic interests, which leads scholars to have a bias toward strategic explanations.

Indeed, almost every policy addressing a complex problem is insufficient and often the only alternatives are bad ones—so which bad one is the best? As David Baldwin notes in his assessment of economic sanctions, “If the menu of choice includes only the options of sinking or swimming, the observation that swimming is a ‘notoriously poor’ way to get from one place to another is not very helpful. And if the principal alternative to economic sanctions is appearing to condone communism, racism, terrorism, or genocide, the observation that they are a ‘notoriously poor tool of statecraft’ may miss the point. In the context of the logic of choice, the evaluation of one policy alternative in isolation from others makes little sense.” 39 Policymakers may have an ambitious declared goal (“stopping human rights abuses”), but in practice they may settle for a range of lesser achievements, such as slightly reducing human rights abuses by making it more difficult for a regime to access resources, signaling disapproval to gain allied support, avoiding pressure to use military force that may backfire, and so on. Recommendations that do not at least acknowledge the poor range of options available to policymakers will not be convincing.

Taylor Fravel and Charles Glaser's work on the South China Sea and U.S. policy is an excellent example of how scholars can avoid these traps. 40 Fravel and Glaser are careful not to caricature current policy as they describe alternatives such as greater retrenchment and more intense military resistance. They detail the conditions under which different alternatives might be appropriate and suggest specific policies to accompany the alternatives, such as clarifying ambiguous treaty arrangements, imposing substantial economic sanctions, implementing shaming measures when China violates norms, and deploying surface and air forces, among many others. Overall, the reader is left with a better understanding of the balance that current U.S. policy is trying to strike, which Chinese actions would suggest the policy is failing, and the many potential downsides of different approaches, particularly how more aggressive efforts risk unwanted escalation.

the need to transcend the dilemma

Scholars must understand the policymakers’ dilemma and factor it into their recommendations, but they should not be bound by it. Pointing out the weakness of a policy in addressing a problem is an important service, and strong arguments can help policymakers advocate for more resources, shift priorities, or even take political risks in the face of domestic and elite opinion. Even better, however, is offering a plausible alternative. A particularly important role for scholars is to help policymakers reconsider factors that the policy community sees as insurmountable rather than malleable, such as identifying ways to overcome long-standing animosities, to reshape public support, to reprioritize regional objectives, and so on.

Scholars are taught to dissect complex problems, but often they focus on a lacuna in the literature rather than the policy implications of their research findings. 41 If they focus more on the advantages of a particular method or on why a variant of one major paradigm is better than another, such elements by themselves are of little interest to the policymaker. Below I both offer advice for authors as they begin to craft a piece designed to increase policy influence and list factors to consider as their research progresses. Some of these steps may prove useful even if the scholar sees the research as primarily academic.

step one: help a policymaker solve a problem

For those interested in speaking directly to policymakers as well as academics, start with the “so what” that motivated the research in the first place to determine how it fits into the policy world. What factors shape current policies, how malleable are they, and what alternatives are on the table? What will policymakers learn from reading the article that may improve their understanding about the problems they face and that may offer potential solutions? The article's focus should help solve a problem that is in a policymaker's inbox or, just as important, should be in their inbox. As the then deputy secretary of state James Steinberg noted, policymakers are “desperate” for ideas and solutions. 42

step two: consider, realistically, the audience

Before scholars begin their research, they should examine the issues that different kinds of policymakers or policy influencers see as important. Make sure to include those topics in the essay in a way that their audience can recognize, understand, and appreciate. Some policymakers write strategic documents, others evaluate weapons systems, still others negotiate treaties, and so on. Sometimes scholars decide that their work will have the greatest impact if they inform the media. The research findings should help reporters enlighten the public and ask nuanced and informed questions of government officials. Likewise, if the research will have the greatest impact by shaping the thinking of undergraduates and masters’ candidates—the next generation of policymakers—consider how to structure the whole essay, and possibly the research more broadly, to be most useful and effective for that audience.

With the issue in mind, identify the target policy audience. For those writing on a common topic like alliances and war, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries’ ministries of defense and foreign affairs, the leaders of Asian democracies, and intelligence chiefs are some (ambitious) possibilities. But authors should think broadly, beyond just governments, even if their piece is focused on traditional interstate security issues. For example, social media companies have emerged as important players in the information realm. With three billion monthly active users, Facebook's decisions on who to allow on its platform and what can be discussed are often more consequential than various foreign ministries’ statements. Companies’ content moderation policies and crisis response protocols, or lack thereof, can hinder or enable genocide. 43 Schools can teach new subjects (or old subjects differently), affecting reconciliation between once-embittered communities and public attitudes toward age-old problems like the impact of discrimination. Civil society and advocacy organizations such as the International Campaign to Ban Landmines can shift discourse, rally domestic coalitions (remember the box and how domestic politics shapes it!), and advance international law. Also consider where on the policy food chain your audience is. The U.S. president can change things more quickly than the assistant secretary of state for the Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, and the assistant secretary has more power than a desk officer. But guess which one has more time to read your article?

Authors who want to speak directly to policymakers should think of ways to infuse their entire project—puzzle, theoretical approach, hypothesis testing, and presentation of findings—with answers to both scholarly and policy questions. In addition to presenting rigorous methods and building on existing literatures, an article's theoretical and hypothesis sections must also make sense to a curious policymaker. Why is comparing many states’ approaches to military training better than delving deep into one example (or vice versa)? Why present some explanations but not others? A policymaker working on this issue should nod her head as she goes along rather than wonder why vital, obvious details that are necessary to make progress on a problem are missing from an article's analysis.

step three: emphasize useful variables and proper linkages

Scholars can also emphasize certain variables in their analyses to identify ways that policymakers can achieve the best results. If civil wars are correlated with ethnic disputes, economic inequality, or poor governance, then policies that foster ethnic harmony, greater equality, and reduced corruption should be encouraged. Policymakers would eagerly listen to scholars who provide specifics on what has worked. Articles that focus on methods can also be useful to policymakers, though drawing policy insights from such works often requires a bit more effort. Nicolas Sambanis, for example, argues that changes to both the threshold of violence used to define a civil war and the coding of intrastate, interstate, and extrastate wars can dramatically alter findings regarding peace duration and the causal power of economic problems, among many others. 44 If articles that draw on such findings are not robust, as Sambanis's research suggests, then policy recommendations built on them should be reconsidered.

Some scholars may prefer to skip the above steps and instead focus on the article's contributions to the academic literature. If they do so, however, they can still write useful policy recommendations. Having read a scholar's research, the intended current or future policymaker may be more informed about the causes of war, why alliances fracture, barriers to ethnic reconciliation, and other grave problems and perhaps better equipped to reduce these dangers. The author should now ask, “Given the findings from my research, what makes desirable policy outcomes more likely?” This might involve pointing out tensions between different policy approaches. Lindsey O'Rourke, for example, finds that policymakers prefer covert regime change over overt measures because they can deny responsibility for failures and reduce criticism for meddling in general. Efforts to ensure deniability, however, make the operations less likely to succeed. Highlighting this trade-off between two competing benefits (deniability versus improved chances of success) is important and increases the article's utility to policymakers. 45 This step tends to be easier if scholars have designed their work with policy concerns in mind from the start. Even so, articles that are more academic facing may still make desirable policy outcomes more likely.

Scholars’ recommendations should flow from their analyses. Such a point seems straightforward, even obvious. But often policy recommendations stray from the analytic foundations on which they claim to rest. For example, the 9/11 Commission issued a powerful report condemning intelligence failures and calling for major structural reforms, particularly to centralize intelligence under a director of national intelligence. 46 As Richard Posner pointed out, however, among intelligence agencies it was only the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that demonstrated major structural failures in combating terrorism. 47 The 9/11 Commission nevertheless recommended major institutional changes elsewhere in the intelligence community but not in the FBI. Although the report indicated that post-9/11 information sharing worked well and that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) paramilitary operations were effective and agile, it recommended centralizing information sharing and moving the CIA's operations under the Defense Department. To be clear, such recommendations may have been good ones, but they did not match the substance of the commission's findings on information sharing or paramilitary operations.

Finally, avoid offering hackneyed recommendations. A recommendation that urges policymakers to focus on economic growth may be vacuous. A call for more intelligence may be hard to enact. Instead, provide thoughts on why intelligence is currently lacking. 48

step four: create a menu of policy options

Depending on the research topic, there are many practicable ways to influence policy. It is useful to consider all options, even if most do not end up being relevant to your findings. The U.S. military teaches its students that the instruments of power are summarized by the acronym DIME (diplomatic, informational, military, and economic)—and that is one place to start. 49 What might a diplomat do to sail the ship of state in the right direction? Is more intelligence needed? If so, could government education or propaganda campaigns help? What about the many variations of military force? Do economic tools such as sanctions help? Sometimes the answer to such questions is a clear and quick “no.” But combining these tools can often move policy forward. There are numerous variations of DIME, such as MIDFIELD (military, informational, diplomatic, financial, intelligence, economic, law, and development), which brings in financial and economic tools, international and domestic law, and so on. 50 In other cases, changes to education policy might be appropriate. Regardless of the preferred abbreviation, if any, thinking through a list of tools is a useful way to start.

Combinations are particularly important. Policymakers rarely rely on one instrument, and saying that such an instrument succeeds or fails, by itself, is less persuasive than discussing combinations.

Another approach is to think of a checklist for policymakers. Alexander George's writing on coercive diplomacy, for example, offers both contingent generalizations on when it works and factors for policymakers to think through. In essence, George shows how structured, focused comparisons of past cases help policymakers assess what they need to know and do for current developments. 51

step five: consider costs and limits of your policy recommendations

Some policy recommendations may be highly effective but also involve high costs in lives or money. Others help solve one problem but introduce others. Considering the findings, what current policies are making things worse or simply wasting money? Similarly, what costs and trade-offs are likely if a policymaker implements the article's recommendations? In general, it is always useful to ask, “Why is this not being done already?”

The findings that promoting regime change in Iran would lead to many casualties and would foster anti-Americanism would be useful to share with policymakers. Yet a recommendation to avoid foreign intervention might mean accepting a hostile, nuclear-armed Iran. It is easier for policymakers to dismiss research that fails to consider the latter possibility. Other policies are just expensive. Asking Asian countries to respond to China's rise by vastly increasing their anti-access/area denial capabilities may be sensible, but doing so is costly. Political leaders have other uses for the money.

By contrast, examining the cost of existing policies can generate new recommendations. For example, Kenneth Pollack finds that U.S. efforts to train Arab militaries using a U.S. military model is a recipe for failure given different political, cultural, and institutional settings. This seems like a finding that would lead to a recommendation to stop training altogether. Even though ineffective training is often useless in a military sense, stopping it would anger allied elites and harm bilateral relationships. Pollack thus recommends that the United States shift how it trains foreign militaries to better recognize these differences. 52

With the above in mind, make recommendations that are distinctive and clear. In her work on military training, Renanah Miles Joyce contends, “Liberal providers should emphasize building institutions that help to regulate military behavior rather than prioritizing individual or unit-level training with a normative component tacked on.” 53 This sentence packs a lot of substance: it identifies the actors (liberal states that provide military assistance), the policy that needs to change (prioritizing individual and unit-level training), and the proposed alternative (building institutions).

Another approach is to think about the policy box and where you stand in relation to it. It is tempting for scholars to ignore politics and simply point out the best answers. Yet recommendations that incorporate political realities are potentially more influential. Often, a mix is best. A scholar might note that today's political reality makes the ideal policy infeasible. Instead, the author might recommend a suboptimal but still useful set of steps: “As long as U.S. domestic politics makes a return to the Trans-Pacific Partnership [TPP] difficult, a less effective but valuable step would be to engage in a series of bilateral trade agreements that, cumulatively, offer lesser but still important security benefits similar to TPP.” This recommendation acknowledges the preferred solution (TPP) and offers a more politically plausible middle ground (bilateral agreements) that a policymaker could consider. Similarly, it is important to acknowledge resource constraints but not be bound by them: “Ideally, Taiwan would purchase a suite of anti-access/area denial capabilities rather than rely on more traditional systems like tanks, and it should begin with Harpoon anti-ship missiles.” 54

step six: use research as a springboard for other outputs

After conducting exhaustive research and developing informed recommendations, a scholar can repackage their research for podcasts and as shorter pieces for magazines like Foreign Affairs , outlets like Lawfare , and newspapers. These shorter pieces come to the attention of policymakers at multiple levels and make it more likely that at least a few of them may engage the longer work. After Keir Lieber and Daryl Press published their deeply researched findings on challenges to nuclear deterrence in International Security , they reached broader audiences by sharing their results in Foreign Affairs and the Atlantic . 55

Believe it or not, many editors welcome pitches from informed, serious scholars, even if the scholars have not previously written for popular publications. Most outlets have information on where and how to submit on their websites. Emailing editors directly is also an option. 56 In many cases, busy editors will not respond to inquiries or will otherwise not give a pitch the time it deserves. So be it. Curse to yourself, move on, and submit elsewhere, repeating as necessary. After initial contact is made, subsequent submissions are often easier, especially if an author proves to be authoritative, responsive, and otherwise easy to work with. I edit the “Foreign Policy Essay” at Lawfare and regularly feature content that draws on long academic articles. A simple email to me usually leads to a response—the author and I discuss if a piece might be suitable and, if so, how it might draw on the original research but reach a different, policy-focused audience.

After following some form of steps one through six, there are several important questions that scholars should pose to themselves as they draft policy recommendations for their articles. These questions have no right answers—but considering them will help properly situate the research in ways that policymakers find useful.

It is fine to think big, and it is also fine to think small—each category has different audiences and different impacts. Mid- or senior-level officials are more likely to act on smaller, more fine-grained recommendations. They can use their bureaucratic power to advocate purchasing a particular weapons system, strengthening an international organization, or using financial tools instead of military force to coerce an adversary. They cannot, however, easily establish a new norm on a controversial topic, jettison the 1947 National Security Act, or dump a long-standing ally in favor of a new one. Yet such broad recommendations, even if infeasible in the short or medium term, are part of what academics contribute to a debate. By changing public and elite perceptions over time, scholars can give policymakers more agency to overhaul their approach, thereby loosening the constraints of the policy box. Another factor to consider is the timing of a recommendation. For example, proposing that the European Union change its aid recipients as the deadline for doing so approaches might be more influential than making that same recommendation months or years after the deadline has passed.

do the recommendations solve the problem or move the needle?

A related question is whether a recommendation focuses on either solving or mitigating a problem. The former, obviously, is better, but in most cases it is unrealistic. If scholars have solutions for how to finally end civil wars, reconcile embittered ethnic groups, or ensure that nuclear war is an impossibility, then they should propose them! Yet small improvements in dangerous situations are tremendously valuable. Recommendations that make a civil war a little less likely, reduce the odds of a counterproductive intervention, or minimize wasted time or resources have measurable consequences. Offering a recommendation that reduces the number of refugees from one million to 950,000 is less consequential than preventing the disaster that created one million refugees. But it is still monumental to have fifty thousand fewer refugees, even if the reduction seems insufficient to the scale of the suffering. Most scholarship at best slightly shifts policy, and academics should be comfortable, indeed proud, that it does so. Academic authors should recognize that sometimes only limited progress is possible given resources, the limits of policy instruments, and political realities.

conveying uncertainty

Policymakers and government analysts are often wrong. And so are academics. A powerful advantage of academics, however, is (or should be) that mistakes are learning opportunities. Scholars can revisit foreign policy decisions and, by understanding why people were wrong, identify neglected variables or scope conditions. This power, however, comes with responsibility. Just as methods and sources have inevitable limits and gaps, so do policy recommendations. Small variations in findings—“sanctions always fail” versus “sanctions usually fail”—have profound policy implications, and those variations should be made clear. In addition, scholars should reevaluate their work and highlight their mistakes as ways to ensure their integrity. 57 Scholars can and will be wrong, and refusing to acknowledge this by making excuses or otherwise avoiding responsibility misses a learning opportunity and reduces the scholar's credibility. In conveying uncertainty, scholars should strike a balance between showing humility by acknowledging research limitations and offering policymakers clear advice despite unknown or conflicting variables.

are you writing implications or recommendations?

Although this article focuses on policy recommendations, an important (and at times easier) variant is to consider policy implications: How do research findings inform existing policies? This differs from a recommendation, which asks: “What should policymakers do differently in light of the research findings?” Consider this statement: “There is no need to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons because it is unlikely to use them.” If policymakers are convinced by the argument, they might abandon efforts to coerce Iran or otherwise dramatically change their approach. Another variant is to warn of possible problems with a current approach: “Efforts to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons will face challenges from Iran's insecurity about its own defense capabilities, from the different interests of Iran's trading partners, and from a distrust of U.S. credibility following the U.S. withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action under President Trump.” This latter example offers no new policy but warns current policymakers about potential obstacles to success. Presumably, policymakers could try to mitigate these constraints, such as by providing side payments to trading partners, but the author is not making a specific recommendation.

By contrast, consider an approach that focuses on recommendations: “To stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, the United States and its allies should focus less on military pressure and more on tightening economic sanctions.” Ideally, a scholar would provide examples for how to do such tightening. When in doubt, it is better to be direct than to let others draw their own conclusions.

Pointing out both policy recommendations and policy implications is valuable for the reasons discussed above. Policymaking is difficult, and solutions are not always obvious. Relatedly, sometimes a particular recommendation is uncomfortable (e.g., don't do humanitarian intervention or otherwise help a vulnerable population). This discomfort does not mean that scholars should avoid highlighting unpopular policy implications. Ideally, scholars would embrace this role as they are less likely than someone in government to suffer career harm from an unpopular position.

Table 1 presents five International Security articles that were published in the last five years. These examples highlight a wide range of topics that might matter to policymakers. 58 Some focus on a clear policy issue like civil-military relations or on an instrument like military training. Others seem more abstract, examining the nature of the international system or hostile uses of water. The authors represent a mix of both senior scholars and people at earlier career stages. Without claiming expertise on any of these issues myself, I identify potential audiences, policy recommendations, and other policy platforms for each article. (Note: the scholars themselves may disagree with my read on the implications of their work.)

Examples of Policy Audiences, Policy Recommendations, and Policy Implications of Select International Security Articles

SOURCES: See note 58 for the citations for these five International Security articles. The spin-offs listed in column four include: John J. Mearsheimer, “The Inevitable Rivalry: America, China, and the Tragedy of Great Power Politics,” Foreign Affairs , Vol. 100, No. 6 (November/December 2021), https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2021-10-19/inevitable-rivalry-cold-war ; Isaac Chotiner, “Why John Mearsheimer Blames the U.S. for the Crisis in Ukraine,” New Yorker , March 1, 2022, https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/why-john-mearsheimer-blames-the-us-for-the-crisis-in-ukraine ; The U.S.-China Technology Relationship in Flux,” panel discussion (transcript), Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, October 4, 2019, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/fp_20191004_china_tech_transcript.pdf ; Andrea Kendall-Taylor et al., “Henry Farrell and Abraham Newman Discuss ‘Weaponized Interdependence,’” Brussels Sprouts , podcast, Center for a New American Security, March 6, 2020, https://www.cnas.org/publications/podcast/henry-farrell-and-abraham-newman-discuss-weaponized-interdependence ; Henry J. Farrell and Abraham L. Newman, “This is What the Future of Globalization Will Look Like,” Foreign Policy , July 4, 2020, https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/04/this-is-what-the-future-of-globalization-will-look-like/ ; Henry J. Farrell and Abraham L. Newman, “The U.S. Is the Only Sanctions Superpower. It Must Use That Power Wisely,” New York Times , March 16, 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/opinion/us-russia-sanctions-power-economy.html ; Henry J. Farrell and Abraham L. Newman, “America Weaponized the Global Financial System. Now Other Countries Are Fighting Back,” Monkey Cage (blog), Washington Post , December 19, 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/19/america-weaponized-global-financial-system-now-other-states-are-fighting-back/ ; Risa Brooks, “The Erosion of Civil-Military Relations,” Power Problems , podcast, Cato Institute, November 16, 2021, https://www.cato.org/multimedia/power-problems/erosion-civil-military-relations ; Risa Brooks, Jim Goldby, and Heidi Urben, “Crisis of Command: America's Broken Civil-Military Relationship Imperils National Security,” Foreign Affairs , Vol. 100, No. 3 (May/June 2021), https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2021-04-09/national-security-crisis-command ; Risa Brooks, “What Can Military and Civilian Leaders Do to Prevent the Military's Politicization,” War on the Rocks , April 27, 2020, https://warontherocks.com/2020/04/what-can-military-and-civilian-leaders-do-to-prevent-the-militarys-politicization/ ; Sam Ratner, “The Stuff of Life and Death: Part II,” The World , May 4, 2021, https://theworld.org/stories/2021/05/04/stuff-life-and-death-part-ii ; Renanah Miles Joyce, “Rethinking How the United States Trains Foreign Militaries,” Lawfare , August 14, 2022, https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/rethinking-how-united-states-trains-foreign-militaries .

To illustrate the framework and some of the points above more fully, consider a hypothetical article that examines alliances, a staple topic in international relations. The scholar asks, “What causes major power alliances to fail?” To make the work more policy relevant, the author should investigate the policies of the United States or other relevant countries, seeking to understand why they do what they do. Why did alliances with a particular focus, strength, and scope emerge, and what limits did they have? This investigation might involve reviewing government records, interviewing diplomats, and otherwise treating this baseline question as its own research topic. When doing interviews, it is useful to ask counterfactuals to determine why different results did not occur: Why were certain desirable countries excluded or problematic countries included in the alliance? Why was a particularly difficult coordination mechanism included or an alternative excluded? Overall, the scholar should try to get a sense of why the status quo emerged the way that it did.

With this background in mind, it is time to look forward. The question—what causes major power alliances to fail—is of obvious interest to a U.S. or an Asian diplomat, a NATO leader, or another official who might be involved in strengthening alliances. Nonetheless, it is hard to consider a specific audience for this topic. If the piece is highly relevant to the United States, the audience might be the regional bureaus at the State Department, which manage diplomatic relations for their parts of the world. Another option is the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Policy, which has departments that focus on the Indo-Pacific region, Strategy and Plans, and International Security Affairs, among others. Other entities, perhaps less central but also important, might include the International Finance office at the Department of Treasury and various shops within the intelligence community that monitor relations with countries around the world. The more scholars learn about these audiences’ agendas, remits, and resources, the better scholars’ recommendations will be.

Although the variables in play will of course depend on the research, it is worth considering two hypothetical alternative variables: shared interests versus institutional design. The former, of course, is out of the hands of almost all policymakers. But at least some (very senior) policymakers have input into institutional design.

This hypothetical example also illustrates how recommendations and implications may differ. The implications of different interests may lead to problems that are difficult to solve but must be anticipated and managed, perhaps to the point of not relying on allies under certain conditions or expecting only fitful cooperation. In contrast, a scholar may recommend a specific change to institutional design, such as a new entity, or greater powers for or new members of an existing entity. Here, as in other instances, it is important to consider the scope of the recommendation. Academics might rightly propose an entirely new alliance structure, such as an Asian version of NATO. Or they might focus more narrowly (but with more chance of influencing the debate) on how to tweak an existing structure to make it more effective.

Similarly, it is useful to consider how different elements of national power might help, and drafting a basic policy menu is a useful first step. The scholar should ask how diplomats, intelligence officers, the military, and economic actors like the Treasury Department might contribute. Imagine holding a meeting (or, ideally, interviewing people from different agencies) and think about how each might play a role.

It is also valuable for scholars to think ahead about likely problems with their recommendations. If, say, the recommendation is more resources to help gain the goodwill of a particular country, the trade-off is one that senior policymakers always face: fewer resources for other countries. But there may be less obvious costs and trade-offs. Might strengthening the alliance alarm a neighbor, perhaps leading to a dangerous spiral? Might the ally become more aggressive, creating a moral hazard, or, conversely, fear being chain-ganged into a conflict? Such possibilities need not be covered exhaustively, but it is important to acknowledge the limits of a recommendation. Again, interviewing and engaging with relevant policymakers can highlight these limits.

When the research is completed and published, it is time to consider additional publishing options. Many of these should be tied to current events: For a scholar writing in early 2024, what does research on alliance weakness tell us about how the Australia-United Kingdom-United States alliance might hold up or how Sweden and Finland's accession to NATO might be best managed? Leading newspapers might find these topics of interest, as would more specialized outlets like Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy . When possible, scholars should give briefings on their work or otherwise promote it.

Writing policy recommendations can seem daunting, and in many ways it is. It can be done poorly and at times even counterproductively. When done well, however, recommendations can help guide decision-makers and the public on the world's more difficult issues.

In many ways, the process is the same for crafting both a better policy recommendation and a better article. Use clear, jargon-free prose and structured arguments to make recommendations more convincing. 59 Authors should seek out criticism, ideally from those with policy experience as well as from fellow scholars. The editors at International Security are an invaluable resource: they can help scholars think through and fully consider both ideas and implications. By making policy recommendations, scholars join a broader community that seeks to make the world a better place. It is not an easy task, but it is a necessary and rewarding one.

The author would like to thank Michael Desch, James Goldgeier, Matthew Kirchman, Ines Oulamene, Kenneth Pollack, Jeremy Shapiro, and the anonymous reviewers for their comments and excellent feedback on previous versions of this article.

As of April 2024, these articles are among the thirty most-cited contributions to International Security , according to data obtained by MIT Press. Thomas F. Homer-Dixon, “Environmental Scarcities and Violent Conflict: Evidence from Cases,” International Security , Vol. 19, No. 1 (Summer 1994), pp. 5–40, https://doi.org/10.2307/2539147 ; John J. Mearsheimer, “The False Promise of International Institutions,” International Security , Vol. 19, No. 3 (Winter 1994/95), pp. 5–49, https://doi.org/10.2307/2539078 ; Andrew H. Kydd and Barbara F. Walter, “The Strategies of Terrorism,” International Security , Vol. 31, No. 1 (Summer 2006), pp. 49–80, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2006.31.1.49 ; Maria J. Stephan and Erica Chenoweth, “Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict,” International Security , Vol. 33, No. 1 (Summer 2008), pp. 7–44, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2008.33.1.7 Henry Farrell and Abraham L. Newman, “Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion,” International Security , Vol. 44, No. 1 (Summer 2019), pp. 42–79, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00351 .

See, among others, Naazneen H. Barma and James Goldgeier, “How Not to Bridge the Gap in International Relations,” International Affairs , Vol. 98, No. 5 (September 2022), pp. 1763–1781, https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiac102 ; Michael C. Desch, Cult of the Irrelevant: The Waning Influence of Social Science on National Security (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2019); Stephen M. Walt, “The Relationship between Theory and Policy in International Relations,” Annual Review of Political Science , Vol. 8 (2005), pp. 29–32, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.7.012003.104904 ; Alexander L. George, Bridging the Gap: Theory and Practice in Foreign Policy (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace, 1993); Bruce W. Jentleson, “The Need for Praxis: Bringing Policy Relevance Back In,” International Security , Vol. 26, No. 4 (Spring 2002), pp. 169–183, https://doi.org/10.1162/016228802753696816 ; Henry Farrell, “Why Do Policy Makers Hate International Relations Scholarship?,” Monkey Cage (blog), Washington Post , September 18, 2013, https://themonkeycage.org/2013/09/why-do-policy-makers-hate-international-relations-scholarship ; Nicholas Kristof, “Professors, We Need You!,” New York Times , February 16, 2014, https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/opinion/Sunday/kristof-professors-we-need-you.html . For workshops and other initiatives, see, for example, the Bridging the Gap project ( https://www.bridgingthegapproject.org ) as well as the Scholars Strategy Network ( https://scholars.org ). In the United Kingdom, the Research Excellence Framework ( https://www.ref.ac.uk ) links public engagement and policy relevance to funding, as have efforts like the Minerva Research Initiative ( https://minerva.defense.gov ).

Bruce W. Jentleson and Ely Ratner, “Bridging the Beltway–Ivory Tower Gap,” International Studies Review , Vol. 13, No. 1 (March 2011), pp. 6–11, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2486.2010.00992.x ; Paul C. Avey and Michael C. Desch, “What Do Policymakers Want from Us?,” International Studies Quarterly , Vol. 58, No. 2 (June 2014), pp. 227–246, https://doi.org/10.1111/isqu.12111 ; Daniel Byman and Matthew Kroenig, “Reaching beyond the Ivory Tower: A How To Manual,” Security Studies , Vol. 25, No. 2 (2016), pp. 289–319, https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2016.1171969 .

James B. Steinberg, “Universities and Public Policy,” presentation at Presidents’ National Dialogue, University of Ottawa, October 22, 2009, https://www.cips-cepi.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/steinberg.pdf .

See Michael W. Doyle, “Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs,” in Arthur Ripstein, ed., Immanuel Kant (London: Routledge, 2017), pp. 503–533. For a critique, see Sebastian Rosato, “The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory,” American Political Science Review , No. 97, No. 4 (November 2003), pp. 585–602, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000893 . A foundational deterrence book is Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981).

For an argument that policy recommendations are not essential for policy relevance, see Daniel Maliniak et al., eds., Bridging the Theory-Practice Divide in International Relations (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2020), pp. 8–10. For a critique, see Desch, Cult of the Irrelevant , pp. 250–255.

For a comparison of International Security 's focus on explicit policy recommendations with other security journals, see Jack Hoagland et al., “The Blind Men and the Elephant: Comparing the Study of International Security across Journals,” Security Studies , Vol. 29, No. 3 (2020), pp. 425–426, https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2020.1761439 .

Teresa Pelton Johnson, “Writing for International Security: A Contributor's Guide,” International Security , Vol. 16, No. 2 (Fall 1991), pp. 171–180, https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/writing-international-security-contributors-guide .

See the question “Does your research tend to be basic or applied?” in the 2017 TRIP Faculty Survey. Daniel Maliniak et al., 2017 TRIP Faculty Survey, Teaching, Research, and International Policy Project, Global Research Institute, Williamsburg, VA, https://trip.wm.edu/research/faculty-surveys .

Graham T. Allison et al., Avoiding Nuclear Anarchy: Containing the Threat of Loose Russian Nuclear Weapons and Fissile Material (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996), pp. 1–176.

John Mueller, “Harbinger or Aberration? A 9/11 Provocation,” National Interest , Vol. 69 (Fall 2002): pp. 45–50, https://www.jstor.org/stable/42895558 .

Byman and Kroenig, “Reaching beyond the Ivory Tower,” p. 295.

Yuen Foong Khong, Analogies at War: Korea, Munich, Dien Bien Phu, and the Vietnam Decisions of 1965 (Princenton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992), pp. 3–18.

Daniel W. Drezner, The Ideas Industry: How Pessimists, Partisans, and Plutocrats are Transforming the Marketplace of Ideas (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), pp. 43–101.

David D. Newsom, “Foreign Policy and Academia,” Foreign Policy , No. 101 (Winter 1995/96), p. 56, https://doi.org/10.2307/1149406 .

Rebecca Adler-Nissen, “Leaving the Lab,” Duck of Minerva (blog), September 2, 2021, https://www.duckofminerva.com/2021/09/leaving-the-lab.html .

John M. Owen IV, “Review: Iraq and the Democratic Peace: Who Says Democracies Don't Fight?,” Foreign Affairs , Vol. 84, No. 6 (November/December 2005), pp. 122–127, https://doi.org/10.2307/20031781 .

Paul Musgrave, “Political Science Has Its Own Lab Leaks,” Foreign Policy , July 3, 2021, https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/07/03/political-science-dangerous-lab-leaks/ .

Erica De Bruin, “How Can We Vaccinate against Viral Political Science?,” Duck of Minerva (blog), August 31, 2021, https://www.duckofminerva.com/2021/08/how-can-we-vaccinate-against-viral-political-science.html . De Bruin points to the program Rigor, Relevance, and Responsibility at the University of Denver's Sié Center as one such effort.

Charli Carpenter, “‘You Talk of Terrible Things So Matter-of-Factly in This Language of Science’: Constructing Human Rights in the Academy,” Perspectives on Politics , Vol. 10, No. 2 (June 2012), pp. 363–383, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592712000710 .

Michael O'Hanlon, “Why China Cannot Conquer Taiwan,” International Security , Vol. 25, No. 2 (Fall 2000), pp. 51–86, https://doi.org/10.1162/016228800560453 .

“Submissions,” Foreign Affairs , accessed February 21, 2023, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/submissions ; “New York Times Opinion Guest Essays,” New York Times , accessed February 21, 2023, https://help.nytimes.com/hc/en-us/articles/115014809107-New-York-Times-Opinion-Guest-Essays .

For International Security , see “Submission Guidelines,” International Security , Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School, https://www.belfercenter.org/journal-international-security/overview#!submission-guidelines .

Kydd and Walter, “The Strategies of Terrorism.”

Caitlin Talmadge, “Closing Time: Assessing the Iranian Threat to the Strait of Hormuz,” International Security , Vol. 33, No. 1 (Summer 2008), pp. 82–117, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2008.33.1.82 .

Barma and Goldgeier, “How Not to Bridge the Gap,” p. 1768.

John Maynard Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money (1936; repr., London: Macmillan, 2007), pp. 383–384.

Keir A. Lieber, “The New History of World War I and What It Means for International Relations Theory,” International Security , Vol. 32, No. 2 (Fall 2007), pp. 155–191, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2007.32.2.155 .

Barma and Goldgeier, “How Not to Bridge the Gap,” p. 1781.

James T. Quinlivan, “Coup-proofing: Its Practice and Consequences in the Middle East,” International Security , Vol. 24, No. 2 (Fall 1999), pp. 131–165, https://doi.org/10.1162/016228899560202 ; Lise Morjé Howard and Alexandra Stark, “How Civil Wars End: The International System, Norms, and the Role of External Actors,” International Security , Vol. 42, No. 3 (Winter 2017/18), pp. 127–171, https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00305 ; Edward D. Mansfield and Jack Snyder, “Democratic Transitions, Institutional Strength, and War,” International Organization , Vol. 56, No. 2 (Spring 2002), pp. 297–337, https://doi.org/10.1162/002081802320005496 .

Elizabeth N. Saunders, “Elites in the Making and Breaking of Foreign Policy,” Annual Review of Political Science , Vol. 25, No. 1 (2022), pp. 219–240, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041719-103330 ; Mary E. Gallagher and Jonathan K. Hanson, “Power Tool or Dull Blade? Selectorate Theory for Autocracies,” Annual Review of Political Science , Vol. 18, No. 1 (2015), pp. 367–385, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-071213-041224 .

Colin L. Powell and Joseph E. Persico, My American Journey (New York: Ballantine, 1995), p. 393.

Shane Harris et. al., “Road to War: U.S. Struggled to Convince Allies, and Zelensky, of Risk of Invasion,” Washington Post , August 16, 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/interactive/2022/ukraine-road-to-war/ ; Afiq Fitri, “How President Zelensky's Approval Ratings Have Surged,” New Statesman , March 1, 2022, https://www.newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-day/2022/03/how-president-zelenskys-approval-ratings-have-surged .

Suzanne Maloney and Fred Dews, “Iran's Nuclear Aspirations,” Brookings Cafeteria , podcast, February 18, 2022, https://www.brookings.edu/podcast-episode/irans-nuclear-aspirations/ ; Mark Fitzpatrick, “Assessing the JCPOA,” Adelphi Series , Vol. 57, No. 466–467 (2017), pp. 19–60, https://doi.org/10.1080/19445571.2017.1555914 .

Steinberg, “Universities and Public Policy.”

Nikolaos van Dam, “What the West Got Wrong in Syria,” Foreign Policy , August 22, 2017, https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/22/what-the-west-got-wrong-in-syria/ . On variations on signaling in general, see Kai Quek, “Four Costly Signaling Mechanisms,” American Political Science Review , Vol. 115, No. 2 (2021), pp. 537–549.

Donald J. Trump, National Security Strategy of the United States of America (Washington, DC: White House, 2017), https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf .

David A. Baldwin, “The Sanctions Debate and the Logic of Choice,” International Security , Vol. 24, No. 3 (Winter 1999/2000), p. 84, https://doi.org/10.1162/016228899560248 .

M. Taylor Fravel and Charles L. Glaser, “How Much Risk Should the United States Run in the South China Sea?,” International Security , Vol. 47, No. 2 (Fall 2022), pp. 88–134, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00443 .

Lawrence M. Mead, “Scholasticism in Political Science,” Perspectives on Politics , Vol. 8, No. 2 (June 2010), p. 454, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592710001192 .

Daniel Byman and Aditi Joshi, “Social Media Companies Need Better Emergency Protocols,” Lawfare , January 14, 2021, https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/social-media-companies-need-better-emergency-protocols .

Nicholas Sambanis, “What Is Civil War? Conceptual and Empirical Complexities of an Operational Definition,” Journal of Conflict Resolution , Vol. 48, No. 6 (2004), pp. 814–858, https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002704269355 .

Lindsey A. O'Rourke, “The Strategic Logic of Covert Regime Change: U.S.-Backed Regime Change Campaigns during the Cold War,” Security Studies , Vol. 29, No. 1 (2020), pp. 92–127, https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2020.1693620 .

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States , Vol. 3 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 2004), pp. 399–428.

Richard A. Posner, “The 9/11 Report: A Dissent,” New York Times , August 29, 2004, https://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/29/books/the-9-11-report-a-dissent.html .

Daniel Byman and Jeremy Shapiro, “‘What U.S. Foreign Policy Really Needs Is …’: The 11 Worst Washington Insider Policy Clichés,” Foreign Policy , June 5, 2015, https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/06/05/the-11-worst-useless-foreign-policy-pundit-cliches/ .

Joint Chiefs of Staff, Strategy , Joint Doctrine Note 1–18 (Washington, DC: Joint Force Development, 2018), pp. II-5–II-11, https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/jdn_jg/jdn1_18.pdf .

Joint Chiefs of Staff, Strategy , p. II-8.

Alexander L. George and William E. Simons, eds., The Limits of Coercive Diplomacy (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994), pp. 53–55, 267–294.

Kenneth M. Pollack, Armies of Sand: The Past, Present, and Future of Arab Military Effectiveness (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), pp. 439–451.

Renanah Miles Joyce, “Soldiers’ Dilemma: Foreign Military Training and Liberal Norm Conflict,” International Security , Vol. 46, No. 4 (Spring 2022), p. 89, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00432 .

Edward Wong and Amy Qin, “U.S. Presses Taiwan to Buy Weapons More Suited to Win against China,” New York Times , May 7, 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/07/us/politics/china-taiwan-weapons.html .

Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press, “The End of MAD? The Nuclear Dimension of U.S. Primacy,” International Security , Vol. 30, No. 4 (Spring 2006), pp. 7–44, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2006.30.4.7 ; Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press, “The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy,” Foreign Affairs , Vol. 85, No. 2 (March/April 2006), pp. 42–54, https://doi.org/10.2307/20031910 ; Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press, “Superiority Complex: Why America's Growing Nuclear Supremacy May Make War with China More Likely,” Atlantic , July/Aug. 2007, pp. 86–92, https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2007/07/superiority-complex/305989/ .

See, for example, submission information for Foreign Policy at https://foreignpolicy.submittable.com/submit and for Foreign Affairs at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/submissions-0 .

Barma and Goldgeier, “How Not to Bridge the Gap,” p. 1773.

John J. Mearsheimer, “Bound to Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order,” International Security , Vol. 43, No. 4 (Spring 2019), pp. 7–50, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00342 ; Farrell and Newman, “Weaponized Interdependence”; Risa Brooks, “Paradoxes of Professionalism: Rethinking Civil-Military Relations in the United States,” International Security , Vol. 44, No. 4 (Spring 2020), pp. 7–44, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00374 ; Charlotte Grech-Madin, “Water and Warfare: The Evolution and Operation of the Water Taboo,” International Security , Vol. 45, No. 4 (Spring 2021), pp. 84–125, https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00404 ; Joyce, “Soldiers’ Dilemma.”

Johnson, “Writing for International Security.”

Email alerts

Affiliations.

• Online ISSN 1531-4804
• Print ISSN 0162-2889

A product of The MIT Press

Mit press direct.

• About MIT Press Direct

Information

• Accessibility
• For Authors
• For Customers
• For Librarians
• Direct to Open
• Open Access
• Media Inquiries
• Rights and Permissions
• For Advertisers
• About the MIT Press
• The MIT Press Reader
• MIT Press Blog
• Seasonal Catalogs
• MIT Press Home
• Give to the MIT Press
• Direct Service Desk
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Statement
• Crossref Member
• COUNTER Member  
• The MIT Press colophon is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Research to Action

The Global Guide to Research Impact

Social Media

• How to write actionable policy recommendations

By Nyasha Musandu 16/07/2013

When writing a policy brief, there are many things one has to consider: The language has to be just right, not too technical but professional. The length has to be brief yet informative and most of all it needs to speak to a pre-identified and targeted audience.

The policy brief has become the ‘go to’ tool in facilitating evidence based policies. The policy brief seeks to inform the decision maker of policy options that are evidence based, robust and will achieve the desired result in various scenarios. With the creation of each policy brief we hope that maybe, just maybe, we will get the right policy maker to read our compelling arguments, experience a eureka moment and spearhead the process of creating sound and effective policies with our research as their sword.  Unfortunately, policy influence rarely happens in this manner. What you have to try to do is identify your policy makers’ problems and give him/her actionable policy recommendations.

Here are some simple things to consider to ensure that your recommendations are practical and actionable.

1 .   Ensure that you have identified your target audience beforehand. Understanding who your audience is and what their job entails is crucial. What is their sphere of influence and what change can they implement?

2.   Be very clear about what the current policy you want to change is.

3.   Set the scene: Identify the shortfalls of the current policy. Where is this policy failing, why and how can your recommendations improve the status quo?

4.   Be aware of how policies are made: remember that government policy actors are interested in making decisions that are practical, cost-effective and socially acceptable.

5.   If you are suggesting change ask yourself: What specifically needs to be changed? How will this change come about? What resources will be needed? Where will these resources come from? What is the overall benefit to both the policy maker and society in general? If your recommendations include these components they are much more likely to garner the required change.

6.   The word actionable suggests that your recommendations should be active. Try using language that is active rather than passive. Words such as use, engage, incorporate etc.

7 .   Keep your policy recommendations short. Identify 3 recommendations and elaborate on these. Pick the three that are most practical and relevant for your target audience then focus on presenting these in the most actionable way.

8 .   Make sure your research supports your recommendations. This may sound very obvious but policy makers will want to know that the evidence supports your assertions. Where you are providing an opinion, not supported by research, make this very clear.

9.   Ask yourself, is my recommendation viable? Does the recommendation seem feasible?

References:

·       Global HIV/AIDS Initiatives Network, 2008. Policy Brief Guidelines.

·       Community – Based Monitoring System (CBMS) Network Coordinating Team. Guidelines for writing a policy brief.

·       FAO. Food Security Communications Toolkit .

·       MEASURE Evaluation, 2009. Making Research Findings Actionable: A quick reference to communicating health information for decision making .

Contribute Write a blog post, post a job or event, recommend a resource

Partner with Us Are you an institution looking to increase your impact?

Most Recent Posts

• Seven lessons about impact case studies from REF 2021
• 1-2-4-all, the atomic bomb of Liberating Structures (LS under the lens)
• How to co-produce a research project
• How to design a research uptake plan
• Development and Outreach Officer: Girls not Brides

This Week's Most Read

• What do we mean by ‘impact’?
• How to develop input, activity, output, outcome and impact indicators 
• Gap analysis for literature reviews and advancing useful knowledge
• Outcome Mapping: A Basic Introduction
• AEN Evidence 23 – Online Access Registration now open!
• 12ft Ladder: Making research accessible
• AI in Research: Its Uses and Limitations
• Policymaker, policy maker, or policy-maker?
• Stakeholder Engagement a Tool to Measure Public Policy

Research To Action (R2A) is a learning platform for anyone interested in maximising the impact of research and capturing evidence of impact.

The site publishes practical resources on a range of topics including research uptake, communications, policy influence and monitoring and evaluation. It captures the experiences of practitioners and researchers working on these topics and facilitates conversations between this global community through a range of social media platforms.

R2A is produced by a small editorial team, led by CommsConsult . We welcome suggestions for and contributions to the site.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

Our contributors

Browse all authors

Friends and partners

• Global Development Network (GDN)
• Institute of Development Studies (IDS)
• International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie)
• On Think Tanks
• Politics & Ideas
• Research for Development (R4D)
• Research Impact

Writing Effective Conclusions and Recommendations in a Thesis

Table of Contents

Have you ever experienced the triumphant moment of finishing a jigsaw puzzle , only to find that the final piece doesn’t quite fit? Such is the challenge when writing the conclusion and findings .">recommendations in your thesis . This final section isn’t just an endnote; it’s your opportunity to make your research resonate. Let’s explore how to craft a compelling conclusion that not only summarizes your findings but also sets the stage for future inquiry.

Understanding the weight of conclusions and recommendations

In the grand scheme of your thesis, the conclusion is your final act, your closing argument. It is here that you revisit your research objectives to demonstrate how your findings address them. But it’s not just a rehash of your research; it’s your chance to interpret the implications of your work and persuade your audience of its significance.

The art of summarizing findings

Begin by revisiting the questions you posed at the start of your journey. Summarize the answers you’ve uncovered, concisely distilling the essence of your research. This isn’t a place for exhaustive detail—that’s what the body of your thesis is for. Instead, think of it as the highlight reel, showcasing the most significant insights.

Drawing insightful conclusions

Conclusions are the thoughtful deductions you’ve drawn from your research. Linking back to your objectives, ask yourself: What have I learned? How have my findings contributed to the field? This is where you can shine a light on the larger implications of your work, the ‘so what?’ of your thesis.

Outlining clear and actionable recommendations

Your recommendations are your legacy, the path you lay for future research ers or practitioners. They should be clear, specific, and grounded in your findings. Think of them as a call to action—what should be done in light of your research? Whether it’s suggesting areas for further study or recommending changes to practice, your recommendations should inspire action.

Linking conclusions to research objectives

To ensure your conclusions are meaningful, they must be tethered to your research objectives. This alignment reinforces the relevance of your work and ensures you’re answering the questions you set out to explore.

Reflecting on research questions

Revisit your research questions or hypotheses . How have your findings addressed them? This reflection ensures your conclusions are directly tied to your initial inquiry, creating a cohesive narrative from start to finish.

Emphasizing the impact of your findings

Highlight the impact of your research. Have you filled a gap in knowledge? Challenged existing theories? Applied your findings to practice? Your conclusions should underscore the value of your work and its ripple effect in your field.

Formulating recommendations with purpose

Recommendations should never be an afterthought. They are your opportunity to influence the future, to suggest how the knowledge you’ve generated can be used to better understand or improve upon a particular issue.

Grounding recommendations in evidence

Ensure your recommendations are evidence\-based . They should flow naturally from the conclusions you’ve drawn, each one supported by the data you’ve collected.

Keeping recommendations achievable

Make your recommendations achievable. Pie-in-the-sky ideas might be inspirational, but they’re less helpful than practical, attainable suggestions that can be realistically implemented.

Setting the stage for future research

Use your recommendations to set the stage for future research. What questions have emerged from your study? Where are the knowledge gaps ? Propel the academic conversation forward by identifying the next steps.

Writing with clarity and conviction

The best conclusions and recommendations are those written with clarity and conviction. You’ve spent countless hours on your research—now’s the time to confidently present your findings and their implications.

Using precise language

Be precise in your language. Avoid ambiguity and make every word count. This precision not only makes your writing clearer but also reinforces the authority of your conclusions and recommendations.

Ensuring cohesiveness

Your conclusion should feel like a natural culmination of your thesis, not a separate entity. Ensure that it flows logically from the body of your work, with each part reinforcing the other.

Engaging the reader’s imagination

Engage your reader’s imagination by painting a picture of what could be. Use your recommendations to inspire visions of future possibilities, grounded in the solid foundation of your research.

In conclusion, remember that the final sections of your thesis are not mere formalities but the bridge between your research and its potential impact on the world. The conclusions and recommendations you write are your scholarly legacy , a testament to the hard work you’ve poured into your research. Approach them with the same rigor , creativity, and dedication as the rest of your thesis, and you’ll leave a lasting mark on your field.

What do you think? How do you approach writing conclusions and recommendations, and what strategies do you find most effective? Are there particular challenges you’ve faced in this part of the thesis-writing process?

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating / 5. Vote count:

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

We are sorry that this post was not useful for you!

Let us improve this post!

Tell us how we can improve this post?

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

Submit Comment

Research Methodology

1 Introduction to Research in General

• Research in General
• Research Circle
• Tools of Research
• Methods: Quantitative or Qualitative
• The Product: Research Report or Papers

2 Original Unity of Philosophy and Science

• Myth Philosophy and Science: Original Unity
• The Myth: A Spiritual Metaphor
• Myth Philosophy and Science
• The Greek Quest for Unity
• The Ionian School
• Towards a Grand Unification Theory or Theory of Everything
• Einstein’s Perennial Quest for Unity

3 Evolution of the Distinct Methods of Science

• Definition of Scientific Method
• The Evolution of Scientific Methods
• Theory-Dependence of Observation
• Scope of Science and Scientific Methods
• Prevalent Mistakes in Applying the Scientific Method

4 Relation of Scientific and Philosophical Methods

• Definitions of Scientific and Philosophical method
• Philosophical method
• Scientific method
• The relation
• The Importance of Philosophical and scientific methods

5 Dialectical Method

• Introduction and a Brief Survey of the Method
• Types of Dialectics
• Dialectics in Classical Philosophy
• Dialectics in Modern Philosophy
• Critique of Dialectical Method

6 Rational Method

• Understanding Rationalism
• Rational Method of Investigation
• Descartes’ Rational Method
• Leibniz’ Aim of Philosophy
• Spinoza’ Aim of Philosophy

7 Empirical Method

• Common Features of Philosophical Method
• Empirical Method
• Exposition of Empiricism
• Locke’s Empirical Method
• Berkeley’s Empirical Method
• David Hume’s Empirical Method

8 Critical Method

• Basic Features of Critical Theory
• On Instrumental Reason
• Conception of Society
• Human History as Dialectic of Enlightenment
• Substantive Reason
• Habermasian Critical Theory
• Habermas’ Theory of Society
• Habermas’ Critique of Scientism
• Theory of Communicative Action
• Discourse Ethics of Habermas

9 Phenomenological Method (Western and Indian)

• Phenomenology in Philosophy
• Phenomenology as a Method
• Phenomenological Analysis of Knowledge
• Phenomenological Reduction
• Husserl’s Triad: Ego Cogito Cogitata
• Intentionality
• Understanding ‘Consciousness’
• Phenomenological Method in Indian Tradition
• Phenomenological Method in Religion

10 Analytical Method (Western and Indian)

• Analysis in History of Philosophy
• Conceptual Analysis
• Analysis as a Method
• Analysis in Logical Atomism and Logical Positivism
• Analytic Method in Ethics
• Language Analysis
• Quine’s Analytical Method
• Analysis in Indian Traditions

11 Hermeneutical Method (Western and Indian)

• The Power (Sakti) to Convey Meaning
• Three Meanings
• Pre-understanding
• The Semantic Autonomy of the Text
• Towards a Fusion of Horizons
• The Hermeneutical Circle
• The True Scandal of the Text
• Literary Forms

12 Deconstructive Method

• The Seminal Idea of Deconstruction in Heidegger
• Deconstruction in Derrida
• Structuralism and Post-structuralism
• Sign Signifier and Signified
• Writing and Trace
• Deconstruction as a Strategic Reading
• The Logic of Supplement
• No Outside-text

13 Method of Bibliography

• Preparing to Write
• Writing a Paper
• The Main Divisions of a Paper
• Writing Bibliography in Turabian and APA
• Sample Bibliography

14 Method of Footnotes

• Citations and Notes
• General Hints for Footnotes
• Writing Footnotes
• Examples of Footnote or Endnote
• Example of a Research Article

15 Method of Notes Taking

• Methods of Note-taking
• Note Book Style
• Note taking in a Computer
• Types of Note-taking
• Notes from Field Research
• Errors to be Avoided

16 Method of Thesis Proposal and Presentation

• Preliminary Section
• Presenting the Problem of the Thesis
• Design of the Study
• Main Body of the Thesis
• Conclusion Summary and Recommendations
• Reference Material

Share on Mastodon

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 Recommendations in Research | Examples & Tips

How to Write Recommendations in Research | Examples & Tips

Published on 15 September 2022 by Tegan George .

Recommendations in research are a crucial component of your discussion section and the conclusion of your thesis , dissertation , or research paper .

As you conduct your research and analyse the data you collected , perhaps there are ideas or results that don’t quite fit the scope of your research topic . Or, maybe your results suggest that there are further implications of your results or the causal relationships between previously-studied variables than covered in extant research.

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 should recommendations look like, building your research recommendation, how should your recommendations be written, recommendation in research example, frequently asked questions about recommendations.

Recommendations for future research should be:

• Concrete and specific
• Supported with a clear rationale
• Directly connected to your research

Overall, strive to highlight ways other researchers can reproduce or replicate your results to draw further conclusions, and suggest different directions that future research can take, if applicable.

Relatedly, when making these recommendations, avoid:

• Undermining your own work, but rather offer suggestions on how future studies can build upon it
• Suggesting recommendations actually needed to complete your argument, but rather ensure that your research stands alone on its own merits
• Using recommendations as a place for self-criticism, but rather as a natural extension point for your work

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

There are many different ways to frame recommendations, but the easiest is perhaps to follow the formula of research question   conclusion  recommendation. Here’s an example.

Conclusion An important condition for controlling many social skills is mastering language. If children have a better command of language, they can express themselves better and are better able to understand their peers. Opportunities to practice social skills are thus dependent on the development of language skills.

As a rule of thumb, try to limit yourself to only the most relevant future recommendations: ones that stem directly from your work. While you can have multiple recommendations for each research conclusion, it is also acceptable to have one recommendation that is connected to more than one conclusion.

These recommendations should be targeted at your audience, specifically toward peers or colleagues in your field that work on similar topics to yours. They can flow directly from any limitations you found while conducting your work, offering concrete and actionable possibilities for how future research can build on anything that your own work was unable to address at the time of your writing.

See below for a full research recommendation example that you can use as a template to write your own.

The current study can be interpreted as a first step in the research on COPD speech characteristics. However, the results of this study should be treated with caution due to the small sample size and the lack of details regarding the participants’ characteristics.

Future research could further examine the differences in speech characteristics between exacerbated COPD patients, stable COPD patients, and healthy controls. It could also contribute to a deeper understanding of the acoustic measurements suitable for e-health measurements.

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

While it may be tempting to present new arguments or evidence in your thesis or disseration conclusion , especially if you have a particularly striking argument you’d like to finish your analysis with, you shouldn’t. Theses and dissertations follow a more formal structure than this.

All your findings and arguments should be presented in the body of the text (more specifically in the discussion section and results section .) The conclusion is meant to summarize and reflect on the evidence and arguments you have already presented, not introduce new ones.

The conclusion of your thesis or dissertation should include the following:

• A restatement of your research question
• A summary of your key arguments and/or results
• A short discussion of the implications of your research

For a stronger dissertation conclusion , avoid including:

• Generic concluding phrases (e.g. “In conclusion…”)
• Weak statements that undermine your argument (e.g. “There are good points on both sides of this issue.”)

Your conclusion should leave the reader with a strong, decisive impression of your work.

In a thesis or dissertation, the discussion is an in-depth exploration of the results, going into detail about the meaning of your findings and citing relevant sources to put them in context.

The conclusion is more shorter and more general: it concisely answers your main research question and makes recommendations based on your overall findings.

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.

George, T. (2022, September 15). How to Write Recommendations in Research | Examples & Tips. Scribbr. Retrieved 11 June 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/research-recommendations/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, how to write a discussion section | tips & examples, how to write a thesis or dissertation conclusion, how to write a results section | tips & examples.

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

What are Implications and Recommendations in Research? How to Write It, with Examples

Highly cited research articles often contain both implications and recommendations , but there is often some confusion around the difference between implications and recommendations in research. Implications of a study are the impact your research makes in your chosen area; they discuss how the findings of the study may be important to justify further exploration of your research topic. Research recommendations suggest future actions or subsequent steps supported by your research findings. It helps to improve your field of research or cross-disciplinary fields through future research or provides frameworks for decision-makers or policymakers. Recommendations are the action plan you propose based on the outcome.

In this article, we aim to simplify these concepts for researchers by providing key insights on the following:  

• what are implications in research 
• what is recommendation in research 
• differences between implications and recommendations 
• how to write implications in research 
• how to write recommendation in research 
• sample recommendation in research 

Table of Contents

What are implications in research

The implications in research explain what the findings of the study mean to researchers or to certain subgroups or populations beyond the basic interpretation of results. Even if your findings fail to bring radical or disruptive changes to existing ways of doing things, they might have important implications for future research studies. For example, your proposed method for operating remote-controlled robots could be more precise, efficient, or cheaper than existing methods, or the remote-controlled robot could be used in other application areas. This could enable more researchers to study a specific problem or open up new research opportunities.   

Implications in research inform how the findings, drawn from your results, may be important for and impact policy, practice, theory, and subsequent research. Implications may be theoretical or practical. 1  

• Practical implications are potential values of the study with practical or real outcomes . Determining the practical implications of several solutions can aid in identifying optimal solution results. For example, clinical research or research on classroom learning mostly has practical implications in research . If you developed a new teaching method, the implication would be how teachers can use that method based on your findings.  
• Theoretical implications in research constitute additions to existing theories or establish new theories. These types of implications in research characterize the ability of research to influence society in apparent ways. It is, at most, an educated guess (theoretical) about the possible implication of action and need not be as absolute as practical implications in research . If your study supported the tested theory, the theoretical implication would be that the theory can explain the investigated phenomenon. Else, your study may serve as a basis for modifying the theory. Theories may be partially supported as well, implying further study of the theory or necessary modifications are required.  

What are recommendations in research?

Recommendations in research can be considered an important segment of the analysis phase. Recommendations allow you to suggest specific interventions or strategies to address the issues and constraints identified through your study. It responds to key findings arrived at through data collection and analysis. A process of prioritization can help you narrow down important findings for which recommendations are developed.  

Recommendations in research examples

Recommendations in research may vary depending on the purpose or beneficiary as seen in the table below.  

Table: Recommendations in research examples based on purpose and beneficiary  

If you’re wondering how to make recommendations in research . You can use the simple  recommendation in research example below as a handy template.  

Table: Sample recommendation in research template  

Basic differences between implications and recommendations in research

Implications and recommendations in research are two important aspects of a research paper or your thesis or dissertation. Implications discuss the importance of the research findings, while recommendations offer specific actions to solve a problem. So, the basic difference between the two is in their function and the questions asked to achieve it. The following table highlights the main differences between implications and recommendations in research .  

Table: Differences between implications and recommendations in research  

Where do implications go in your research paper

Because the implications and recommendations of the research are based on study findings, both are usually written after the completion of a study. There is no specific section dedicated to implications in research ; they are usually integrated into the discussion section adding evidence as to why the results are meaningful and what they add to the field. Implications can be written after summarizing your main findings and before the recommendations and conclusion.   

Implications can also be presented in the conclusion section after a short summary of the study results.   

How to write implications in research

Implication means something that is inferred. The implications of your research are derived from the importance of your work and how it will impact future research. It is based on how previous studies have advanced your field and how your study can add to that.   

When figuring out how to write implications in research , a good strategy is to separate it into the different types of implications in research , such as social, political, technological, policy-related, or others. As mentioned earlier, the most frequently used are the theoretical and practical implications.   

Next, you need to ask, “Who will benefit the most from reading my paper?” Is it policymakers, physicians, the public, or other researchers? Once you know your target population, explain how your findings can help them.  

The implication section can include a paragraph or two that asserts the practical or managerial implications and links it to the study findings. A discussion can then follow, demonstrating that the findings can be practically implemented or how they will benefit a specific audience. The writer is given a specific degree of freedom when writing research implications , depending on the type of implication in research you want to discuss: practical or theoretical. Each is discussed differently, using different words or in separate sections. The implications can be based on how the findings in your study are similar or dissimilar to that in previous studies. Your study may reaffirm or disprove the results of other studies, which has important implications in research . You can also suggest future research directions in the light of your findings or require further research to confirm your findings, which are all crucial implications. Most importantly, ensure the implications in research are specific and that your tone reflects the strength of your findings without exaggerating your results.   

Implications in research can begin with the following specific sentence structures:  

• These findings suggest that…
• These results build on existing body of evidence of…
• These results should be considered when…
• While previous research focused on x, our results show that y…

What should recommendations in research look like?

Recommendations for future research should be:  

• Directly related to your research question or findings  
• Concrete and specific  
• Supported by a clear reasoning  

The recommendations in research can be based on the following factors:  

1. Beneficiary: A paper’s research contribution may be aimed at single or multiple beneficiaries, based on which recommendations can vary. For instance, if your research is about the quality of care in hospitals, the research recommendation to different beneficiaries might be as follows:  

• Nursing staff: Staff should undergo training to enhance their understanding of what quality of care entails.  
• Health science educators: Educators must design training modules that address quality-related issues in the hospital.  
• Hospital management: Develop policies that will increase staff participation in training related to health science.  

2. Limitations: The best way to figure out what to include in your research recommendations is to understand the limitations of your study. It could be based on factors that you have overlooked or could not consider in your present study. Accordingly, the researcher can recommend that other researchers approach the problem from a different perspective, dimension, or methodology. For example, research into the quality of care in hospitals can be based on quantitative data. The researcher can then recommend a qualitative study of factors influencing the quality of care, or they can suggest investigating the problem from the perspective of patients rather than the healthcare providers.   

3. Theory or Practice: Your recommendations in research could be implementation-oriented or further research-oriented.   

4. Your research: Research recommendations can be based on your topic, research objectives, literature review, and analysis, or evidence collected. For example, if your data points to the role of faculty involvement in developing effective programs, recommendations in research can include developing policies to increase faculty participation. Take a look at the evidence-based recommendation in research example s provided below.   

Table: Example of evidence-based research recommendation  

Avoid making the following mistakes when writing research recommendations :  

• Don’t undermine your own work: Recommendations in research should offer suggestions on how future studies can be built upon the current study as a natural extension of your work and not as an entirely new field of research.  
• Support your study arguments: Ensure that your research findings stand alone on their own merits to showcase the strength of your research paper.   

How to write recommendations in research

When writing research recommendations , your focus should be on highlighting what additional work can be done in that field. It gives direction to researchers, industries, or governments about changes or developments possible in this field. For example, recommendations in research can include practical and obtainable strategies offering suggestions to academia to address problems. It can also be a framework that helps government agencies in developing strategic or long-term plans for timely actions against disasters or aid nation-building.  

There are a few SMART 2 things to remember when writing recommendations in research. Your recommendations must be: 

• S pecific: Clearly state how challenges can be addressed for better outcomes and include an action plan that shows what can be achieved. 
• M easurable: Use verbs denoting measurable outcomes, such as identify, analyze, design, compute, assess, evaluate, revise, plan, etc., to strengthen recommendations in research .   
• A ttainable: Recommendations should offer a solution-oriented approach to problem-solving and must be written in a way that is easy to follow.  
• R elevant: Research recommendations should be reasonable, realistic, and result-based. Make sure to suggest future possibilities for your research field.  
• T imely: Time-based or time-sensitive recommendations in research help divide the action plan into long-term or short-term (immediate) goals. A timeline can also inform potential readers of what developments should occur over time.  

If you are wondering how many words to include in your research recommendation , a general rule of thumb would be to set aside 5% of the total word count for writing research recommendations . Finally, when writing the research implications and recommendations , stick to the facts and avoid overstating or over-generalizing the study findings. Both should be supported by evidence gathered through your data analysis.  

References:  

• Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings.  Psychological bulletin ,  124 (2), 262.
• Doran, G. T. (1981). There’s a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management’s goals and objectives.  Manag Rev ,  70 (11), 35-36.

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

Based on 21+ years of experience in academia, Researcher.Life All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $17 a month !    

Related Posts

Language and Cultural Barriers in Research: How to Bridge the Gap

Tips on Writing the Acknowledgments Section 

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of exploration. In an era marked by rapid technological advancements and an ever-expanding knowledge base, refining the process of generating research recommendations becomes imperative.

But, what is a research recommendation?

Research recommendations are suggestions or advice provided to researchers to guide their study on a specific topic . They are typically given by experts in the field. Research recommendations are more action-oriented and provide specific guidance for decision-makers, unlike implications that are broader and focus on the broader significance and consequences of the research findings. However, both are crucial components of a research study.

Difference Between Research Recommendations and Implication

Although research recommendations and implications are distinct components of a research study, they are closely related. The differences between them are as follows:

Types of Research Recommendations

Recommendations in research can take various forms, which are as follows:

These recommendations aim to assist researchers in navigating the vast landscape of academic knowledge.

Let us dive deeper to know about its key components and the steps to write an impactful research recommendation.

Key Components of Research Recommendations

The key components of research recommendations include defining the research question or objective, specifying research methods, outlining data collection and analysis processes, presenting results and conclusions, addressing limitations, and suggesting areas for future research. Here are some characteristics of research recommendations:

Research recommendations offer various advantages and play a crucial role in ensuring that research findings contribute to positive outcomes in various fields. However, they also have few limitations which highlights the significance of a well-crafted research recommendation in offering the promised advantages.

The importance of research recommendations ranges in various fields, influencing policy-making, program development, product development, marketing strategies, medical practice, and scientific research. Their purpose is to transfer knowledge from researchers to practitioners, policymakers, or stakeholders, facilitating informed decision-making and improving outcomes in different domains.

How to Write Research Recommendations?

Research recommendations can be generated through various means, including algorithmic approaches, expert opinions, or collaborative filtering techniques. Here is a step-wise guide to build your understanding on the development of research recommendations.

1. Understand the Research Question:

Understand the research question and objectives before writing recommendations. Also, ensure that your recommendations are relevant and directly address the goals of the study.

2. Review Existing Literature:

Familiarize yourself with relevant existing literature to help you identify gaps , and offer informed recommendations that contribute to the existing body of research.

3. Consider Research Methods:

Evaluate the appropriateness of different research methods in addressing the research question. Also, consider the nature of the data, the study design, and the specific objectives.

4. Identify Data Collection Techniques:

Gather dataset from diverse authentic sources. Include information such as keywords, abstracts, authors, publication dates, and citation metrics to provide a rich foundation for analysis.

5. Propose Data Analysis Methods:

Suggest appropriate data analysis methods based on the type of data collected. Consider whether statistical analysis, qualitative analysis, or a mixed-methods approach is most suitable.

6. Consider Limitations and Ethical Considerations:

Acknowledge any limitations and potential ethical considerations of the study. Furthermore, address these limitations or mitigate ethical concerns to ensure responsible research.

7. Justify Recommendations:

Explain how your recommendation contributes to addressing the research question or objective. Provide a strong rationale to help researchers understand the importance of following your suggestions.

8. Summarize Recommendations:

Provide a concise summary at the end of the report to emphasize how following these recommendations will contribute to the overall success of the research project.

By following these steps, you can create research recommendations that are actionable and contribute meaningfully to the success of the research project.

Download now to unlock some tips to improve your journey of writing research recommendations.

Example of a Research Recommendation

Here is an example of a research recommendation based on a hypothetical research to improve your understanding.

Research Recommendation: Enhancing Student Learning through Integrated Learning Platforms

Background:

The research study investigated the impact of an integrated learning platform on student learning outcomes in high school mathematics classes. The findings revealed a statistically significant improvement in student performance and engagement when compared to traditional teaching methods.

Recommendation:

In light of the research findings, it is recommended that educational institutions consider adopting and integrating the identified learning platform into their mathematics curriculum. The following specific recommendations are provided:

• Implementation of the Integrated Learning Platform:

Schools are encouraged to adopt the integrated learning platform in mathematics classrooms, ensuring proper training for teachers on its effective utilization.

• Professional Development for Educators:

Develop and implement professional programs to train educators in the effective use of the integrated learning platform to address any challenges teachers may face during the transition.

• Monitoring and Evaluation:

Establish a monitoring and evaluation system to track the impact of the integrated learning platform on student performance over time.

• Resource Allocation:

Allocate sufficient resources, both financial and technical, to support the widespread implementation of the integrated learning platform.

By implementing these recommendations, educational institutions can harness the potential of the integrated learning platform and enhance student learning experiences and academic achievements in mathematics.

This example covers the components of a research recommendation, providing specific actions based on the research findings, identifying the target audience, and outlining practical steps for implementation.

Using AI in Research Recommendation Writing

Enhancing research recommendations is an ongoing endeavor that requires the integration of cutting-edge technologies, collaborative efforts, and ethical considerations. By embracing data-driven approaches and leveraging advanced technologies, the research community can create more effective and personalized recommendation systems. However, it is accompanied by several limitations. Therefore, it is essential to approach the use of AI in research with a critical mindset, and complement its capabilities with human expertise and judgment.

Here are some limitations of integrating AI in writing research recommendation and some ways on how to counter them.

1. Data Bias

AI systems rely heavily on data for training. If the training data is biased or incomplete, the AI model may produce biased results or recommendations.

How to tackle: Audit regularly the model’s performance to identify any discrepancies and adjust the training data and algorithms accordingly.

2. Lack of Understanding of Context:

AI models may struggle to understand the nuanced context of a particular research problem. They may misinterpret information, leading to inaccurate recommendations.

How to tackle: Use AI to characterize research articles and topics. Employ them to extract features like keywords, authorship patterns and content-based details.

3. Ethical Considerations:

AI models might stereotype certain concepts or generate recommendations that could have negative consequences for certain individuals or groups.

How to tackle: Incorporate user feedback mechanisms to reduce redundancies. Establish an ethics review process for AI models in research recommendation writing.

4. Lack of Creativity and Intuition:

AI may struggle with tasks that require a deep understanding of the underlying principles or the ability to think outside the box.

How to tackle: Hybrid approaches can be employed by integrating AI in data analysis and identifying patterns for accelerating the data interpretation process.

5. Interpretability:

Many AI models, especially complex deep learning models, lack transparency on how the model arrived at a particular recommendation.

How to tackle: Implement models like decision trees or linear models. Provide clear explanation of the model architecture, training process, and decision-making criteria.

6. Dynamic Nature of Research:

Research fields are dynamic, and new information is constantly emerging. AI models may struggle to keep up with the rapidly changing landscape and may not be able to adapt to new developments.

How to tackle: Establish a feedback loop for continuous improvement. Regularly update the recommendation system based on user feedback and emerging research trends.

The integration of AI in research recommendation writing holds great promise for advancing knowledge and streamlining the research process. However, navigating these concerns is pivotal in ensuring the responsible deployment of these technologies. Researchers need to understand the use of responsible use of AI in research and must be aware of the ethical considerations.

Exploring research recommendations plays a critical role in shaping the trajectory of scientific inquiry. It serves as a compass, guiding researchers toward more robust methodologies, collaborative endeavors, and innovative approaches. Embracing these suggestions not only enhances the quality of individual studies but also contributes to the collective advancement of human understanding.

Frequently Asked Questions

The purpose of recommendations in research is to provide practical and actionable suggestions based on the study's findings, guiding future actions, policies, or interventions in a specific field or context. Recommendations bridges the gap between research outcomes and their real-world application.

To make a research recommendation, analyze your findings, identify key insights, and propose specific, evidence-based actions. Include the relevance of the recommendations to the study's objectives and provide practical steps for implementation.

Begin a recommendation by succinctly summarizing the key findings of the research. Clearly state the purpose of the recommendation and its intended impact. Use a direct and actionable language to convey the suggested course of action.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Diversity and Inclusion
• Industry News

6 Reasons Why There is a Decline in Higher Education Enrollment: Action plan to overcome this crisis

Over the past decade, colleges and universities across the globe have witnessed a concerning trend…

• Reporting Research

Academic Essay Writing Made Simple: 4 types and tips

The pen is mightier than the sword, they say, and nowhere is this more evident…

Ensuring Academic Integrity and Transparency in Academic Research: A comprehensive checklist for researchers

Academic integrity is the foundation upon which the credibility and value of scientific findings are…

• Publishing News

Unified AI Guidelines Crucial as Academic Writing Embraces Generative Tools

As generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT are advancing at an accelerating pace, their…

How to Effectively Cite a PDF (APA, MLA, AMA, and Chicago Style)

The pressure to “publish or perish” is a well-known reality for academics, striking fear into…

How to Optimize Your Research Process: A step-by-step guide

Digital Citations: A comprehensive guide to citing of websites in APA, MLA, and CMOS…

Sign-up to read more

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

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

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

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

As a researcher, what do you consider most when choosing an image manipulation detector?

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.13(1); 2007 Feb

Policy recommendations in the discussion section of a research article

Short abstract.

Should a research article in Injury Prevention make policy recommendations in the discussion section?

Imagine that the Acme Auto Company has designed Device X to prevent death in a vehicle crash. You and I have completed the first randomized controlled trial of Device X; we studied 400 drivers who were randomly assigned to X or a placebo device at the time of their crash and ascertained which drivers died.

The risk of death among the drivers with Device X was 0.075 compared with 0.15 for drivers without X (table): risk ratio 0.5, 95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.90. Our draft manuscript concludes: “We found that drivers who crashed in vehicles with Device X had a risk of death which was half that of similar drivers in similar vehicles without X. If our findings represent the casual effects of X, this device can prevent about half the driver deaths that would otherwise occur in a crash.” After reading our draft, a colleague suggests we make a policy recommendation in the discussion section of our paper. Should we?

Interpreting results or stating preventive implications does not require a statement about policy; the two sentences in quotations above provide an adequate interpretation. Calls for more data or research are often unnecessary, but they are not my topic. 1 A policy recommendation is advice that some action should be taken by someone to promote health : a behavior should be adopted, advice should be given, a public education campaign should begin, a product should be purchased, a law should be enacted, and so on.

I will offer three reasons for not giving a policy recommendation in the discussion section of our research study of Device X. Similar ideas have been expressed by others. 2 , 3 , 4 , 5

Reason 1: The results of the study may not be correct

Any study, even a randomized trial, may produce biased estimates of casual associations. Even if our hypothetical study had no apparent limitations (I have never written or read a study without limitations), our estimate of Device X's effect is still uncertain. Given the observed data, the maximum likelihood estimate for the risk ratio is 0.5, but risk ratios from 0.26 to 0.94 all have likelihoods at least 1/8th the maximum (fig). 6 , 7 A second study might find that Device X reduced mortality by only 10%, not 50%. There is a small possibility that X has no causal influence on the risk of death or might even be harmful. If we studied Device X using a design other than a randomized trial, we would want to be even more cautious about recommendations, as our estimate of the effect of X might be biased by differences between the drivers with X and those without X. 8 , 9

The relative likelihood of a range of risk ratio values, from 0.1 to 2.5, for the risk ratio of death among drivers who crashed in vehicles with Device X compared with otherwise similar drivers and vehicles without Device X.

Reason 2: All the important risks and benefits have not been studied

We studied the effect of X on death only. But perhaps X greatly increases the risk of quadriplegia, traumatic brain injury, and limb amputation. Perhaps X is ineffective or harmful for subgroups of drivers or vehicles. Even if X prevents bad health outcomes in a crash, we have no information about whether it might affect the risk of a crash—if it halved the risk of death, but doubled the risk of crashing, it might offer no net benefit for driver health. Could X have detrimental effects for other occupants of the same vehicle or occupants in other vehicles? If Device X adds 281 kg of weight to each vehicle, what does that imply for fuel consumption, dependency on imported oil, and increased emissions that might contribute to global warming (which may have health effects). If X adds $9481 to the cost of each vehicle, do the benefits justify that cost?

We can never have all the evidence we might want, so lack of information alone does not prohibit policy making. But a serious discussion of policy regarding Device X should consider what evidence is needed and whether some policy is justified by what is known. It is rare that the discussion section of a research paper will have the space for this review or that the findings of a single research study will fill the gap in knowledge that tips the balance in favor of a particular policy. 2

Reason 3: manuscript space rarely allows a full review of alternative policy choices

Even if we are convinced that Device X is beneficial, has no adverse consequences, and the costs are justified, what policy choice would be best? Choices include advising drivers to purchase X, offering X on some new vehicles, putting X into all new vehicles, retrofitting all vehicles with X, or requiring X in vehicles by law. Before recommending a public campaign to encourage the purchase of X, we might want evidence that a substantial part of the public would respond favorably to such a campaign. Before suggesting that health practitioners should advise patients to use X, we might want evidence that patients would follow this advice and we should consider whether the time needed to deliver this advice is justified, compared with other demands upon the time of health professionals.

Is there any harm in policy recommendations in research articles?

It would be tragic if a recommended policy was so misguided that its implementation produced harm. Ineffective advice would waste time and money. Even a useful policy may be wasteful if a superior policy is feasible. We cannot expect that policy advice will always be correct, but if research can contribute to effective policies, I think the best policy is more likely to emerge if it is based upon thorough review of the evidence and thoughtful consideration of alternatives.

I doubt that the policy suggestions given in the discussion section of some injury research papers are likely to result in serious harm; I suspect most readers recognize the offhand nature of these ideas and do not take them seriously. The harm from facile policy recommendations in research studies is probably subtle: (1) a paragraph of policy advice makes the article longer, wasting journal space and reader time; (2) policy discussion diverts attention from the strengths and limitations of the research; (3) casual policy recommendations can give the impression that injury research does not demand critical thinking. In the most egregious instances, recommendations are so loosely related to the research that the discussion becomes an editorial expressing the unsupported opinions of the authors.

Can researchers contribute to policy formation?

Research papers provide evidence that can contribute to policy. For example, early case‐control studies of injuries examined the association between alcohol use and traffic crashes. 10 , 11 , 12 These studies all reported evidence of harm associated with alcohol use, although none made policy recommendations. Today we have laws, educational campaigns, and other policies regarding drinking and driving. The early case‐control studies helped provide evidence for those policies.

Researchers can contribute to policy beyond their research. Some testify before legislative panels, some provide expert advice to public information campaigns, and some write thoughtful articles about policy alternatives. A recent commentary 13 and article 14 in Injury Prevention are examples of thinking about policy, and the journal encourages articles about policies. 15 I am not recommending that injury researchers avoid policy recommendations—I am suggesting that they do so in a serious manner and that policy discussions at the end of research papers are usually too short to be useful.

Should injury prevention have a policy about policy?

I am not advocating a ban on policy recommendations in research studies. I have no objection to a policy recommendation that is clearly supported by the research; I just think that situation is rare. 2 But I worry that Injury Prevention actually encourages authors to make policy statements. The journal's advice to authors states “Whenever possible, the Discussion should conclude with a separate section entitled Implications for Prevention.” I think some authors interpret these words as an invitation to recommend policies. I suggest these words could be cut from the instructions with no important loss. Or replaced with language that explains what “implications” are and why they are not usually policy recommendations.

Competing interests: None.

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

A policy memo is a practical, professionally written document that can vary in length from one page to over twenty-five pages. It provides analysis and recommendations directed to a predetermined audience regarding a specific situation, topic, or issue. A well-written policy memo reflects attention to the policy problem. It is well organized and structured in a clear and concise style that assumes the reader possesses limited knowledge of, as well as little time to conduct research about, the topic of concern. There is no thesis statement or overall theoretical framework underpinning the document; the focus is on describing one or more specific policy recommendations and their supporting action items.

Bhasin, Tavishi and Charity Butcher. “Teaching Effective Policy Memo Writing and Infographics in a Policy Programme.” European Political Science 21 (2022): 1-17; Davis, Jennifer. Guide to Writing Effective Policy Memos. MIT OpenCourseWare, Water and Sanitation Infrastructure Planning in Developing Countries, Spring 2004; Judge, Andrew. "Designing and Implementing Policy Writing Assessments: A Practical Guide." Teaching Public Administration 39 (2021): 351-368; Pennock, Andrew. “The Case for Using Policy Writing in Undergraduate Political Science Courses.” PS: Political Science and Politics 44 (January 2011): 141-146.

How to Approach Writing a Policy Memo

Benefits of Writing a Policy Memo

Writing a policy memo is intended to support the following learning outcomes:

• Helps students learn how to write academically rigorous, persuasive papers about a specific “real-world” issue;
• Teaches how to choose and craft a document’s content based on the needs of a particular audience [rather than for a general readership];
• Prepares students to write an effective position paper in non-academic settings;
• Promotes researching, organizing, and writing a persuasive paper that emphasizes presenting evidence-based recommendations rather than simply reporting a study's findings;
• Teaches students to be client-oriented and to better anticipate the assumptions and concerns of their targeted readership;
• Encourages reflective thinking about the cause and consequential effect of a particular recommendation and to anticipate what questions stakeholder groups may have; and,
• Enables students to create original work that synthesizes policy-making research into a clearly written document advocating change and specific courses of action.

Do not approach writing a policy memo in the same way as you would an academic research paper . Yes, there are certain commonalities in how the content is presented [e.g., a well-written problem statement], but the overarching objective of a policy memo is not to discover or create new knowledge. It is focused on providing to a predetermined group of readers the rationale for choosing a particular policy alternative and/or specific courses of action leading to positive social and political change within society. In this sense, most policy memos possess a component of advocacy and advice intended to promote evidence-based dialog about an issue.

Essential Elements of an Effective Policy Memo Focus and Objectives The overall content of your memo should be strategically aimed at achieving the following goal: convincing your target audience about the accuracy of your analysis and, by extension, that your policy recommendations are valid. Avoid lengthy digressions and superfluous narration that can distract the reader from understanding the policy problem. Note that your target audience is defined in two ways: by the decision-makers who can advocate for or implement change and by individuals and groups most likely impacted by your policy recommendations should they be implemented. Professionally Written Always keep in mind that a policy memorandum is a tool for decision-making. Keep it professional and avoid hyperbole and clever or indeterminate language that could undermine the credibility of your document. The presentation and content of the memo should be polished, easy to understand, and free of jargon. Writing professionally does not imply that you can’t be passionate about your topic, but your policy recommendations should be evidence-based and grounded in solid reasoning and a succinct writing style. Evidence-based A policy memo is not an argumentative debate paper. The reader should expect your recommendations to be based upon evidence that the problem exists and understand the consequences [both good and bad] of adopting particular policy alternatives. To address this, policy memos should include a clear cost-benefit analysis that considers anticipated outcomes, the potential impact on stakeholder groups you have identified, clear and quantifiable performance goals, and how success will be measured. Accessibility A policy memo requires clear and simple language that avoids unnecessary jargon and concepts of an academic discipline. Do not skip around. Use one paragraph to develop one idea or argument and make that idea or argument explicit within the first one or two sentences. Your memo should have a straightforward, explicit organizational structure that provides well-explained arguments arranged within a logical sequence of reasoning [think in terms of an if/then logic model--if this policy recommendation, then this action; if this benefit, then this potential cost; if this group is allocated resources, then this group may be excluded]. Presentation Style The visual impact of your memo affects the reader’s ability to grasp your ideas quickly and easily. Include a table of contents and list of figures and charts, if necessary. Subdivide the text using clear and descriptive headings to guide the reader. Incorporate devices such as capitalization, bold text, and bulleted items, but be consistent, and don’t go crazy; the purpose is to facilitate access to specific sections of the paper for successive readings. If it is difficult to find information in your document, policy makers will not use it. Practical and Feasible Your memorandum should provide a set of actions based on what is actually happening in reality. Do not base your policy recommendations on future scenarios or hypothetical situations that could be interpreted as unlikely to occur or that do not appear possible because you have not adequately explained the circumstances supporting these scenarios. Here again, your cost-benefit analysis can be essential to validating the practicality and feasibility of your recommendations. Explicit Transparency Provide specific criteria to assess either the success or failure of the policies you are recommending. As much as possible, this criteria should be derived from your cost/benefit analysis or framed as a SWOT [Strengths-weaknesses, opportunities-threats]. Do not hide or under-report information that does not support your policy recommendations. Just as you would note the limitations of your study in a research paper, a policy memo should describe issues of weakness of your analysis. Explain why they may arise and why your recommendations are still valid despite these issues. Be open and straightforward because doing so strengthens your arguments and it will help the reader assess the overall impact of recommended policy changes.

NOTE: Technically, it would not be wrong for your policy memo to argue for maintaining the status quo. However, the general objective of a policy memo assignment is to critically examine opportunities for transformative change and to highlight the risks of on-going complacency. If you choose to argue for maintaining the current policy trajectory, in whole or in part, be concise in identifying and systematically refuting all relevant policy options. Again, it must be rooted in an evidence-based cost/benefit analysis. Whether maintaining current policies is short-term or long-term [and these need to be clearly defined], you must explain concisely why each possible outcome of maintaining the status quo would be preferable to any alternative policy options and recommended courses of action. If your argument for maintaining the status quo is short-term, explain what factors in the future could trigger a policy-related course correction.

Herman, Luciana. Policy Memos. John F. Kennedy School of Government. Harvard University; How to Write a Public Policy Memo. Student Learning Center. University of California, Berkeley; Policy Memo. Thompson Writing Program, Writing Studio. Duke University; Policy Memo Guidelines. Cornell Fellows Program. Cornell University; Memo: Audience and Purpose. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition. Institute for Public Policy Studies. University of Denver; Thrall, A. Trevor. How to Write a Policy Memo. University of Michigan--Dearborn, 2006; Mastro, Oriana Skylar. "Teach What you Preach: A Comprehensive Guide to the Policy Memo as a Methods Teaching Tool." Journal of Political Science Education 17 (2021): 326-340; Writing Effective Memos. Electronic Hallway. Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs. University of Washington; Writing Effective Policy Memos. Water & Sanitation Infrastructure Planning syllabus. Spring 2004. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Structure and Writing Style

The contents of a policy memo can be organized in a variety of ways. Below is a general template adapted from the “Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition” published by the Institute for Public Policy Studies at the University of Denver and from suggestions made in the book, A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem-Solving [Eugene Bardach. 4th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2012] . Both sources provide useful approaches to writing a policy memo in the event your professor does not provide specific guidance. Overall, the tone of your writing should be formal but assertive. Note that the most important consideration in terms of writing style is professionalism, not creativity. I.  Cover Page Provide a complete and informative cover page that includes the document title, date, the full names and titles of the writer or writers [i.e., Joe Smith, Student, Department of Political Science, University of Southern California]. The title of the policy memo should be formally written and specific to the policy issue [e.g., “Charter Schools, Fair Housing, and Legal Standards: A Call for Equal Treatment”]. For longer memos, consider including a brief executive summary that highlights key findings and recommendations.

II.  Introduction and Problem Definition A policy memorandum should begin with a short summary introduction that defines the policy problem, provides important contextual background information, and explains what issues are being covered. This is followed by a short justification for writing the memo, why a decision needs to be made [answering the “So What?” question], and an outline of the recommendations you make or key themes the reader should keep in mind. Summarize your main points in a few sentences, then conclude with a description of how the remainder of the memo is organized.

III.  Methods This is usually where other research about the problem or issue of concern is summarized. Describe how you plan to identify and locate the information on which your policy memo is based. This may include peer-reviewed journals and books as well as possible professionals you interviewed, databases and websites you explored, or legislative histories or relevant case law that you used. Remember this is not intended to be a thorough literature review; only choose sources that persuasively support your position or that help lay a foundation for understanding why actions need to be taken.

IV.  Issue Analysis This section is where you explain in detail how you examined the issue and, by so doing, persuade the reader of the appropriateness of your analysis. This is followed by a description of how your analysis contributes to the current policy debate. It is important to demonstrate that the policy issue may be more complex than a basic pro versus con debate. Very few public policy debates can be reduced to this type of rhetorical dichotomy. Be sure your analysis is thorough and takes into account all factors that may influence possible strategies that could advance a recommended set of solutions.

V.  Proposed Solutions Write a brief review of the specific solutions you evaluated, noting the criteria by which you examined and compared different proposed policy alternatives. Identify the stakeholders impacted by the proposed solutions and describe in what ways they will benefit from your proposed solution. Focus on identifying solutions that have not been proposed or tested elsewhere. Offer a contrarian viewpoint that challenges the reader to take into account a new perspective on the research problem. Note that you can propose solutions that may be considered radical or unorthodox, but they must be realistic and politically feasible.

VI.  Strategic Recommendations Solutions are just opinions until you provide a path that delineates how to get from where you are to where you want to go. Describe what you believe are the best recommended courses of action [i.e., "action items"]. In writing this section, state the broad approach to be taken, with specific, practical steps or measures that should be implemented. Be sure to also state by whom and within what time frame these actions should be taken. Conclude by highlighting the consequences of maintaining the status quo [or if supporting the status quo, why change at this time would be detrimental]. Also, clearly explain why your strategic recommendations are best suited for addressing the current policy situation.

VI.  Limitations As in any academic paper, you must describe limitations to your analysis. In particular, ask yourself if each of your recommendations are realistic, feasible, and sustainable, and in particular, that they can be implemented within the current bureaucratic, economic, political, cultural, social, or other type of contextual climate in which they reside. If not, you should go back and clarify your recommendations and provide further evidence as to why the recommendation is most appropriate for addressing the issue. It does not necessarily undermine the overall recommendations of your study if the limitation cannot be overcome, but you must clearly acknowledge this. Place the limitation within the context of a critical issue that needs further study in concurrence with possible implementation [i.e., findings indicate service learning promotes civic engagement, but there is a lack of data on the types of service learning programs that exist among high schools in South Central Los Angeles].

VII.  Cost-Benefit Analysis This section may be optional but, in some cases, your professor may ask you to include an explicit summary analysis of the costs and benefits of each recommendation. If you are asked to include a separate cost-benefit analysis, be concise and brief. Since most policy memos do not have a formal conclusion, the cost-benefit analysis can act as your conclusion by summarizing the key differences among policy alternatives and recommended courses of action.

NOTE:   A feature found in many policy memos is the inclusion of text boxes or sidebars that are separate from the main body of text. A text box contains a useful checklist, case study, summary, example, quotation, definition, or expansion of an idea that is located close to the text it supports. A sidebar is a type of exclamation located beside or within the main content that brings further attention to a key point or is used to encourage the reader to pay particular attention to that section of the memo. A sidebar often contains a quotation or brief statement lifted from the main text. Both features are appropriate to use in your policy memo, but don't overdo it. Limit the use of a text box or sidebar to only the most essential text that expands or adds value to understanding content in a specific section of the policy memo, in particular, in the issue analysis section or when describing your strategic recommendations.

Bardach, Eugene. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem-Solving . 4th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2012; Herman, Luciana. Policy Memos. John F. Kennedy School of Government. Harvard University; How to Write a Public Policy Memo. Student Learning Center. University of California, Berkeley; Policy Memo Guidelines. Cornell Fellows Program. Cornell University; Memo: Audience and Purpose. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Pennock, Andrew. “The Case for Using Policy Writing in Undergraduate Political Science Courses.” PS: Political Science and Politics 44 (January 2011): 141-146; Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition. Institute for Public Policy Studies. University of Denver; Text Boxes and Callouts. Australian Government Style Manual; Thrall, A. Trevor. How to Write a Policy Memo. University of Michigan--Dearborn, 2006; Sajedinejad, S., et al. From Research to Impact: A Toolkit for Developing Effective Policy Briefs . Toronto, Ontario: Policy Bench, Fraser Mustard Institute of Human Development, University of Toronto, 2021; What Are Policy Briefs. FAO Corporate Document Repository. United Nations; Writing Effective Memos. Electronic Hallway. Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs. University of Washington; Writing Effective Policy Memos. Water & Sanitation Infrastructure Planning syllabus. Spring 2004. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Proofreading the Memo

Problems to Avoid

The style and arrangement of an effectively written memo can differ because no two policies, nor their intended audience of readers, are exactly the same. Nevertheless, before you submit your policy memo, be sure you proofread the document so that you avoid these common problems. If you identify one or more of these problems, you should rewrite or re-organize the content accordingly.

1.  Acknowledge the Law of Unintended Consequences . No policy analysis is complete until you have identified for whom the policy actions are supposed to benefit and identify what groups may be impacted by the consequences of their implementation. Review your memo and make sure you have clearly delineated who could be helped and who could be potentially harmed or excluded from benefiting from your recommended policy actions. As noted by Wilcoxen, this is also important because describing who may or may not benefit can help you anticipate which stakeholder groups will support your policy recommendations and which groups will likely oppose it. Calculating potential "winners" and "losers" will help reveal how much it may cost to compensate those groups excluded from benefiting. By building this compensation into your policy recommendations, you are better able to show the reader how to reduce political obstacles.

2.  Anticipate the Reader's Questions . Examine your recommended courses of action and identify any open-ended, declarative, indeterminate, or ambiguous statements that could lead the reader to have to ask further questions. For example, you declare that the most important factor supporting school choice among parents is distance from home. Without clarification or additional information, this could lead the reader to ask numerous questions, such as, why or by what means do you know this, what distance is considered to be too far, what factors contribute to parent's decision about school choice and distance from schools, or what age group does this most apply to. Clarify these types of open-ended statements so that your policy recommendations can be more fully understood and accepted as valid.

3.  Be Concise . Being succinct in your writing does not relate to the overall length of the policy memo or the amount of words you use. It relates to your ability to provide a lot of information clearly and without superfluous detail. Strategies include r eviewing long paragraphs and breaking them up into parts, looking for long sentences and eliminating unnecessary qualifiers and modifiers, and deleting prepositional phrases in favor of adjectives or adverbs. The overarching goal is to be thorough and precise in how your ideas are presented and to avoid writing that uses too many words or excessively technical expressions.

4.  Focus on the Results . While it is important that your memo describe the methods by which you gathered and analyzed the data informing your policy recommendations, the content should focus on explaining the results of your analysis and the logic underpinning your recommendations. Remember your audience. The reader is presumably a decision-maker with limited knowledge of the issue and who has little time to contemplate the methods of analysis. The validity of your findings will be determined primarily by your reader's determination that your policy recommendations and supporting action items are realistic and rooted in sound reasoning. Review your memo and make sure the statement about how you gathered the data is brief and concise. If necessary, technical issues or raw data can be included in an appendix.

5.  Minimize Subjective Reasoning . Although the memo should be persuasive, avoid emphasizing your personal opinion about the topic. A policy memo should be written in a professional tone with recommendations based upon empirical reasoning while, at the same time, reflecting a level of passion about your topic. However, being passionate does not imply being opinionated. The memo should emphasize presenting all of the facts a reader would need to reach their own conclusions about the validity of your recommendations.

6.  Use of Non-textual Elements . It is common for policy memos to include data, statistics, and other types of information that require visualization. Review all tables, charts, figures, graphs, photographs, and other non-textual elements and make sure they are labeled correctly. Examine each in relation to the text, making sure they are described adequately and that they relate to the overall content of your memo. If these elements are located in appendices, make sure descriptive references to them within the text are correct [i.e., reference to Figure 2 is actually the table you want the reader to look at].

Bardach, Eugene and Eric M. Pataschnik. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem-Solving . 5th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2016; Herman, Luciana. Policy Memos. John F. Kennedy School of Government. Harvard University; How to Write a Public Policy Memo. Student Learning Center. University of California, Berkeley; Memo: Audience and Purpose. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Policy Memo Requirements and Guidelines, 2012-2013 edition. Institute for Public Policy Studies. University of Denver; Wilcoxen, Peter J. Tips on Writing a Policy Memo. PAI 723, Economics for Public Decisions Course Syllabus. Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University.

Writing Tip

Difference Between a Policy Memo and a Policy Brief

A policy memo and a policy brief share much in common. They both describe the rationale for choosing particular policy alternatives or courses of action, they both contain persuasive language, and both documents are written for non-experts, such as, practitioners, politicians, non-governmental agency workers, lobbyists, and others who work on or regularly make decisions about the issue addressed in the document. Both documents are free of jargon or technical terminology and focus on communicating the practical implications of prior policy research to a specific audience based on available evidence.

Ironically, however, a policy memo is typically shorter in length than a policy “brief.” A policy memo usually ranges from one to twenty-five pages, while a policy brief can be anywhere from twenty to more than a hundred pages in length depending on the complexity of the topic. Therefore:

• A policy brief is commonly produced in response to a request from a decision-maker concerning an issue that requires more thorough information to address the underlying policy problem or they are produced by an advocacy group or organization for the purpose of influencing a specific policy, often in an urgent tone. Non-textual elements , such as, figures, charts, graphs, or diagrams, are often included.
• A policy memo is concisely written and presents information, ideas, and recommendations clearly so the reader can quickly scan the document for the most relevant points. Policy memos focus on brevity and often synthesize existing evidence in language that is direct, specific, and with minimal background information or historical context. Non-textual elements are only included if necessary.

Guide to Writing an Effective Policy Memo. Leadership for Educational Equity, New York; Policy Briefs. The Writing Center, University of North Carolina;  Policy Memo. Writing Studio, Duke University; Manny, Karoline. What is a Policy Brief/Memo? Grace Doherty Library, Centra College; Sajedinejad, S., et al. From Research to Impact: A Toolkit for Developing Effective Policy Briefs . Toronto, Ontario: Policy Bench. Fraser Mustard Institute of Human Development, University of Toronto, 2021.

Another Writing Tip

Citing Sources

Policy memos generally do not include extensive footnotes, endnotes, further readings, or a bibliography. However, if you use supporting information in a memo, cite the source in the text. For example, you may refer to a study that supported a specific assertion by referencing it in the following manner: "A study published in 2012 by the Eagleton Center for Public Interest Polling showed that public opinion towards China was....” However, some assignments may require a formal list of references. Before writing your memo, be sure you are clear about how your professor wants you to cite any sources referred to in your analysis.

Policy Memo. Thompson Writing Program, Writing Studio. Duke University.

Yet Another Writing Tip

Using Non-Textual Elements

Policy memos are not just text-based but frequently include numeric tables and charts or other non-textual elements, such as photographs, maps, and illustrations. However, it is important that you use non-textual elements judiciously and only in relation to supplementing and clarifying arguments made in the text so as not to distract the reader from the main points of your memo . As with any non-textual elements, describe what the reader is seeing and why the data is important to understanding the policy problem.

Still Yet Another Writing Tip

Including Appendices

The purpose of an appendix is to provide supplementary material that is not an essential part of the main text but which may be helpful in providing the reader with more complete information. If you have information that is vital to understanding an issue discussed in the memo, it can be included in one or more appendices. However, if you have a lot of information, don't write a five page memo and include twenty pages of appendices. Memos are intended to be  succinct and clearly expressed. If there is a lot of data, refer to the source and summarize it, or discuss with your professor how it should be included.

• << Previous: Writing Field Notes
• Next: Writing a Reflective Paper >>
• Last Updated: Jun 3, 2024 9:44 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Recommendations – Examples and Writing Guide

Research Recommendations – Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Recommendations

Definition:

Research recommendations refer to suggestions or advice given to someone who is looking to conduct research on a specific topic or area. These recommendations may include suggestions for research methods, data collection techniques, sources of information, and other factors that can help to ensure that the research is conducted in a rigorous and effective manner. Research recommendations may be provided by experts in the field, such as professors, researchers, or consultants, and are intended to help guide the researcher towards the most appropriate and effective approach to their research project.

Parts of Research Recommendations

Research recommendations can vary depending on the specific project or area of research, but typically they will include some or all of the following parts:

• Research question or objective : This is the overarching goal or purpose of the research project.
• Research methods : This includes the specific techniques and strategies that will be used to collect and analyze data. The methods will depend on the research question and the type of data being collected.
• Data collection: This refers to the process of gathering information or data that will be used to answer the research question. This can involve a range of different methods, including surveys, interviews, observations, or experiments.
• Data analysis : This involves the process of examining and interpreting the data that has been collected. This can involve statistical analysis, qualitative analysis, or a combination of both.
• Results and conclusions: This section summarizes the findings of the research and presents any conclusions or recommendations based on those findings.
• Limitations and future research: This section discusses any limitations of the study and suggests areas for future research that could build on the findings of the current project.

How to Write Research Recommendations

Writing research recommendations involves providing specific suggestions or advice to a researcher on how to conduct their study. Here are some steps to consider when writing research recommendations:

• Understand the research question: Before writing research recommendations, it is important to have a clear understanding of the research question and the objectives of the study. This will help to ensure that the recommendations are relevant and appropriate.
• Consider the research methods: Consider the most appropriate research methods that could be used to collect and analyze data that will address the research question. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the different methods and how they might apply to the specific research question.
• Provide specific recommendations: Provide specific and actionable recommendations that the researcher can implement in their study. This can include recommendations related to sample size, data collection techniques, research instruments, data analysis methods, or other relevant factors.
• Justify recommendations : Justify why each recommendation is being made and how it will help to address the research question or objective. It is important to provide a clear rationale for each recommendation to help the researcher understand why it is important.
• Consider limitations and ethical considerations : Consider any limitations or potential ethical considerations that may arise in conducting the research. Provide recommendations for addressing these issues or mitigating their impact.
• Summarize recommendations: Provide a summary of the recommendations at the end of the report or document, highlighting the most important points and emphasizing how the recommendations will contribute to the overall success of the research project.

Example of Research Recommendations

Example of Research Recommendations sample for students:

• Further investigate the effects of X on Y by conducting a larger-scale randomized controlled trial with a diverse population.
• Explore the relationship between A and B by conducting qualitative interviews with individuals who have experience with both.
• Investigate the long-term effects of intervention C by conducting a follow-up study with participants one year after completion.
• Examine the effectiveness of intervention D in a real-world setting by conducting a field study in a naturalistic environment.
• Compare and contrast the results of this study with those of previous research on the same topic to identify any discrepancies or inconsistencies in the findings.
• Expand upon the limitations of this study by addressing potential confounding variables and conducting further analyses to control for them.
• Investigate the relationship between E and F by conducting a meta-analysis of existing literature on the topic.
• Explore the potential moderating effects of variable G on the relationship between H and I by conducting subgroup analyses.
• Identify potential areas for future research based on the gaps in current literature and the findings of this study.
• Conduct a replication study to validate the results of this study and further establish the generalizability of the findings.

Applications of Research Recommendations

Research recommendations are important as they provide guidance on how to improve or solve a problem. The applications of research recommendations are numerous and can be used in various fields. Some of the applications of research recommendations include:

• Policy-making: Research recommendations can be used to develop policies that address specific issues. For example, recommendations from research on climate change can be used to develop policies that reduce carbon emissions and promote sustainability.
• Program development: Research recommendations can guide the development of programs that address specific issues. For example, recommendations from research on education can be used to develop programs that improve student achievement.
• Product development : Research recommendations can guide the development of products that meet specific needs. For example, recommendations from research on consumer behavior can be used to develop products that appeal to consumers.
• Marketing strategies: Research recommendations can be used to develop effective marketing strategies. For example, recommendations from research on target audiences can be used to develop marketing strategies that effectively reach specific demographic groups.
• Medical practice : Research recommendations can guide medical practitioners in providing the best possible care to patients. For example, recommendations from research on treatments for specific conditions can be used to improve patient outcomes.
• Scientific research: Research recommendations can guide future research in a specific field. For example, recommendations from research on a specific disease can be used to guide future research on treatments and cures for that disease.

Purpose of Research Recommendations

The purpose of research recommendations is to provide guidance on how to improve or solve a problem based on the findings of research. Research recommendations are typically made at the end of a research study and are based on the conclusions drawn from the research data. The purpose of research recommendations is to provide actionable advice to individuals or organizations that can help them make informed decisions, develop effective strategies, or implement changes that address the issues identified in the research.

The main purpose of research recommendations is to facilitate the transfer of knowledge from researchers to practitioners, policymakers, or other stakeholders who can benefit from the research findings. Recommendations can help bridge the gap between research and practice by providing specific actions that can be taken based on the research results. By providing clear and actionable recommendations, researchers can help ensure that their findings are put into practice, leading to improvements in various fields, such as healthcare, education, business, and public policy.

Characteristics of Research Recommendations

Research recommendations are a key component of research studies and are intended to provide practical guidance on how to apply research findings to real-world problems. The following are some of the key characteristics of research recommendations:

• Actionable : Research recommendations should be specific and actionable, providing clear guidance on what actions should be taken to address the problem identified in the research.
• Evidence-based: Research recommendations should be based on the findings of the research study, supported by the data collected and analyzed.
• Contextual: Research recommendations should be tailored to the specific context in which they will be implemented, taking into account the unique circumstances and constraints of the situation.
• Feasible : Research recommendations should be realistic and feasible, taking into account the available resources, time constraints, and other factors that may impact their implementation.
• Prioritized: Research recommendations should be prioritized based on their potential impact and feasibility, with the most important recommendations given the highest priority.
• Communicated effectively: Research recommendations should be communicated clearly and effectively, using language that is understandable to the target audience.
• Evaluated : Research recommendations should be evaluated to determine their effectiveness in addressing the problem identified in the research, and to identify opportunities for improvement.

Advantages of Research Recommendations

Research recommendations have several advantages, including:

• Providing practical guidance: Research recommendations provide practical guidance on how to apply research findings to real-world problems, helping to bridge the gap between research and practice.
• Improving decision-making: Research recommendations help decision-makers make informed decisions based on the findings of research, leading to better outcomes and improved performance.
• Enhancing accountability : Research recommendations can help enhance accountability by providing clear guidance on what actions should be taken, and by providing a basis for evaluating progress and outcomes.
• Informing policy development : Research recommendations can inform the development of policies that are evidence-based and tailored to the specific needs of a given situation.
• Enhancing knowledge transfer: Research recommendations help facilitate the transfer of knowledge from researchers to practitioners, policymakers, or other stakeholders who can benefit from the research findings.
• Encouraging further research : Research recommendations can help identify gaps in knowledge and areas for further research, encouraging continued exploration and discovery.
• Promoting innovation: Research recommendations can help identify innovative solutions to complex problems, leading to new ideas and approaches.

Limitations of Research Recommendations

While research recommendations have several advantages, there are also some limitations to consider. These limitations include:

• Context-specific: Research recommendations may be context-specific and may not be applicable in all situations. Recommendations developed in one context may not be suitable for another context, requiring adaptation or modification.
• I mplementation challenges: Implementation of research recommendations may face challenges, such as lack of resources, resistance to change, or lack of buy-in from stakeholders.
• Limited scope: Research recommendations may be limited in scope, focusing only on a specific issue or aspect of a problem, while other important factors may be overlooked.
• Uncertainty : Research recommendations may be uncertain, particularly when the research findings are inconclusive or when the recommendations are based on limited data.
• Bias : Research recommendations may be influenced by researcher bias or conflicts of interest, leading to recommendations that are not in the best interests of stakeholders.
• Timing : Research recommendations may be time-sensitive, requiring timely action to be effective. Delayed action may result in missed opportunities or reduced effectiveness.
• Lack of evaluation: Research recommendations may not be evaluated to determine their effectiveness or impact, making it difficult to assess whether they are successful or not.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Scope of the Research – Writing Guide and...

Limitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Assignment – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Significance of the Study – Examples and Writing...

Background of The Study – Examples and Writing...

Data Verification – Process, Types and Examples

The Plagiarism Checker Online For Your Academic Work

Start Plagiarism Check

Editing & Proofreading for Your Research Paper

Get it proofread now

Online Printing & Binding with Free Express Delivery

Configure binding now

• Academic essay overview
• The writing process
• Structuring academic essays
• Types of academic essays
• Academic writing overview
• Sentence structure
• Academic writing process
• Improving your academic writing
• Titles and headings
• APA style overview
• APA citation & referencing
• APA structure & sections
• Citation & referencing
• Structure and sections
• APA examples overview
• Commonly used citations
• Other examples
• British English vs. American English
• Chicago style overview
• Chicago citation & referencing
• Chicago structure & sections
• Chicago style examples
• Citing sources overview
• Citation format
• Citation examples
• College essay overview
• Application
• How to write a college essay
• Types of college essays
• Commonly confused words
• Definitions
• Dissertation overview
• Dissertation structure & sections
• Dissertation writing process
• Graduate school overview
• Application & admission
• Study abroad
• Master degree
• Harvard referencing overview
• Language rules overview
• Grammatical rules & structures
• Parts of speech
• Punctuation
• Methodology overview
• Analyzing data
• Experiments
• Observations
• Inductive vs. Deductive
• Qualitative vs. Quantitative
• Types of validity
• Types of reliability
• Sampling methods
• Theories & Concepts
• Types of research studies
• Types of variables
• MLA style overview
• MLA examples
• MLA citation & referencing
• MLA structure & sections
• Plagiarism overview
• Plagiarism checker
• Types of plagiarism
• Printing production overview
• Research bias overview
• Types of research bias
• Example sections
• Types of research papers
• Research process overview
• Problem statement
• Research proposal
• Research topic
• Statistics overview
• Levels of measurment
• Frequency distribution
• Measures of central tendency
• Measures of variability
• Hypothesis testing
• Parameters & test statistics
• Types of distributions
• Correlation
• Effect size
• Hypothesis testing assumptions
• Types of ANOVAs
• Types of chi-square
• Statistical data
• Statistical models
• Spelling mistakes
• Tips overview
• Academic writing tips
• Dissertation tips
• Sources tips
• Working with sources overview
• Evaluating sources
• Finding sources
• Including sources
• Types of sources

Your Step to Success

Plagiarism Check within 10min

Printing & Binding with 3D Live Preview

Dissertation Recommendations — How To Write Them

How do you like this article cancel reply.

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

Recommendations are crucial to your paper because they suggest solutions to your research problems. You can include recommendations in the discussion sections of your writing and briefly in the conclusions of your dissertation , thesis, or research paper . This article discusses dissertation recommendations, their purpose, and how to write one.

Inhaltsverzeichnis

• 1 Dissertation Recommendations — In a Nutshell
• 2 Definition: Dissertation recommendations
• 3 How to write dissertation recommendations
• 4 Dissertation recommendations based on your findings
• 5 Purpose of dissertation recommendations

Dissertation Recommendations — In a Nutshell

• Dissertation recommendations are an important aspect of your research paper.
• They should be specific, measurable, and have the potential of future possibilities.
• Additionally, these recommendations should offer practical insights and suggestions for solving real-life problems.

When making your recommendations, please ensure the following:

• Your recommendations are an extension of your work instead of a basis for self-criticism
• Your research stands independently instead of suggesting recommendations that will complete it
• Your dissertation recommendations offer insights into how future research can build upon it instead of undermining your research

Definition: Dissertation recommendations

Dissertation recommendations are the actionable insights and suggestions presented after you get your research findings. These suggestions are usually based on what you find and help to guide future studies or practical applications. It’s best to place your dissertation recommendations at the conclusion.

How to write dissertation recommendations

When writing your academic paper, you can frame dissertation recommendations using one of the following methods:

Use the problem: In this approach, you should address the issues highlighted in your research.

Offer solutions: You can offer some practical solutions to the problems revealed in your research.

Use a theory: Here, you can base your recommendations on your study’s theoretical approach.

Here are some helpful tips for writing dissertation recommendations that you should incorporate when drafting a research paper:

• Avoid general or vague recommendations
• Be specific and concrete
• Offer measurable insights   Ensure your suggestions are practical and implementable
• Avoid focusing on theoretical concepts or new findings but on future possibilities

“Based on the study’s outcomes, it’s recommended that businesses and organizations develop mental health well-being frameworks to reduce workplace stress. This training should be mandatory for all employees and conducted on a monthly basis.”

Dissertation recommendations based on your findings

After analysing your findings, you can divide your dissertation recommendations into two subheadings as discussed below:

What can be done?

This section highlights the steps you can use when conducting the research. You may also include any steps needed to address the issues highlighted in your research question. For instance, if the study reveals a lack of emotional connection between employees, implementing dynamic awareness training or sit-downs could be recommended.

Is further research needed?

This section highlights the benefits of further studies that will help build on your research findings. For instance, if your research found less data on employee mental well-being, your dissertation recommendations could suggest future studies.

Purpose of dissertation recommendations

Note: Dissertation recommendations have the following purposes:

• Provide guidance and improve the quality of further studies based on your research findings
• Offer insights, call to action, or suggest other studies
• Highlight specific, clear, and realistic suggestions for future studies

When writing your dissertation recommendations, always remember to keep them specific, measurable, and clear. You should also ensure that a comprehensible rationale supports these recommendations. Additionally, your requests should always be directly linked to your research and offer suggestions from that angle.

Note that your suggestions should always focus on future possibilities and not on present new findings or theoretical concepts. This is because future researchers may use your results to draw further conclusions and gather new insights from your work.

Can I include new arguments in the conclusion of a dissertation

Dissertations follow a more formal structure; hence, you can only present new arguments in the conclusion. Use your dissertation’s concluding part as a summary of your points or to provide recommendations.

How is the conclusion different from the discussion sections?

The discussion section describes a detailed account of your findings, while the conclusion answers the research question and highlights some recommendations.

What shouldn't I include in the dissertation recommendations?

Avoid concluding with weak statements like “there are good insights from both ends…”, generic phrases like “in conclusion…” or evidence that you failed to mention in the discussion or results section.

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential, while others help us to improve this website and your experience.

• External Media

Individual Privacy Preferences

Cookie Details Privacy Policy Imprint

Here you will find an overview of all cookies used. You can give your consent to whole categories or display further information and select certain cookies.

Accept all Save

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the proper function of the website.

Show Cookie Information Hide Cookie Information

Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.

Content from video platforms and social media platforms is blocked by default. If External Media cookies are accepted, access to those contents no longer requires manual consent.

Privacy Policy Imprint

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation

How to Write a Thesis or Dissertation Conclusion

Published on September 6, 2022 by Tegan George and Shona McCombes. Revised on November 20, 2023.

The conclusion is the very last part of your thesis or dissertation . It should be concise and engaging, leaving your reader with a clear understanding of your main findings, as well as the answer to your research question .

In it, you should:

• Clearly state the answer to your main research question
• Summarize and reflect on your research process
• Make recommendations for future work on your thesis or dissertation topic
• Show what new knowledge you have contributed to your field
• Wrap up your thesis or dissertation

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Discussion vs. conclusion, how long should your conclusion be, step 1: answer your research question, step 2: summarize and reflect on your research, step 3: make future recommendations, step 4: emphasize your contributions to your field, step 5: wrap up your thesis or dissertation, full conclusion example, conclusion checklist, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about conclusion sections.

While your conclusion contains similar elements to your discussion section , they are not the same thing.

Your conclusion should be shorter and more general than your discussion. Instead of repeating literature from your literature review , discussing specific research results , or interpreting your data in detail, concentrate on making broad statements that sum up the most important insights of your research.

As a rule of thumb, your conclusion should not introduce new data, interpretations, or arguments.

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

Depending on whether you are writing a thesis or dissertation, your length will vary. Generally, a conclusion should make up around 5–7% of your overall word count.

An empirical scientific study will often have a short conclusion, concisely stating the main findings and recommendations for future research. A humanities dissertation topic or systematic review , on the other hand, might require more space to conclude its analysis, tying all the previous sections together in an overall argument.

Your conclusion should begin with the main question that your thesis or dissertation aimed to address. This is your final chance to show that you’ve done what you set out to do, so make sure to formulate a clear, concise answer.

• Don’t repeat a list of all the results that you already discussed
• Do synthesize them into a final takeaway that the reader will remember.

An empirical thesis or dissertation conclusion may begin like this:

A case study –based thesis or dissertation conclusion may begin like this:

In the second example, the research aim is not directly restated, but rather added implicitly to the statement. To avoid repeating yourself, it is helpful to reformulate your aims and questions into an overall statement of what you did and how you did it.

Your conclusion is an opportunity to remind your reader why you took the approach you did, what you expected to find, and how well the results matched your expectations.

To avoid repetition , consider writing more reflectively here, rather than just writing a summary of each preceding section. Consider mentioning the effectiveness of your methodology , or perhaps any new questions or unexpected insights that arose in the process.

You can also mention any limitations of your research, but only if you haven’t already included these in the discussion. Don’t dwell on them at length, though—focus on the positives of your work.

• While x limits the generalizability of the results, this approach provides new insight into y .
• This research clearly illustrates x , but it also raises the question of y .

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

You may already have made a few recommendations for future research in your discussion section, but the conclusion is a good place to elaborate and look ahead, considering the implications of your findings in both theoretical and practical terms.

• Based on these conclusions, practitioners should consider …
• To better understand the implications of these results, future studies could address …
• Further research is needed to determine the causes of/effects of/relationship between …

When making recommendations for further research, be sure not to undermine your own work. Relatedly, while future studies might confirm, build on, or enrich your conclusions, they shouldn’t be required for your argument to feel complete. Your work should stand alone on its own merits.

Just as you should avoid too much self-criticism, you should also avoid exaggerating the applicability of your research. If you’re making recommendations for policy, business, or other practical implementations, it’s generally best to frame them as “shoulds” rather than “musts.” All in all, the purpose of academic research is to inform, explain, and explore—not to demand.

Make sure your reader is left with a strong impression of what your research has contributed to the state of your field.

Some strategies to achieve this include:

• Returning to your problem statement to explain how your research helps solve the problem
• Referring back to the literature review and showing how you have addressed a gap in knowledge
• Discussing how your findings confirm or challenge an existing theory or assumption

Again, avoid simply repeating what you’ve already covered in the discussion in your conclusion. Instead, pick out the most important points and sum them up succinctly, situating your project in a broader context.

The end is near! Once you’ve finished writing your conclusion, it’s time to wrap up your thesis or dissertation with a few final steps:

• It’s a good idea to write your abstract next, while the research is still fresh in your mind.
• Next, make sure your reference list is complete and correctly formatted. To speed up the process, you can use our free APA citation generator .
• Once you’ve added any appendices , you can create a table of contents and title page .
• Finally, read through the whole document again to make sure your thesis is clearly written and free from language errors. You can proofread it yourself , ask a friend, or consider Scribbr’s proofreading and editing service .

Here is an example of how you can write your conclusion section. Notice how it includes everything mentioned above:

V. Conclusion

The current research aimed to identify acoustic speech characteristics which mark the beginning of an exacerbation in COPD patients.

The central questions for this research were as follows: 1. Which acoustic measures extracted from read speech differ between COPD speakers in stable condition and healthy speakers? 2. In what ways does the speech of COPD patients during an exacerbation differ from speech of COPD patients during stable periods?

All recordings were aligned using a script. Subsequently, they were manually annotated to indicate respiratory actions such as inhaling and exhaling. The recordings of 9 stable COPD patients reading aloud were then compared with the recordings of 5 healthy control subjects reading aloud. The results showed a significant effect of condition on the number of in- and exhalations per syllable, the number of non-linguistic in- and exhalations per syllable, and the ratio of voiced and silence intervals. The number of in- and exhalations per syllable and the number of non-linguistic in- and exhalations per syllable were higher for COPD patients than for healthy controls, which confirmed both hypotheses.

However, the higher ratio of voiced and silence intervals for COPD patients compared to healthy controls was not in line with the hypotheses. This unpredicted result might have been caused by the different reading materials or recording procedures for both groups, or by a difference in reading skills. Moreover, there was a trend regarding the effect of condition on the number of syllables per breath group. The number of syllables per breath group was higher for healthy controls than for COPD patients, which was in line with the hypothesis. There was no effect of condition on pitch, intensity, center of gravity, pitch variability, speaking rate, or articulation rate.

This research has shown that the speech of COPD patients in exacerbation differs from the speech of COPD patients in stable condition. This might have potential for the detection of exacerbations. However, sustained vowels rarely occur in spontaneous speech. Therefore, the last two outcome measures might have greater potential for the detection of beginning exacerbations, but further research on the different outcome measures and their potential for the detection of exacerbations is needed due to the limitations of the current study.

Checklist: Conclusion

I have clearly and concisely answered the main research question .

I have summarized my overall argument or key takeaways.

I have mentioned any important limitations of the research.

I have given relevant recommendations .

I have clearly explained what my research has contributed to my field.

I have  not introduced any new data or arguments.

You've written a great conclusion! Use the other checklists to further improve your dissertation.

If you want to know more about AI for academic writing, AI tools, or research bias, make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

Research bias

• Survivorship bias
• Self-serving bias
• Availability heuristic
• Halo effect
• Hindsight bias
• Deep learning
• Generative AI
• Machine learning
• Reinforcement learning
• Supervised vs. unsupervised learning

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

In a thesis or dissertation, the discussion is an in-depth exploration of the results, going into detail about the meaning of your findings and citing relevant sources to put them in context.

The conclusion is more shorter and more general: it concisely answers your main research question and makes recommendations based on your overall findings.

While it may be tempting to present new arguments or evidence in your thesis or disseration conclusion , especially if you have a particularly striking argument you’d like to finish your analysis with, you shouldn’t. Theses and dissertations follow a more formal structure than this.

All your findings and arguments should be presented in the body of the text (more specifically in the discussion section and results section .) The conclusion is meant to summarize and reflect on the evidence and arguments you have already presented, not introduce new ones.

For a stronger dissertation conclusion , avoid including:

• Important evidence or analysis that wasn’t mentioned in the discussion section and results section
• Generic concluding phrases (e.g. “In conclusion …”)
• Weak statements that undermine your argument (e.g., “There are good points on both sides of this issue.”)

Your conclusion should leave the reader with a strong, decisive impression of your work.

The conclusion of your thesis or dissertation shouldn’t take up more than 5–7% of your overall word count.

The conclusion of your thesis or dissertation should include the following:

• A restatement of your research question
• A summary of your key arguments and/or results
• A short discussion of the implications of your research

Cite this Scribbr article

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

George, T. & McCombes, S. (2023, November 20). How to Write a Thesis or Dissertation Conclusion. Scribbr. Retrieved June 11, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/write-conclusion/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, how to write a discussion section | tips & examples, how to write an abstract | steps & examples, how to write a thesis or dissertation introduction, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Verify originality of an essay

Get ideas for your paper

Find top study documents

How to Write Recommendations in a Research Paper Correctly and Appropriately

Updated 13 Mar 2024

Completing a research paper can be daunting, but it becomes more manageable if you delve deeper into the process. Academic papers adhere to specific formats that must be followed to ensure high-quality content.

The conclusion and recommendations sections are crucial components of a research paper. They mark the end of your research, leave a lasting impression on your readers, and should be approached with great care. No wonder many students search for information about how to write recommendations in research papers. Explore this comprehensive guide to infuse your content with thoughtfulness and coherence, thereby elevating the impact of your research paper.

Recommendations in a research paper: meaning and goals

Before you start learning how to write recommendations in a research paper, the first thing is to clarify the meaning of this term. It is a significant element in the research paper structure, as it is critical to your discussion section and conclusion. While conducting research and analyzing gathered data, you may come across ideas or results that only partially align with the scope of your research topic. Alternatively, your findings offer possible implications or causal relationships between the aspects not covered in existing research.

This section will provide practical solutions for further research based on your conclusions and findings. The particular goals of this section depend on the research nature and usually include the following:

• Providing strategies to address the issues considered in the paper;
• Delivering suggestions on how the investigation findings can be applied in practice;
• Identifying gaps in the subject area and suggesting ways to extend existing knowledge;
• Enhancing reliability and validity of the research findings. 

Where to put recommendations?

To better understand how to write recommendations in research, you should know where to insert them. These elements are typically added in the conclusion (a short version) and discussion sections. Still, if you’re doing research with a practical or business focus, you can also include your suggestions in an advisory report or separate section. This text part should be completed based on the research findings and evidence. It should be clear, specific, and actionable, targeted to the intended audience, such as researchers, practitioners, or policymakers.

Get plagiarism-free papers in just 3 hours

• Zero AI - 100% human-crafted content
• Tailored to your writing style
• Sourced from the latest, reliable sources

Guaranteed Turnitin success ✌️

Place an order

What should recommendations look like?

When providing your solutions for further research, it’s important to ensure they are specific, fully connected to your investigation, and supported by a comprehensible rationale. The essential goal is to show how other researchers can generate the same results to make conclusions and offer potential directions for future research. 

Recommendations should be clear and include actionable words. While completing this section, the writer should show a solution-oriented approach by highlighting the scope for future investigation. Using bullet points is a better way to ensure clarity instead of writing long paragraphs.

Look at the following recommendation in a research paper example:

It is recommended that company X should create and promote sugar-free biscuits along with their existing product range. The marketing department should focus on creating a positive and healthy image. 

Let’s rewrite this paragraph to make it clear and well-structured:

• The corporation has to introduce and promote sugar-free products;
• The company has to create a new positive image;
• The company has to launch an advertising campaign to show their products’ benefits for health.

When visiting the EduBirdie website, you’ll find many helpful tips on writing a research paper, ranging from completing a research paper conclusion to exploring examples of a well-thought-out recommendations section. Don’t miss your chance to improve your paper with our assistance!

Structure of recommendations

Let’s consider the typical structure of this part. You’ll come across many various ways to organize it. The most common approach uses a simple formula with three elements: research question, conclusion, and recommendation. Now, you’ll see how this structure can be implemented.

Research question:

Which category of people is more prone to social exclusion? 

Conclusion:

The study found that individuals over 65 have a greater risk of being isolated from society.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the institutions dealing with overcoming social exclusion should focus on this particular group. 

In this example, the author delivers a suggestion based on the research findings (the risk of social isolation grows among people aged 65 and more). The measures to improve this situation are indicated (the organizations dealing with problems of social isolation should pay more attention to people over 65 years old).

How to write recommendations in research papers: essential guidelines

Look at some tips to help you complete a flawless chapter for your papers.

• Be concise in your statements.  Ensure that your suggestions are written in clear and concise language, avoiding jargon or technical terms difficult to understand. Try to limit yourself to one-sentence statements to present your recommendation. Not only it can help with language learning overall, but will also look more professional.
• Organize your ideas logically and coherently . You may use lists or paragraphs depending on your institution's guidelines or field of study. Use headings and subheadings to structure your section for easy navigation.
• Provide specific and concrete suggestions.  Clearly state the issues you explore and offer specific measures and solutions. Your call to action and suggestions should be related to the issues mentioned in the previous sections. Focusing on the most relevant and actionable suggestions directly stemming from your research is crucial.
• Match recommendations to your conclusion.  Ensure that your suggestions logically align with your conclusions. Refrain from suggesting too many solutions. You can create one recommendation addressing several conclusions when you must provide numerous suggestions for every study conclusion.
• Ensure your solutions are achievable.  Your recommendations should be practical and feasible to implement. Suggest specific and actionable steps to effectively address the considered issues or gaps in the research, avoiding vague or impractical suggestions.
• Use a comprehensive approach.  Make sure your solutions cover all relevant areas within your research scope. Consider different contexts, stakeholders, and perspectives affected by the recommendations. Be thorough in identifying potential improvement areas and offering appropriate actions.
• Don’t add new information to this part of your paper.  Avoid introducing new issues or ideas to complete your argument when writing recommendations in a research paper. Your academic paper has to stand on its own merits. 
• Create content tailored to your readers.  Ensure that your recommendations are aimed at your audience, namely your colleagues in the field of study who work on similar topics. The ideas you provide in the paper should be based on limitations identified during research. They should offer concrete possibilities for further study to rely on areas your investigation could not cover when completed.
• Explain how your recommendations can solve the issues you explore.  Go beyond listing suggestions and provide a rationale for each, including why it is essential, how it handles the research problem, and what evidence or theory supports it. Use relevant literature citations to strengthen your content. Explain how the suggested solutions can effectively answer the research question. This can be done by adding the following:
• Ideas for improving the methodology or approach;
• Policy suggestions;
• Perspectives for future research.
• Don’t undermine your research contribution or criticize yourself.   Avoid criticizing yourself in this section. Instead, use it as a perfect opportunity to provide ideas on how future studies can build upon your findings, making them a natural extension point. 
• Acknowledge any limitations or constraints of your research.  Reflect on how these limitations may impact the feasibility or generalizability of your solutions. This demonstrates critical thinking and awareness of the limitations of your study.
• End this section with a summary.  Highlight the key suggestions and their potential impact in a short conclusion. Emphasize the significance of your ideas and their valuable contribution to the field.

Don’t forget to consult and adhere to the requirements and specific guidelines provided by your institution for this section.

How do the discussion and the conclusion sections differ in a research paper? 

The discussion usually entails a comprehensive analysis of the results, delving into the significance of your findings and providing contextualization using citations of relevant sources. On the other hand, the conclusion is typically more concise and general. It briefly considers the main research question and provides suggestions from your findings.

Can the research paper conclusion come with new arguments? 

Although adding fresh evidence or arguments in the conclusion might be tempting, especially if you have a compelling point, we don’t recommend doing it. Research papers, dissertations, or theses typically adhere to a formal structure. Exposing all your arguments and findings in the thesis body is crucial. It’s better to do it in the discussion and results chapters. The conclusion should serve as a summary and reflection of your evidence and arguments rather than a place to introduce new ideas.

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback.

Written by Steven Robinson

Steven Robinson is an academic writing expert with a degree in English literature. His expertise, patient approach, and support empower students to express ideas clearly. On EduBirdie's blog, he provides valuable writing guides on essays, research papers, and other intriguing topics. Enjoys chess in free time.

Related Blog Posts

How to write a conclusion for a research paper like a pro.

A research paper is an integral part of any educational process, thus writing it properly is a must for any student, including the discussion secti...

Discover How to Write a Discussion Section of a Research Paper

When working on a research paper, one of the most important parts you must include is the discussion or the analytical section where you outline yo...

How to Write the Results Section of a Research Paper: Writing Tips & Examples

Completing the results chapter is one of the most important and challenging parts of the research process. Many students are interested in how to w...

Join our 150K of happy users

• Get original papers written according to your instructions
• Save time for what matters most

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How to Write an “Implications of Research” Section

4-minute read

• 24th October 2022

When writing research papers , theses, journal articles, or dissertations, one cannot ignore the importance of research. You’re not only the writer of your paper but also the researcher ! Moreover, it’s not just about researching your topic, filling your paper with abundant citations, and topping it off with a reference list. You need to dig deep into your research and provide related literature on your topic. You must also discuss the implications of your research.

Interested in learning more about implications of research? Read on! This post will define these implications, why they’re essential, and most importantly, how to write them. If you’re a visual learner, you might enjoy this video .

What Are Implications of Research?

Implications are potential questions from your research that justify further exploration. They state how your research findings could affect policies, theories, and/or practices.

Implications can either be practical or theoretical. The former is the direct impact of your findings on related practices, whereas the latter is the impact on the theories you have chosen in your study.

Example of a practical implication: If you’re researching a teaching method, the implication would be how teachers can use that method based on your findings.

Example of a theoretical implication: You added a new variable to Theory A so that it could cover a broader perspective.

Finally, implications aren’t the same as recommendations, and it’s important to know the difference between them .

Questions you should consider when developing the implications section:

●  What is the significance of your findings?

●  How do the findings of your study fit with or contradict existing research on this topic?

●  Do your results support or challenge existing theories? If they support them, what new information do they contribute? If they challenge them, why do you think that is?

Why Are Implications Important?

You need implications for the following reasons:

● To reflect on what you set out to accomplish in the first place

● To see if there’s a change to the initial perspective, now that you’ve collected the data

● To inform your audience, who might be curious about the impact of your research

How to Write an Implications Section

Usually, you write your research implications in the discussion section of your paper. This is the section before the conclusion when you discuss all the hard work you did. Additionally, you’ll write the implications section before making recommendations for future research.

Implications should begin with what you discovered in your study, which differs from what previous studies found, and then you can discuss the implications of your findings.

Your implications need to be specific, meaning you should show the exact contributions of your research and why they’re essential. They should also begin with a specific sentence structure.

Examples of starting implication sentences:

●  These results build on existing evidence of…

●  These findings suggest that…

●  These results should be considered when…

●  While previous research has focused on x , these results show that y …

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

You should write your implications after you’ve stated the results of your research. In other words, summarize your findings and put them into context.

The result : One study found that young learners enjoy short activities when learning a foreign language.

The implications : This result suggests that foreign language teachers use short activities when teaching young learners, as they positively affect learning.

 Example 2

The result : One study found that people who listen to calming music just before going to bed sleep better than those who watch TV.

The implications : These findings suggest that listening to calming music aids sleep quality, whereas watching TV does not.

To summarize, remember these key pointers:

●  Implications are the impact of your findings on the field of study.

●  They serve as a reflection of the research you’ve conducted.              

●  They show the specific contributions of your findings and why the audience should care.

●  They can be practical or theoretical.

●  They aren’t the same as recommendations.

●  You write them in the discussion section of the paper.

●  State the results first, and then state their implications.

Are you currently working on a thesis or dissertation? Once you’ve finished your paper (implications included), our proofreading team can help ensure that your spelling, punctuation, and grammar are perfect. Consider submitting a 500-word document for free.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

How to write recommendations for the study in a thesis report?

Typically noted as ‘Conclusion and Recommendations for the study’ in thesis reports, the section dedicated to recommendations for the study is brief and direct. In many thesis reports it is also presented as a standalone section. Recommendations for the study do not explain anything as other sections of the research would do. Instead, the focus here is on highlighting what more can be done in that field of study. It also gives direction to fellow researchers to dive into the discussion in the future.

The main themes of this section are:

• Improvement
• Development

The recommendations for the study section present possible areas of improvement for future studies.

Constituents of the recommendations for the study section

Since this section of the thesis report is most often set along with the conclusion of the study, it is better presented in a brief but direct approach. It is introduced by one direct sentence that separates it from the conclusion of the study. The preceding statements should immediately note the recommendations and why these suggestions are important. It should then explain how such suggestions can be achieved in a future research. While writing the recommendations for the study section, it is important that the suggestions are:

• Measurable,
• Attainable,
• Realistic, and

This section can also be presented in bullet points and focus to cover:

While there is no required specific number of recommendations but 4 recommendations for every 20000 words in a thesis report is a general thumb. Limit the number of words in this section up to 5% of the total word count of your thesis report. This is to set a balance as to what else can be done and the current investigation.

What not to do?

Remember that the recommendations for the study section should not be confused with the conclusion or the summary of the study. It should only focus on the suggestions for future possibilities. Do not present new findings or statistical or experimental data. Do not include theoretical concepts. Start with an introductory statement.

This section enlists the recommendations of the study. The purpose is to offer ideas on how the findings of this study can be implemented in academia to further this field of study. It also offers suggestions on how the challenges of the industry or individuals can be addressed for better outcomes.

Thereafter, split the section into three sub-sections as explained above. After writing the recommendations for each sub-section, close the thesis with ‘ Scope for further research ‘.

It is suggested that direct interviews with individuals who have been diagnosed with PNES be pursued in the future to allow the researchers to closely look into the situation more closely. After accomplishing the interview, a few context suggestions on how to improve the lives of the said individuals ought to be given particular attention.

The above recommendation focuses on improving the idea behind exploring the issue of how Psychological Non-Epileptic Seizures affect the functionality of a person suffering from the condition. This recommendation is for a 1000-word research paper on PNES or Psychological Non-Epileptic Seizures. There is only one specific recommendation which is explained in a few statements- which remains true to the idea behind keeping the recommendations section brief and focused.

• Priya Chetty
• Ruth Serrano Raquel

Priya is the co-founder and Managing Partner of Project Guru, a research and analytics firm based in Gurgaon. She is responsible for the human resource planning and operations functions. Her expertise in analytics has been used in a number of service-based industries like education and financial services.

Her foundational educational is from St. Xaviers High School (Mumbai). She also holds MBA degree in Marketing and Finance from the Indian Institute of Planning and Management, Delhi (2008).

Some of the notable projects she has worked on include:

• Using systems thinking to improve sustainability in operations: A study carried out in Malaysia in partnership with Universiti Kuala Lumpur.
• Assessing customer satisfaction with in-house doctors of Jiva Ayurveda (a project executed for the company)
• Predicting the potential impact of green hydrogen microgirds (A project executed for the Government of South Africa)

She is a key contributor to the in-house research platform Knowledge Tank.

She currently holds over 300 citations  from her contributions to the platform.

She has also been a guest speaker at various institutes such as JIMS (Delhi), BPIT (Delhi), and SVU (Tirupati).

I have been a freelance ghost writer for more than 12 years now. I worked with clients from the US, UK, Canada, Australia and Asia. I have been commissioned to write eBooks, SEO articles for marketing, business analysis and reports, and academic pieces designed to help clients get a better take on their assignments in class. 

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

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

proofreading

Introductions

What this handout is about.

This handout will explain the functions of introductions, offer strategies for creating effective introductions, and provide some examples of less effective introductions to avoid.

The role of introductions

Introductions and conclusions can be the most difficult parts of papers to write. Usually when you sit down to respond to an assignment, you have at least some sense of what you want to say in the body of your paper. You might have chosen a few examples you want to use or have an idea that will help you answer the main question of your assignment; these sections, therefore, may not be as hard to write. And it’s fine to write them first! But in your final draft, these middle parts of the paper can’t just come out of thin air; they need to be introduced and concluded in a way that makes sense to your reader.

Your introduction and conclusion act as bridges that transport your readers from their own lives into the “place” of your analysis. If your readers pick up your paper about education in the autobiography of Frederick Douglass, for example, they need a transition to help them leave behind the world of Chapel Hill, television, e-mail, and The Daily Tar Heel and to help them temporarily enter the world of nineteenth-century American slavery. By providing an introduction that helps your readers make a transition between their own world and the issues you will be writing about, you give your readers the tools they need to get into your topic and care about what you are saying. Similarly, once you’ve hooked your readers with the introduction and offered evidence to prove your thesis, your conclusion can provide a bridge to help your readers make the transition back to their daily lives. (See our handout on conclusions .)

Note that what constitutes a good introduction may vary widely based on the kind of paper you are writing and the academic discipline in which you are writing it. If you are uncertain what kind of introduction is expected, ask your instructor.

Why bother writing a good introduction?

You never get a second chance to make a first impression. The opening paragraph of your paper will provide your readers with their initial impressions of your argument, your writing style, and the overall quality of your work. A vague, disorganized, error-filled, off-the-wall, or boring introduction will probably create a negative impression. On the other hand, a concise, engaging, and well-written introduction will start your readers off thinking highly of you, your analytical skills, your writing, and your paper.

Your introduction is an important road map for the rest of your paper. Your introduction conveys a lot of information to your readers. You can let them know what your topic is, why it is important, and how you plan to proceed with your discussion. In many academic disciplines, your introduction should contain a thesis that will assert your main argument. Your introduction should also give the reader a sense of the kinds of information you will use to make that argument and the general organization of the paragraphs and pages that will follow. After reading your introduction, your readers should not have any major surprises in store when they read the main body of your paper.

Ideally, your introduction will make your readers want to read your paper. The introduction should capture your readers’ interest, making them want to read the rest of your paper. Opening with a compelling story, an interesting question, or a vivid example can get your readers to see why your topic matters and serve as an invitation for them to join you for an engaging intellectual conversation (remember, though, that these strategies may not be suitable for all papers and disciplines).

Strategies for writing an effective introduction

Start by thinking about the question (or questions) you are trying to answer. Your entire essay will be a response to this question, and your introduction is the first step toward that end. Your direct answer to the assigned question will be your thesis, and your thesis will likely be included in your introduction, so it is a good idea to use the question as a jumping off point. Imagine that you are assigned the following question:

Drawing on the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass , discuss the relationship between education and slavery in 19th-century America. Consider the following: How did white control of education reinforce slavery? How did Douglass and other enslaved African Americans view education while they endured slavery? And what role did education play in the acquisition of freedom? Most importantly, consider the degree to which education was or was not a major force for social change with regard to slavery.

You will probably refer back to your assignment extensively as you prepare your complete essay, and the prompt itself can also give you some clues about how to approach the introduction. Notice that it starts with a broad statement and then narrows to focus on specific questions from the book. One strategy might be to use a similar model in your own introduction—start off with a big picture sentence or two and then focus in on the details of your argument about Douglass. Of course, a different approach could also be very successful, but looking at the way the professor set up the question can sometimes give you some ideas for how you might answer it. (See our handout on understanding assignments for additional information on the hidden clues in assignments.)

Decide how general or broad your opening should be. Keep in mind that even a “big picture” opening needs to be clearly related to your topic; an opening sentence that said “Human beings, more than any other creatures on earth, are capable of learning” would be too broad for our sample assignment about slavery and education. If you have ever used Google Maps or similar programs, that experience can provide a helpful way of thinking about how broad your opening should be. Imagine that you’re researching Chapel Hill. If what you want to find out is whether Chapel Hill is at roughly the same latitude as Rome, it might make sense to hit that little “minus” sign on the online map until it has zoomed all the way out and you can see the whole globe. If you’re trying to figure out how to get from Chapel Hill to Wrightsville Beach, it might make more sense to zoom in to the level where you can see most of North Carolina (but not the rest of the world, or even the rest of the United States). And if you are looking for the intersection of Ridge Road and Manning Drive so that you can find the Writing Center’s main office, you may need to zoom all the way in. The question you are asking determines how “broad” your view should be. In the sample assignment above, the questions are probably at the “state” or “city” level of generality. When writing, you need to place your ideas in context—but that context doesn’t generally have to be as big as the whole galaxy!

Try writing your introduction last. You may think that you have to write your introduction first, but that isn’t necessarily true, and it isn’t always the most effective way to craft a good introduction. You may find that you don’t know precisely what you are going to argue at the beginning of the writing process. It is perfectly fine to start out thinking that you want to argue a particular point but wind up arguing something slightly or even dramatically different by the time you’ve written most of the paper. The writing process can be an important way to organize your ideas, think through complicated issues, refine your thoughts, and develop a sophisticated argument. However, an introduction written at the beginning of that discovery process will not necessarily reflect what you wind up with at the end. You will need to revise your paper to make sure that the introduction, all of the evidence, and the conclusion reflect the argument you intend. Sometimes it’s easiest to just write up all of your evidence first and then write the introduction last—that way you can be sure that the introduction will match the body of the paper.

Don’t be afraid to write a tentative introduction first and then change it later. Some people find that they need to write some kind of introduction in order to get the writing process started. That’s fine, but if you are one of those people, be sure to return to your initial introduction later and rewrite if necessary.

Open with something that will draw readers in. Consider these options (remembering that they may not be suitable for all kinds of papers):

• an intriguing example —for example, Douglass writes about a mistress who initially teaches him but then ceases her instruction as she learns more about slavery.
• a provocative quotation that is closely related to your argument —for example, Douglass writes that “education and slavery were incompatible with each other.” (Quotes from famous people, inspirational quotes, etc. may not work well for an academic paper; in this example, the quote is from the author himself.)
• a puzzling scenario —for example, Frederick Douglass says of slaves that “[N]othing has been left undone to cripple their intellects, darken their minds, debase their moral nature, obliterate all traces of their relationship to mankind; and yet how wonderfully they have sustained the mighty load of a most frightful bondage, under which they have been groaning for centuries!” Douglass clearly asserts that slave owners went to great lengths to destroy the mental capacities of slaves, yet his own life story proves that these efforts could be unsuccessful.
• a vivid and perhaps unexpected anecdote —for example, “Learning about slavery in the American history course at Frederick Douglass High School, students studied the work slaves did, the impact of slavery on their families, and the rules that governed their lives. We didn’t discuss education, however, until one student, Mary, raised her hand and asked, ‘But when did they go to school?’ That modern high school students could not conceive of an American childhood devoid of formal education speaks volumes about the centrality of education to American youth today and also suggests the significance of the deprivation of education in past generations.”
• a thought-provoking question —for example, given all of the freedoms that were denied enslaved individuals in the American South, why does Frederick Douglass focus his attentions so squarely on education and literacy?

Pay special attention to your first sentence. Start off on the right foot with your readers by making sure that the first sentence actually says something useful and that it does so in an interesting and polished way.

How to evaluate your introduction draft

Ask a friend to read your introduction and then tell you what they expect the paper will discuss, what kinds of evidence the paper will use, and what the tone of the paper will be. If your friend is able to predict the rest of your paper accurately, you probably have a good introduction.

Five kinds of less effective introductions

1. The placeholder introduction. When you don’t have much to say on a given topic, it is easy to create this kind of introduction. Essentially, this kind of weaker introduction contains several sentences that are vague and don’t really say much. They exist just to take up the “introduction space” in your paper. If you had something more effective to say, you would probably say it, but in the meantime this paragraph is just a place holder.

Example: Slavery was one of the greatest tragedies in American history. There were many different aspects of slavery. Each created different kinds of problems for enslaved people.

2. The restated question introduction. Restating the question can sometimes be an effective strategy, but it can be easy to stop at JUST restating the question instead of offering a more specific, interesting introduction to your paper. The professor or teaching assistant wrote your question and will be reading many essays in response to it—they do not need to read a whole paragraph that simply restates the question.

Example: The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass discusses the relationship between education and slavery in 19th century America, showing how white control of education reinforced slavery and how Douglass and other enslaved African Americans viewed education while they endured. Moreover, the book discusses the role that education played in the acquisition of freedom. Education was a major force for social change with regard to slavery.

3. The Webster’s Dictionary introduction. This introduction begins by giving the dictionary definition of one or more of the words in the assigned question. Anyone can look a word up in the dictionary and copy down what Webster says. If you want to open with a discussion of an important term, it may be far more interesting for you (and your reader) if you develop your own definition of the term in the specific context of your class and assignment. You may also be able to use a definition from one of the sources you’ve been reading for class. Also recognize that the dictionary is also not a particularly authoritative work—it doesn’t take into account the context of your course and doesn’t offer particularly detailed information. If you feel that you must seek out an authority, try to find one that is very relevant and specific. Perhaps a quotation from a source reading might prove better? Dictionary introductions are also ineffective simply because they are so overused. Instructors may see a great many papers that begin in this way, greatly decreasing the dramatic impact that any one of those papers will have.

Example: Webster’s dictionary defines slavery as “the state of being a slave,” as “the practice of owning slaves,” and as “a condition of hard work and subjection.”

4. The “dawn of man” introduction. This kind of introduction generally makes broad, sweeping statements about the relevance of this topic since the beginning of time, throughout the world, etc. It is usually very general (similar to the placeholder introduction) and fails to connect to the thesis. It may employ cliches—the phrases “the dawn of man” and “throughout human history” are examples, and it’s hard to imagine a time when starting with one of these would work. Instructors often find them extremely annoying.

Example: Since the dawn of man, slavery has been a problem in human history.

5. The book report introduction. This introduction is what you had to do for your elementary school book reports. It gives the name and author of the book you are writing about, tells what the book is about, and offers other basic facts about the book. You might resort to this sort of introduction when you are trying to fill space because it’s a familiar, comfortable format. It is ineffective because it offers details that your reader probably already knows and that are irrelevant to the thesis.

Example: Frederick Douglass wrote his autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave , in the 1840s. It was published in 1986 by Penguin Books. In it, he tells the story of his life.

And now for the conclusion…

Writing an effective introduction can be tough. Try playing around with several different options and choose the one that ends up sounding best to you!

Just as your introduction helps readers make the transition to your topic, your conclusion needs to help them return to their daily lives–but with a lasting sense of how what they have just read is useful or meaningful. Check out our handout on  conclusions for tips on ending your paper as effectively as you began it!

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Douglass, Frederick. 1995. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Written by Himself . New York: Dover.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors

Page Contents

• Why Authorship Matters
• Who Is an Author?
• Non-Author Contributors
• Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Assisted Technology

1. Why Authorship Matters

Authorship confers credit and has important academic, social, and financial implications. Authorship also implies responsibility and accountability for published work. The following recommendations are intended to ensure that contributors who have made substantive intellectual contributions to a paper are given credit as authors, but also that contributors credited as authors understand their role in taking responsibility and being accountable for what is published.

Editors should be aware of the practice of excluding local researchers from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) from authorship when data are from LMICs. Inclusion of local authors adds to fairness, context, and implications of the research. Lack of inclusion of local investigators as authors should prompt questioning and may lead to rejection.

Because authorship does not communicate what contributions qualified an individual to be an author, some journals now request and publish information about the contributions of each person named as having participated in a submitted study, at least for original research. Editors are strongly encouraged to develop and implement a contributorship policy. Such policies remove much of the ambiguity surrounding contributions, but leave unresolved the question of the quantity and quality of contribution that qualify an individual for authorship. The ICMJE has thus developed criteria for authorship that can be used by all journals, including those that distinguish authors from other contributors.

2. Who Is an Author?

The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
• Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; AND
• Final approval of the version to be published; AND
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.

All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged—see Section II.A.3 below. These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. The criteria are not intended for use as a means to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion #s 2 or 3. Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.

The individuals who conduct the work are responsible for identifying who meets these criteria and ideally should do so when planning the work, making modifications as appropriate as the work progresses. We encourage collaboration and co-authorship with colleagues in the locations where the research is conducted. It is the collective responsibility of the authors, not the journal to which the work is submitted, to determine that all people named as authors meet all four criteria; it is not the role of journal editors to determine who qualifies or does not qualify for authorship or to arbitrate authorship conflicts. If agreement cannot be reached about who qualifies for authorship, the institution(s) where the work was performed, not the journal editor, should be asked to investigate. The criteria used to determine the order in which authors are listed on the byline may vary, and are to be decided collectively by the author group and not by editors. If authors request removal or addition of an author after manuscript submission or publication, journal editors should seek an explanation and signed statement of agreement for the requested change from all listed authors and from the author to be removed or added.

The corresponding author is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer-review, and publication process. The corresponding author typically ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and disclosures of relationships and activities are properly completed and reported, although these duties may be delegated to one or more co-authors. The corresponding author should be available throughout the submission and peer-review process to respond to editorial queries in a timely way, and should be available after publication to respond to critiques of the work and cooperate with any requests from the journal for data or additional information should questions about the paper arise after publication. Although the corresponding author has primary responsibility for correspondence with the journal, the ICMJE recommends that editors send copies of all correspondence to all listed authors.

When a large multi-author group has conducted the work, the group ideally should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, including approval of the final manuscript, and they should be able to take public responsibility for the work and should have full confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the work of other group authors. They will also be expected as individuals to complete disclosure forms.

Some large multi-author groups designate authorship by a group name, with or without the names of individuals. When submitting a manuscript authored by a group, the corresponding author should specify the group name if one exists, and clearly identify the group members who can take credit and responsibility for the work as authors. The byline of the article identifies who is directly responsible for the manuscript, and MEDLINE lists as authors whichever names appear on the byline. If the byline includes a group name, MEDLINE will list the names of individual group members who are authors or who are collaborators, sometimes called non-author contributors, if there is a note associated with the byline clearly stating that the individual names are elsewhere in the paper and whether those names are authors or collaborators.

3. Non-Author Contributors

Contributors who meet fewer than all 4 of the above criteria for authorship should not be listed as authors, but they should be acknowledged. Examples of activities that alone (without other contributions) do not qualify a contributor for authorship are acquisition of funding; general supervision of a research group or general administrative support; and writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading. Those whose contributions do not justify authorship may be acknowledged individually or together as a group under a single heading (e.g. "Clinical Investigators" or "Participating Investigators"), and their contributions should be specified (e.g., "served as scientific advisors," "critically reviewed the study proposal," "collected data," "provided and cared for study patients," "participated in writing or technical editing of the manuscript").

Because acknowledgment may imply endorsement by acknowledged individuals of a study’s data and conclusions, editors are advised to require that the corresponding author obtain written permission to be acknowledged from all acknowledged individuals.

Use of AI for writing assistance should be reported in the acknowledgment section.

4. Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Assisted Technology

At submission, the journal should require authors to disclose whether they used artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies (such as Large Language Models [LLMs], chatbots, or image creators) in the production of submitted work. Authors who use such technology should describe, in both the cover letter and the submitted work in the appropriate section if applicable, how they used it. For example, if AI was used for writing assistance, describe this in the acknowledgment section (see Section II.A.3). If AI was used for data collection, analysis, or figure generation, authors should describe this use in the methods (see Section IV.A.3.d). Chatbots (such as ChatGPT) should not be listed as authors because they cannot be responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the work, and these responsibilities are required for authorship (see Section II.A.1). Therefore, humans are responsible for any submitted material that included the use of AI-assisted technologies. Authors should carefully review and edit the result because AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. Authors should not list AI and AI-assisted technologies as an author or co-author, nor cite AI as an author. Authors should be able to assert that there is no plagiarism in their paper, including in text and images produced by the AI. Humans must ensure there is appropriate attribution of all quoted material, including full citations.

Next: Disclosure of Financial and Non-Financial Relationships and Activities, and Conflicts of Interest

Keep up-to-date Request to receive an E-mail when the Recommendations are updated.

Subscribe to Changes

• Grades 6-12
• School Leaders

100 Last-Day-of-School Activities Your Students Will Love!

10 Strong Scholarship Recommendation Letter Examples

Help make college more affordable for your students.

Paying for college takes a lot of planning. Tuition costs rise every year and graduates are buckling under the weight of debt from loans. For some, the expense of higher education is prohibitive, with many talented students being forced to cut their dreams short. Scholarships can make getting a degree more affordable. Students qualify based on academic performance, special interests, or financial needs. If you’ve been asked to help with the process, we’ve got you covered! Here’s a list of sample recommendation letters for scholarship applications that best meet your students’ needs.

How To Write Scholarship Recommendation Letters

If you’ve been asked to write a recommendation letter for your student’s scholarship, you might feel overwhelmed. You want to help your student, but you’re worried your letter won’t be good enough. In the end, you can only do your best, so lead with your heart and consider the following suggestions:

• Use letterhead and add your personal information (full name, title, school name, etc.) in the top left corner. 
• Fill the whole page (at least 300 words) with an introduction, two or three paragraphs, and a conclusion. 
• In the first paragraph, introduce your student, specify the scholarship for which they are applying, and share details about the nature and length of your relationship. 
• In the body paragraphs, describe the ways your student is suitable and deserving of the scholarship. 
• In your final section, pull everything together and emphasize your student’s strengths as well as the reasons why you are endorsing them. 

Here’s a quick video on how to craft an effective scholarship recommendation letter:

Don’t feel you can honestly provide a positive recommendation? Gently decline their request for a letter. Avoid putting yourself in a position where you will have to be insincere. You don’t want to write something negative because it could cost the student an opportunity to earn a scholarship. 

Sample Recommendation Letters for Scholarship Applications

1. general scholarship recommendation letter.

This is a great sample scholarship letter if you’re trying to offer a rounded view of a student’s performance in high school. You’ll include information about your experience with them as well as your thoughts on their potential success in a higher-education setting.

2. Sample Rhodes Scholarship letter 

If your student is a candidate for a prestigious award such as the Rhodes Scholarship, this sample scholarship letter will give you an idea of what to share with the selection committee. With these types of recommendation letters, you want to provide as much praise and positive information as possible.

3. Scholarship letter for math students

There are many great scholarship opportunities for strong math students. This sample recommendation letter outlines how to share not only your student’s math talents but the other traits that make them a good candidate as well.

4. Leadership scholarship sample letter

This helpful scholarship recommendation letter offers an example for highlighting leadership skills. Back up your endorsement by sharing specific situations as well as participation in any committees, programs, and events where your student excelled.

5. Scholarship letter for international studies

Does your student plan to go abroad? If so, review this sample for writing a strong letter of recommendation for this specific type of scholarship. Be sure to include evidence as to why you believe your student is well rounded and exceptional. 

6. Environmentalist scholarship letter

Has one of your students decided to pursue a degree in environmental sciences and wildlife? If so, this scholarship recommendation letter is a good example because it concisely highlights their strengths and shares why they would make a good candidate.

7. Scholarship letter for students who need financial assistance

No one should miss out on a college education because they can’t afford to pay. You can help them overcome this barrier! This excellent sample letter of recommendation shows the details to include for scholarships based on financial need. 

8. Scholarship recommendation letter for STEM students

There are many scholarships for students who plan to pursue a career in STEM fields. If you’ve been asked to write a letter of recommendation for this type of scholarship, this sample will give you a good idea of what to include. 

9. Greek society scholarship letter sample

Fraternities and sororities can be a great source of financial support for college and university students. Review this sample recommendation letter for scholarship applications for Greek society candidates.

10. Personal endorsement for scholarships

This sample recommendation letter for a scholarship application is best when you can’t vouch for the prospective student’s academic performance but want to share information about their personal character and how it relates to the scholarship program. 

Do you have a great sample recommendation letter for scholarship applications? Please share it in the comments below!

Plus, check out  the ultimate guide to college scholarships, want more articles like this be sure to subscribe to our newsletters ..

You Might Also Like

Tips for Writing a Genuine and Powerful College Recommendation Letter

Your words can make a big difference. Continue Reading

Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved. 5335 Gate Parkway, Jacksonville, FL 32256

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Welcome to the Purdue Online Writing Lab

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

The Online Writing Lab (the Purdue OWL) at Purdue University houses writing resources and instructional material, and we provide these as a free service at Purdue. Students, members of the community, and users worldwide will find information to assist with many writing projects. Teachers and trainers may use this material for in-class and out-of-class instruction.

The On-Campus and Online versions of Purdue OWL assist clients in their development as writers—no matter what their skill level—with on-campus consultations, online participation, and community engagement. The Purdue OWL serves the Purdue West Lafayette and Indianapolis campuses and coordinates with local literacy initiatives. The Purdue OWL offers global support through online reference materials and services.

Social Media

Facebook twitter.

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

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

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

View all Consumer Alerts

Get Consumer Alerts

Credit, Loans, and Debt

Learn about getting and using credit, borrowing money, and managing debt.

View Credit, Loans, and Debt

Jobs and Making Money

What to know when you're looking for a job or more education, or considering a money-making opportunity or investment.

View Jobs and Making Money

Unwanted Calls, Emails, and Texts

What to do about unwanted calls, emails, and text messages that can be annoying, might be illegal, and are probably scams.

View Unwanted Calls, Emails, and Texts

Identity Theft and Online Security

How to protect your personal information and privacy, stay safe online, and help your kids do the same.

View Identity Theft and Online Security

• Search Show/hide Search menu items Items per page 20 50 100 Filters Fulltext search

What To Know About Identity Theft

Learn what identity theft is, how to protect yourself against it, and how to know if someone stole your identity.

What Is Identity Theft?

How to protect yourself against identity theft, how to know if someone stole your identity, monitoring services, recovery services, and identity theft insurance.

Identity theft is when someone uses your personal or financial information without your permission.

They might steal your name and address, credit card, or bank account numbers, Social Security number, or medical insurance account numbers. And they could use them to

• buy things with your credit cards
• get new credit cards in your name
• open a phone, electricity, or gas account in your name
• steal your tax refund
• use your health insurance to get medical care
• pretend to be you if they are arrested

Taking steps to protect your personal information can help you avoid identity theft. Here’s what you can do to stay ahead of identity thieves.

Protect documents that have personal information

If you get statements with personal information in the mail, take your mail out of the mailbox as soon as you can.

Ask questions before giving out your Social Security number

Some organizations need your Social Security number to identify you. Those organizations include the IRS, your bank, and your employer. Organizations like these that do need your Social Security number won’t call, email, or text you to ask for it.

Other organizations that might ask you for your Social Security number might not really need it. Those organizations include a medical provider, a company, or your child’s school. Ask these questions before you give them your Social Security number:

• Why do you need it?
• How will you protect it?
• Can you use a different identifier?
• Can you use just the last four digits of my Social Security number?

Protect your information from scammers online and on your phone

If you’re logging in to an online account, use a strong password .

Add multi-factor authentication for accounts that offer it. Multi-factor authentication offers extra security by requiring two or more credentials to log in to your account. The additional credentials you need to log in to your account fall into two categories: something you have — like a passcode you get via text message or an authentication app, or something you are — like a scan of your fingerprint, your retina, or your face. Multi-factor authentication makes it harder for scammers to log in to your accounts if they do get your username and password.

Do not give your personal information to someone who calls, emails, or texts you. It could be a scammer trying to steal your information .

Watch  5 Ways To Help Protect Your Identity .

In addition to taking steps to protect your information, it pays to know how to tell if someone stole your identity . There are things you can do yourself to detect identity theft. There also are companies that sell credit and identity monitoring services.

What you can do to detect identity theft

Here’s what you can do to spot identity theft:

• Track what bills you owe and when they’re due. If you stop getting a bill, that could be a sign that someone changed your billing address.
• Review your bills.  Charges for things you didn’t buy could be a sign of identity theft. So could a new bill you didn’t expect.
• Check your bank account statement.  Withdrawals you didn’t make could be a sign of identity theft.
• Get and review your credit reports.  Accounts in your name that you don’t recognize could be a sign of identity theft. Here’s how you can get your free credit reports .

(View or share the  YouTube version of the video. )

If you discover that someone is misusing your personal information, visit IdentityTheft.gov to report and recover from identity theft.

Many companies sell identity theft protection services that may include credit monitoring, identity monitoring, identity recovery services, and identity theft insurance. These services also might be offered by your

• bank or credit union
• credit card provider
• employer’s benefits program
• insurance company

Credit monitoring services

Credit monitoring services scan activity that shows up on your credit reports. They might monitor activity at one, two, or all three of the major credit bureaus — Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion.

Credit monitoring services will usually alert you when

• a company checks your credit history
• a new loan or credit card account appears on your credit reports
• a creditor or debt collector says your payment is late
• public records show that you filed for bankruptcy
• someone files a lawsuit against you
• your credit limit changes
• your personal information, like your name, address, or phone number, changes

Credit monitoring services will not alert you when

• someone withdraws money from your bank account
• someone uses your Social Security number to file a tax return and collect your refund

If you’re considering using a credit monitoring service, here are some questions you can ask them:

• How often do you check credit reports for changes?
• Which of the three credit bureaus do you monitor?
• Is there a limit to how often I can review my credit reports?
• Will I be charged each time I review my credit reports?
• Are other services included, like access to my credit score?

Identity monitoring services

Companies that offer identity monitoring services check databases that collect different types of information to see if they contain new or inaccurate information about you. Those could be a sign that someone is using your personal information. These services can detect uses of your personal information that won’t show up on your credit report.

Identity monitoring services may tell you when your information shows up in

• a change of address request
• court or arrest records
• orders for new utility, cable, or wireless services
• an application for a payday loan
• a request to cash a check
• on social media
• on websites that identity thieves use to trade stolen information

Most identity monitoring services will not alert you if someone uses your information to

• file a tax return and collect your refund
• get Medicare benefits
• get Medicaid benefits
• get welfare benefits
• claim Social Security benefits
• claim unemployment benefits

Identity recovery services

Companies that sell credit and identity monitoring services also may offer identity recovery services to help you fix any damage caused by identity theft. These services may be included or cost extra. Some of the services they offer may be things you can do on your own for little or no cost.

Identity recovery services typically give you access to counselors or case managers who will help you recover your identity. They may

• help you write letters to creditors and debt collectors
• place a freeze on your credit report to prevent an identity thief from opening new accounts in your name
• guide you through documents you have to review

Some services will represent you in dealing with creditors or other institutions if you formally grant them authority to act on your behalf.

Identity theft insurance

Companies that sell monitoring services also may offer identity theft insurance. These services may be included or cost extra.

Identity theft insurance may cover

• the cost of copying documents
• postage costs for sending documents
• costs for getting documents notarized
• wages you lost
• legal fees you paid

Identity theft insurance generally won’t reimburse you for money stolen or financial loss resulting from the theft. Most policies won’t pay if your loss is covered by your homeowner’s or renter’s insurance. If you’re considering getting identity theft insurance, ask about the deductible and find out what’s covered and what isn’t.

Find out how to recognize the signs of medical identity theft , tax identity theft , and child identity theft .

File Download PDF 677a_idt_what_to_know_wtd.pdf (6.09 MB)