a summary of research paper

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Summary – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Research Summary – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Summary

Definition:

A research summary is a brief and concise overview of a research project or study that highlights its key findings, main points, and conclusions. It typically includes a description of the research problem, the research methods used, the results obtained, and the implications or significance of the findings. It is often used as a tool to quickly communicate the main findings of a study to other researchers, stakeholders, or decision-makers.

Structure of Research Summary

The Structure of a Research Summary typically include:

• Introduction : This section provides a brief background of the research problem or question, explains the purpose of the study, and outlines the research objectives.
• Methodology : This section explains the research design, methods, and procedures used to conduct the study. It describes the sample size, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.
• Results : This section presents the main findings of the study, including statistical analysis if applicable. It may include tables, charts, or graphs to visually represent the data.
• Discussion : This section interprets the results and explains their implications. It discusses the significance of the findings, compares them to previous research, and identifies any limitations or future directions for research.
• Conclusion : This section summarizes the main points of the research and provides a conclusion based on the findings. It may also suggest implications for future research or practical applications of the results.
• References : This section lists the sources cited in the research summary, following the appropriate citation style.

How to Write Research Summary

Here are the steps you can follow to write a research summary:

• Read the research article or study thoroughly: To write a summary, you must understand the research article or study you are summarizing. Therefore, read the article or study carefully to understand its purpose, research design, methodology, results, and conclusions.
• Identify the main points : Once you have read the research article or study, identify the main points, key findings, and research question. You can highlight or take notes of the essential points and findings to use as a reference when writing your summary.
• Write the introduction: Start your summary by introducing the research problem, research question, and purpose of the study. Briefly explain why the research is important and its significance.
• Summarize the methodology : In this section, summarize the research design, methods, and procedures used to conduct the study. Explain the sample size, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.
• Present the results: Summarize the main findings of the study. Use tables, charts, or graphs to visually represent the data if necessary.
• Interpret the results: In this section, interpret the results and explain their implications. Discuss the significance of the findings, compare them to previous research, and identify any limitations or future directions for research.
• Conclude the summary : Summarize the main points of the research and provide a conclusion based on the findings. Suggest implications for future research or practical applications of the results.
• Revise and edit : Once you have written the summary, revise and edit it to ensure that it is clear, concise, and free of errors. Make sure that your summary accurately represents the research article or study.
• Add references: Include a list of references cited in the research summary, following the appropriate citation style.

Example of Research Summary

Here is an example of a research summary:

Title: The Effects of Yoga on Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction: This meta-analysis examines the effects of yoga on mental health. The study aimed to investigate whether yoga practice can improve mental health outcomes such as anxiety, depression, stress, and quality of life.

Methodology : The study analyzed data from 14 randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of yoga on mental health outcomes. The sample included a total of 862 participants. The yoga interventions varied in length and frequency, ranging from four to twelve weeks, with sessions lasting from 45 to 90 minutes.

Results : The meta-analysis found that yoga practice significantly improved mental health outcomes. Participants who practiced yoga showed a significant reduction in anxiety and depression symptoms, as well as stress levels. Quality of life also improved in those who practiced yoga.

Discussion : The findings of this study suggest that yoga can be an effective intervention for improving mental health outcomes. The study supports the growing body of evidence that suggests that yoga can have a positive impact on mental health. Limitations of the study include the variability of the yoga interventions, which may affect the generalizability of the findings.

Conclusion : Overall, the findings of this meta-analysis support the use of yoga as an effective intervention for improving mental health outcomes. Further research is needed to determine the optimal length and frequency of yoga interventions for different populations.

References :

• Cramer, H., Lauche, R., Langhorst, J., Dobos, G., & Berger, B. (2013). Yoga for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Depression and anxiety, 30(11), 1068-1083.
• Khalsa, S. B. (2004). Yoga as a therapeutic intervention: a bibliometric analysis of published research studies. Indian journal of physiology and pharmacology, 48(3), 269-285.
• Ross, A., & Thomas, S. (2010). The health benefits of yoga and exercise: a review of comparison studies. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 16(1), 3-12.

Purpose of Research Summary

The purpose of a research summary is to provide a brief overview of a research project or study, including its main points, findings, and conclusions. The summary allows readers to quickly understand the essential aspects of the research without having to read the entire article or study.

Research summaries serve several purposes, including:

• Facilitating comprehension: A research summary allows readers to quickly understand the main points and findings of a research project or study without having to read the entire article or study. This makes it easier for readers to comprehend the research and its significance.
• Communicating research findings: Research summaries are often used to communicate research findings to a wider audience, such as policymakers, practitioners, or the general public. The summary presents the essential aspects of the research in a clear and concise manner, making it easier for non-experts to understand.
• Supporting decision-making: Research summaries can be used to support decision-making processes by providing a summary of the research evidence on a particular topic. This information can be used by policymakers or practitioners to make informed decisions about interventions, programs, or policies.
• Saving time: Research summaries save time for researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders who need to review multiple research studies. Rather than having to read the entire article or study, they can quickly review the summary to determine whether the research is relevant to their needs.

Characteristics of Research Summary

The following are some of the key characteristics of a research summary:

• Concise : A research summary should be brief and to the point, providing a clear and concise overview of the main points of the research.
• Objective : A research summary should be written in an objective tone, presenting the research findings without bias or personal opinion.
• Comprehensive : A research summary should cover all the essential aspects of the research, including the research question, methodology, results, and conclusions.
• Accurate : A research summary should accurately reflect the key findings and conclusions of the research.
• Clear and well-organized: A research summary should be easy to read and understand, with a clear structure and logical flow.
• Relevant : A research summary should focus on the most important and relevant aspects of the research, highlighting the key findings and their implications.
• Audience-specific: A research summary should be tailored to the intended audience, using language and terminology that is appropriate and accessible to the reader.
• Citations : A research summary should include citations to the original research articles or studies, allowing readers to access the full text of the research if desired.

When to write Research Summary

Here are some situations when it may be appropriate to write a research summary:

• Proposal stage: A research summary can be included in a research proposal to provide a brief overview of the research aims, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes.
• Conference presentation: A research summary can be prepared for a conference presentation to summarize the main findings of a study or research project.
• Journal submission: Many academic journals require authors to submit a research summary along with their research article or study. The summary provides a brief overview of the study’s main points, findings, and conclusions and helps readers quickly understand the research.
• Funding application: A research summary can be included in a funding application to provide a brief summary of the research aims, objectives, and expected outcomes.
• Policy brief: A research summary can be prepared as a policy brief to communicate research findings to policymakers or stakeholders in a concise and accessible manner.

Advantages of Research Summary

Research summaries offer several advantages, including:

• Time-saving: A research summary saves time for readers who need to understand the key findings and conclusions of a research project quickly. Rather than reading the entire research article or study, readers can quickly review the summary to determine whether the research is relevant to their needs.
• Clarity and accessibility: A research summary provides a clear and accessible overview of the research project’s main points, making it easier for readers to understand the research without having to be experts in the field.
• Improved comprehension: A research summary helps readers comprehend the research by providing a brief and focused overview of the key findings and conclusions, making it easier to understand the research and its significance.
• Enhanced communication: Research summaries can be used to communicate research findings to a wider audience, such as policymakers, practitioners, or the general public, in a concise and accessible manner.
• Facilitated decision-making: Research summaries can support decision-making processes by providing a summary of the research evidence on a particular topic. Policymakers or practitioners can use this information to make informed decisions about interventions, programs, or policies.
• Increased dissemination: Research summaries can be easily shared and disseminated, allowing research findings to reach a wider audience.

Limitations of Research Summary

Limitations of the Research Summary are as follows:

• Limited scope: Research summaries provide a brief overview of the research project’s main points, findings, and conclusions, which can be limiting. They may not include all the details, nuances, and complexities of the research that readers may need to fully understand the study’s implications.
• Risk of oversimplification: Research summaries can be oversimplified, reducing the complexity of the research and potentially distorting the findings or conclusions.
• Lack of context: Research summaries may not provide sufficient context to fully understand the research findings, such as the research background, methodology, or limitations. This may lead to misunderstandings or misinterpretations of the research.
• Possible bias: Research summaries may be biased if they selectively emphasize certain findings or conclusions over others, potentially distorting the overall picture of the research.
• Format limitations: Research summaries may be constrained by the format or length requirements, making it challenging to fully convey the research’s main points, findings, and conclusions.
• Accessibility: Research summaries may not be accessible to all readers, particularly those with limited literacy skills, visual impairments, or language barriers.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Interpretation – Process, Methods and...

Critical Analysis – Types, Examples and Writing...

Research Methodology – Types, Examples and...

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Appendices – Writing Guide, Types and Examples

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Working with sources
• How to Write a Summary | Guide & Examples

How to Write a Summary | Guide & Examples

Published on November 23, 2020 by Shona McCombes . Revised on May 31, 2023.

Summarizing , or writing a summary, means giving a concise overview of a text’s main points in your own words. A summary is always much shorter than the original text.

There are five key steps that can help you to write a summary:

• Read the text
• Break it down into sections
• Identify the key points in each section
• Write the summary
• Check the summary against the article

Writing a summary does not involve critiquing or evaluating the source . You should simply provide an accurate account of the most important information and ideas (without copying any text from the original).

Table of contents

When to write a summary, step 1: read the text, step 2: break the text down into sections, step 3: identify the key points in each section, step 4: write the summary, step 5: check the summary against the article, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about summarizing.

There are many situations in which you might have to summarize an article or other source:

• As a stand-alone assignment to show you’ve understood the material
• To keep notes that will help you remember what you’ve read
• To give an overview of other researchers’ work in a literature review

When you’re writing an academic text like an essay , research paper , or dissertation , you’ll integrate sources in a variety of ways. You might use a brief quote to support your point, or paraphrase a few sentences or paragraphs.

But it’s often appropriate to summarize a whole article or chapter if it is especially relevant to your own research, or to provide an overview of a source before you analyze or critique it.

In any case, the goal of summarizing is to give your reader a clear understanding of the original source. Follow the five steps outlined below to write a good summary.

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

You should read the article more than once to make sure you’ve thoroughly understood it. It’s often effective to read in three stages:

• Scan the article quickly to get a sense of its topic and overall shape.
• Read the article carefully, highlighting important points and taking notes as you read.
• Skim the article again to confirm you’ve understood the key points, and reread any particularly important or difficult passages.

There are some tricks you can use to identify the key points as you read:

• Start by reading the abstract . This already contains the author’s own summary of their work, and it tells you what to expect from the article.
• Pay attention to headings and subheadings . These should give you a good sense of what each part is about.
• Read the introduction and the conclusion together and compare them: What did the author set out to do, and what was the outcome?

To make the text more manageable and understand its sub-points, break it down into smaller sections.

If the text is a scientific paper that follows a standard empirical structure, it is probably already organized into clearly marked sections, usually including an introduction , methods , results , and discussion .

Other types of articles may not be explicitly divided into sections. But most articles and essays will be structured around a series of sub-points or themes.

Now it’s time go through each section and pick out its most important points. What does your reader need to know to understand the overall argument or conclusion of the article?

Keep in mind that a summary does not involve paraphrasing every single paragraph of the article. Your goal is to extract the essential points, leaving out anything that can be considered background information or supplementary detail.

In a scientific article, there are some easy questions you can ask to identify the key points in each part.

If the article takes a different form, you might have to think more carefully about what points are most important for the reader to understand its argument.

In that case, pay particular attention to the thesis statement —the central claim that the author wants us to accept, which usually appears in the introduction—and the topic sentences that signal the main idea of each paragraph.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Now that you know the key points that the article aims to communicate, you need to put them in your own words.

To avoid plagiarism and show you’ve understood the article, it’s essential to properly paraphrase the author’s ideas. Do not copy and paste parts of the article, not even just a sentence or two.

The best way to do this is to put the article aside and write out your own understanding of the author’s key points.

Examples of article summaries

Let’s take a look at an example. Below, we summarize this article , which scientifically investigates the old saying “an apple a day keeps the doctor away.”

Davis et al. (2015) set out to empirically test the popular saying “an apple a day keeps the doctor away.” Apples are often used to represent a healthy lifestyle, and research has shown their nutritional properties could be beneficial for various aspects of health. The authors’ unique approach is to take the saying literally and ask: do people who eat apples use healthcare services less frequently? If there is indeed such a relationship, they suggest, promoting apple consumption could help reduce healthcare costs.

The study used publicly available cross-sectional data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Participants were categorized as either apple eaters or non-apple eaters based on their self-reported apple consumption in an average 24-hour period. They were also categorized as either avoiding or not avoiding the use of healthcare services in the past year. The data was statistically analyzed to test whether there was an association between apple consumption and several dependent variables: physician visits, hospital stays, use of mental health services, and use of prescription medication.

Although apple eaters were slightly more likely to have avoided physician visits, this relationship was not statistically significant after adjusting for various relevant factors. No association was found between apple consumption and hospital stays or mental health service use. However, apple eaters were found to be slightly more likely to have avoided using prescription medication. Based on these results, the authors conclude that an apple a day does not keep the doctor away, but it may keep the pharmacist away. They suggest that this finding could have implications for reducing healthcare costs, considering the high annual costs of prescription medication and the inexpensiveness of apples.

However, the authors also note several limitations of the study: most importantly, that apple eaters are likely to differ from non-apple eaters in ways that may have confounded the results (for example, apple eaters may be more likely to be health-conscious). To establish any causal relationship between apple consumption and avoidance of medication, they recommend experimental research.

An article summary like the above would be appropriate for a stand-alone summary assignment. However, you’ll often want to give an even more concise summary of an article.

For example, in a literature review or meta analysis you may want to briefly summarize this study as part of a wider discussion of various sources. In this case, we can boil our summary down even further to include only the most relevant information.

Using national survey data, Davis et al. (2015) tested the assertion that “an apple a day keeps the doctor away” and did not find statistically significant evidence to support this hypothesis. While people who consumed apples were slightly less likely to use prescription medications, the study was unable to demonstrate a causal relationship between these variables.

Citing the source you’re summarizing

When including a summary as part of a larger text, it’s essential to properly cite the source you’re summarizing. The exact format depends on your citation style , but it usually includes an in-text citation and a full reference at the end of your paper.

You can easily create your citations and references in APA or MLA using our free citation generators.

APA Citation Generator MLA Citation Generator

Finally, read through the article once more to ensure that:

• You’ve accurately represented the author’s work
• You haven’t missed any essential information
• The phrasing is not too similar to any sentences in the original.

If you’re summarizing many articles as part of your own work, it may be a good idea to use a plagiarism checker to double-check that your text is completely original and properly cited. Just be sure to use one that’s safe and reliable.

If you want to know more about ChatGPT, AI tools , citation , and plagiarism , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• ChatGPT vs human editor
• ChatGPT citations
• Is ChatGPT trustworthy?
• Using ChatGPT for your studies
• What is ChatGPT?
• Chicago style
• Paraphrasing

 Plagiarism

• Types of plagiarism
• Self-plagiarism
• Avoiding plagiarism
• Academic integrity
• Consequences of plagiarism
• Common knowledge

A summary is a short overview of the main points of an article or other source, written entirely in your own words. Want to make your life super easy? Try our free text summarizer today!

A summary is always much shorter than the original text. The length of a summary can range from just a few sentences to several paragraphs; it depends on the length of the article you’re summarizing, and on the purpose of the summary.

You might have to write a summary of a source:

• As a stand-alone assignment to prove you understand the material
• For your own use, to keep notes on your reading
• To provide an overview of other researchers’ work in a literature review
• In a paper , to summarize or introduce a relevant study

To avoid plagiarism when summarizing an article or other source, follow these two rules:

• Write the summary entirely in your own words by paraphrasing the author’s ideas.
• Cite the source with an in-text citation and a full reference so your reader can easily find the original text.

An abstract concisely explains all the key points of an academic text such as a thesis , dissertation or journal article. It should summarize the whole text, not just introduce it.

An abstract is a type of summary , but summaries are also written elsewhere in academic writing . For example, you might summarize a source in a paper , in a literature review , or as a standalone assignment.

All can be done within seconds with our free text summarizer .

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.

McCombes, S. (2023, May 31). How to Write a Summary | Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 16, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/working-with-sources/how-to-summarize/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to paraphrase | step-by-step guide & examples, how to quote | citing quotes in apa, mla & chicago, the basics of in-text citation | apa & mla examples, 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

Cite sources with ease

Research Summary Structure, Samples, Writing Steps, and Useful Suggestions

Updated 24 Jul 2024

What is a Research Summary and Why Is It Important?

A research summary is a type of paper designed to provide a brief overview of a given study - typically, an article from a peer-reviewed academic journal. It is a frequent type of task encountered in US colleges and universities, both in humanitarian and exact sciences, which is due to how important it is to teach students to properly interact with and interpret scientific literature and in particular, academic papers, which are the key way through which new ideas, theories, and evidence are presented to experts in many fields of knowledge. A research summary typically preserves the structure/sections of the article it focuses on. Get the grades you want with our professional research paper helper .

How to Write a Research Summary – Typical Steps

Follow these clear steps to help avoid typical mistakes and productivity bottlenecks, allowing for a more efficient through your writing process:

• Skim the article in order to get a rough idea of the content covered in each section and to understand the relative importance of content, for instance, how important different lines of evidence are (this helps you understand which sections you should focus on more when reading in detail). Make sure you understand the task and your professor's requirements before reading the article. In this step, you can also decide whether to write a summary by yourself or ask for a cheap research paper writing service instead.
• Analyze and understand the topic and article. Writing a summary of a research paper involves becoming very familiar with the topic – sometimes, it is impossible to understand the content without learning about the current state of knowledge, as well as key definitions, concepts, models. This is often performed while reading the literature review. As for the paper itself, understanding it means understanding analysis questions, hypotheses, listed evidence, how strongly this evidence supports the hypotheses, as well as analysis implications. Keep in mind that only a deep understanding allows one to efficiently and accurately summarize the content.
• Make notes as you read. You could highlight or summarize each paragraph with a brief sentence that would record the key idea delivered in it (obviously, some paragraphs deserve more attention than others). However, be careful not to engage in extensive writing while still reading. This is important because, while reading, you might realize that some sections you initially considered important might actually be less important compared to information that follows. As for underlining or highlighting – do these only with the most important evidence, otherwise, there is little use in “coloring” everything without distinction.
• Assemble a draft by bringing together key evidence and notes from each paragraph/ section. Make sure that all elements characteristic of a research summary are covered (as detailed below).
• Find additional literature for forming or supporting your critical view (this is if your critical view/position is required), for instance, judgments about limitations of the study or contradictory evidence.

Read Also:  Criminal Justice Research Topics To Impress Your Teacher

Research Summary Structure

The research summary format resembles that found in the original paper (just a concise version of it). Content from all sections should be covered and reflected upon, regardless of whether corresponding headings are present or not. Key structural elements of any research summary are as follows:

• Title – it announces the exact topic/area of analysis and can even be formulated to briefly announce key finding(s) or argument(s) delivered.
• Abstract – this is a very concise and comprehensive description of the study, present virtually in any academic article (the length varies greatly, typically within 100-500 words). Unlike an academic article, your research summary is expected to have a much shorter abstract.
• Introduction – this is an essential part of any research summary which provides necessary context (the literature review) that helps introduce readers to the subject by presenting the current state of the investigation, an important concept or definition, etc. This section might also describe the subject’s importance (or might not, for instance, when it is self-evident). Finally, an introduction typically lists investigation questions and hypotheses advanced by authors, which are normally mentioned in detail in any research summary (obviously, doing this is only possible after identifying these elements in the original paper).
• Methodology – regardless of its location, this section details experimental methods or data analysis methods used (e.g. types of experiments, surveys, sampling, or statistical analysis). In a research summary, many of these details would have to be omitted; hence, it is important to understand what is most important to mention.
• Results section – this section lists in detail evidence obtained from all experiments with some primary data analysis, conclusions, observations, and primary interpretations being made. It is typically the largest section of any analysis paper, so, it has to be concisely rewritten, which implies understanding which content is worth omitting and worth keeping.
• Discussion – this is where results are being discussed in the context of current knowledge among experts. This section contains interpretations of results, theoretical models explaining the observed results, study strengths and especially limitations, complementary future exploration to be undertaken, conclusions, etc. All these are important elements that need to be conveyed in a summary.
• Conclusion – in the original article, this section could be absent or merged with “Discussion”. Specific research summary instructions might require this to be a standalone section. In a conclusion, hypotheses are revisited and validated or denied, based on how convincing the evidence is (key lines of evidence could be highlighted).
• References – this section is for mentioning those cited works directly in your summary – obviously, one has to provide appropriate citations at least for the original article (this often suffices). Mentioning other works might be relevant when your critical opinion is also required (supported with new unrelated evidence).

Note that if you need some model research summary papers done before you start writing yourself (this will help familiarize you with essay structure and various sections), you could simply recruit our company by following the link provided below.

Need more writing assistance?

Connect with our top writers and receive a research paper sample crafted to your needs.

Research Summary Writing Tips

Below is a checklist of useful research paper tips worth considering when writing research summaries:

• Make sure you are always aware of the bigger picture/ direction. You need to keep in mind a complete and coherent picture of the story delivered by the original article. It might be helpful to reread or scan it quickly to remind yourself of the declared goals, hypotheses, key evidence, and conclusions – this awareness offers a constant sense of direction, which ensures that no written sentence is out of context. It is useful doing this even after you have written a fourth, a third, or half of the paper (to make sure no deviation occurs).
• Consider writing a detailed research outline before writing the draft – it might be of great use when structuring your paper. A research summary template is also very likely to help you structure your paper.
• Sketch the main elements of the conclusion before writing it. Do this for a number of reasons: validate/invalidate hypotheses; enumerate key evidence supporting or invalidating them, list potential implications; mention the subject’s importance; mention study limitations and future directions for research. In order to include them all, it is useful having them written down and handy.
• Consider writing the introduction and discussion last. It makes sense to first list hypotheses, goals, questions, and key results. Latter, information contained in the introduction and discussion can be adapted as needed (for instance, to match a preset word count limit). Also, on the basis of already written paragraphs, you can easily generate your discussion with the help of a conclusion tool ; it works online and is absolutely free of charge. Apart from this, follow a natural order.
• Include visuals – you could summarize a lot of text using graphs or charts while simultaneously improving readability.
• Be very careful not to plagiarize. It is very tempting to “borrow” or quote entire phrases from an article, provided how well-written these are, but you need to summarize your paper without plagiarizing at all (forget entirely about copy-paste – it is only allowed to paraphrase and even this should be done carefully). The best way to stay safe is by formulating your own thoughts from scratch.
• Keep your word count in check. You don’t want your summary to be as long as the original paper (just reformulated). In addition, you might need to respect an imposed word count limit, which requires being careful about how much you write for each section.
• Proofread your work for grammar, spelling, wordiness, and formatting issues (feel free to use our convert case tool for titles, headings, subheadings, etc.).
• Watch your writing style – when summarizing content, it should be impersonal, precise, and purely evidence-based. A personal view/attitude should be provided only in the critical section (if required).
• Ask a colleague to read your summary and test whether he/she could understand everything without reading the article – this will help ensure that you haven’t skipped some important content, explanations, concepts, etc.

For additional information on formatting, structure, and for more writing tips, check out these research paper guidelines on our website. Remember that we cover most research papers writing services you can imagine and can offer help at various stages of your writing project, including proofreading, editing, rewriting for plagiarism elimination, and style adjustment.

Research Summary Example 1

Below are some defining elements of a sample research summary written from an imaginary article.

Title – “The probability of an unexpected volcanic eruption in Yellowstone” Introduction – this section would list those catastrophic consequences hitting our country in  case of a massive eruption and the importance of analyzing this matter. Hypothesis –  An eruption of the Yellowstone supervolcano would be preceded by intense precursory activity manifesting a few weeks up to a few years in advance. Results – these could contain a report of statistical data from multiple volcanic eruptions happening worldwide looking specifically at activity that preceded these events (in particular, how early each type of activity was detected). Discussion and conclusion – Given that Yellowstone is continuously monitored by scientists and that signs of an eruption are normally detected much in advance and at least a few days in advance, the hypothesis is confirmed. This could find application in creating emergency plans detailing an organized evacuation campaign and other response measures.

Research Summary Example 2

Below is another sample sketch, also from an imaginary article.

Title – “The frequency of extreme weather events in US in 2000-2008 as compared to the ‘50s” Introduction – Weather events bring immense material damage and cause human victims. Hypothesis – Extreme weather events are significantly more frequent nowadays than in the ‘50s Results – these could list the frequency of several categories of extreme events now and then: droughts and associated fires, massive rainfall/snowfall and associated floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, arctic cold waves, etc. Discussion and conclusion – Several types of extreme events indeed became significantly more frequent recently, confirming this hypothesis. This increasing frequency correlates reliably with rising CO2 levels in atmosphere and growing temperatures worldwide and in the absence of another recent major global change that could explain a higher frequency of disasters but also knowing how growing temperature disturbs weather patterns, it is natural to assume that global warming (CO2) causes this increase in frequency. This, in turn, suggests that this increased frequency of disasters is not a short-term phenomenon but is here to stay until we address CO2 levels.

Get professional fact-checking and editing!

Ensure accuracy and enhance quality in your papers. Our experts provide thorough fact-checking and editing for just $7/page.

Let Professionals Help With Your Research Summary

Writing a research summary has its challenges, but becoming familiar with its structure (i.e. the structure of an article), understanding well the article that needs to be summarized, and adhering to recommended guidelines will help the process go smoothly.

Simply create your account in a few clicks, place an order by uploading your instructions, and upload or indicate the article requiring a summary and choose a preferred writer for this task (according to experience, rating, bidding price). Our transparent system puts you in control, allowing you to set priorities as you wish (to our knowledge, few competitors have something equivalent in place). Obviously, we can help with many other essay types such as critical thinking essay, argumentative essay, etc. In particular, the research paper definition article on our website highlights a few popular paper types we work with.

Another unique advantage is that we allow and encourage you to communicate directly with your writer (if you wish) guiding his or her work – feel free to request partial drafts, to clarify potential issues you worry about, or even to revise papers as often as needed (for free) until you achieve a satisfactory result. We’ve implemented a system where money is released to writers only after students are fully satisfied with what they get. If you feel like giving it a try, it’s easy and worry-free! Just follow the link below.

ORDER RESEARCH PAPER

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback.

Written by Paul Calderon

As a trained writer and an expert in book publishing and finalization, Paul knows how to engage readers in his text. As an author himself, Paul never misses a chance to write. Writing is his true passion as he explores technology, education, and entertainment among many popular subjects these days. His mentoring experience and skills of creative guidance make his writing accessible, clear, and fun to follow.

Related Blog Posts

What is qualitative research approaches, methods, and examples.

Students in social sciences frequently seek to understand how people feel, think, and behave in specific situations or relationships that evolve ov...

Delimitations in research: meaning, types, and examples

Working on academic papers can make it easy to feel overwhelmed by the huge amount of available data and information. One of the most crucial consi...

Discover how to compose acknowledgements in research paper

This post will help you learn about the use of acknowledgements in research paper and determine how they are composed and why they must be present ...

Join our 150K of happy users

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

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case AskWhy Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Surveys Academic Research

Research Summary: What is it & how to write one

The Research Summary is used to report facts about a study clearly. You will almost certainly be required to prepare a research summary during your academic research or while on a research project for your organization.

If it is the first time you have to write one, the writing requirements may confuse you. The instructors generally assign someone to write a summary of the research work. Research summaries require the writer to have a thorough understanding of the issue.

This article will discuss the definition of a research summary and how to write one.

What is a research summary?

A research summary is a piece of writing that summarizes your research on a specific topic. Its primary goal is to offer the reader a detailed overview of the study with the key findings. A research summary generally contains the article’s structure in which it is written.

You must know the goal of your analysis before you launch a project. A research overview summarizes the detailed response and highlights particular issues raised in it. Writing it might be somewhat troublesome. To write a good overview, you want to start with a structure in mind. Read on for our guide.

Why is an analysis recap so important?

Your summary or analysis is going to tell readers everything about your research project. This is the critical piece that your stakeholders will read to identify your findings and valuable insights. Having a good and concise research summary that presents facts and comes with no research biases is the critical deliverable of any research project.

We’ve put together a cheat sheet to help you write a good research summary below.

Research Summary Guide

• Why was this research done?  – You want to give a clear description of why this research study was done. What hypothesis was being tested?
• Who was surveyed? – The what and why or your research decides who you’re going to interview/survey. Your research summary has a detailed note on who participated in the study and why they were selected. 
• What was the methodology? – Talk about the methodology. Did you do face-to-face interviews? Was it a short or long survey or a focus group setting? Your research methodology is key to the results you’re going to get. 
• What were the key findings? – This can be the most critical part of the process. What did we find out after testing the hypothesis? This section, like all others, should be just facts, facts facts. You’re not sharing how you feel about the findings. Keep it bias-free.
• Conclusion – What are the conclusions that were drawn from the findings. A good example of a conclusion. Surprisingly, most people interviewed did not watch the lunar eclipse in 2022, which is unexpected given that 100% of those interviewed knew about it before it happened.
• Takeaways and action points – This is where you bring in your suggestion. Given the data you now have from the research, what are the takeaways and action points? If you’re a researcher running this research project for your company, you’ll use this part to shed light on your recommended action plans for the business.

LEARN ABOUT:   Action Research

If you’re doing any research, you will write a summary, which will be the most viewed and more important part of the project. So keep a guideline in mind before you start. Focus on the content first and then worry about the length. Use the cheat sheet/checklist in this article to organize your summary, and that’s all you need to write a great research summary!

But once your summary is ready, where is it stored? Most teams have multiple documents in their google drives, and it’s a nightmare to find projects that were done in the past. Your research data should be democratized and easy to use.

We at QuestionPro launched a research repository for research teams, and our clients love it. All your data is in one place, and everything is searchable, including your research summaries! 

Authors: Prachi, Anas

MORE LIKE THIS

Jotform vs SurveyMonkey: Which Is Best in 2024

Aug 15, 2024

360 Degree Feedback Spider Chart is Back!

Aug 14, 2024

Jotform vs Wufoo: Comparison of Features and Prices

Aug 13, 2024

Product or Service: Which is More Important? — Tuesday CX Thoughts

Other categories.

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Tuesday CX Thoughts (TCXT)
• Uncategorized
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

• How it works

Writing a Summary – Explanation & Examples

Published by Alvin Nicolas at October 17th, 2023 , Revised On October 17, 2023

In a world bombarded with vast amounts of information, condensing and presenting data in a digestible format becomes invaluable. Enter summaries. 

A summary is a brief and concise account of the main points of a larger body of work. It distils complex ideas, narratives, or data into a version that is quicker to read and easier to understand yet still retains the essence of the original content.

Importance of Summaries

The importance of summarising extends far beyond just making reading more manageable. In academic settings, summaries aid students in understanding and retaining complex materials, from textbook chapters to research articles. They also serve as tools to showcase one’s grasp of the subject in essays and reports. 

In professional arenas, summaries are pivotal in business reports, executive briefings, and even emails where key points need to be conveyed quickly to decision-makers. Meanwhile, summarising skills come into play in our personal lives when we relay news stories to friends, recap a movie plot, or even scroll through condensed news or app notifications on our smartphones.

Why Do We Write Summaries?

In our modern information age, the sheer volume of content available can be overwhelming. From detailed research papers to comprehensive news articles, the quest for knowledge is often met with lengthy and complex resources. This is where the power of a well-crafted summary comes into play. But what drives us to create or seek out summaries? Let’s discuss.

Makes Important Things Easy to Remember

At the heart of summarisation is the goal to understand. A well-written summary aids in digesting complex material. By distilling larger works into their core points, we reinforce the primary messages, making them easier to remember. This is especially crucial for students who need to retain knowledge for exams or professionals prepping for a meeting based on a lengthy report.

Simplification of Complex Topics

Not everyone is an expert in every field. Often, topics come laden with jargon, intricate details, and nuanced arguments. Summaries act as a bridge, translating this complexity into accessible and straightforward content. This is especially beneficial for individuals new to a topic or those who need just the highlights without the intricacies.

Aid in Researching and Understanding Diverse Sources

Researchers, writers, and academics often wade through many sources when working on a project. This involves finding sources of different types, such as primary or secondary sources , and then understanding their content. Sifting through each source in its entirety can be time-consuming. Summaries offer a streamlined way to understand each source’s main arguments or findings, making synthesising information from diverse materials more efficient.

Condensing Information for Presentation or Sharing

In professional settings, there is often a need to present findings, updates, or recommendations to stakeholders. An executive might not have the time to go through a 50-page report, but they would certainly appreciate a concise summary highlighting the key points. Similarly, in our personal lives, we often summarise movie plots, book stories, or news events when sharing with friends or family.

Characteristics of a Good Summary

Crafting an effective summary is an art. It’s more than just shortening a piece of content; it is about capturing the essence of the original work in a manner that is both accessible and true to its intent. Let’s explore the primary characteristics that distinguish a good summary from a mediocre one:

Conciseness

At the core of a summary is the concept of brevity. But being concise doesn’t mean leaving out vital information. A good summary will:

• Eliminate superfluous details or repetitive points.
• Focus on the primary arguments, events, or findings.
• Use succinct language without compromising the message.

Objectivity

Summarising is not about infusing personal opinions or interpretations. A quality summary will:

• Stick to the facts as presented in the original content.
• Avoid introducing personal biases or perspectives.
• Represent the original author’s intent faithfully.

A summary is meant to simplify and make content accessible. This is only possible if the summary itself is easy to understand. Ensuring clarity involves:

• Avoiding jargon or technical terms unless they are essential to the content. If they are used, they should be clearly defined.
• Structuring sentences in a straightforward manner.
• Making sure ideas are presented in a way that even someone unfamiliar with the topic can grasp the primary points.

A jumble of ideas, no matter how concise, will not make for a good summary. Coherence ensures that there’s a logical flow to the summarised content. A coherent summary will:

• Maintain a logical sequence, often following the structure of the original content.
• Use transition words or phrases to connect ideas and ensure smooth progression.
• Group related ideas together to provide structure and avoid confusion.

Steps of Writing a Summary

The process of creating a compelling summary is not merely about cutting down content. It involves understanding, discerning, and crafting. Here is a step-by-step guide to writing a summary that encapsulates the essence of the original work:

Reading Actively

Engage deeply with the content to ensure a thorough understanding.

• Read the entire document or work first to grasp its overall intent and structure.
• On the second read, underline or highlight the standout points or pivotal moments.
• Make brief notes in the margins or on a separate sheet, capturing the core ideas in your own words.

Identifying the Main Idea

Determine the backbone of the content, around which all other details revolve.

• Ask yourself: “What is the primary message or theme the author wants to convey?”
• This can often be found in the title, introduction, or conclusion of a piece.
• Frame the main idea in a clear and concise statement to guide your summary.

List Key Supporting Points

Understand the pillars that uphold the main idea, providing evidence or depth to the primary message.

• Refer back to the points you underlined or highlighted during your active reading.
• Note major arguments, evidence, or examples that the author uses to back up the main idea.
• Prioritise these points based on their significance to the main idea.

Draft the Summary

Convert your understanding into a condensed, coherent version of the original.

• Start with a statement of the main idea.
• Follow with the key supporting points, maintaining logical order.
• Avoid including trivial details or examples unless they’re crucial to the primary message.
• Use your own words, ensuring you are not plagiarising the original content.

Fine-tune your draft to ensure clarity, accuracy, and brevity.

• Read your draft aloud to check for flow and coherence.
• Ensure that your summary remains objective, avoiding any personal interpretations or biases.
• Check the length. See if any non-essential details can be removed without sacrificing understanding if it is too lengthy.
• Ensure clarity by ensuring the language is straightforward, and the main ideas are easily grasped.

The research done by our experts have:

• Precision and Clarity
• Zero Plagiarism
• Authentic Sources

Dos and Don’ts of Summarising Key Points

Summarising, while seemingly straightforward, comes with its nuances. Properly condensing content demands a balance between brevity and fidelity to the original work. To aid in crafting exemplary summaries, here is a guide on the essential dos and don’ts:

Use your Own Words

This ensures that you have truly understood the content and are not merely parroting it. It also prevents issues of plagiarism.

Tip: After reading the original content, take a moment to reflect on it. Then, without looking at the source, write down the main points in your own words.

Attribute Sources Properly

Giving credit is both ethical and provides context to readers, helping them trace back to the original work if needed. How to cite sources correctly is a skill every writer should master.

Tip: Use signal phrases like “According to [Author/Source]…” or “As [Author/Source] points out…” to seamlessly incorporate attributions.

Ensure Accuracy of the Summarised Content

A summary should be a reliable reflection of the original content. Distorting or misrepresenting the original ideas compromises the integrity of the summary.

Tip: After drafting your summary, cross-check with the original content to ensure all key points are represented accurately and ensure you are referencing credible sources .

Avoid Copy-Pasting Chunks of Original Content

This not only raises plagiarism concerns but also shows a lack of genuine engagement with the material.

Tip: If a particular phrase or sentence from the original is pivotal and cannot be reworded without losing its essence, use block quotes , quotation marks, and attribute the source.

Do not Inject your Personal Opinion

A summary should be an objective reflection of the source material. Introducing personal biases or interpretations can mislead readers.

Tip: Stick to the facts and arguments presented in the original content. If you find yourself writing “I think” or “In my opinion,” reevaluate the sentence.

Do not Omit Crucial Information

While a summary is meant to be concise, it shouldn’t be at the expense of vital details that are essential to understanding the original content’s core message.

Tip: Prioritise information. Always include the main idea and its primary supports. If you are unsure whether a detail is crucial, consider its impact on the overall message.

Examples of Summaries

Here are a few examples that will help you get a clearer view of how to write a summary. 

Example 1: Summary of a News Article

Original Article: The article reports on the recent discovery of a rare species of frog in the Amazon rainforest. The frog, named the “Emerald Whisperer” due to its unique green hue and the soft chirping sounds it makes, was found by a team of researchers from the University of Texas. The discovery is significant as it offers insights into the biodiversity of the region, and the Emerald Whisperer might also play a pivotal role in understanding the ecosystem balance.

Summary: Researchers from the University of Texas have discovered a unique frog, termed the “Emerald Whisperer,” in the Amazon rainforest. This finding sheds light on the region’s biodiversity and underscores the importance of the frog in ecological studies.

Example 2: Summary of a Research Paper

Original Paper: In a study titled “The Impact of Urbanisation on Bee Populations,” researchers conducted a year-long observation on bee colonies in three urban areas and three rural areas. Using specific metrics like colony health, bee productivity, and population size, the study found that urban environments saw a 30% decline in bee populations compared to rural settings. The research attributes this decline to factors like pollution, reduced green spaces, and increased temperatures in urban areas.

Summary: A study analysing the effects of urbanisation on bee colonies found a significant 30% decrease in bee populations in urban settings compared to rural areas. The decline is linked to urban factors such as pollution, diminished greenery, and elevated temperatures.

Example 3: Summary of a Novel

Original Story: In the novel “Winds of Fate,” protagonist Clara is trapped in a timeless city where memories dictate reality. Throughout her journey, she encounters characters from her past, present, and imagined future. Battling her own perceptions and a menacing shadow figure, Clara seeks an elusive gateway to return to her real world. In the climax, she confronts the shadow, which turns out to be her own fear, and upon overcoming it, she finds her way back, realising that reality is subjective.

Summary: “Winds of Fate” follows Clara’s adventures in a surreal city shaped by memories. Confronting figures from various phases of her life and battling a symbolic shadow of her own fear, Clara eventually discovers that reality’s perception is malleable and subjective.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is a summary.

A summary condenses a larger piece of content, capturing its main points and essence.  It is usually one-fourth of the original content.

What is a summary?

A summary is a concise representation of a larger text or content, highlighting its main ideas and points. It distils complex information into a shorter form, allowing readers to quickly grasp the essence of the original material without delving into extensive details. Summaries prioritise clarity, brevity, and accuracy.

When should I write a summary?

Write a summary when you need to condense lengthy content for easier comprehension and recall. It’s useful in academic settings, professional reports, presentations, and research to highlight key points. Summaries aid in comparing multiple sources, preparing for discussions, and sharing essential details of extensive materials efficiently with others.

How can I summarise a source without plagiarising?

To summarise without plagiarising: Read the source thoroughly, understand its main ideas, and then write the summary in your own words. Avoid copying phrases verbatim. Attribute the source properly. Use paraphrasing techniques and cross-check your summary against the original to ensure distinctiveness while retaining accuracy. Always prioritise understanding over direct replication.

What is the difference between a summary and an abstract?

A summary condenses a text, capturing its main points from various content types like books, articles, or movies. An abstract, typically found in research papers and scientific articles, provides a brief overview of the study’s purpose, methodology, results, and conclusions. Both offer concise versions, but abstracts are more structured and specific.

You May Also Like

The ability to effectively incorporate multiple sources into one’s work is not just a skill, but a necessity. Whether we are talking about research papers, articles, or even simple blog posts, synthesising sources can elevate our content to a more nuanced, comprehensive, and insightful level.

From academic research to personal blogs, the bedrock of trust and credibility is often established by one simple act: source citing. Whether we are constructing a thesis for a graduate program or debunking a myth on a personal blog, providing the origins of our information bolsters our arguments and pays homage to the original creators of that knowledge.

A secondary source refers to any material that interprets, analyses, or reviews information originally presented elsewhere. Unlike primary sources, which offer direct evidence or first-hand testimony, secondary sources work on those original materials, offering commentary, critiques, and perspectives.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

How to Write a Research Paper Summary

One of the most important skills you can imbibe as an academician is to know how to summarize a research paper. During your academic journey, you may need to write a summary of findings in research quite often and for varied reasons – be it to write an introduction for a peer-reviewed publication , to submit a critical review, or to simply create a useful database for future referencing.

It can be quite challenging to effectively write a research paper summary for often complex work, which is where a pre-determined workflow can help you optimize the process. Investing time in developing this skill can also help you improve your scientific acumen, increasing your efficiency and productivity at work. This article illustrates some useful advice on how to write a research summary effectively. But, what is research summary in the first place?  

A research paper summary is a crisp, comprehensive overview of a research paper, which encapsulates the purpose, findings, methods, conclusions, and relevance of a study. A well-written research paper summary is an indicator of how well you have understood the author’s work. 

Table of Contents

Draft a research paper summary in minutes with paperpal. click here to start writing.

• 2. Invest enough time to understand the topic deeply 

Use Paperpal to summarize your research paper. Click here to get started!

• Mistakes to avoid while writing your research paper summary 

Let Paperpal do the heavy lifting. Click here to start writing your summary now!

Frequently asked questions (faq), how to write a research paper summary.

Writing a good research paper summary comes with practice and skill. Here is some useful advice on how to write a research paper summary effectively.  

1. Determine the focus of your summary

Before you begin to write a summary of research papers, determine the aim of your research paper summary. This will give you more clarity on how to summarize a research paper, including what to highlight and where to find the information you need, which accelerates the entire process. If you are aiming for the summary to be a supporting document or a proof of principle for your current research findings, then you can look for elements that are relevant to your work.

On the other hand, if your research summary is intended to be a critical review of the research article, you may need to use a completely different lens while reading the paper and conduct your own research regarding the accuracy of the data presented. Then again, if the research summary is intended to be a source of information for future referencing, you will likely have a different approach. This makes determining the focus of your summary a key step in the process of writing an effective research paper summary. 

2. Invest enough time to understand the topic deeply

In order to author an effective research paper summary, you need to dive into the topic of the research article. Begin by doing a quick scan for relevant information under each section of the paper. The abstract is a great starting point as it helps you to quickly identify the top highlights of the research article, speeding up the process of understanding the key findings in the paper. Be sure to do a careful read of the research paper, preparing notes that describe each section in your own words to put together a summary of research example or a first draft. This will save your time and energy in revisiting the paper to confirm relevant details and ease the entire process of writing a research paper summary.

When reading papers, be sure to acknowledge and ignore any pre-conceived notions that you might have regarding the research topic. This will not only help you understand the topic better but will also help you develop a more balanced perspective, ensuring that your research paper summary is devoid of any personal opinions or biases. 

3. Keep the summary crisp, brief and engaging

A research paper summary is usually intended to highlight and explain the key points of any study, saving the time required to read through the entire article. Thus, your primary goal while compiling the summary should be to keep it as brief, crisp and readable as possible. Usually, a short introduction followed by 1-2 paragraphs is adequate for an effective research article summary. Avoid going into too much technical detail while describing the main results and conclusions of the study. Rather focus on connecting the main findings of the study to the hypothesis , which can make the summary more engaging. For example, instead of simply reporting an original finding – “the graph showed a decrease in the mortality rates…”, you can say, “there was a decline in the number of deaths, as predicted by the authors while beginning the study…” or “there was a decline in the number of deaths, which came as a surprise to the authors as this was completely unexpected…”.

Unless you are writing a critical review of the research article, the language used in your research paper summaries should revolve around reporting the findings, not assessing them. On the other hand, if you intend to submit your summary as a critical review, make sure to provide sufficient external evidence to support your final analysis. Invest sufficient time in editing and proofreading your research paper summary thoroughly to ensure you’ve captured the findings accurately. You can also get an external opinion on the preliminary draft of the research paper summary from colleagues or peers who have not worked on the research topic. 

Mistakes to avoid while writing your research paper summary

Now that you’ve understood how to summarize a research paper, watch out for these red flags while writing your summary. 

• Not paying attention to the word limit and recommended format, especially while submitting a critical review 
• Evaluating the findings instead of maintaining an objective , unbiased view while reading the research paper 
• Skipping the essential editing step , which can help eliminate avoidable errors and ensure that the language does not misrepresent the findings 
• Plagiarism, it is critical to write in your own words or paraphrase appropriately when reporting the findings in your scientific article summary 

We hope the recommendations listed above will help answer the question of how to summarize a research paper and enable you to tackle the process effectively. 

Summarize your research paper with Paperpal

Paperpal, an AI academic writing assistant, is designed to support academics at every step of the academic writing process. Built on over two decades of experience helping researchers get published and trained on millions of published research articles, Paperpal offers human precision at machine speed. Paperpal Copilot, with advanced generative AI features, can help academics achieve 2x the writing in half the time, while transforming how they research and write.

How to summarize a research paper with Paperpal?

To generate your research paper summary, simply login to the platform and use the Paperpal Copilot Summary feature to create a flawless summary of your work. Here’s a step-by-step process to help you craft a summary in minutes:

• Paste relevant research articles to be summarized into Paperpal; the AI will scan each section and extract key information.
• In minutes, Paperpal will generate a comprehensive summary that showcases the main paper highlights while adhering to academic writing conventions.
• Check the content to polish and refine the language, ensure your own voice, and add citations or references as needed.

The abstract and research paper summary serve similar purposes but differ in scope, length, and placement. The abstract is a concise yet detailed overview of the research, placed at the beginning of a paper, with the aim of providing readers with a quick understanding of the paper’s content and to help them decide whether to read the full article. Usually limited to a few hundred words, it highlights the main objectives, methods, results, and conclusions of the study. On the other hand, a research paper summary provides a crisp account of the entire research paper. Its purpose is to provide a brief recap for readers who may want to quickly grasp the main points of the research without reading the entire paper in detail.

The structure of a research summary can vary depending on the specific requirements or guidelines provided by the target publication or institution. A typical research summary includes the following key sections: introduction (including the research question or objective), methodology (briefly describing the research design and methods), results (summarizing the key findings), discussion (highlighting the implications and significance of the findings), and conclusion (providing a summary of the main points and potential future directions).

The summary of a research paper is important because it provides a condensed overview of the study’s purpose, methods, results, and conclusions. It allows you to quickly grasp the main points and relevance of the research without having to read the entire paper. Research summaries can also be an invaluable way to communicate research findings to a broader audience, such as policymakers or the general public.

  When writing a research paper summary, it is crucial to avoid plagiarism by properly attributing the original authors’ work. To learn how to summarize a research paper while avoiding plagiarism, follow these critical guidelines: (1) Read the paper thoroughly to understand the main points and key findings. (2) Use your own words and sentence structures to restate the information, ensuring that the research paper summary reflects your understanding of the paper. (3) Clearly indicate when you are paraphrasing or quoting directly from the original paper by using appropriate citation styles. (4) Cite the original source for any specific ideas, concepts, or data that you include in your summary. (5) Review your summary to ensure it accurately represents the research paper while giving credit to the original authors.

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• 5 Reasons for Rejection After Peer Review
• Ethical Research Practices For Research with Human Subjects
• How to Write a Conclusion for Research Papers (with Examples)
• Publish or Perish – Understanding the Importance of Scholarly Publications in Academia

PhD Dissertation Outline: Creating a Roadmap to Success

How ai can improve the academic writing experience, you may also like, how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write an abstract in research papers..., how to write dissertation acknowledgements, how to write a high-quality conference paper, measuring academic success: definition & strategies for excellence, is it ethical to use ai-generated abstracts without..., what are journal guidelines on using generative ai..., should you use ai tools like chatgpt for..., 9 steps to publish a research paper, how to make translating academic papers less challenging.

Have a thesis expert improve your writing

Check your thesis for plagiarism in 10 minutes, generate your apa citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Working with sources
• How to Write a Summary | Guide & Examples

How to Write a Summary | Guide & Examples

Published on 25 September 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 12 May 2023.

Summarising , or writing a summary, means giving a concise overview of a text’s main points in your own words. A summary is always much shorter than the original text.

There are five key steps that can help you to write a summary:

• Read the text
• Break it down into sections
• Identify the key points in each section
• Write the summary
• Check the summary against the article

Writing a summary does not involve critiquing or analysing the source. You should simply provide an accurate account of the most important information and ideas (without copying any text from the original).

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

When to write a summary, step 1: read the text, step 2: break the text down into sections, step 3: identify the key points in each section, step 4: write the summary, step 5: check the summary against the article, frequently asked questions.

There are many situations in which you might have to summarise an article or other source:

• As a stand-alone assignment to show you’ve understood the material
• To keep notes that will help you remember what you’ve read
• To give an overview of other researchers’ work in a literature review

When you’re writing an academic text like an essay , research paper , or dissertation , you’ll integrate sources in a variety of ways. You might use a brief quote to support your point, or paraphrase a few sentences or paragraphs.

But it’s often appropriate to summarize a whole article or chapter if it is especially relevant to your own research, or to provide an overview of a source before you analyse or critique it.

In any case, the goal of summarising is to give your reader a clear understanding of the original source. Follow the five steps outlined below to write a good summary.

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

You should read the article more than once to make sure you’ve thoroughly understood it. It’s often effective to read in three stages:

• Scan the article quickly to get a sense of its topic and overall shape.
• Read the article carefully, highlighting important points and taking notes as you read.
• Skim the article again to confirm you’ve understood the key points, and reread any particularly important or difficult passages.

There are some tricks you can use to identify the key points as you read:

• Start by reading the abstract . This already contains the author’s own summary of their work, and it tells you what to expect from the article.
• Pay attention to headings and subheadings . These should give you a good sense of what each part is about.
• Read the introduction and the conclusion together and compare them: What did the author set out to do, and what was the outcome?

To make the text more manageable and understand its sub-points, break it down into smaller sections.

If the text is a scientific paper that follows a standard empirical structure, it is probably already organised into clearly marked sections, usually including an introduction, methods, results, and discussion.

Other types of articles may not be explicitly divided into sections. But most articles and essays will be structured around a series of sub-points or themes.

Now it’s time go through each section and pick out its most important points. What does your reader need to know to understand the overall argument or conclusion of the article?

Keep in mind that a summary does not involve paraphrasing every single paragraph of the article. Your goal is to extract the essential points, leaving out anything that can be considered background information or supplementary detail.

In a scientific article, there are some easy questions you can ask to identify the key points in each part.

If the article takes a different form, you might have to think more carefully about what points are most important for the reader to understand its argument.

In that case, pay particular attention to the thesis statement —the central claim that the author wants us to accept, which usually appears in the introduction—and the topic sentences that signal the main idea of each paragraph.

Now that you know the key points that the article aims to communicate, you need to put them in your own words.

To avoid plagiarism and show you’ve understood the article, it’s essential to properly paraphrase the author’s ideas. Do not copy and paste parts of the article, not even just a sentence or two.

The best way to do this is to put the article aside and write out your own understanding of the author’s key points.

Examples of article summaries

Let’s take a look at an example. Below, we summarise this article , which scientifically investigates the old saying ‘an apple a day keeps the doctor away’.

An article summary like the above would be appropriate for a stand-alone summary assignment. However, you’ll often want to give an even more concise summary of an article.

For example, in a literature review or research paper, you may want to briefly summarize this study as part of a wider discussion of various sources. In this case, we can boil our summary down even further to include only the most relevant information.

Citing the source you’re summarizing

When including a summary as part of a larger text, it’s essential to properly cite the source you’re summarizing. The exact format depends on your citation style , but it usually includes an in-text citation and a full reference at the end of your paper.

You can easily create your citations and references in APA or MLA using our free citation generators.

APA Citation Generator MLA Citation Generator

Finally, read through the article once more to ensure that:

• You’ve accurately represented the author’s work
• You haven’t missed any essential information
• The phrasing is not too similar to any sentences in the original.

If you’re summarising many articles as part of your own work, it may be a good idea to use a plagiarism checker to double-check that your text is completely original and properly cited. Just be sure to use one that’s safe and reliable.

A summary is a short overview of the main points of an article or other source, written entirely in your own words.

Save yourself some time with the free summariser.

A summary is always much shorter than the original text. The length of a summary can range from just a few sentences to several paragraphs; it depends on the length of the article you’re summarising, and on the purpose of the summary.

With the summariser tool you can easily adjust the length of your summary.

You might have to write a summary of a source:

• As a stand-alone assignment to prove you understand the material
• For your own use, to keep notes on your reading
• To provide an overview of other researchers’ work in a literature review
• In a paper , to summarise or introduce a relevant study

To avoid plagiarism when summarising an article or other source, follow these two rules:

• Write the summary entirely in your own words by   paraphrasing the author’s ideas.
• Reference the source with an in-text citation and a full reference so your reader can easily find the original text.

An abstract concisely explains all the key points of an academic text such as a thesis , dissertation or journal article. It should summarise the whole text, not just introduce it.

An abstract is a type of summary , but summaries are also written elsewhere in academic writing . For example, you might summarise a source in a paper , in a literature review , or as a standalone assignment.

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, May 12). How to Write a Summary | Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 12 August 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/working-sources/how-to-write-a-summary/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to paraphrase | step-by-step guide & examples, how to quote | citing quotes in harvard & apa, apa referencing (7th ed.) quick guide | in-text citations & references.

• Research Summary: What Is It & How To Write One

Introduction

A research summary is a requirement during academic research and sometimes you might need to prepare a research summary during a research project for an organization.

Most people find a research summary a daunting task as you are required to condense complex research material into an informative, easy-to-understand article most times with a minimum of 300-500 words.

In this post, we will guide you through all the steps required to make writing your research summary an easier task. 

What is a Research Summary?

A research summary is a piece of writing that summarizes the research of a specific topic into bite-size easy-to-read and comprehend articles. The primary goal is to give the reader a detailed outline of the key findings of a research.

It is an unavoidable requirement in colleges and universities. To write a good research summary, you must understand the goal of your research, as this would help make the process easier. 

A research summary preserves the structure and sections of the article it is derived from.

Research Summary or Abstract: What’s The Difference?

The Research Summary and Abstract are similar, especially as they are both brief, straight to the point, and provide an overview of the entire research paper. However, there are very clear differences.

To begin with, a Research summary is written at the end of a research activity, while the Abstract is written at the beginning of a research paper. 

A Research Summary captures the main points of a study, with an emphasis on the topic, method , and discoveries, an Abstract is a description of what your research paper would talk about and the reason for your research or the hypothesis you are trying to validate.

Let us take a deeper look at the difference between both terms.

What is an Abstract?

An abstract is a short version of a research paper. It is written to convey the findings of the research to the reader. It provides the reader with information that would help them understand the research, by giving them a clear idea about the subject matter of a research paper. It is usually submitted before the presentation of a research paper.

What is a Summary?

A summary is a short form of an essay, a research paper, or a chapter in a book. A research summary is a narration of a research study, condensing the focal points of research to a shorter form, usually aligned with the same structure of the research study, from which the summary is derived.

What Is The Difference Between an Abstract and a Summary?

An abstract communicates the main points of a research paper, it includes the questions, major findings, the importance of the findings, etc.

An abstract reflects the perceptions of the author about a topic, while a research summary reflects the ideology of the research study that is being summarized.

Getting Started with a Research Summary

Before commencing a research summary, there is a need to understand the style and organization of the content you plan to summarize. There are three fundamental areas of the research that should be the focal point:

• When deciding on the content include a section that speaks to the importance of the research, and the techniques and tools used to arrive at your conclusion.
• Keep the summary well organized, and use paragraphs to discuss the various sections of the research.
• Restrict your research to 300-400 words which is the standard practice for research summaries globally. However, if the research paper you want to summarize is a lengthy one, do not exceed 10% of the entire research material.

Once you have satisfied the requirements of the fundamentals for starting your research summary, you can now begin to write using the following format:

• Why was this research done?   – A clear description of the reason the research was embarked on and the hypothesis being tested.
• Who was surveyed? – Your research study should have details of the source of your information. If it was via a survey, you should document who the participants of the survey were and the reason that they were selected.
• What was the methodology? – Discuss the methodology, in terms of what kind of survey method did you adopt. Was it a face-to-face interview, a phone interview, or a focus group setting?
• What were the key findings? – This is perhaps the most vital part of the process. What discoveries did you make after the testing? This part should be based on raw facts free from any personal bias.
• Conclusion – What conclusions did you draw from the findings?
• Takeaways and action points – This is where your views and perception can be reflected. Here, you can now share your recommendations or action points.
• Identify the focal point of the article –  In other to get a grasp of the content covered in the research paper, you can skim the article first, in a bid to understand the most essential part of the research paper. 
• Analyze and understand the topic and article – Writing a summary of a research paper involves being familiar with the topic –  the current state of knowledge, key definitions, concepts, and models. This is often gleaned while reading the literature review. Please note that only a deep understanding ensures efficient and accurate summarization of the content.
• Make notes as you read – Highlight and summarize each paragraph as you read. Your notes are what you would further condense to create a draft that would form your research summary.

How to Structure Your Research Summary

• Title – This highlights the area of analysis, and can be formulated to briefly highlight key findings.
• Abstract – this is a very brief and comprehensive description of the study, required in every academic article, with a length of 100-500 words at most. 
• Introduction – this is a vital part of any research summary, it provides the context and the literature review that gently introduces readers to the subject matter. The introduction usually covers definitions, questions, and hypotheses of the research study. 
• Methodology –This section emphasizes the process and or data analysis methods used, in terms of experiments, surveys, sampling, or statistical analysis. 
• Results section – this section lists in detail the results derived from the research with evidence obtained from all the experiments conducted.
• Discussion – these parts discuss the results within the context of current knowledge among subject matter experts. Interpretation of results and theoretical models explaining the observed results, the strengths of the study, and the limitations experienced are going to be a part of the discussion. 
• Conclusion – In a conclusion, hypotheses are discussed and revalidated or denied, based on how convincing the evidence is.
• References – this section is for giving credit to those who work you studied to create your summary. You do this by providing appropriate citations as you write.

Research Summary Example 1

Below are some defining elements of a sample research summary.

Title – “The probability of an unexpected volcanic eruption in Greenwich”

Introduction – this section would list the catastrophic consequences that occurred in the country and the importance of analyzing this event. 

Hypothesis –  An eruption of the Greenwich supervolcano would be preceded by intense preliminary activity manifesting in advance, before the eruption.

Results – these could contain a report of statistical data from various volcanic eruptions happening globally while looking critically at the activity that occurred before these events. 

Discussion and conclusion – Given that Greenwich is now consistently monitored by scientists and that signs of an eruption are usually detected before the volcanic eruption, this confirms the hypothesis. Hence creating an emergency plan outlining other intervention measures and ultimately evacuation is essential. 

Research Summary Example 2

Below is another sample sketch.

Title – “The frequency of extreme weather events in the UK in 2000-2008 as compared to the ‘60s”

Introduction – Weather events bring intense material damage and cause pain to the victims affected.

Hypothesis – Extreme weather events are more frequent in recent times compared to the ‘50s

Results – The frequency of several categories of extreme events now and then are listed here, such as droughts, fires, massive rainfall/snowfalls, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, etc.

Discussion and conclusion – Several types of extreme events have become more commonplace in recent times, confirming the hypothesis. This rise in extreme weather events can be traced to rising CO2 levels and increasing temperatures and global warming explain the rising frequency of these disasters. Addressing the rising CO2 levels and paying attention to climate change is the only to combat this phenomenon.

A research summary is the short form of a research paper, analyzing the important aspect of the study. Everyone who reads a research summary has a full grasp of the main idea being discussed in the original research paper. Conducting any research means you will write a summary, which is an important part of your project and would be the most read part of your project.

Having a guideline before you start helps, this would form your checklist which would guide your actions as you write your research summary. It is important to note that a Research Summary is different from an Abstract paper written at the beginning of a research paper, describing the idea behind a research paper.

Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free!

• abstract in research papers
• abstract writing
• action research
• research summary
• research summary vs abstract
• research surveys
• Angela Kayode-Sanni

You may also like:

Research Questions: Definitions, Types + [Examples]

A comprehensive guide on the definition of research questions, types, importance, good and bad research question examples

Action Research: What it is, Stages & Examples

Introduction Action research is an evidence-based approach that has been used for years in the field of education and social sciences....

The McNamara Fallacy: How Researchers Can Detect and to Avoid it.

Introduction The McNamara Fallacy is a common problem in research. It happens when researchers take a single piece of data as evidence...

How to Write An Abstract For Research Papers: Tips & Examples

In this article, we will share some tips for writing an effective abstract, plus samples you can learn from.

Formplus - For Seamless Data Collection

Collect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today..

• EXPLORE Random Article
• Happiness Hub

How to Write a Summary of a Research Paper

Last Updated: July 10, 2020 References

This article was reviewed by Annaliese Dunne and by wikiHow staff writer, Hannah Madden . Annaliese Dunne is a Middle School English Teacher. With over 10 years of teaching experience, her areas of expertise include writing and grammar instruction, as well as teaching reading comprehension. She is also an experienced freelance writer. She received her Bachelor's degree in English. This article has been viewed 28,701 times.

Writing a summary of an academic research paper is an important skill, and it shows that you understand all of the relevant information presented to you. However, writing a summary can be tough, since it requires you to be completely objective and keep any analysis or criticisms to yourself. By keeping your goal in mind as you read the paper and focusing on the key points, you can write a succinct, accurate summary of a research paper to prove that you understood the overall conclusion.

Reading the Research Paper

• For instance, if you’re supporting an argument in your own research paper, focus on the elements that are similar to yours.
• Or, if you’re comparing and contrasting methodology, focus on the methods and the significance of the results.

• You can also read the abstract of the paper as a good example of what the authors find to be important in their article.

• Depending on how long and dense the paper is, your initial reading could take you up to an hour or more.

• The important information will usually be toward the end of the paper as the authors explain their findings and conclusions.

• Writing a summary without plagiarizing, or copying the paper, is really important. Writing notes in your own words will help you get into the mindset of relaying information in your own way.

Including Relevant Information

• For example, “The methods used in this paper are not up to standards and require more testing to be conclusive.” is an analysis.
• ”The methods used in this paper include an in-depth survey and interview session with each candidate.” is a summary.

• If you’re writing a summary for class, your professor may specify how long your summary should be.
• Some summaries can even be as short as one sentence.

• ”Environmental conditions in North Carolina pose a threat to frogs and toads.”

• For example: “According to the climate model, frog and toad populations have been decreasing at a rapid rate over the past 10 years, and are on track to decrease even further in the coming years.”

• For example: “Smith and Herman (2008) argue that by decreasing greenhouse gases, frog and toad populations could reach historical levels within 20 years, and the climate model projections support that statement.”
• You can add in the authors and year of publication at any time during your summary.

• If you have time, try reading your summary to someone who hasn’t read the original paper and see if they understand the key points of the article.

Expert Q&A

• Make sure you fully understand the paper before you start writing the summary. Thanks Helpful 2 Not Helpful 0
• Plagiarism can have serious consequences in the academic world, so make sure you’re writing your summary in your own words. [12] X Research source Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://writingcenter.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/593/2014/06/How_to_Summarize_a_Research_Article1.pdf
• ↑ https://www.ufv.ca/media/assets/academic-success-centre/handouts/Summarizing-a-Scholarly-Journal-Article-rev2018.pdf
• ↑ https://integrity.mit.edu/handbook/academic-writing/summarizing
• ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/summary-using-it-wisely/
• ↑ https://davidson.libguides.com/c.php?g=349327&p=2361763

About this article

Reader Success Stories

Mark Jimenez

Oct 18, 2022

Did this article help you?

• About wikiHow
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

How to Write a Research Paper Summary [Infographic]

Whether you’re a seasoned academic or a budding scholar, summarizing your research findings concisely and effectively is a vital skill to acquire. In the fast-paced world of academia, a well-crafted research paper summary can do wonders, helping the reader capture the essence of your study and giving them an opportunity to delve deeper into your research paper. Creating an effective research paper summary requires finesse, precision, and the art of distilling complex information into bite-sized pieces of knowledge.

Here’s an infographic explaining the 3 key things you must keep in mind as you write a research paper summary.

Paperpal is an AI academic writing assistant that can help researchers deliver perfectly composed, error-free text. With comprehensive language corrections, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, academic translation and rewrites, Paperpal helps you enhance your writing and move ever closer to publishing success. Try Paperpal on Word and Web for free or unlock unlimited access to premium features when you get Paperpal Prime for just $12/month . If you want more, we recommend buying a Researcher.Life All Access Pack, which gives you full access to Paperpal Prime and more!

Researcher.Life is a subscription-based platform that unifies top AI tools and services designed to speed up, simplify, and streamline a researcher’s journey, from reading to writing, submission, promotion and more. Based on over 20 years of experience in academia, Researcher.Life empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success.   

Try for free or sign up for the Researcher.Life All Access Pack , a one-of-a-kind subscription that unlocks full access to an AI academic writing assistant, literature reading app, journal finder, scientific illustration tool, and exclusive discounts on professional services from Editage. Find the best AI tools a researcher needs, all in one place – Get All Access now at just $25 a month or $199 for a year!  

Related Posts

What are the Best Research Funding Sources

Inductive vs. Deductive Research Approach

Six elements a research summary should include

Summarizing a research paper (or papers) sounds like it should be a pretty quick, easy task. After all, how hard can writing 200 words be?! But whether you’re writing a summary to include in your essay or dissertation, or you need to draft a compelling abstract for your own paper, distilling complex research into an informative, easy-to-read snapshot can be one of the most daunting parts of the research process. For that reason, it’s often the activity that gets left to last.

Having a few questions top of mind while you draft your summary can really help to structure your thoughts and make sure you include the most important aspects of the research. In short, every academic summary should cover ‘the why’, ‘the how’, ‘the who’ and ‘the what’ of a study. Asking yourself the following six questions as you start to think about your summary can help you to structure your thoughts and find the right words.

1.  Why is this study necessary and important?

The ‘why’ can often be found in the first sentence of the introduction or background of a research article. Let’s have a look at a 2014 paper about plastic pollution in the world’s oceans (1) :

" Plastic pollution is globally distributed across all oceans due to its properties of buoyancy and durability, and the sorption of toxicants to plastic while traveling through the environment have led some researchers to claim that synthetic polymers in the ocean should be regarded as hazardous waste."

Another quick way of identifying the ‘why’ of the research is to search for the subject of the study (eg. ‘Plastic pollution in the world’s oceans’) in Wikipedia. This can help inject wider significance into your research summary, for example:

"Waterborne plastic poses a serious threat to fish , seabirds , marine reptiles , and marine mammals , as well as to boats and coasts."

The Abstract of this paper also points to a gap in the research – the lack of data on the amount of plastic waste in the Southern Hemisphere.

2.    Who were the participants?

It’s good practice to include statistical information about the study subjects or participants in your summary. This will quickly tell your reader how well the key findings are backed up. This part of the summary can combine a short narrative description of the participants (eg. age, location etc); what was ‘done’ to the participants as part of the study; what impact the study had on the participants and a brief description of the control group.

3.    What were the methods used?

How was the study carried out? What kind of materials were used to conduct the study and in what quantities or doses? Again, where possible include statistics here: number of materials; sample sizes; metrics (weight, volume, concentration etc). Here’s an example summary of a methods section from the above paper on ocean plastic:

"Net tows were conducted using neuston nets with a standard mesh size of 0.33 mm towed between 0.5 and 2 m s −1 at the sea surface for 15–60 minutes outside of the vessel’s wake to avoid downwelling of debris. Samples were preserved in 5% formalin.Microplastic was manually separated from natural debris, sorted through stacked Tyler sieves into three size classes counted individually and weighed together."

Including information about the consistency of methods or techniques used will help underline the credibility of the research.

4.    What were the key findings of the study?

Stick to the high level, headline finding of the research here. What do the quantitative results of the study reveal that was previously unknown? Again, including statistics where you can will help reinforce the findings, but remember to keep it brief. Here’s an example from the same plastic pollution paper:

"Based on the model results, the authors estimate that at least 5.25 trillion plastic particles weighing 268,940 tons are currently floating at sea."

5.    What conclusion was drawn from the research?

At this stage,  try to focus on the overall outcome of the research, but also what makes the study both significant and novel. What was uncovered as part of the research that wasn’t previously known? Do the results of the study tell us something different to what was previously known or assumed?In the plastic pollution paper, what was previously unknown was an estimate of the amount of plastic in the oceans of the Southern Hemisphere. The authors explain that their results confirm the same pattern of dispersal in the Southern Hemisphere as for the Northern Hemisphere:

"Surprisingly, the total amounts of plastics determined for the southern hemisphere oceans are within the same range as for the northern hemisphere oceans, which is unexpected given that inputs are substantially higher in the northern than in the southern hemisphere ."

6.    What kind of relevance does the research have for the wider world? (the big why)

Rounding off your summary with a powerful statement that shows how the outcome of the research has a wider significance is good practice. The ‘big why’ can often be found in the Discussion or at the end of the Conclusion of a research article, and often in the Abstract as well.Including clear, concise research summaries in your essay or dissertation can be very beneficial in strengthening your argument and demonstrating your understanding of complex research, all of which can help to improve your final grade. Using this six-point formula as a way of structuring your summary will also help you to think more critically about the research you read and make it easier for you to communicate your understanding both verbally and in writing. Try out Scholarcy’s Smart Summarizer to help draft your own research summary. ‍

• ‍ ‍ Eriksen, M., Lebreton, L., Carson, H., Thiel, M., Moore, C., Borerro, J., Galgani, F., Ryan, P. and Reisser, J., 2014. Plastic Pollution in the World's Oceans: More than 5 Trillion Plastic Pieces Weighing over 250,000 Tons Afloat at Sea. PLoS ONE , 9(12), p.e111913.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to enjoy a better experience.

A Complete Guide to Writing a Research Summary

A summary is a key part of any research. So, how should you go about writing one?

You will find many guides on the Internet about writing research. But, any article seldom covers the prospect of writing a research summary. While many things are shortened versions of the original article, there’s much more to research summaries.

From descriptive statistics to writing scientific research, a summary plays a vital role in describing the key ideas within. So, it begs a few questions, such as:

• What exactly is a research summary?
• How do you write one?
• What are some of the tips for writing a good research summary ?

In this guide, we’ll answer all of these questions and explore a few essential factors about research writing. So, let’s jump right into it.

What is a Research Summary?

A research summary is a short, concise summary of an academic research paper. It is often used to summarize the results of an experiment, summarize the major findings and conclusions, and provide a brief overview of the methods and procedures used in the study.

The purpose of a research summary is to provide readers with enough information about an article to decide whether they want to read it in its entirety. It should be no more than two paragraphs long and should include:

• A brief introduction summarizing why the article was written
• The main idea of the article
• The major findings and conclusions
• An overview of how the study was conducted

In order to write effective research summaries, it is important that you can capture the essential points of the research and provide a concise overview. The key step in writing a good summary is to read through the article and make notes of the key points.

This can be done by underlining or highlighting key phrases in the article. One essential thing is to organize these points into an outline format, which includes an introduction and conclusion paragraph.

Another best and quick way to generate a precise summary of your research paper is to take assistance from the online text summarizer, like Summarizer.org .

The online summarizing tool gets the research paper and creates a precise summary of it by taking the important points.

Finally, you must edit your work for grammar and spelling errors before submitting it for grading.

The purpose of the research summary is to provide a comprehensive sum of everything that’s in the research. This includes a summarization of scientific/literal research, as well as of the writer’s aim and personal thoughts.

As for the summary length, it shouldn’t be more than 10% of the entire content. So, if your research is around 1000-words or so, then your summary should be 100-words. But, considering how most research papers are around 3000-4000 words, it should be 300-400 words.

Key pillars of a Research Summary

The summary of any research doesn’t just include the summarized text of the entire research paper. It includes a few other key things, which we’ll explore later on in this article. But, the purpose of a summary is to give proper insights to the reader, such as:

• The writer’s intention
• sources and bases of research
• the purpose & result.

That’s why it’s important to understand that the summary should tell your reader all these elements. So, the fundamentals of any summary include:

• Write a section and state the importance of the research paper from your perspective. In this section, you will have to describe the techniques, tools, and sources you employed to get the conclusion.
• Besides that, it’s also meant to provide a brief and descriptive explanation of the actionable aspect of your research. In other words, how it can be implemented in real life.
• Treat your research summary like a smaller article or blog. So, each important section of your research should be written within a subheading. However, this is highly optional to keep things organized.
• As mentioned before, the research summary shouldn’t exceed 300-400 words. But, some research summaries are known to surpass 10000-words. So, try to employ the 10% formula and write one-tenth of the entire length of your research paper.

These four main points allow you to understand how a research summary is different from the research itself. So, it’s like a documentary where research and other key factors are left to the science (research paper), while the narration explains the key points (research summary)

How do you write a Research Summary?

Writing a research summary is a straightforward affair. Yet, it requires some understanding, as it’s not a lengthy process but rather a tricky and technical one. In a research summary, a few boxes must be checked. To help you do just that, here are 6 things you should tend to separately:

A summary’s title can be the same as the title of your primary research. However, putting separate titles in both has a few benefits. Such as:

• A separate title shifts attention towards the conclusion.
• A different title can focus on the main point of your research.
• Using two different titles can provide a better abstract.

Speaking of an abstract, a summary is the abstract of your research. Therefore, a title representing that very thought is going to do a lot of good too. That’s why it’s better if the title of your summary differs from the title of your research paper.

2. Abstract

The abstract is the summarization of scientific or research methods used in your primary paper. This allows the reader to understand the pillars of the study conducted. For instance, there has been an array of astrological research since James Webb Space Telescope started sending images and data.

So, many research papers explain this Telescope’s technological evolution in their abstracts. This allows the reader to differentiate from the astrological research made by previous space crafts, such as Hubble or Chandra .

The point of providing this abstract is to ensure that the reader grasps the standards or boundaries within which the research was held.

3. Introduction

This is the part where you introduce your topic. In your main research, you’d dive right into the technicalities in this part. However, you’ll try to keep things mild in a research summary. Simply because it needs to summarize the key points in your main introduction.

So, a lot of introductions you’ll find as an example will be extensive in length. But, a research summary needs to be as concise as possible. Usually, in this part, a writer includes the basics and standards of investigation.

For instance, if your research is about James Webb’s latest findings , then you’ll identify how the studies conducted by this Telescope’s infrared and other technology made this study possible. That’s when your introduction will hook the reader into the main premise of your research.

4. Methodology / Study

This section needs to describe the methodology used by you in your research. Or the methodology you relied on when conducting this particular research or study. This allows the reader to grasp the fundamentals of your research, and it’s extremely important.

Because if the reader doesn’t understand your methods, then they will have no response to your studies. How should you tend to this? Include things such as:

• The surveys or reviews you used;
• include the samplings and experiment types you researched;
• provide a brief statistical analysis;
• give a primary reason to pick these particular methods.

Once again, leave the scientific intricacies for your primary research. But, describe the key methods that you employed. So, when the reader is perusing your final research, they’ll have your methods and study techniques in mind.

5. Results / Discussion

This section of your research needs to describe the results that you’ve achieved. Granted, some researchers will rely on results achieved by others. So, this part needs to explain how that happened – but not in detail.

The other section in this part will be a discussion. This is your interpretation of the results you’ve found. Thus, in the context of the results’ application, this section needs to dive into the theoretical understanding of your research. What will this section entail exactly? Here’s what:

• Things that you covered, including results;
• inferences you provided, given the context of your research;
• the theory archetype that you’ve tried to explain in the light of the methodology you employed;
• essential points or any limitations of the research.

These factors will help the reader grasp the final idea of your research. But, it’s not full circle yet, as the pulp will still be left for the actual research.

6. Conclusion

The final section of your summary is the conclusion. The key thing about the conclusion in your research summary, compared to your actual research, is that they could be different. For instance, the actual conclusion in your research should bring around the study.

However, the research in this summary should bring your own ideas and affirmations to full circle. Thus, this conclusion could and should be different from the ending of your research.

5 Tips for writing a Research Summary

Writing a research summary is easy once you tend to the technicalities. But, there are some tips and tricks that could make it easier. Remember, a research summary is the sum of your entire research. So, it doesn’t need to be as technical or in-depth as your primary work.

Thus, to make it easier for you, here are four tips you can follow:

1. Read & read again

Reading your own work repeatedly has many benefits. First, it’ll help you understand any mistakes or problems your research might have. After that, you’ll find a few key points that stand out from the others – that’s what you need to use in your summary.

So, the best advice anyone can give you is to read your research again and again. This will etch the idea in your mind and allow you to summarize it better.

2. Focus on key essentials in each section

As we discussed earlier, each section of your research has a key part. To write a thoroughly encapsulating summary, you need to focus on and find each such element in your research.

Doing so will give you enough leverage to write a summary that thoroughly condenses your research idea and gives you enough to write a summary out of it.

3. Write the research using a summarizing tool

The best advice you can get is to write a summary using a tool. Condensing each section might be a troublesome experience for some – as it can be time-consuming.

To avoid all that, you can simply take help from an online summarizer. It gets the lengthy content and creates a precise summary of it by using advanced AI technology.

As you can see, the tool condenses this particular section perfectly while the details are light.

Bringing that down to 10% or 20% will help you write each section accordingly. Thus, saving precious time and effort.

4. Word count limit

As mentioned earlier, word count is something you need to follow thoroughly. So, if your section is around 200-word, then read it again. And describe it to yourself in 20-words or so. Doing this to every section will help you write exactly a 10% summary of your research.

5. Get a second opinion

If you’re unsure about quality or quantity, get a second opinion. At times, ideas are in our minds, but we cannot find words to explain them. In research or any sort of creative process, getting a second opinion can save a lot of trouble.

There’s your guide to writing a research summary, folks. While it’s not different from condensing the entire premise of your research, writing it in simpler words will do wonders. So, try to follow the tips, tools, and ideas provided in this article, and write outstanding summaries for your research.

Questions? Call us: 

Email: 

• How it works
• Testimonials

Essay Writing

• Essay service
• Essay writers
• College essay service
• Write my essay
• Pay for essay
• Essay topics

Term Paper Writing

• Term paper service
• Buy term papers
• Term paper help
• Term paper writers
• College term papers
• Write my term paper
• Pay for term paper
• Term paper topic

Research Paper Writing

• Research paper service
• Buy research paper
• Research paper help
• Research paper writers
• College research papers
• Write my research paper
• Pay for research paper
• Research paper topics

Dissertation Writing

• Dissertation service
• Buy dissertation
• Dissertation help
• Dissertation writers
• College thesis
• Write my dissertation
• Pay for dissertation
• Dissertation topics

Other Services

• Custom writing services
• Speech writing service
• Movie review writing
• Editing service
• Assignment writing
• Article writing service
• Book report writing
• Book review writing

Popular request:

How to write a summary of a research paper.

October 15, 2020

What is a research paper summary? The summary of research paper is a piece of writing the attempts to summarize the essence and key components of a research project to a prospective audience. It follows a standard format and is usually no more than a few pages long. It is sometimes also referred to as an executive summary for a research paper when the written piece is used for business purposes (e.g., research project involving sales strategies).

This article will focus on the latter and show students how to properly plan, write, and format an executive summary of research paper for a project dealing with a business project and report. It is simply a brief overview of a larger report and should be written last. It is in no way a comprehensive piece of writing (an executive summary example research paper is usually about 10 percent the length of the original) and should only communicate the most important points of the original report.

How to Write a Summary of a Research Paper

Writing an executive summary for a research paper requires you to know some basics, including stylistic and structural guidelines. These include:

• Paragraphs should be short and concise, consisting of no more than 4 – 5 sentences each.
• A research paper executive summary should make sense without having to read the original report.
• A summary should clearly define the research problem(s) and present the solution(s).
• A summary should be written in language that is appropriate for the intended audience.
• A summary should utilize graphics and bullet points to make the document easier to read.

You might want to use a research paper summary template when you are just starting. If you can’t find one available for free, a professional writing and editing service like ourselves can always custom-write any type of template you need for an assignment.

A 10-Step Process for Writing a Summary of a Research Paper

Let us assume that you are the person who wrote the original document. You should know the study firsthand and should able to quickly identify and take out the most important parts. We suggest you simply highlight each topic sentence, supporting evidence, and examples. List these items in order in a new document that could serve as an outline to your executive summary of research paper.

We keep stressing the term “short.” This is because you are not going into great depth. A summary is a tool an audience will use to determine if it is worth the time to read the full report. Avoid business jargon at all costs. Just stick to the facts and keep your writing clear and concise. Condense the information from your outline as much as possible.

Like in other types of writing, the executive summary for a research paper needs to have a hook placed at the start of the document. In no more than 2 or 3 sentences, you need to tell the audience why your research project is important. Chances are the audience will already have some interest in your report, so the hook should seal the deal by convincing readers that your findings are relevant to them.

The important part of learning how to write summary of research paper is identifying and defining the major research problem. You need to make sure the problem is explained as clearly as possible. If you do not achieve this your audience will not be convinced there is a problem at all, and your solution will not have as great an impact as you had hoped it would.

Explaining the research problem is the easy part. You need to give the reader a solution to that problem by presenting it in a way that is logical and easy to understand. The reader should have the sense that the solution can be applied to other situations (e.g., to a business problem he or she might be facing) and feel as they can make great use of your ideas.

Elaborate on the major problem by showing statistics taken from the larger report. Utilize visual tools like graphs and charts to convey complicated information. Explain each visual tool in a few sentences so that the audience knows precisely what it is you are talking about, and always make sure the information supports your solutions.

As we explained before, this type of writing is used almost exclusively for business purposes. Your summary at the end of a research paper will be read by people who are familiar with whatever industry you focused your report on, so you must state the specific advantages your solution will have over others. This isn’t much different than making a sales pitch, so you might consider using language that promotes your proposition.

You may not have to include your business model, but it would do no harm if you did. If the research you conducted dealt with a specific business plan, then you need to make sure you share this information with the audience. The reason behind this is that your solution might only apply to certain situations and by letting the audience know you protect yourself from presenting an idea that is not universal.

Again, you may not need to incorporate this section in all cases. This is tied with a business plan which usually identifies and describes what type of management team needs to be put in place for your business solution to work. Since most businesses will need to make investments when it comes to implementing new ideas, you should be transparent about what you had in mind when it comes to workflow processes.

Finally, bring your summary to a close by making revenue projections. You need to support your claims with realistic forecasts regarding money saved or money earned. You can use the numbers you arrived at in your original study, but you should also provide a general explanation (e.g., using percentages) of what others should expect if they applied your solution to their businesses.

And that’s it. You should now have a solid understanding of how to write a summary of a research paper on any subject dealing with business. As you can see the process isn’t that much different from other types of writing. If you follow these 10-steps, you should be able to craft a great summary without much difficulty.

Need More Help with Your Executive Summary Research Paper?

One of the best ways to learn how to successfully write a summary of research paper is to learn from the pros. Our paper writers can provide you with a custom written research paper summary example as well as other academic resources to instruct you on how to write an executive summary for a research paper in any discipline. We can help you write, revise, and edit all of your assignments. You can reach us in one of several ways, including chat, email, and phone 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Let us know if you find this article helpful and feel free to share it with your friends and classmates. And tell us what else you’d like us to write about, we’re always open to suggestions.

Take a break from writing.

Top academic experts are here for you.

• How To Write An Autobiography Guideline And Useful Advice
• 182 Best Classification Essay Topics To Learn And Write About
• How To Manage Stress In College: Top Practical Tips  
• How To Write A Narrative Essay: Definition, Tips, And A Step-by-Step Guide
• How To Write Article Review Like Professional
• Great Problem Solution Essay Topics
• Creating Best Stanford Roommate Essay
• Costco Essay – Best Writing Guide
• How To Quote A Dialogue
• Wonderful Expository Essay Topics
• Research Paper Topics For 2020
• Interesting Persuasive Essay Topics

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

Research paper summarizer | An overview of the best AI summarizers

Table of Contents

In scholarly publishing, keeping abreast of the latest research findings and breakthroughs is vital. However, with the ever-expanding scope of scientific knowledge, reading and understanding research article is becoming a hard and time-consuming task.

Plus, the prevalent use of acronyms, jargon, and complex terminologies in research papers is impeding scientific engagement. Therefore, affecting the researcher’s reading interest and perceived understanding of research articles.

In light of this, a recent study from Science Direct enunciated that “automatic summarization of scientific articles helps students speed up their investigation process”. And this underscores the importance of AI tools like research paper summarizers.

This article enunciates the role and advantages of AI summarizers in enhancing reading comprehension.

What is a Research Paper Summarizer?

Research paper summarizer is an AI-powered article summarizer tool designed to condense extensive academic papers into concise summaries.

These summaries capture the critical points, key findings, and main arguments of a research article and represent them in the most succinct way possible. As a result, researchers quickly grasp the scope of the research paper without spending much time.

What are the benefits of research paper summarizers?

AI summarizers or research paper summarizers are a revolutionary tool that is changing the conventional reading method of scholarly publishing. While the inception of research paper summarizers may seem like a radical shift. By embracing this technology aid, the academic community can manage the challenge of reading comprehension.

Here's where AI summarizers steps in:

Saves you plenty of time

Research paper summarizers offer a streamlined path to the key points, insights, and findings of a paper, saving researchers hours of reading and sifting through vast information.

Imagine the productivity boost when you can certainly review ten papers in the time it used to take to read just one.

Managing information overload

Research paper summarizers combat information overload by presenting the most critical information from a paper instantly. This enables researchers to quickly identify whether key information in a paper is relevant to their work, while saving time from diving into lengthy papers that may not be directly related to their domain or research area of interest.

Improved accessibility for both academicians and non-academicians

Technical research papers are difficult to understand by non-academicians due to scientific jargon and complexity. However, these AI summarization tools make research more inclusive and understandable to non-scientific users, facilitating enhanced knowledge dissemination to users.

Extracts key findings in seconds

With PDF summarizers or AI summarizers, researchers can get critical findings of the research articles with a single click. These AI summarizers pull out the main key points of a long article efficiently, ensuring readers quickly grasp the essence of the study.

For example, Scholarcy, an AI-based tool, creates a summary-length flashcard of research papers enlisting the key insights, references, and figures. This way, it helps you speed-read the article consuming less time.

Cross-disciplinary insights

Traditional research papers are often confined within disciplinary boundaries, making it challenging for researchers to explore ideas beyond their domain or area of interest. Research paper summarizers, however, assist them in comprehending interdisciplinary insights by summarizing the paper in the simplest way possible.

That way, researchers can easily understand and summarize studies from diverse fields, fostering scientific innovation and novel perspectives.

Also read: Top online tools to boost your academic performance

Top 5 AI summarizers — For summarizing research papers

Scispace copilot.

SciSpace Copilot, an AI tool helps researchers understand research papers by summarizing every bit of the highlighted information. You just have to select the text portion and click on summarize, it generates a summary of the text in seconds. Once you have the summaries, it also allows you to ask follow-up questions if you have. Unlike other tools, it is not only limited to generating summaries, it also assists you with explaining math, tables, figures, and equations.

• Summarizes and explains text, math, tables, and equations.
• Get summaries in multiple languages. You can interact with the paper in 70+ languages
• It acts as a Chatbot for your paper. You can ask any questions relevant to your paper and it explains it to you
• The answers are reliable as they’re backed by citations.
• Sometimes, it shows repetitive responses

Scholarly is an online article summarizer tool that assists students and researchers in quickly summarizing and comprehending research articles, book chapters, reports, and other documents. The tool simplifies difficult information into digestible chunks, gives context to important sentences, highlights important passages, and enables users to quickly save or export summaries as word documents for later use.

For students and researchers who need to keep up with their academic reading and writing, Scholarcy is a great resource. This AI summarizing tool highlights important facts and results while breaking down intricate information into interactive flashcards. It highlights key points and generate links to open-access versions of cited sources. Any device can read, share, and annotate these flashcards, making it simple to understand the research papers.

• Provides key insights of a lengthy research paper in multiple summary flashcards
• Save your flashcards in a dedicated Scholarcy library
• Free Edge and Chrome extension
• Only 3 free summary flashcards per day
• Glitchy interface
• Need a subscription to access advanced features

TLDR this is an AI-powered tool quickly summarizes any research paper, essay , document, report, and others in just a click. You can get the article summary in two different types — short and brief summary (actual TLDR) or long and detailed summary based on your requirements. All you have to do is, enter the website URL or paste the link to the content and generate a summary

• Generate 10 free summaries at no cost
• The interface is pretty straightforward
• It also tells you if the summary sounds AI-generated or human-like
• The quality of the summary has to be improved as there is essentially no difference between short and long summaries
• Output throws a few sentences from the original text and doesn’t produce an authentic summary

Quillbot Summarizer

Quillbot is another AI summarizing tool designed to break down lengthy articles, papers, or documents into their essential points in an instant and easy way. It works similarly to its paraphrasing tool. By leveraging the power of AI and NLP models, Quillbot online summarizer ensures that the core information is summarized without losing the original context.

Users can benefit from two different AI modes, choosing between "Key Sentences" or "Paragraph Mode" summaries. This summarization tool offers unlimited usage and is 100% free, making it an invaluable asset for researchers and writers alike.

• Availability of different modes of summarization based on the type and length of the content
• You can also paraphrase the obtained summary for a better understanding
• The free version comes with a word limit of 1200 words
• It's observed that the accuracy goes off the line sometimes

Amidst these dedicated AI summarizers, let's not forget ChatGPT. While not exclusively a research paper summarizer, ChatGPT can be an effective tool for summarizing long articles , books, news articles, research articles, reports, and more. By feeding it with the text you wish to summarize, you can get a tailored summary in real time.

• Completely free to use
• Users can clarify, refine, or request more detailed summaries interactively.
• Can produce summaries of varying lengths based on user requirements.
• Might occasionally provide less accurate summaries for very niche topics
• The summaries can sometimes be more verbose

Wrapping up!

While the journey of research paper summarizers has seen massive amounts of growth and adaptation, it's also evident that challenges still exist in terms of accuracy. However, with the rapid pace of technological advancements and the solutions emerging in response to these changes, the future looks promising. These tools will become even more intuitive, accurate, and user-centric, further bridging the gap between new scientific discoveries and their easy comprehension.

Although AI summarizers are valuable tools for quickly extracting essential information from lengthy research papers they should be only used as aids for initial comprehension rather than as substitutes for in-depth reading and analysis. The quality of the summary may vary, so it's essential to evaluate their accuracy for your specific needs.

You can explore all the above-listed tools and let us know which one helped you the most!

Good reads, curated just for you!

Best AI Tools for Research Paper Writing

How To Write A Research Summary

AI tools for research: Revolutionize your work with top research assistants

5 literature review tools to ace your reseach (+2 bonus tools)

ChatPDF vs. SciSpace Copilot: AI tools to chat with your PDF

Citation Machine Alternatives — A comparison of top citation generator tools 2023

You might also like

Boosting Citations: A Comparative Analysis of Graphical Abstract vs. Video Abstract

The Impact of Visual Abstracts on Boosting Citations

Introducing SciSpace’s Citation Booster To Increase Research Visibility

How To Write A Summary For Research Paper

How To Write a Summary For a Research Paper: A Step-by-Step Guide

Published on: Aug 13, 2024

Last updated on: Aug 13, 2024

People also read

As a student, you’ll often need to summarize research papers. 

Whether you’re studying for exams, writing assignments, or participating in class discussions, knowing how to create a clear summary is essential. Summarizing helps you understand and communicate the main points of a research paper in a simpler way.

In this guide, we’ll show you how to write an effective summary for a research paper. You’ll learn how to pick out the most important information and present it clearly. 

By following these steps, you’ll be able to create summaries that help you and others quickly grasp the key insights of any research paper. 

Let’s start writing!

What is the Summary of a Research Paper? 

A research paper summary is a comprehensive overview that captures the core aspects of the study. It includes the research purpose, methodology, main findings, and conclusions. 

The goal is to provide a brief yet comprehensive snapshot of the paper’s key points, allowing readers to quickly grasp the study’s significance and relevance.

The ideal length of a research paper summary is typically one paragraph or about 10-15% of the original paper’s length. This ensures that the summary is brief yet comprehensive enough to convey the key points. 

For most research papers, a summary should be around 150-250 words, depending on the complexity and length of the original document.

5 Steps to Write a Research Paper Summary 

Writing a summary for a research paper involves several key steps to ensure you capture the essence of the study clearly and concisely. 

Here’s a simple guide on how to write a summary paragraph for a research paper:

Step 1: Read the Paper Thoroughly 

Before you can summarize a research paper, you need to understand it completely. Start by reading the entire paper carefully, paying close attention to the following sections:

• Abstract: The abstract provides a brief overview of the research, including the purpose, methods, results, and conclusions. It can help you get a quick understanding of the paper’s key points.
• Introduction: Identify the research question or problem being addressed. Understand the background and significance of the study.
• Literature Review: Review this section to see how the research fits within the existing body of knowledge. Note key theories and previous findings referenced.
• Methods: Understand how the research was conducted, including the design, procedures, and tools used. Note the sample size and data collection methods.
• Results: Note the main findings of the study, including any data, statistics, or observations reported.
• Discussion: Comprehend the interpretation of the results. This section often explains the implications of the findings and how they fit with or challenge existing knowledge.
• Conclusion: Summarize the main conclusions drawn by the authors and their recommendations for future research or practical applications.

Take notes on these key points as you read to help you remember them later.

Step 2: Identify the Main Points 

Once you’ve read the paper, highlight the most important information. This typically includes:

Make sure to focus on the most important details rather than getting caught up in minor specifics.

Step 3: Create an Outline

Organize your notes into a brief outline. This will help you structure your summary logically. A typical outline might look like this:

• Introduction: State the research problem or question and include a brief description of the paper’s purpose. Mention the thesis statement and key points.
• Methods: Briefly describe the approach used in the study.
• Results: Summarize the key findings.
• Conclusion: Describe the conclusions drawn by the author and their significance.

Step 4: Write the Summary 

Using your outline, write a draft of the summary. Keep these tips in mind:

• Be Clear and Concise: Use simple language and avoid jargon. Aim to be as direct as possible.
• Stick to the Main Points: Include only the most important information from each section of the paper.
• Keywords: Use relevant keywords to help readers understand the focus and importance of the paper.
• Do Not Add New Information: Your summary should reflect what is in the research paper, not introduce new ideas or opinions.

Step 5: Review and Revise 

After writing your summary, take the time to review it. Check for clarity and accuracy:

• Compare with the Original: Ensure your summary accurately reflects the main points of the research paper.
• Check for Conciseness: Make sure your summary is brief and to the point, ideally no more than about 10-15% of the original paper’s length.
• Proofread: Correct any grammatical or spelling errors.

Mistakes to Avoid in Research Paper Summaries 

Creating an accurate and effective summary of a research paper requires attention to detail. Here are some common mistakes to avoid:

• Ignoring the Main Points: Ensure you cover the core elements—purpose, methods, findings, and conclusions. Missing any of these elements can lead to an incomplete overview.
• Adding Personal Opinions: A summary should reflect the original research without introducing new opinions or interpretations. Stick to the content provided in the paper.
• Being Overly Detailed: Focus on summarizing the main points rather than including every detail from the paper. Aim for clarity and conciseness, typically keeping the summary within 10-15% of the original length.
• Omitting the Research Purpose: Clearly state the research question or thesis. Failing to include the paper’s purpose can leave readers without essential context.
• Misrepresenting the Findings: Ensure that your summary accurately reflects the research paper’s conclusions and results. Misrepresentation can mislead readers and undermine the summary’s effectiveness.

By avoiding these mistakes, you can craft a clear, accurate, and effective summary that captures the essence of the research paper.

All in all, a well-crafted summary not only reflects a thorough understanding of the research but also helps readers quickly grasp the significance of the study. 

By following these guidelines, you can create summaries that are both informative and precise, contributing to clearer and more impactful academic writing.

For an effortless and accurate summarization process, use our advanced summarizer tool. It ensures precise, high-quality summaries, helping you save time and enhance your academic efficiency. 

Additionally, if you’re looking for an AI that will write a paper for you , explore MyEssayWriter.ai. 

Frequently Asked Questions

How to write an executive summary for a research paper.

An executive summary provides a concise overview of the research paper. Summarize the research question, key findings, methods, and conclusions in a concise overview. Focus on the main points and significance.

How to Write a Summary of a Research Article?

To write a summary of a research article, first read the article thoroughly. Identify and condense the article’s purpose, methods, results, and conclusions into a few sentences, keeping it clear and to the point.

How to Write a Synopsis for a Research Paper?

A synopsis is a summary that outlines the main points of a research paper. Outline the research question, methodology, results, and conclusions briefly. Include the purpose and significance of the study.

How to Write an Outline for a Term Paper?

To write an outline for a term paper, start by defining the main topic and thesis statement. Then organize key sections (introduction, body, conclusion) with bullet points for each section’s main ideas.

How to Summarize a Scientific Paper?

To summarize a scientific paper, briefly state the research objective, methods, key findings, and conclusions. Focus on presenting the main points clearly and concisely.

Caleb S. (Mass Literature and Linguistics, Masters)

Caleb S. is an accomplished author with over five years of experience and a Master's degree from Oxford University. He excels in various writing forms, including articles, press releases, blog posts, and whitepapers. As a valued author at MyEssayWriter.ai, Caleb assists students and professionals by providing practical tips on research, citation, sentence structure, and style enhancement.

On This Page On This Page

Get Access to Advanced Features with our Affordable Plans

Complimentary Trial

Continue for Free

OFFER ENDS Today

Access to all Tools

No Credit Card needed

Quota: 1500 Words (6 pages)

Offer ends in: 03hr 19m 8s

For Monthly Usage

$ 9.99 /month

Up to 2500 words/month

Access to all features

AI Essay Writer

AI Essay Outliner

Go Big Monthly!

$ 14.99 /month

Up to 100,000 words/month

Access to all existing tools

50% off on custom essay orders

500 credits for plagiarism check

Top Annual Savings!

Advanced (4 Months FREE )

$ 99.99 /year

OFFER ENDS Soon

Unlimited essays

12 Months for the price of 8

Access to all upcoming tools

Get started for free

Please enter a valid Name

Please enter a valid email address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Please enter atleast five characters

Please enter a valid Password

Show Password

Already have an account? Sign In here.

Please enter your email address

Forgot Password?

Don’t have an account? Sign Up

Verify Your Account

Enter the verification codes to confirm your identity.

Code sent to [email protected]

Send again in seconds

Code sent to +1 302 385 6690

Claim Free Essay

Your first custom essay order on our website is FREE!

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

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

An executive summary is a thorough overview of a research report or other type of document that synthesizes key points for its readers, saving them time and preparing them to understand the study's overall content. It is a separate, stand-alone document of sufficient detail and clarity to ensure that the reader can completely understand the contents of the main research study. An executive summary can be anywhere from 1-10 pages long depending on the length of the report, or it can be the summary of more than one document [e.g., papers submitted for a group project].

Bailey, Edward, P. The Plain English Approach to Business Writing . (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), p. 73-80 Todorovic, Zelimir William and Marietta Wolczacka Frye. “Writing Effective Executive Summaries: An Interdisciplinary Examination.” In United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Conference Proceedings . (Decatur, IL: United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 2009): pp. 662-691.

Importance of a Good Executive Summary

Although an executive summary is similar to an abstract in that they both summarize the contents of a research study, there are several key differences. With research abstracts, the author's recommendations are rarely included, or if they are, they are implicit rather than explicit. Recommendations are generally not stated in academic abstracts because scholars operate in a discursive environment, where debates, discussions, and dialogs are meant to precede the implementation of any new research findings. The conceptual nature of much academic writing also means that recommendations arising from the findings are distributed widely and not easily or usefully encapsulated. Executive summaries are used mainly when a research study has been developed for an organizational partner, funding entity, or other external group that participated in the research . In such cases, the research report and executive summary are often written for policy makers outside of academe, while abstracts are written for the academic community. Professors, therefore, assign the writing of executive summaries so students can practice synthesizing and writing about the contents of comprehensive research studies for external stakeholder groups.

When preparing to write, keep in mind that:

• An executive summary is not an abstract.
• An executive summary is not an introduction.
• An executive summary is not a preface.
• An executive summary is not a random collection of highlights.

Christensen, Jay. Executive Summaries Complete The Report. California State University Northridge; Clayton, John. "Writing an Executive Summary that Means Business." Harvard Management Communication Letter (July 2003): 2-4; Keller, Chuck. "Stay Healthy with a Winning Executive Summary." Technical Communication 41 (1994): 511-517; Murphy, Herta A., Herbert W. Hildebrandt, and Jane P. Thomas. Effective Business Communications . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997; Vassallo, Philip. "Executive Summaries: Where Less Really is More." ETC.: A Review of General Semantics 60 (Spring 2003): 83-90 .

Structure and Writing Style

Writing an Executive Summary

Read the Entire Document This may go without saying, but it is critically important that you read the entire research study thoroughly from start to finish before you begin to write the executive summary. Take notes as you go along, highlighting important statements of fact, key findings, and recommended courses of action. This will better prepare you for how to organize and summarize the study. Remember this is not a brief abstract of 300 words or less but, essentially, a mini-paper of your paper, with a focus on recommendations.

Isolate the Major Points Within the Original Document Choose which parts of the document are the most important to those who will read it. These points must be included within the executive summary in order to provide a thorough and complete explanation of what the document is trying to convey.

Separate the Main Sections Closely examine each section of the original document and discern the main differences in each. After you have a firm understanding about what each section offers in respect to the other sections, write a few sentences for each section describing the main ideas. Although the format may vary, the main sections of an executive summary likely will include the following:

• An opening statement, with brief background information,
• The purpose of research study,
• Method of data gathering and analysis,
• Overview of findings, and,
• A description of each recommendation, accompanied by a justification. Note that the recommendations are sometimes quoted verbatim from the research study.

Combine the Information Use the information gathered to combine them into an executive summary that is no longer than 10% of the original document. Be concise! The purpose is to provide a brief explanation of the entire document with a focus on the recommendations that have emerged from your research. How you word this will likely differ depending on your audience and what they care about most. If necessary, selectively incorporate bullet points for emphasis and brevity. Re-read your Executive Summary After you've completed your executive summary, let it sit for a while before coming back to re-read it. Check to make sure that the summary will make sense as a separate document from the full research study. By taking some time before re-reading it, you allow yourself to see the summary with fresh, unbiased eyes.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Length of the Executive Summary As a general rule, the correct length of an executive summary is that it meets the criteria of no more pages than 10% of the number of pages in the original document, with an upper limit of no more than ten pages [i.e., ten pages for a 100 page document]. This requirement keeps the document short enough to be read by your audience, but long enough to allow it to be a complete, stand-alone synopsis. Cutting and Pasting With the exception of specific recommendations made in the study, do not simply cut and paste whole sections of the original document into the executive summary. You should paraphrase information from the longer document. Avoid taking up space with excessive subtitles and lists, unless they are absolutely necessary for the reader to have a complete understanding of the original document. Consider the Audience Although unlikely to be required by your professor, there is the possibility that more than one executive summary will have to be written for a given document [e.g., one for policy-makers, one for private industry, one for philanthropists]. This may only necessitate the rewriting of the introduction and conclusion, but it could require rewriting the entire summary in order to fit the needs of the reader. If necessary, be sure to consider the types of audiences who may benefit from your study and make adjustments accordingly. Clarity in Writing One of the biggest mistakes you can make is related to the clarity of your executive summary. Always note that your audience [or audiences] are likely seeing your research study for the first time. The best way to avoid a disorganized or cluttered executive summary is to write it after the study is completed. Always follow the same strategies for proofreading that you would for any research paper. Use Strong and Positive Language Don’t weaken your executive summary with passive, imprecise language. The executive summary is a stand-alone document intended to convince the reader to make a decision concerning whether to implement the recommendations you make. Once convinced, it is assumed that the full document will provide the details needed to implement the recommendations. Although you should resist the temptation to pad your summary with pleas or biased statements, do pay particular attention to ensuring that a sense of urgency is created in the implications, recommendations, and conclusions presented in the executive summary. Be sure to target readers who are likely to implement the recommendations.

Bailey, Edward, P. The Plain English Approach to Business Writing . (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), p. 73-80; Christensen, Jay. Executive Summaries Complete The Report. California State University Northridge; Executive Summaries. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Clayton, John. "Writing an Executive Summary That Means Business." Harvard Management Communication Letter , 2003; Executive Summary. University Writing Center. Texas A&M University;  Green, Duncan. Writing an Executive Summary.   Oxfam’s Research Guidelines series ; Guidelines for Writing an Executive Summary. Astia.org; Markowitz, Eric. How to Write an Executive Summary. Inc. Magazine, September, 15, 2010; Kawaski, Guy. The Art of the Executive Summary. "How to Change the World" blog; Keller, Chuck. "Stay Healthy with a Winning Executive Summary." Technical Communication 41 (1994): 511-517; The Report Abstract and Executive Summary. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing Executive Summaries. Effective Writing Center. University of Maryland; Kolin, Philip. Successful Writing at Work . 10th edition. (Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2013), p. 435-437; Moral, Mary. "Writing Recommendations and Executive Summaries." Keeping Good Companies 64 (June 2012): 274-278; Todorovic, Zelimir William and Marietta Wolczacka Frye. “Writing Effective Executive Summaries: An Interdisciplinary Examination.” In United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Conference Proceedings . (Decatur, IL: United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 2009): pp. 662-691.

• << Previous: 3. The Abstract
• Next: 4. The Introduction >>
• Last Updated: Aug 13, 2024 12:57 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Research Summary

Ai generator.

A research paper analyzes a perspective or argues a point. It is an expanded essay based on your interpretation, evaluation or argument about a certain topic.

According to Sunny Empire State College , “When you write a research paper you build upon what you know about the subject and make a deliberate attempt to find out what experts know. A research paper involves surveying a field of knowledge in order to find the best possible information in that field.” Whatever type of research paper you choose to write, it should present your own ideas backed with others’ (especially experts on the field) information and data.

Every research paper has a research summary. A research summary is a brief overview of what the whole research is about. It is a professional piece of writing that describes your research to the readers. It concisely yet perfectly captures the essence of the research as a whole. You may also see What Should Be in an Executive Summary of a Report?

Fundamentals of a Research Summary

Having a good template for a research summary is nothing if you don’t know its importance and basic function. Before you start writing your research summary, you should first know its fundamentals on the areas you need to pay attention to such as its content, style and organization.

• The content of your research summary must briefly discuss the techniques and tools used in the research and the importance of the research as a whole. Explain how the research can be of benefit for the people.
• To organize your research summary, each topic must be discussed in separate paragraphs. How you came up with a factual research must be briefly explained in a separate paragraph.
• If you have a lengthy research paper, try not to write not more than 10% of the entire paper. If it’s not as lengthy, you should not write more than 300 words in your summary.

However, rules may vary according to your research professor’s standards. This is just the basic fundamentals on how to write your research summary. Also see  Thesis Outline Examples

How to Write a Research Summary

It is apparent that a research summary is a condensed version of the main idea of your research paper. Because of this, it is advised that the summary of your paper is written after you are done with your entire research. This is to ensure that all the added information in your research can be written in your summary as well and all of those that removed can be edited out. Here are a few steps on how to write a research summary:

Read your paper

It should be a fact you should know beforehand; the importance of reading your entire research paper thoroughly to write an effective research summary. Along the way, take notes of the important details and key findings that you want to highlight in your paper. This will help you organize your summary better. Remember that your research summary is a mini-paper of your study and it should contain the main ideas of your entire research.

Write a draft

For your first draft, focus on the content rather than the length of your summary. Your draft is your first outline on what to include in the final summary. Writing a draft ensures you write a clear, thorough and coherent summary of your research paper. Also see  How to Write a Rough Outline

Identify main points

Within your research paper, you must identify the major points that will encourage prospective readers to go through your research paper. These major points must thoroughly and completely explain what the paper is trying to convey.

Separate sections

Identify the differences of the main section in your paper. Write a few sentences describing the main ideas of each section. In short, you should be able to present and thoroughly describe what each main section is focused on. It should have these basic sections:

• Introduction, brief opening statement
• Purpose of the study
• Data gathering method
• Summary of findings
• Description of recommendations with actual justification.

Combine Information

All the information you have gathered must be then used to make your summary. Remember that your summary is just an overview of your research paper as a whole. It should be not be more than 10% of your whole paper. Also see  5 Summary Writing Examples and Samples

Making The First Draft

After establishing the basic way of writing a research summary, it is a must to write a first draft. It should follow the flow of the original paper. Here’s a few steps on how to make a first draft:

First, state the research question in the introduction of your summary. This holds the ground as to the summary’s direction. Provide an explanation why your research is interesting and how it can help your target recipients.

Second, state the hypothesis you wish to prove. This will help you and your readers stay grounded on the topic at hand.

Third, briefly discuss the methodology used in your research. Discuss and describe the procedure, materials, participants, design, etc. The analysis of your data must also be included. You may also see  How to Write a Successful Thesis Proposal

Fourth, describe the results and significance of your research. And lastly, briefly discuss the key implications of your research. The results and its interpretation should directly coincide with your hypothesis.

Editing your Research Summary

A research paper is a formal piece of writing. Your summary should be tailored to your expected readers. Say for example the prospective readers are your classmates, so the style of your paper should be clearly understood by them.

Eliminate wordiness. Avoid using unnecessary adjectives and adverbs. Write in a way it would be easier for your readers to understand. It is common for research papers to establish a word count. Avoid elongating your sentences when it has shorter versions.

Being vague in describing and explaining the points of your paper might lead to confusion in your readers part. Use specific, concrete language when presenting results. Use reliable and specific examples and references as well. You should also use scientifically accurate language to help support your claims. Avoid informal words and adjectives to describe the results of your research.

Paraphrase the information you want to include in your research paper. Direct quoting the information you have read from a different source is not oftenly used in formal writings. To give the exact credit for the information you paraphrased, follow the citation format required by your professor.

Reread your paper and let others read it as well. This way minor errors you were not able to notice can be quickly pointed out and corrected.

Research Summary Writing Tips

Your research summary should not be more than 10 pages long or not more than 10% of your original document. This keeps your research summary concise and compact. It should be short enough for your readers to read through but long enough for you to clearly explain your study.

Copy and paste

Avoid simply copy and pasting different parts of your paper into your summary. You should paraphrase parts that you want to include. As most research advisers read through all of your paper, it can easily be identified if you have copy-pasted parts from your research and might give you a bad grade.

Consider the readers

Although not a requirement from your professor, catering your summary to what the readers need is sometimes required. As some studies are given out to different influential people in the field, writing a summary that caters to the readers’ necessities might be required.

Research Article Summary Template

• Google Docs

Size: 158 KB

Research Report Executive Summary Template

Size: 120 KB

Research Summary Example

Size: 130 KB

Research Summary Sample

Size: 486 KB

Research Writing Summary Tips (continuation)

Clarity and organization.

One of the common mistakes in writing a research is publishing an unclear and unpolished summary. Bear in mind that your readers are likely reading about the topic of your research for the first time, avoid unclear and uncertain explanations and a disorganized summary.

Use strong and positive language

Use precise and strong words to help strengthen the foundation of your summary. Your summary should be able to stand alone despite it being a part of the research paper. Once you have convinced your readers with the recommendations regarding the topic of your paper, the readers should be able to find concrete evidence and explanations within your summary. Avoid pleas and biased statements in your summary, but make sure you are able to relay the sense of urgency for the recommendations you have given.

Divide into parts

To make things easier for you, divide your paper into different sections and headings, much like creating an outline. With this in mind, every point should be explained limited to its essence. In this way, you avoid writing too much information about your paper in your summary.

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

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

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 14 August 2024

A Scottish provenance for the Altar Stone of Stonehenge

• Anthony J. I. Clarke   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0304-0484 1 ,
• Christopher L. Kirkland   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3367-8961 1 ,
• Richard E. Bevins 2 ,
• Nick J. G. Pearce   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3157-9564 2 ,
• Stijn Glorie 3 &
• Rob A. Ixer 4  

Nature volume  632 ,  pages 570–575 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

58k Accesses

1 Citations

4288 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Archaeology

Understanding the provenance of megaliths used in the Neolithic stone circle at Stonehenge, southern England, gives insight into the culture and connectivity of prehistoric Britain. The source of the Altar Stone, the central recumbent sandstone megalith, has remained unknown, with recent work discounting an Anglo-Welsh Basin origin 1 , 2 . Here we present the age and chemistry of detrital zircon, apatite and rutile grains from within fragments of the Altar Stone. The detrital zircon load largely comprises Mesoproterozoic and Archaean sources, whereas rutile and apatite are dominated by a mid-Ordovician source. The ages of these grains indicate derivation from an ultimate Laurentian crystalline source region that was overprinted by Grampian (around 460 million years ago) magmatism. Detrital age comparisons to sedimentary packages throughout Britain and Ireland reveal a remarkable similarity to the Old Red Sandstone of the Orcadian Basin in northeast Scotland. Such a provenance implies that the Altar Stone, a 6 tonne shaped block, was sourced at least 750 km from its current location. The difficulty of long-distance overland transport of such massive cargo from Scotland, navigating topographic barriers, suggests that it was transported by sea. Such routing demonstrates a high level of societal organization with intra-Britain transport during the Neolithic period.

Similar content being viewed by others

The expansion of Acheulean hominins into the Nefud Desert of Arabia

Cryptic geological histories accessed through entombed and matrix geochronometers in dykes

The earliest evidence of Acheulian occupation in Northwest Europe and the rediscovery of the Moulin Quignon site, Somme valley, France

Stonehenge, the Neolithic standing stone circle located on the Salisbury Plain in Wiltshire, England, offers valuable insight into prehistoric Britain. Construction at Stonehenge began as early as 3000  bc , with subsequent modifications during the following two millennia 3 , 4 . The megaliths of Stonehenge are divided into two major categories: sarsen stones and bluestones (Fig. 1a ). The larger sarsens comprise duricrust silcrete predominantly sourced from the West Woods, Marlborough, approximately 25 km north of Stonehenge 5 , 6 . Bluestone, the generic term for rocks considered exotic to the local area, includes volcanic tuff, rhyolite, dolerite and sandstone lithologies 4 (Fig. 1a ). Some lithologies are linked with Neolithic quarrying sites in the Mynydd Preseli area of west Wales 7 , 8 . An unnamed Lower Palaeozoic sandstone, associated with the west Wales area on the basis of acritarch fossils 9 , is present only as widely disseminated debitage at Stonehenge and possibly as buried stumps (Stones 40g and 42c).

a , Plan view of Stonehenge showing exposed constituent megaliths and their provenance. The plan of Stonehenge was adapted from ref.  6 under a CC BY 4.0 license. Changes in scale and colour were made, and annotations were added. b , An annotated photograph shows the Altar Stone during a 1958 excavation. The Altar Stone photograph is from the Historic England archive. Reuse is not permitted.

The central megalith of Stonehenge, the Altar Stone (Stone 80), is the largest of the bluestones, measuring 4.9 × 1.0 × 0.5 m, and is a recumbent stone (Fig. 1b ), weighing 6 t and composed of pale green micaceous sandstone with distinctive mineralogy 1 , 2 , 10 (containing baryte, calcite and clay minerals, with a notable absence of K-feldspar) (Fig. 2 ).

Minerals with a modal abundance above 0.5% are shown with compositional values averaged across both thin sections. U–Pb ablation pits from laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP–MS) are shown with age (in millions of years ago, Ma), with uncertainty at the 2 σ level.

Previous petrographic work on the Altar Stone has implied an association to the Old Red Sandstone 10 , 11 , 12 (ORS). The ORS is a late Silurian to Devonian sedimentary rock assemblage that crops out widely throughout Great Britain and Ireland (Extended Data Fig. 1 ). ORS lithologies are dominated by terrestrial siliciclastic sedimentary rocks deposited in continental fluvial, lacustrine and aeolian environments 13 . Each ORS basin reflects local subsidence and sediment infill and thus contains proximal crystalline signatures 13 , 14 .

Constraining the provenance of the Altar Stone could give insights into the connectivity of Neolithic people who left no written record 15 . When the Altar Stone arrived at Stonehenge is uncertain; however, it may have been placed within the central trilithon horseshoe during the second construction phase around 2620–2480  bc 3 . Whether the Altar Stone once stood upright as an approximately 4 m high megalith is unclear 15 ; nevertheless, the current arrangement has Stones 55b and 156 from the collapsed Great Trilithon resting atop the prone and broken Altar Stone (Fig. 1b ).

An early proposed source for the Altar Stone from Mill Bay, Pembrokeshire (Cosheston Subgroup of the Anglo-Welsh ORS Basin), close to the Mynydd Preseli source of the doleritic and rhyolitic bluestones, strongly influenced the notion of a sea transport route via the Bristol Channel 12 . However, inconsistencies in petrography and detrital zircon ages between the Altar Stone and the Cosheston Subgroup have ruled this source out 1 , 11 . Nonetheless, a source from elsewhere in the ORS of the Anglo-Welsh Basin was still considered likely, with an inferred collection and overland transport of the Altar Stone en route to Stonehenge from the Mynydd Preseli 1 . However, a source from the Senni Formation (Cosheston Subgroup) is inconsistent with geochemical and petrographic data, which shows that the Anglo-Welsh Basin is highly unlikely to be the source 2 . Thus, the ultimate provenance of the Altar Stone had remained an open question.

Studies of detrital mineral grains are widely deployed to address questions throughout the Earth sciences and have utility in archaeological investigations 16 , 17 . Sedimentary rocks commonly contain a detrital component derived from a crystalline igneous basement, which may reflect a simple or complex history of erosion, transport and deposition cycles. This detrital cargo can fingerprint a sedimentary rock and its hinterland. More detailed insights become evident when a multi-mineral strategy is implemented, which benefits from the varying degrees of robustness to sedimentary transportation in the different minerals 18 , 19 , 20 .

Here, we present in situ U–Pb, Lu–Hf and trace element isotopic data for zircon, apatite and rutile from two fragments of the Altar Stone collected at Stonehenge: MS3 and 2010K.240 21 , 22 . In addition, we present comparative apatite U–Pb dates for the Orcadian Basin from Caithness and Orkney. We utilize statistical tools (Fig. 3 ) to compare the obtained detrital mineral ages and chemistry (Supplementary Information  1 – 3 ) to crystalline terranes and ORS successions across Great Britain, Ireland and Europe (Fig. 4 and Extended Data Fig. 1 ).

a , Multidimensional scaling (MDS) plot of concordant zircon U–Pb ages from the Altar Stone and comparative age datasets, with ellipses at the 95% confidence level 58 . DIM 1 and DIM 2, dimensions 1 and 2. b , Cumulative probability plot of zircon U–Pb ages from crystalline terranes, the Orcadian Basin and the Altar Stone. For a cumulative probability plot of all ORS basins, see Extended Data Fig. 8 .

a , Schematic map of Britain, showing outcrops of ORS and other Devonian sedimentary rocks, basement terranes and major faults. Potential Caledonian source plutons are colour-coded on the basis of age 28 . b , Kernel density estimate diagrams displaying zircon U–Pb age (histogram) and apatite Lu–Hf age (dashed line) spectra from the Altar Stone, the Orcadian Basin 25 and plausible crystalline source terranes. The apatite age components for the Altar Stone and Orcadian Basins are shown below their respective kernel density estimates. Extended Data Fig. 3 contains kernel density estimates of other ORS and New Red Sandstone (NRS) age datasets.

Laurentian basement signatures

The crystalline basement terranes of Great Britain and Ireland, from north to south, are Laurentia, Ganderia, Megumia and East Avalonia (Fig. 4a and Extended Data Fig. 1 ). Cadomia-Armorica is south of the Rheic Suture and encompasses basement rocks in western Europe, including northern France and Spain. East Avalonia, Megumia and Ganderia are partly separated by the Menai Strait Fault System (Fig. 4a ). Each terrane has discrete age components, which have imparted palaeogeographic information into overlying sedimentary basins 13 , 14 , 23 . Laurentia was a palaeocontinent that collided with Baltica and Avalonia (a peri-Gondwanan microcontinent) during the early Palaeozoic Caledonian Orogeny to form Laurussia 14 , 24 . West Avalonia is a terrane that includes parts of eastern Canada and comprised the western margin of Avalonia (Extended Data Fig. 1 ).

Statistical comparisons, using a Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, between zircon ages from the Laurentian crystalline basement and the Altar Stone indicate that at a 95% confidence level, no distinction in provenance is evident between Altar Stone detrital zircon U–Pb ages and those from the Laurentian basement. That is, we cannot reject the null hypothesis that both samples are from the same underlying age distribution (Kolmogorov–Smirnov test: P  > 0.05) (Fig. 3a ).

Detrital zircon age components, defined by concordant analyses from at least 4 grains in the Altar Stone, include maxima at 1,047, 1,091, 1,577, 1,663 and 1,790 Ma (Extended Data Fig. 2 ), corresponding to known tectonomagmatic events and sources within Laurentia and Baltica, including the Grenville (1,095–980 Ma), Labrador (1,690–1,590 Ma), Gothian (1,660–1,520 Ma) and Svecokarellian (1,920–1,770 Ma) orogenies 25 .

Laurentian terranes are crystalline lithologies north of the Iapetus Suture Zone (which marks the collision zone between Laurentia and Avalonia) and include the Southern Uplands, Midland Valley, Grampian, Northern Highlands and Hebridean Terranes (Fig. 4a ). Together, these terranes preserve a Proterozoic to Archaean record of zircon production 24 , distinct from the southern Gondwanan-derived terranes of Britain 20 , 26 (Fig. 4a and Extended Data Fig. 3 ).

Age data from Altar Stone rutile grains also point towards an ultimate Laurentian source with several discrete age components (Extended Data Fig. 4 and Supplementary Information  1 ). Group 2 rutile U–Pb analyses from the Altar Stone include Proterozoic ages from 1,724 to 591 Ma, with 3 grains constituting an age peak at 1,607 Ma, overlapping with Laurentian magmatism, including the Labrador and Pinwarian (1,690–1,380 Ma) orogenies 24 . Southern terranes in Britain are not characterized by a large Laurentian (Mesoproterozoic) crystalline age component 25 (Fig. 4b and Extended Data Fig. 3 ). Instead, terranes south of the Iapetus Suture are defined by Neoproterozoic to early Palaeozoic components, with a minor component from around two billion years ago (Figs. 3b and  4b ).

U–Pb analyses of apatite from the Altar Stone define two distinct age groupings. Group 2 apatite U–Pb analyses define a lower intercept age of 1,018 ± 24 Ma ( n  = 9) (Extended Data Fig. 5 ), which overlaps, within uncertainty, to a zircon age component at 1,047 Ma, consistent with a Grenville source 25 . Apatite Lu–Hf dates at 1,496 and 1,151 Ma also imply distinct Laurentian sources 25 (Fig. 4b , Extended Data Fig. 6 and Supplementary Information  2 ). Ultimately, the presence of Grenvillian apatite in the Altar Stone suggests direct derivation from the Laurentian basement, given the lability of apatite during prolonged chemical weathering 20 , 27 .

Grampian Terrane detrital grains

Apatite and rutile U–Pb analyses from the Altar Stone are dominated by regressions from common Pb that yield lower intercepts of 462 ± 4 Ma ( n  = 108) and 451 ± 8 Ma ( n  = 83), respectively (Extended Data Figs. 4 and 5 ). A single concordant zircon analysis also yields an early Palaeozoic age of 498 ± 17 Ma. Hence, with uncertainty from both lower intercepts, Group 1 apatite and rutile analyses demonstrate a mid-Ordovician (443–466 Ma) age component in the Altar Stone. These mid-Ordovician ages are confirmed by in situ apatite Lu–Hf analyses, which define a lower intercept of 470 ± 29 Ma ( n  = 16) (Extended Data Fig. 6 and Supplementary Information  2 ).

Throughout the Altar Stone are sub-planar 100–200-µm bands of concentrated heavy resistive minerals. These resistive minerals are interpreted to be magmatic in origin, given internal textures (oscillatory zonation), lack of mineral overgrowths (in all dated minerals) (Fig. 2 ) and the igneous apatite trace element signatures 27 (Extended Data Fig. 7 and Supplementary Information  3 ). Moreover, there is a general absence of detrital metamorphic zircon grains, further supporting a magmatic origin for these grains.

The most appropriate source region for such mid-Ordovician grains within Laurentian basement is the Grampian Terrane of northeast Scotland (Fig. 4a ). Situated between the Great Glen Fault to the north and the Highland Boundary Fault to the south, the terrane comprises Neoproterozoic to Lower Palaeozoic metasediments termed the Dalradian Supergroup 28 , which are intruded by a compositionally diverse suite of early Palaeozoic granitoids and gabbros (Fig. 4a ). The 466–443 Ma age component from Group 1 apatite and rutile U–Pb analyses overlaps with the terminal stages of Grampian magmatism and subsequent granite pluton emplacement north of the Highland Boundary Fault 28 (Fig. 4a ).

Geochemical classification plots for the Altar Stone apatite imply a compositionally diverse source, much like the lithological diversity within the Grampian Terrane 28 , with 61% of apatite classified as coming from felsic sources, 35% from mafic sources and 4% from alkaline sources (Extended Data Fig. 7 and Supplementary Information  3 ). Specifically, igneous rocks within the Grampian Terrane are largely granitoids, thus accounting for the predominance of felsic-classified apatite grains 29 . We posit that the dominant supply of detritus from 466–443 Ma came from the numerous similarly aged granitoids formed on the Laurentian margin 28 , which are present in both the Northern Highlands and the Grampian Terranes 28 (Fig. 4a ). The alkaline to calc-alkaline suites in these terranes are volumetrically small, consistent with the scarcity of alkaline apatite grains within the Altar Stone (Extended Data Fig. 7 ). Indeed, the Glen Dessary syenite at 447 ± 3 Ma is the only age-appropriate felsic-alkaline pluton in the Northern Highlands Terrane 30 .

The Stacey and Kramers 31 model of terrestrial Pb isotopic evolution predicts a 207 Pb/ 206 Pb isotopic ratio ( 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i ) of 0.8601 for 465 Ma continental crust. Mid-Ordovician regressions through Group 1 apatite and rutile U–Pb analyses yield upper intercepts for 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i of 0.8603 ± 0.0033 and 0.8564 ± 0.0014, respectively (Extended Data Figs. 4 and 5 and Supplementary Information  1 ). The similarity between apatite and rutile 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i implies they were sourced from the same Mid-Ordovician magmatic fluids. Ultimately, the calculated 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i value is consistent with the older (Laurentian) crust north of the Iapetus Suture in Britain 32 (Fig. 4a ).

Orcadian Basin ORS

The detrital zircon age spectra confirm petrographic associations between the Altar Stone and the ORS. Furthermore, the Altar Stone cannot be a New Red Sandstone (NRS) lithology of Permo-Triassic age. The NRS, deposited from around 280–240 Ma, unconformably overlies the ORS 14 . NRS, such as that within the Wessex Basin (Extended Data Fig. 1 ), has characteristic detrital zircon age components, including Carboniferous to Permian zircon grains, which are not present in the Altar Stone 1 , 23 , 26 , 33 , 34 (Extended Data Fig. 3 ).

An ORS classification for the Altar Stone provides the basis for further interpretation of provenance (Extended Data Figs. 1 and 8 ), given that the ORS crops out in distinct areas of Great Britain and Ireland, including the Anglo-Welsh border and south Wales, the Midland Valley and northeast Scotland, reflecting former Palaeozoic depocentres 14 (Fig. 4a ).

Previously reported detrital zircon ages and petrography show that ORS outcrops of the Anglo-Welsh Basin in the Cosheston Subgroup 1 and Senni Formation 2 are unlikely to be the sources of the Altar Stone (Fig. 4a ). ORS within the Anglo-Welsh Basin is characterized by mid-Palaeozoic zircon age maxima and minor Proterozoic components (Fig. 4a ). Ultimately, the detrital zircon age spectra of the Altar Stone are statistically distinct from the Anglo-Welsh Basin (Fig. 3a ). In addition, the ORS outcrops of southwest England (that is, south of the Variscan front), including north Devon and Cornwall (Cornubian Basin) (Fig. 4a ), show characteristic facies, including marine sedimentary structures and fossils along with a metamorphic fabric 13 , 26 , inconsistent with the unmetamorphosed, terrestrial facies of the Altar Stone 1 , 11 .

Another ORS succession with published age data for comparison is the Dingle Peninsula Basin, southwest Ireland. However, the presence of late Silurian (430–420 Ma) and Devonian (400–350 Ma) apatite, zircon and muscovite from the Dingle Peninsula ORS discount a source for the Altar Stone from southern Ireland 20 . The conspicuous absence of apatite grains of less than 450 Ma in age in the Altar Stone precludes the input of Late Caledonian magmatic grains to the source sediment of the Altar Stone and demonstrates that the ORS of the Altar Stone was deposited prior to or distally from areas of Late Caledonian magmatism, unlike the ORS of the Dingle Peninsula 20 . Notably, no distinction in provenance between the Anglo-Welsh Basin and the Dingle Peninsula ORS is evident (Kolmogorov–Smirnov test: P  > 0.05), suggesting that ORS basins south of the Iapetus Suture are relatively more homogenous in terms of their detrital zircon age components (Fig. 4a ).

In Scotland, ORS predominantly crops out in the Midland Valley and Orcadian Basins (Fig. 4a ). The Midland Valley Basin is bound between the Highland Boundary Fault and the Iapetus Suture and is located within the Midland Valley and Southern Uplands Terranes. Throughout Midland Valley ORS stratigraphy, detrital zircon age spectra broadly show a bimodal age distribution between Lower Palaeozoic and Mesoproterozoic components 35 , 36 (Extended Data Fig. 3 ). Indeed, throughout 9 km of ORS stratigraphy in the Midland Valley Basin and across the Sothern Uplands Fault, no major changes in provenance are recognized 36 (Fig. 4a ). Devonian zircon, including grains as young as 402 ± 5 Ma from the northern ORS in the Midland Valley Basin 36 , further differentiates this basin from the Altar Stone (Fig. 3a and Extended Data Fig. 3 ). The scarcity of Archaean to late Palaeoproterozoic zircon grains within the Midland Valley ORS shows that the Laurentian basement was not a dominant detrital source for those rocks 35 . Instead, ORS of the Midland Valley is primarily defined by zircon from 475 Ma interpreted to represent the detrital remnants of Ordovician volcanism within the Midland Valley Terrane, with only minor and periodic input from Caledonian plutonism 35 .

The Orcadian Basin of northeast Scotland, within the Grampian and Northern Highlands terranes, contains a thick package of mostly Mid-Devonian ORS, around 4 km thick in Caithness and up to around 8 km thick in Shetland 14 (Fig. 4a ). The detrital zircon age spectra from Orcadian Basin ORS provides the closest match to the Altar Stone detrital ages 25 (Fig. 3 and Extended Data Fig. 8 ). A Kolmogorov–Smirnov test on age spectra from the Altar Stone and the Orcadian Basin fails to reject the null hypothesis that they are derived from the same underlying distribution (Kolmogorov–Smirnov test: P  > 0.05) (Fig. 3a ). To the north, ORS on the Svalbard archipelago formed on Laurentian and Baltican basement rocks 37 . Similar Kolmogorov–Smirnov test results, where each detrital zircon dataset is statistically indistinguishable, are obtained for ORS from Svalbard, the Orcadian Basin and the Altar Stone.

Apatite U–Pb age components from Orcadian Basin samples from Spittal, Caithness (AQ1) and Cruaday, Orkney (CQ1) (Fig. 4a ) match those from the Altar Stone. Group 2 apatite from the Altar Stone at 1,018 ± 24 Ma is coeval with a Grenvillian age from Spittal at 1,013 ± 35 Ma. Early Palaeozoic apatite components at 473 ± 25 Ma and 466 ± 6 Ma, from Caithness and Orkney, respectively (Extended Data Fig. 5 and Supplementary Information  1 ), are also identical, within uncertainty, to Altar Stone Group 1 (462 ± 4 Ma) apatite U–Pb analyses and a Lu–Hf component at 470 ± 28 Ma supporting a provenance from the Orcadian Basin for the Altar Stone (Extended Data Fig. 6 and Supplementary Information  2 ).

During the Palaeozoic, the Orcadian Basin was situated between Laurentia and Baltica on the Laurussian palaeocontinent 14 . Correlations between detrital zircon age components imply that both Laurentia and Baltica supplied sediment into the Orcadian Basin 25 , 36 . Detrital grains from more than 900 Ma within the Altar Stone are consistent with sediment recycling from intermediary Neoproterozoic supracrustal successions (for example, Dalradian Supergroup) within the Grampian Terrane but also from the Särv and Sparagmite successions of Baltica 25 , 36 . At around 470 Ma, the Grampian Terrane began to denude 28 . Subsequently, first-cycle detritus, such as that represented by Group 1 apatite and rutile, was shed towards the Orcadian Basin from the southeast 25 .

Thus, the resistive mineral cargo in the Altar Stone represents a complex mix of first and multi-cycle grains from multiple sources. Regardless of total input from Baltica versus Laurentia into the Orcadian Basin, crystalline terranes north of the Iapetus Suture (Fig. 4a ) have distinct age components that match the Altar Stone in contrast to Gondwanan-derived terranes to the south.

The Altar Stone and Neolithic Britain

Isotopic data for detrital zircon and rutile (U–Pb) and apatite (U–Pb, Lu–Hf and trace elements) indicate that the Altar Stone of Stonehenge has a provenance from the ORS in the Orcadian Basin of northeast Scotland (Fig. 4a ). Given this detrital mineral provenance, the Altar Stone cannot have been sourced from southern Britain (that is, south of the Iapetus Suture) (Fig. 4a ), including the Anglo-Welsh Basin 1 , 2 .

Some postulate a glacial transport mechanism for the Mynydd Preseli (Fig. 4a ) bluestones to Salisbury Plain 38 , 39 . However, such transport for the Altar Stone is difficult to reconcile with ice-sheet reconstructions that show a northwards movement of glaciers (and erratics) from the Grampian Mountains towards the Orcadian Basin during the Last Glacial Maximum and, indeed, previous Pleistocene glaciations 40 , 41 . Moreover, there is little evidence of extensive glacial deposition in central southern Britain 40 , nor are Scottish glacial erratics found at Stonehenge 42 . Sr and Pb isotopic signatures from animal and human remains from henges on Salisbury Plain demonstrate the mobility of Neolithic people within Britain 32 , 43 , 44 , 45 . Furthermore, shared architectural elements and rock art motifs between Neolithic monuments in Orkney, northern Britain, and Ireland point towards the long-distance movement of people and construction materials 46 , 47 .

Thus, we posit that the Altar Stone was anthropogenically transported to Stonehenge from northeast Scotland, consistent with evidence of Neolithic inhabitation in this region 48 , 49 . Whereas the igneous bluestones were brought around 225 km from the Mynydd Preseli to Stonehenge 50 (Fig. 4a ), a Scottish provenance for the Altar Stone demands a transport distance of at least 750 km (Fig. 4a ). Nonetheless, even with assistance from beasts of burden 51 , rivers and topographical barriers, including the Grampians, Southern Uplands and the Pennines, along with the heavily forested landscape of prehistoric Britain 52 , would have posed formidable obstacles for overland megalith transportation.

At around 5000  bc , Neolithic people introduced the common vole ( Microtus arvalis ) from continental Europe to Orkney, consistent with the long-distance marine transport of cattle and goods 53 . A Neolithic marine trade network of quarried stone tools is found throughout Britain, Ireland and continental Europe 54 . For example, a saddle quern, a large stone grinding tool, was discovered in Dorset and determined to have a provenance in central Normandy 55 , implying the shipping of stone cargo over open water during the Neolithic. Furthermore, the river transport of shaped sandstone blocks in Britain is known from at least around 1500  bc (Hanson Log Boat) 56 . In Britain and Ireland, sea levels approached present-day heights from around 4000  bc 57 , and although coastlines have shifted, the geography of Britain and Ireland would have permitted sea routes southward from the Orcadian Basin towards southern England (Fig. 4a ). A Scottish provenance for the Altar Stone implies Neolithic transport spanning the length of Great Britain.

This work analysed two 30-µm polished thin sections of the Altar Stone (MS3 and 2010K.240) and two sections of ORS from northeast Scotland (Supplementary Information  4 ). CQ1 is from Cruaday, Orkney (59° 04′ 34.2″ N, 3° 18′ 54.6″ W), and AQ1 is from near Spittal, Caithness (58° 28′ 13.8″ N, 3° 27′ 33.6″ W). Conventional optical microscopy (transmitted and reflected light) and automated mineralogy via a TESCAN Integrated Mineral Analyser gave insights into texture and mineralogy and guided spot placement during LA-ICP–MS analysis. A CLARA field emission scanning electron microscope was used for textural characterization of individual minerals (zircon, apatite and rutile) through high-resolution micrometre-scale imaging under both back-scatter electron and cathodoluminescence. The Altar Stone is a fine-grained and well-sorted sandstone with a mean grain size diameter of ≤300 µm. Quartz grains are sub-rounded and monocrystalline. Feldspars are variably altered to fine-grained white mica. MS3 and 2010K.240 have a weakly developed planar fabric and non-planar heavy mineral laminae approximately 100–200 µm thick. Resistive heavy mineral bands are dominated by zircon, rutile, and apatite, with grains typically 10–40 µm wide. The rock is mainly cemented by carbonate, with localized areas of barite and quartz cement. A detailed account of Altar Stone petrography is provided in refs. 1 , 59 .

Zircon isotopic analysis

Zircon u–pb methods.

Two zircon U–Pb analysis sessions were completed at the GeoHistory facility in the John De Laeter Centre (JdLC), Curtin University, Australia. Ablations within zircon grains were created using an excimer laser RESOlution LE193 nm ArF with a Laurin Technic S155 cell. Isotopic data was collected with an Agilent 8900 triple quadrupole mass spectrometer, with high-purity Ar as the plasma carrier gas (flow rate 1.l min −1 ). An on-sample energy of ~2.3–2.7 J cm −2 with a 5–7 Hz repetition rate was used to ablate minerals for 30–40 s (with 25–60 s of background capture). Two cleaning pulses preceded analyses, and ultra-high-purity He (0.68 ml min −1 ) and N 2 (2.8 ml min −1 ) were used to flush the sample cell. A block of reference mineral was analysed following 15–20 unknowns. The small, highly rounded target grains of the Altar Stone (usually <30 µm in width) necessitated using a spot size diameter of ~24 µm for all ablations. Isotopic data was reduced using Iolite 4 60 with the U-Pb Geochronology data reduction scheme, followed by additional calculation and plotting via IsoplotR 61 . The primary matrix-matched reference zircon 62 used to correct instrumental drift and mass fractionation was GJ-1, 601.95 ± 0.40 Ma. Secondary reference zircon included Plešovice 63 , 337.13 ± 0.37 Ma, 91500 64 , 1,063.78 ± 0.65 Ma, OG1 65 3,465.4 ± 0.6 Ma and Maniitsoq 66 3,008.7 ± 0.6 Ma. Weighted mean U–Pb ages for secondary reference materials were within 2 σ uncertainty of reported values (Supplementary Information  5 ).

Zircon U–Pb results

Across two LA-ICP–MS sessions, 83 U–Pb measurements were obtained on as many zircon grains; 41 were concordant (≤10% discordant), where discordance is defined using the concordia log distance (%) approach 67 . We report single-spot (grain) concordia ages, which have numerous benefits over conventional U–Pb/Pb–Pb ages, including providing an objective measure of discordance that is directly coupled to age and avoids the arbitrary switch between 206 Pb/ 238 U and 207 Pb/ 206 Pb. Furthermore, given the spread in ages (Early Palaeozoic to Archaean), concordia ages provide optimum use of both U–Pb/Pb–Pb ratios, offering greater precision over 206 Pb/ 238 U or 207 Pb/ 206 Pb ages alone.

Given that no direct sampling of the Altar Stone is permitted, we are limited in the amount of material available for destructive analysis, such as LA-ICP–MS. We collate our zircon age data with the U–Pb analyses 1 of FN593 (another fragment of the Altar Stone), filtered using the same concordia log distance (%) discordance filter 67 . The total concordant analyses used in this work is thus 56 over 3 thin sections, each showing no discernible provenance differences. Zircon concordia ages span from 498 to 2,812 Ma. Age maxima (peak) were calculated after Gehrels 68 , and peak ages defined by ≥4 grains include 1,047, 1,091, 1,577, 1,663 and 1,790 Ma.

For 56 concordant ages from 56 grains at >95% certainty, the largest unmissed fraction is calculated at 9% of the entire uniform detrital population 69 . In any case, the most prevalent and hence provenance important components will be sampled for any number of analyses 69 . We analysed all zircon grains within the spatial limit of the technique in the thin sections 70 . We used in situ thin-section analysis, which can mitigate against contamination and sampling biases in detrital studies 71 . Adding apatite (U–Pb and Lu–Hf) and rutile (U–Pb) analyses bolsters our confidence in provenance interpretations as these minerals will respond dissimilarly during transport.

Comparative zircon datasets

Zircon U–Pb compilations of the basement terranes of Britain and Ireland were sourced from refs. 20 , 26 . ORS detrital zircon datasets used for comparison include isotopic data from the Dingle Peninsula Basin 20 , Anglo-Welsh Basin 72 , Midland Valley Basin 35 , Svalbard ORS 37 and Orcadian Basin 25 . NRS zircon U–Pb ages were sourced from the Wessex Basin 33 . Comparative datasets were filtered for discordance as per our definition above 20 , 26 . Kernel density estimates for age populations were created within IsoplotR 61 using a kernel and histogram bandwidth of 50 Ma.

A two-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov statistical test was implemented to compare the compiled zircon age datasets with the Altar Stone (Supplementary Information  6 ). This two-sided test compares the maximum probability difference between two cumulative density age functions, evaluating the null hypothesis that both age spectra are drawn from the same distribution based on a critical value dependent on the number of analyses and a chosen confidence level.

The number of zircon ages within the comparative datasets used varies from the Altar Stone ( n  = 56) to Laurentia ( n  = 2,469). Therefore, to address the degree of dependence on sample n , we also implemented a Monte Carlo resampling (1,000 times) procedure for the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, including the uncertainty on each age determination to recalculate P values and standard deviations (Supplementary Information  7 ), based on the resampled distribution of each sample. The results from Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests, using Monte Carlo resampling (and multidimensional analysis), taking uncertainty due to sample n into account, also support the interpretation that at >95% certainty, no distinction in provenance can be made between the Altar Stone zircon age dataset ( n  = 56) and those from the Orcadian Basin ( n  = 212), Svalbard ORS ( n  = 619 ) and the Laurentian basement (Supplementary Information  7 ).

MDS plots for zircon datasets were created using the MATLAB script of ref.  58 . Here, we adopted a bootstrap resampling (>1,000 times) with Procrustes rotation of Kolmogorov–Smirnov values, which outputs uncertainty ellipses at a 95% confidence level (Fig. 3a ). In MDS plots, stress is a goodness of fit indicator between dissimilarities in the datasets and distances on the MDS plot. Stress values below 0.15 are desirable 58 . For the MDS plot in Fig. 3a , the value is 0.043, which indicates an “excellent” fit 58 .

Rutile isotopic analysis

Rutile u–pb methods.

One rutile U–Pb analysis session was completed at the GeoHistory facility in the JdLC, Curtin University, Australia. Rutile grains were ablated (24 µm) using a Resonetics RESOlution M-50A-LR sampling system, using a Compex 102 excimer laser, and measured using an Agilent 8900 triple quadrupole mass analyser. The analytical parameters included an on-sample energy of 2.7 J cm −2 , a repetition rate of 7 Hz for a total analysis time of 45 s, and 60 s of background data capture. The sample chamber was purged with ultrahigh purity He at a flow rate of 0.68 l min −1 and N 2 at 2.8 ml min −1 .

U–Pb data for rutile analyses was reduced against the R-10 rutile primary reference material 73 (1,091 ± 4 Ma). The secondary reference material used to monitor the accuracy of U–Pb ratios was R-19 rutile. The mean weighted 238 U/ 206 Pb age obtained for R-19 was 491 ± 10 (mean squared weighted deviation (MSWD) = 0.87, p ( χ 2 ) = 0.57) within uncertainty of the accepted age 74 of 489.5 ± 0.9 Ma.

Rutile grains with negligible Th concentrations can be corrected for common Pb using a 208 Pb correction 74 . Previously used thresholds for Th content have included 75 , 76 Th/U < 0.1 or a Th concentration >5% U. However, Th/U ratios for rutile from MS3 are typically > 1; thus, a 208 Pb correction is not applicable. Instead, we use a 207 -based common Pb correction 31 to account for the presence of common Pb. Rutile isotopic data was reduced within Iolite 4 60 using the U–Pb Geochronology reduction scheme and IsoplotR 61 .

Rutile U–Pb Results

Ninety-two rutile U–Pb analyses were obtained in a U–Pb single session, which defined two coherent age groupings on a Tera–Wasserburg plot.

Group 1 constitutes 83 U–Pb rutile analyses, forming a well-defined mixing array on a Tera-Wasserburg plot between common and radiogenic Pb components. This array yields an upper intercept of 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i  = 0.8563 ± 0.0014. The lower intercept implies an age of 451 ± 8 Ma. The scatter about the line (MSWD = 2.7) is interpreted to reflect the variable passage of rutile of diverse grain sizes through the radiogenic Pb closure temperature at ~600 °C during and after magmatic crystallization 77 .

Group 2 comprises 9 grains, with 207 Pb corrected 238 U/ 206 Pb ages ranging from 591–1,724 Ma. Three grains from Group 2 define an age peak 68 at 1,607 Ma. Given the spread in U–Pb ages, we interpret these Proterozoic grains to represent detrital rutile derived from various sources.

Apatite isotopic analysis

Apatite u–pb methods.

Two apatite U–Pb LA-ICP–MS analysis sessions were conducted at the GeoHistory facility in the JdLC, Curtin University, Australia. For both sessions, ablations were created using a RESOlution 193 nm excimer laser ablation system connected to an Agilent 8900 ICP–MS with a RESOlution LE193 nm ArF and a Laurin Technic S155 cell ICP–MS. Other analytical details include a fluence of 2 J cm 2 and a 5 Hz repetition rate. For the Altar Stone section (MS3) and the Orcadian Basin samples (Supplementary Information  4 ), 24- and 20-µm spot sizes were used, respectively.

The matrix-matched primary reference material used for apatite U–Pb analyses was the Madagascar apatite (MAD-1) 78 . A range of secondary reference apatite was analysed, including FC-1 79 (Duluth Complex) with an age of 1,099.1 ± 0.6 Ma, Mount McClure 80 , 81 526 ± 2.1 Ma, Otter Lake 82 913 ± 7 Ma and Durango 31.44 ± 0.18 83  Ma. Anchored regressions (through reported 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i values) for secondary reference material yielded lower intercept ages within 2 σ uncertainty of reported values (Supplementary Information  8 ).

Altar Stone apatite U–Pb results

This first session of apatite U–Pb of MS3 from the Altar Stone yielded 117 analyses. On a Tera–Wasserburg plot, these analyses form two discordant mixing arrays between common and radiogenic Pb components with distinct lower intercepts.

The array from Group 2 apatite, comprised of 9 analyses, yields a lower intercept equivalent to an age of 1,018 ± 24 Ma (MSWD = 1.4) with an upper intercept 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i  = 0.8910 ± 0.0251. The f 207 % (the percentage of common Pb estimated using the 207 Pb method) of apatite analyses in Group 2 ranges from 16.66–88.8%, with a mean of 55.76%.

Group 1 apatite is defined by 108 analyses yielding a lower intercept of 462 ± 4 Ma (MSWD = 2.4) with an upper intercept 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i  = 0.8603 ± 0.0033. The f 207 % of apatite analyses in Group 1 range from 10.14–99.91%, with a mean of 78.65%. The slight over-dispersion of the apatite regression line may reflect some variation in Pb closure temperature in these crystals 84 .

Orcadian basin apatite U–Pb results

The second apatite U–Pb session yielded 138 analyses from samples CQ1 and AQ1. These data form three discordant mixing arrays between radiogenic and common Pb components on a Tera–Wasserburg plot.

An unanchored regression through Group 1 apatite ( n  = 14) from the Cruaday sample (CQ1) yields a lower intercept of 473 ± 25 Ma (MSWD = 1.8) with an upper intercept of 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i  = 0.8497 ± 0.0128. The f 207 % spans 38–99%, with a mean value of 85%.

Group 1 from the Spittal sample (AQ1), comprised of 109 analyses, yields a lower intercept equal to 466 ± 6 Ma (MSWD = 1.2). The upper 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i is equal to 0.8745 ± 0.0038. f 207 % values for this group range from 6–99%, with a mean value of 83%. A regression through Group 2 analyses ( n  = 17) from the Spittal sample yields a lower intercept of 1,013 ± 35 Ma (MSWD = 1) and an upper intercept 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i of 0.9038 ± 0.0101. f 207 % values span 25–99%, with a mean of 76%. Combined U–Pb analyses from Groups 1 from CQ1 and AQ1 ( n  = 123) yield a lower intercept equivalent to 466 ± 6 Ma (MSWD = 1.4) and an upper intercept 207 Pb/ 206 Pb i of 0.8726 ± 0.0036, which is presented beneath the Orcadian Basin kernel density estimate in Fig. 4b .

Apatite Lu–Hf methods

Apatite grains were dated in thin-section by the in situ Lu–Hf method at the University of Adelaide, using a RESOlution-LR 193 nm excimer laser ablation system, coupled to an Agilent 8900 ICP–MS/MS 85 , 86 . A gas mixture of NH 3 in He was used in the mass spectrometer reaction cell to promote high-order Hf reaction products, while equivalent Lu and Yb reaction products were negligible. The mass-shifted (+82 amu) reaction products of 176+82 Hf and 178+82 Hf reached the highest sensitivity of the measurable range and were analysed free from isobaric interferences. 177 Hf was calculated from 178 Hf, assuming natural abundances. 175 Lu was measured on mass as a proxy 85 for 176 Lu. Laser ablation was conducted with a laser beam of 43 µm at 7.5 Hz repetition rate and a fluency of approximately 3.5 J cm −2 . The analysed isotopes (with dwell times in ms between brackets) are 27 Al (2), 43 Ca (2), 57 Fe (2), 88 Sr (2), 89+85 Y (2), 90+83 Zr (2), 140+15 Ce (2), 146 Nd (2), 147 Sm (2), 172 Yb (5), 175 Lu (10), 175+82 Lu (50), 176+82 Hf (200) and 178+82 Hf (150). Isotopes with short dwell times (<10 ms) were measured to confirm apatite chemistry and to monitor for inclusions. 175+82 Lu was monitored for interferences on 176+82 Hf.

Relevant isotope ratios were calculated in LADR 87 using NIST 610 as the primary reference material 88 . Subsequently, reference apatite OD-306 78 (1,597 ± 7 Ma) was used to correct the Lu–Hf isotope ratios for matrix-induced fractionation 86 , 89 . Reference apatites Bamble-1 (1,597 ± 5 Ma), HR-1 (344 ± 2 Ma) and Wallaroo (1,574 ± 6 Ma) were monitored for accuracy verification 85 , 86 , 90 . Measured Lu–Hf dates of 1,098 ± 7 Ma, 346.0 ± 3.7 Ma and 1,575 ± 12 Ma, respectively, are in agreement with published values. All reference materials have negligible initial Hf, and weighted mean Lu–Hf dates were calculated in IsoplotR 61 directly from the (matrix-corrected) 176 Hf/ 176 Lu ratios.

For the Altar Stone apatites, which have variable 177 Hf/ 176 Hf compositions, single-grain Lu–Hf dates were calculated by anchoring isochrons to an initial 177 Hf/ 176 Hf composition 90 of 3.55 ± 0.05, which spans the entire range of initial 177 Hf/ 176 Hf ratios of the terrestrial reservoir (for example, ref. 91 ). The reported uncertainties for the single-grain Lu–Hf dates are presented as 95% confidence intervals, and dates are displayed on a kernel density estimate plot.

Apatite Lu–Hf results

Forty-five apatite Lu–Hf analyses were obtained from 2010K.240. Those with radiogenic Lu ingrowth or lacking common Hf gave Lu–Hf ages, defining four coherent isochrons and age groups.

Group 1, defined by 16 grains, yields a Lu–Hf isochron with a lower intercept of 470 ± 28 Ma (MSWD = 0.16, p ( χ 2 ) = 1). A second isochron through 5 analyses (Group 2) constitutes a lower intercept equivalent to 604 ± 38 Ma (MSWD = 0.14, p ( χ 2 ) = 0.94). Twelve apatite Lu–Hf analyses define Group 3 with a lower intercept of 1,123 ± 42 Ma (MSWD = 0.75, p ( χ 2 ) = 0.68). Three grains constitute the oldest grouping, Group 4 at 1,526 ± 186 Ma (MSWD = 0.014, p ( χ 2 ) = 0.91).

Apatite trace elements methods

A separate session of apatite trace element analysis was undertaken. Instrumentation and analytical set-up were identical to that described in 4.1. NIST 610 glass was the primary reference material for apatite trace element analyses. 43 Ca was used as the internal reference isotope, assuming an apatite Ca concentration of 40 wt%. Secondary reference materials included NIST 612 and the BHVO−2g glasses 92 . Elemental abundances for secondary reference material were generally within 5–10% of accepted values. Apatite trace element data was examined using the Geochemical Data Toolkit 93 .

Apatite trace elements results

One hundred and thirty-six apatite trace element analyses were obtained from as many grains. Geochemical classification schemes for apatite were used 29 , and three compositional groupings (felsic, mafic-intermediate, and alkaline) were defined.

Felsic-classified apatite grains ( n  = 83 (61% of analyses)) are defined by La/Nd of <0.6 and (La + Ce + Pr)/ΣREE (rare earth elements) of <0.5. The median values of felsic grains show a flat to slightly negative gradient on the chondrite-normalized REE plot from light to heavy REEs 94 . Felsic apatite’s median europium anomaly (Eu/Eu*) is 0.59, a moderately negative signature.

Mafic-intermediate apatite 29 ( n  = 48 (35% of grains)) are defined by (La + Ce + Pr)/ΣREE of 0.5–0.7 and a La/Nd of 0.5–1.5. In addition, apatite grains of this group typically exhibit a chondrite-normalized Ce/Yb of >5 and ΣREEs up to 1.25 wt%. Apatite grains classified as mafic-intermediate show a negative gradient on a chondrite-normalized REE plot from light to heavy REEs. The apatite grains of this group generally show the most enrichment in REEs compared to chondrite 94 . The median europium (Eu/Eu*) of mafic-intermediate apatite is 0.62, a moderately negative anomaly.

Lastly, alkaline apatite grains 29 ( n  = 5 (4% of analyses)) are characterized by La/Nd > 1.5 and a (La + Ce + Pr)/ΣREE > 0.8. The median europium anomaly of this group is 0.45. This grouping also shows elevated chondrite-normalized Ce/Yb of >10 and >0.5 wt% for the ΣREEs.

Reporting summary

Further information on research design is available in the  Nature Portfolio Reporting Summary linked to this article.

Data availability

The isotopic and chemical data supporting the findings of this study are available within the paper and its supplementary information files.

Bevins, R. E. et al. Constraining the provenance of the Stonehenge ‘Altar Stone’: evidence from automated mineralogy and U–Pb zircon age dating. J. Archaeolog. Sci. 120 , 105188 (2020).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Bevins, R. E. et al. The Stonehenge Altar Stone was probably not sourced from the Old Red Sandstone of the Anglo-Welsh Basin: time to broaden our geographic and stratigraphic horizons? J. Archaeolog. Sci. Rep. 51 , 104215 (2023).

Google Scholar  

Pearson, M. P. et al. in Stonehenge for the Ancestors: Part 2: Synthesis (eds Pearson, M. P. et al.) 47–75 (Sidestone Press, 2022).

Pitts, M. W. How to Build Stonehenge (Thames & Hudson, 2022).

Nash, D. J. et al. Origins of the sarsen megaliths at Stonehenge. Sci. Adv. 6 , eabc0133 (2020).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Nash, D. J. et al. Petrological and geochemical characterisation of the sarsen stones at Stonehenge. PLoS ONE 16 , e0254760 (2021).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Pearson, M. P. et al. Megalith quarries for Stonehenge’s bluestones. Antiquity 93 , 45–62 (2019).

Article   Google Scholar  

Pearson, M. P. et al. Craig Rhos-y-felin: a Welsh bluestone megalith quarry for Stonehenge. Antiquity 89 , 1331–1352 (2015).

Ixer, R., Turner, P., Molyneux, S. & Bevins, R. The petrography, geological age and distribution of the Lower Palaeozoic Sandstone debitage from the Stonehenge landscape. Wilts. Archaeol. Nat. Hist. Mag. 110 , 1–16 (2017).

Ixer, R. & Turner, P. A detailed re-examination of the petrography of the Altar Stone and other non-sarsen sandstones from Stonehenge as a guide to their provenance. Wilts. Archaeol. Nat. Hist. Mag. 99 , 1–9 (2006).

Ixer, R., Bevins, R. E., Pirrie, D., Turner, P. & Power, M. No provenance is better than wrong provenance: Milford Haven and the Stonehenge sandstones. Wilts. Archaeol. Nat. Hist. Mag. 113 , 1–15 (2020).

Thomas, H. H. The source of the stones of Stonehenge. The Antiq. J. 3 , 239–260 (1923).

Kendall, R. S. The Old Red Sandstone of Britain and Ireland—a review. Proc. Geol. Assoc. 128 , 409–421 (2017).

Woodcock, N., Holdsworth, R. E. & Strachan, R. A. in Geological History of Britain and Ireland (eds Woodcock, N. & Strachan, R. A.) Ch. 6 91–109 (Wiley-Blackwell, 2012).

Pearson, M. P., Pollard, J., Richards, C., Thomas, J. & Welham, K. Stonehenge: Making Sense of a Prehistoric Mystery (Council for British Archaeology, 2015).

Shewan, L. et al. Dating the megalithic culture of laos: Radiocarbon, optically stimulated luminescence and U/Pb zircon results. PLoS ONE 16 , e0247167 (2021).

Kelloway, S. et al. Sourcing olive jars using U–Pb ages of detrital zircons: a study of 16th century olive jars recovered from the Solomon Islands. Geoarchaeology 29 , 47–60 (2014).

Barham, M. et al. The answers are blowin’ in the wind: ultra-distal ashfall zircons, indicators of Cretaceous super-eruptions in eastern Gondwana. Geology 44 , 643–646 (2016).

Article   ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Gillespie, J., Glorie, S., Khudoley, A. & Collins, A. S. Detrital apatite U–Pb and trace element analysis as a provenance tool: Insights from the Yenisey Ridge (Siberia). Lithos 314–315 , 140–155 (2018).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Fairey, B. J. et al. The provenance of the Devonian Old Red Sandstone of the Dingle Peninsula, SW Ireland; the earliest record of Laurentian and peri-Gondwanan sediment mixing in Ireland. J. Geol. Soc. 175 , 411–424 (2018).

Bevins, R. E. et al. Assessing the authenticity of a sample taken from the Altar Stone at Stonehenge in 1844 using portable XRF and automated SEM-EDS. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 49 , 103973 (2023).

Bevins, R. E. et al. Linking derived debitage to the Stonehenge Altar Stone using portable X-ray fluorescence analysis. Mineral. Mag. 86 , 688–700 (2022).

Morton, A. C., Chisholm, J. I. & Frei, D. Provenance of Carboniferous sandstones in the central and southern parts of the Pennine Basin, UK: evidence from detrital zircon ages. Proc. York. Geol. Soc. 63 , https://doi.org/10.1144/pygs2020-010 (2021).

Cawood, P. A., Nemchin, A. A., Strachan, R., Prave, T. & Krabbendam, M. Sedimentary basin and detrital zircon record along East Laurentia and Baltica during assembly and breakup of Rodinia. J. Geol. Soc. 164 , 257–275 (2007).

Strachan, R. A., Olierook, H. K. H. & Kirkland, C. L. Evidence from the U–Pb–Hf signatures of detrital zircons for a Baltican provenance for basal Old Red Sandstone successions, northern Scottish Caledonides. J. Geol. Soc. 178 , https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2020-241 (2021).

Stevens, T. & Baykal, Y. Detrital zircon U–Pb ages and source of the late Palaeocene Thanet Formation, Kent, SE England. Proc. Geol. Assoc. 132 , 240–248 (2021).

O’Sullivan, G., Chew, D. M., Kenny, G., Heinrichs, I. & Mulligan, D. The trace element composition of apatite and its application to detrital provenance studies. Earth Sci. Rev. 201 , 103044 (2020).

Oliver, G., Wilde, S. & Wan, Y. Geochronology and geodynamics of Scottish granitoids from the late Neoproterozoic break-up of Rodinia to Palaeozoic collision. J. Geol. Soc. 165 , 661–674 (2008).

Fleischer, M. & Altschuler, Z. S. The lanthanides and yttrium in minerals of the apatite group-an analysis of the available data. Neu. Jb. Mineral. Mh. 10 , 467–480 (1986).

Goodenough, K. M., Millar, I., Strachan, R. A., Krabbendam, M. & Evans, J. A. Timing of regional deformation and development of the Moine Thrust Zone in the Scottish Caledonides: constraints from the U–Pb geochronology of alkaline intrusions. J. Geol. Soc. 168 , 99–114 (2011).

Stacey, J. S. & Kramers, J. D. Approximation of terrestrial lead isotope evolution by a two-stage model. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 26 , 207–221 (1975).

Evans, J. A. et al. Applying lead (Pb) isotopes to explore mobility in humans and animals. PLoS ONE 17 , e0274831 (2022).

Morton, A., Knox, R. & Frei, D. Heavy mineral and zircon age constraints on provenance of the Sherwood Sandstone Group (Triassic) in the eastern Wessex Basin, UK. Proc. Geol. Assoc. 127 , 514–526 (2016).

Morton, A., Hounslow, M. W. & Frei, D. Heavy-mineral, mineral-chemical and zircon-age constraints on the provenance of Triassic sandstones from the Devon coast, southern Britain. Geologos 19 , 67–85 (2013).

Phillips, E. R., Smith, R. A., Stone, P., Pashley, V. & Horstwood, M. Zircon age constraints on the provenance of Llandovery to Wenlock sandstones from the Midland Valley terrane of the Scottish Caledonides. Scott. J. Geol. 45 , 131–146 (2009).

McKellar, Z., Hartley, A. J., Morton, A. C. & Frei, D. A multidisciplinary approach to sediment provenance analysis of the late Silurian–Devonian Lower Old Red Sandstone succession, northern Midland Valley Basin, Scotland. J. Geol. Soc. 177 , 297–314 (2019).

Beranek, L. P., Gee, D. G. & Fisher, C. M. Detrital zircon U–Pb–Hf isotope signatures of Old Red Sandstone strata constrain the Silurian to Devonian paleogeography, tectonics, and crustal evolution of the Svalbard Caledonides. GSA Bull. 132 , 1987–2003 (2020).

John, B. The Stonehenge Bluestones (Greencroft Books, 2018).

John, B. The Stonehenge bluestones did not come from Waun Mawn in West Wales. The Holocene https://doi.org/10.1177/09596836241236318 (2024).

Clark, C. D. et al. Growth and retreat of the last British–Irish Ice Sheet, 31 000 to 15 000 years ago: the BRITICE-CHRONO reconstruction. Boreas 51 , 699–758 (2022).

Gibbard, P. L. & Clark, C. D. in Developments in Quaternary Sciences , Vol. 15 (eds Ehlers, J. et al.) 75–93 (Elsevier, 2011).

Bevins, R., Ixer, R., Pearce, N., Scourse, J. & Daw, T. Lithological description and provenancing of a collection of bluestones from excavations at Stonehenge by William Hawley in 1924 with implications for the human versus ice transport debate of the monument’s bluestone megaliths. Geoarchaeology 38 , 771–785 (2023).

Snoeck, C. et al. Strontium isotope analysis on cremated human remains from Stonehenge support links with west Wales. Sci. Rep. 8 , 10790 (2018).

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Viner, S., Evans, J., Albarella, U. & Pearson, M. P. Cattle mobility in prehistoric Britain: strontium isotope analysis of cattle teeth from Durrington Walls (Wiltshire, Britain). J. Archaeolog. Sci. 37 , 2812–2820 (2010).

Evans, J. A., Chenery, C. A. & Fitzpatrick, A. P. Bronze Age childhood migration of individuals near Stonehenge, revealed by strontium and oxygen isotope tooth enamel analysis. Archaeometry 48 , 309–321 (2006).

Bradley, R. Beyond the bluestones: links between distant monuments in Late Neolithic Britain and Ireland. Antiquity 98 , 821–828 (2024).

Bradley, R. Long distance connections within Britain and Ireland: the evidence of insular rock art. Proc. Prehist. Soc. 89 , 249–271 (2023).

Fairweather, A. D. & Ralston, I. B. M. The Neolithic timber hall at Balbridie, Grampian Region, Scotland: the building, the date, the plant macrofossils. Antiquity 67 , 313–323 (1993).

Bayliss, A., Marshall, P., Richards, C. & Whittle, A. Islands of history: the Late Neolithic timescape of Orkney. Antiquity 91 , 1171–1188 (2017).

Parker Pearson, M. et al. in Megaliths and Geology (eds Bouventura, R. et al.) 151–169 (Archaeopress Publishing, 2020).

Pigière, F. & Smyth, J. First evidence for cattle traction in Middle Neolithic Ireland: A pivotal element for resource exploitation. PLoS ONE 18 , e0279556 (2023).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Godwin, H. History of the natural forests of Britain: establishment, dominance and destruction. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 271 , 47–67 (1975).

ADS   Google Scholar  

Martínková, N. et al. Divergent evolutionary processes associated with colonization of offshore islands. Mol. Ecol. 22 , 5205–5220 (2013).

Bradley, R. & Edmonds, M. Interpreting the Axe Trade: Production and Exchange in Neolithic Britain (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005).

Peacock, D., Cutler, L. & Woodward, P. A Neolithic voyage. Int. J. Naut. Archaeol. 39 , 116–124 (2010).

Pinder, A. P., Panter, I., Abbott, G. D. & Keely, B. J. Deterioration of the Hanson Logboat: chemical and imaging assessment with removal of polyethylene glycol conserving agent. Sci. Rep. 7 , 13697 (2017).

Harff, J. et al. in Submerged Landscapes of the European Continental Shelf: Quaternary Paleoenvironments (eds Flemming, N. C. et al.) 11–49 (2017).

Nordsvan, A. R., Kirscher, U., Kirkland, C. L., Barham, M. & Brennan, D. T. Resampling (detrital) zircon age distributions for accurate multidimensional scaling solutions. Earth Sci. Rev. 204 , 103149 (2020).

Ixer, R., Bevins, R. & Turner, P. Alternative Altar Stones? Carbonate-cemented micaceous sandstones from the Stonehenge landscape. Wilts. Archaeol. Nat. Hist. Mag. 112 , 1–13 (2019).

Paton, C., Hellstrom, J. C., Paul, B., Woodhead, J. D. & Hergt, J. M. Iolite: freeware for the visualisation and processing of mass spectrometric data. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. 26 , 2508–2518 (2011).

Vermeesch, P. IsoplotR: a free and open toolbox for geochronology. Geosci. Front. 9 , 1479–1493 (2018).

Jackson, S. E., Pearson, N. J., Griffin, W. L. & Belousova, E. A. The application of laser ablation-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry to in situ U–Pb zircon geochronology. Chem. Geol. 211 , 47–69 (2004).

Sláma, J. et al. Plešovice zircon—A new natural reference material for U–Pb and Hf isotopic microanalysis. Chem. Geol. 249 , 1–35 (2008).

Wiedenbeck, M. et al. Three natural zircon standards for U-Th-Pb, Lu–Hf, trace element and REE analyses. Geostand. Newslett. 19 , 1–23 (1995).

Stern, R. A., Bodorkos, S., Kamo, S. L., Hickman, A. H. & Corfu, F. Measurement of SIMS instrumental mass fractionation of Pb isotopes during zircon dating. Geostand. Geoanal. Res. 33 , 145–168 (2009).

Marsh, J. H., Jørgensen, T. R. C., Petrus, J. A., Hamilton, M. A. & Mole, D. R. U-Pb, trace element, and hafnium isotope composition of the Maniitsoq zircon: a potential new Archean zircon reference material. Goldschmidt Abstr. 2019 , 18 (2019).

Vermeesch, P. On the treatment of discordant detrital zircon U–Pb data. Geochronology 3 , 247–257 (2021).

Gehrels, G. in Tectonics of Sedimentary Basins: Recent Advances (eds Busby, C. & Azor, A.) 45–62 (2011).

Vermeesch, P. How many grains are needed for a provenance study? Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 224 , 441–451 (2004).

Dröllner, M., Barham, M., Kirkland, C. L. & Ware, B. Every zircon deserves a date: selection bias in detrital geochronology. Geol. Mag. 158 , 1135–1142 (2021).

Zutterkirch, I. C., Kirkland, C. L., Barham, M. & Elders, C. Thin-section detrital zircon geochronology mitigates bias in provenance investigations. J. Geol. Soc. 179 , jgs2021–070 (2021).

Morton, A., Waters, C., Fanning, M., Chisholm, I. & Brettle, M. Origin of Carboniferous sandstones fringing the northern margin of the Wales-Brabant Massif: insights from detrital zircon ages. Geol. J. 50 , 553–574 (2015).

Luvizotto, G. et al. Rutile crystals as potential trace element and isotope mineral standards for microanalysis. Chem. Geol. 261 , 346–369 (2009).

Zack, T. et al. In situ U–Pb rutile dating by LA-ICP-MS: 208 Pb correction and prospects for geological applications. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 162 , 515–530 (2011).

Dröllner, M., Barham, M. & Kirkland, C. L. Reorganization of continent-scale sediment routing based on detrital zircon and rutile multi-proxy analysis. Basin Res. 35 , 363–386 (2023).

Liebmann, J., Barham, M. & Kirkland, C. L. Rutile ages and thermometry along a Grenville anorthosite pathway. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 24 , e2022GC010330 (2023).

Zack, T. & Kooijman, E. Petrology and geochronology of rutile. Rev. Mineral. Geochem. 83 , 443–467 (2017).

Thompson, J. et al. Matrix effects in Pb/U measurements during LA-ICP-MS analysis of the mineral apatite. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. 31 , 1206–1215 (2016).

Schmitz, M. D., Bowring, S. A. & Ireland, T. R. Evaluation of Duluth Complex anorthositic series (AS3) zircon as a U–Pb geochronological standard: new high-precision isotope dilution thermal ionization mass spectrometry results. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 67 , 3665–3672 (2003).

Schoene, B. & Bowring, S. U–Pb systematics of the McClure Mountain syenite: thermochronological constraints on the age of the 40 Ar/ 39 Ar standard MMhb. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 151 , 615–630 (2006).

Thomson, S. N., Gehrels, G. E., Ruiz, J. & Buchwaldt, R. Routine low-damage apatite U–Pb dating using laser ablation-multicollector-ICPMS. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 13 , https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GC003928 (2012).

Barfod, G. H., Krogstad, E. J., Frei, R. & Albarède, F. Lu–Hf and PbSL geochronology of apatites from Proterozoic terranes: a first look at Lu–Hf isotopic closure in metamorphic apatite. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 69 , 1847–1859 (2005).

McDowell, F. W., McIntosh, W. C. & Farley, K. A. A precise 40 Ar– 39 Ar reference age for the Durango apatite (U–Th)/He and fission-track dating standard Chem. Geol. 214 , 249–263 (2005).

Kirkland, C. L. et al. Apatite: a U–Pb thermochronometer or geochronometer? Lithos 318-319 , 143–157 (2018).

Simpson, A. et al. In-situ Lu Hf geochronology of garnet, apatite and xenotime by LA ICP MS/MS. Chem. Geol. 577 , 120299 (2021).

Glorie, S. et al. Robust laser ablation Lu–Hf dating of apatite: an empirical evaluation. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 537 , 165–184 (2024).

Norris, C. & Danyushevsky, L. Towards estimating the complete uncertainty budget of quantified results measured by LA-ICP-MS. Goldschmidt Abstr. 2018 , 1894 (2018).

Nebel, O., Morel, M. L. A. & Vroon, P. Z. Isotope dilution determinations of Lu, Hf, Zr, Ta and W, and Hf isotope compositions of NIST SRM 610 and 612 glass wafers. Geostand. Geoanal. Res. 33 , 487–499 (2009).

Kharkongor, M. B. K. et al. Apatite laser ablation LuHf geochronology: A new tool to date mafic rocks. Chem. Geol. 636 , 121630 (2023).

Glorie, S. et al. Detrital apatite Lu–Hf and U–Pb geochronology applied to the southwestern Siberian margin. Terra Nova 34 , 201–209 (2022).

Spencer, C. J., Kirkland, C. L., Roberts, N. M. W., Evans, N. J. & Liebmann, J. Strategies towards robust interpretations of in situ zircon Lu–Hf isotope analyses. Geosci. Front. 11 , 843–853 (2020).

Jochum, K. P. et al. GeoReM: a new geochemical database for reference materials and isotopic standards. Geostand. Geoanal. Res. 29 , 333–338 (2005).

Janousek, V., Farrow, C. & Erban, V. Interpretation of whole-rock geochemical data in igneous geochemistry: introducing Geochemical Data Toolkit (GCDkit). J. Petrol. 47 , 1255–1259 (2006).

Boynton, W. V. in Developments in Geochemistry , Vol. 2 (ed. Henderson, P.) 63–114 (Elsevier, 1984).

Landing, E., Keppie, J. D., Keppie, D. F., Geyer, G. & Westrop, S. R. Greater Avalonia—latest Ediacaran–Ordovicia “peribaltic” terrane bounded by continental margin prisms (“Ganderia”, Harlech Dome, Meguma): review, tectonic implications, and paleogeography. Earth Sci. Rev. 224 , 103863 (2022).

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding was provided by an Australian Research Council Discovery Project (DP200101881). Sample material was loaned from the Salisbury Museum and Amgueddfa Cymru–Museum Wales and sampled with permission. The authors thank A. Green for assistance in accessing the Salisbury Museum material; B. McDonald, N. Evans, K. Rankenburg and S. Gilbert for their help during isotopic analysis; and P. Sampaio for assistance with statistical analysis. Instruments in the John de Laeter Centre, Curtin University, were funded via AuScope, the Australian Education Investment Fund, the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy, and the Australian Government. R.E.B. acknowledges a Leverhulme Trust Emeritus Fellowship.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Timescales of Mineral Systems Group, School of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia

Anthony J. I. Clarke & Christopher L. Kirkland

Department of Geography and Earth Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, UK

Richard E. Bevins & Nick J. G. Pearce

Department of Earth Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

Stijn Glorie

Institute of Archaeology, University College London, London, UK

Rob A. Ixer

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

A.J.I.C.: writing, original draft, formal analysis, investigation, visualization, project administration, conceptualization and methodology. C.L.K.: supervision, resources, formal analysis, funding acquisition, writing, review and editing, conceptualization and methodology. R.E.B.: writing, review and editing, resources and conceptualization. N.J.G.P.: writing, review and editing, resources and conceptualization. S.G.: resources, formal analysis, funding acquisition, writing, review and editing, supervision, and methodology. R.A.I.: writing, review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony J. I. Clarke .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

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

Additional information

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

Extended data figures and tables

Extended data fig. 1 geological maps of potential source terranes for the altar stone..

a , Schematic map of the North Atlantic region with the crystalline terranes in the Caledonian-Variscan orogens depicted prior to the opening of the North Atlantic, adapted after ref.  95 . b , Schematic map of Britain and Ireland, showing outcrops of Old Red Sandstone, basement terranes, and major faults with reference to Stonehenge.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Altar Stone zircon U–Pb data.

a , Tera-Wasserburg plot for all concordant (≤10% discordant) zircon analyses reported from three samples of the Altar Stone. Discordance is defined using the concordia log % distance approach, and analytical ellipses are shown at the two-sigma uncertainty level. The ellipse colour denotes the sample. Replotted isotopic data for thin-section FN593 is from ref. 1 . b , Kernel density estimate for concordia U–Pb ages of concordant zircon from the Altar Stone, using a kernel and histogram bandwidth of 50 Ma. Fifty-six concordant analyses are shown from 113 measurements. A rug plot is given below the kernel density estimate, marking the age of each measurement.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Comparative kernel density estimates of concordant zircon concordia ages from the Altar Stone, crystalline sources terranes, and comparative sedimentary rock successions.

Each plot uses a kernel and histogram bandwidth of 50 Ma. The zircon U–Pb geochronology source for each comparative dataset is shown with their respective kernel density estimate. Zircon age data for basement terranes (right side of the plot) was sourced from refs. 20 , 26 .

Extended Data Fig. 4 Plots of rutile U–Pb ages.

a , Tera-Wasserburg plot of rutile U–Pb analyses from the Altar Stone (thin-section MS3). Isotopic data is shown at the two-sigma uncertainty level. b , Kernel density estimate for Group 2 rutile 207 Pb corrected 206 Pb/ 238 U ages, using a kernel and histogram bandwidth of 25 Ma. The rug plot below the kernel density estimate marks the age for each measurement.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Apatite Tera-Wasserburg U–Pb plots for the Altar Stone and Orcadian Basin.

a , Altar Stone apatite U–Pb analyses from thin-section MS3. b , Orcadian Basin apatite U–Pb analyses from sample AQ1, Spittal, Caithness. c , Orcadian Basin apatite U–Pb analyses from sample CQ1, Cruaday, Orkney. All data are shown as ellipses at the two-sigma uncertainty level. Regressions through U–Pb data are unanchored.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Combined kernel density estimate and histogram for apatite Lu–Hf single-grain ages from the Altar Stone.

Lu–Hf apparent ages from thin-section 2010K.240. Kernel and histogram bandwidth of 50 Ma. The rug plot below the kernel density estimate marks each calculated age. Single spot ages are calculated assuming an initial average terrestrial 177 Hf/ 176 Hf composition (see  Methods ).

Extended Data Fig. 7 Apatite trace element classification plots for the Altar Stone thin-section MS3.

Colours for all plots follow the geochemical discrimination defined in A. a , Reference 29  classification plot for apatite with an inset pie chart depicting the compositional groupings based on these geochemical ratios. b , The principal component plot of geochemical data from apatite shows the main eigenvectors of geochemical dispersion, highlighting enhanced Nd and La in the distinguishing groups. Medians for each group are denoted with a cross. c , Plot of total rare earth elements (REE) (%) versus (Ce/Yb) n with Mahalanobis ellipses around compositional classification centroids. A P = 0.5 in Mahalanobis distance analysis represents a two-sided probability, indicating that 50% of the probability mass of the chi-squared distribution for that compositional grouping is contained within the ellipse. This probability is calculated based on the cumulative distribution function of the chi-squared distribution. d , Chondrite normalized REE plot of median apatite values for each defined apatite classification type.

Extended Data Fig. 8 Cumulative probability density function plot.

Cumulative probability density function plot of comparative Old Red Sandstone detrital zircon U–Pb datasets (concordant ages) versus the Altar Stone. Proximity between cumulative density probability lines implies similar detrital zircon age populations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information 1.

Zircon, rutile, and apatite U–Pb data for the Altar Stone and Orcadian Basin samples. A ) Zircon U–Pb data for MS3, 2010K.240, and FN593. B ) Zircon U–Pb data for secondary references. C ) Rutile U–Pb data for MS3. D ) Rutile U–Pb data for secondary references. E ) Session 1 apatite U–Pb data for MS3. F ) Session 1 apatite U–Pb data for secondary references. G ) Session 2 apatite U–Pb data for Orcadian Basin samples. H ) Session 2 apatite U–Pb data for secondary references.

Reporting Summary

Peer review file, supplementary information 2.

Apatite Lu–Hf data for the Altar Stone. A) Apatite Lu–Hf isotopic data and ages for thin-section 2010K.240. B) Apatite Lu–Hf data for secondary references.

Supplementary Information 3

Apatite trace elements for the Altar Stone. A) Apatite trace element data for MS3. B) Apatite trace element secondary reference values.

Supplementary Information 4–8

Supplementary Information 4 : Summary of analyses. Summary table of analyses undertaken in this work on samples from the Altar Stone and the Orcadian Basin. Supplementary Information 5: Summary of zircon U–Pb reference material. A summary table of analyses was obtained for zircon U–Pb secondary reference material run during this work. Supplementary Information 6: Kolmogorov–Smirnov test results. Table of D and P values for the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test on zircon ages from the Altar Stone and potential source regions. Supplementary Information 7: Kolmogorov–Smirnov test results, with Monte Carlo resampling. Table of D and P values for the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test (with Monte Carlo resampling) on zircon ages from the Altar Stone and potential source regions. Supplementary Information 8: Summary of apatite U–Pb reference material. A summary table of analyses was obtained for the apatite U–Pb secondary reference material run during this work.

Rights and permissions

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Clarke, A.J.I., Kirkland, C.L., Bevins, R.E. et al. A Scottish provenance for the Altar Stone of Stonehenge. Nature 632 , 570–575 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07652-1

Download citation

Received : 16 December 2023

Accepted : 03 June 2024

Published : 14 August 2024

Issue Date : 15 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07652-1

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Stonehenge’s enigmatic centre stone was hauled 800 kilometres from scotland.

• Nisha Gaind

Nature (2024)

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

Quick links

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

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