theoretical contribution thesis example

How are theoretical contributions written? Some samples with illustrations.

Whetten (1989) elucidated in his paper in the academy of management that theoretical contribution or development is not aimed to rewrite the same phenomenon but to search new knowledge/findings (can be a mediator or moderator or new antecedent) having logical justification. It can be Whys, Whats, and Hows? So when we find a new relationship between the constructs which has not been explored in preceding studies, the next step is to explain why such a relationship exists.

Figure I what is the theoretical contribution

For example, in Figure 2 You may witness that the second sentence says the relationship between IL (inclusive leadership) and creativity has been studied (Javed et al. 2019); however, the relationship between IL and innovative work behavior (IWB) is new in the literature. The second and third sentences support the above relationship with reasons and justifications. Next, the authors compare the finding with previous studies.

Figure II an example from the papers

Another example of a theoretical contribution taken from the journal of Business ethics (Wang, Zhang, and Jia 2019) first reveals that CSR (corporate social responsibility has been for the first time linked with employees’ voices. However, strategic management research or past management studies mostly focus on or connect CSR with company performance. After that, the authors have cited various past studies. The contribution ends with an explanation and confirms that CSR can influence two kinds of employee voice. The last sentence reveals why this finding is significant.

Figure III an example from JBE

Another example is taken from the journal of sustainable tourism. It explicates that this is the first study that has investigated the green creativity phenomenon in the tourism industry. However, figure four indicates that ESSL has impact on green creativity, which is a theoretical contribution in the context of the tourism industry. Next, the comparison between two leadership styles are elaborated in the paragraph.

Figure IV theoretical contribution from JOST

Figure V Contribution from JBE

The picture is taken from the Tourism Management journal (Mittal and Dhar 2016)

Figure five presents a much simpler and shortest approach to writing the theoretical contribution in the research papers. It just elucidates and explains the relationships with no details and past literature. It seems the journal has different criteria for theoretical contributions.

Different journals and authors have different approaches to writing theoretical contributions. My learning suggests that relationships between the constructs should be new (novel), with strong theoretical justification and explanation (why), and the authors also have the responsibility to guide the reviewers that what has been done in past and how your relationship is different and fitted there.

Your opinion and experience is always solicited and would add to our knowledge.

The Author is a Ph.D. scholar in HRM and can be reached at the following addresses.

Tahseen Ahemd Bhutto

Wechat: tahaeenahmed

Whatsap: +92 313 1012 386

References:

Javed, Basharat, Sayyed Muhammad Mehdi Raza Naqvi, Abdul Karim Khan, Surendra Arjoon, and Hafiz Habib Tayyeb. 2019. “Impact of Inclusive Leadership on Innovative Work Behavior: The Role of Psychological Safety.” Journal of Management and Organization 25 (1): 117–36. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2017.3 .

Mittal, Swati, and Rajib Lochan Dhar. 2016. “Effect of Green Transformational Leadership on Green Creativity: A Study of Tourist Hotels.” Tourism Management 57: 118–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.05.007 .

Wang, Juan, Zhe Zhang, and Ming Jia. 2019. “Echoes of Corporate Social Responsibility: How and When Does CSR Influence Employees’ Promotive and Prohibitive Voices?” Journal of Business Ethics , no. March. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04151-6 .

Whetten, David A. 1989. “What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution?” Academy Management Review 14 (4): 490–95. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308371 .

Share this:

Published by

Tahseen ahmed bhutto.

PhD Scholar at University of Finance and Economics View all posts by Tahseen Ahmed Bhutto

Leave a comment Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

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

How To Write A Theoretical Research Paper – Tips & Examples

Writing a theoretical research paper might seem tough, but it’s a great way to share your ideas and discoveries. This guide will show you step-by-step how to plan, write, and share your thoughts through a strong research paper.

We’ll give you tips on how to build a clear framework and how to explain your thoughts clearly. You’ll also see examples that help make everything easier to understand.

Whether you’re a student or a researcher, these tips will help you write a paper that’s well-organized and full of good information. Let’s get started and learn how to create a great research paper!

How To Write A Theoretical Research Paper

What Is Theoretical Research?

Theoretical research might sound daunting, but once you dive into its essence, it is simple.

In theoretical research, you focus on creating and exploring theories, models, and frameworks to understand and explain phenomena.

As you do this, you may not necessarily rely on direct observation or data collection.

In theoretical research, everything begins with a hypothesis. This hypothesis acts as a springboard for developing a complete theoretical framework. 

In the context of a research paper, especially in the social sciences, this type of research does not involve direct interaction with the subject of study. Instead, it focuses on the analysis of the research problem through a conceptual lens.

This lens is crafted from existing theory and literature review, which guides the research process meticulously.

The framework you’ve chosen essentially acts as a map, outlining the research questions and the methodology to explore these questions without the immediate need for empirical data.

One might wonder about the practical applications of such research. Theoretical models are not just abstract concepts; they are used to help develop practical solutions and interventions.

In psychology, a theoretical model might be applied to periods of significant social change to predict outcomes and suggest interventions.

Theoretical research can seem isolated from real-world applications, yet it serves as the foundation upon which more practical, or empirical research builds.

Without it, the structure of science would lack depth and fail to reach the heights of innovation and discovery that we see today.

Theoretical vs Empirical Research

Aside from theoretical research, theres also another type of research – empirical. Understanding the differences may help you significantly.

Theoretical research delves deep into concepts and abstracts. Here, you build your study around existing theories, crafting a theoretical framework that drives your inquiry.

In the social sciences, this could mean developing a new hypothesis on the dynamics of social change based on key social science theories from literature.

The theoretical framework serves not just as a guide but as a lens through which you examine your research problem. It’s crafted from thorough literature reviews and is often enriched by engaging with the philosophy of research.

This framework outlines key variables and the relationships among them, setting the stage for potential validation or challenge through empirical methods.

On the other hand, empirical research demands direct interaction with the subject matter through data collection. 

Empirical research seeks to validate the theories posited by your theoretical framework. Here, the focus shifts to practical applications and direct observations, providing concrete answers to your research questions.

Both research types are vital, each feeding into the other:

• Theoretical research frames the questions and potential explanations, while
• Empirical research tests these frameworks against reality. 

Together, they form the complete cycle of the research process, crucial for any scholarly research project.

Writing a theoretical research paper can seem daunting, but with the right approach, you can tackle this intellectually stimulating task with confidence. Here’s a step-by-step guide:

Step 1: Understand Your Research Problem

Your journey begins with a deep understanding of the research problem you are investigating.

This involves identifying the gaps in existing literature and pinpointing the areas that require further exploration. You may want to spend some time reading around, or use AI tools to help simplifying your reading process.

Engage with key theories and recent studies to sharpen your focus. The research problem forms the nucleus of your paper, guiding every subsequent step.

Step 2: Develop a Robust Theoretical Framework

Constructing a theoretical framework is crucial. This framework is the scaffolding of your research, supporting your entire study.

It consists of concepts and theories borrowed from existing literature and uniquely integrated to address your research problem.

Remember, a strong framework not only guides your analysis but also helps explain the relationships among key variables in your study.

Step 3: Literature Review

Your literature review should do more than summarize existing research; it should critically engage with current theories and frameworks, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses.

This section is not just a backdrop; it’s an active participant in shaping your research narrative. Organize it into a logical framework that systematically addresses the research questions posed by your study.

Literature review used to take a long time to complete. With the right tools however, things can be a lot easier:

Step 4: Outline Your Research Design

While theoretical research does not involve empirical data collection, the design of your research is still paramount. Detail the methods you use to construct your theoretical framework.

Discuss the “theory-building research methods” that you applied, such as conceptual analysis or deductive reasoning, which help clarify and test the theoretical assumptions of your study.

Step 5: Develop the Theory or Conceptual Framework

Here’s where you get to argue your point. Present your theoretical or conceptual contributions. Build upon previous research but introduce your innovative perspective.

Support each argument with robust reasoning, examples from pertinent research, and references to foundational texts.

This is also where you validate or challenge theoretical assumptions, demonstrating the novelty and relevance of your framework.

Step 6: Hypothetical Scenarios or Thought Experiments

Illustrate your concepts through hypothetical scenarios or thought experiments.

These are essential for demonstrating how your theoretical model applies to real-world situations or specific periods, even if your paper is purely conceptual.

This step is particularly engaging, as it transforms abstract concepts into tangible insights.

Step 7: Discussion

Analyse the implications of your theoretical developments. How do they: 

• Impact existing theories? or
• What do they mean for future research? 

This part of your paper is crucial for engaging with the scholarly community. It’s where you:

• interpret your findings,
• discuss their significance, and
• propose how they can guide future empirical or theoretical research.

Step 8: Craft Your Discussion Section

The discussion section is your chance to dive deep into the analysis of your theoretical propositions.

Evaluate the strengths and limitations of your framework, discuss its potential applications, and how it challenges or supports existing paradigms.

This section is not just a summary; it’s an insightful discourse that positions your research within the broader academic conversation.

Step 9: Concluding Thoughts

Summarize the key elements of your research, reinforcing the significance of your findings and their implications for further study.

Restate the research problem and reflect on how your work addresses it effectively.

Here, you tie all the sections together, reinforcing the coherence and impact of your theoretical investigation.

Step 10: Reference Section

No academic paper is complete without a thorough reference section. List all the sources you’ve cited throughout your paper.

This is crucial for academic integrity and allows other researchers to trace your intellectual journey. Make sure your referencing follows the specific style guide recommended by your field or university.

There are many AI tools that can help with references , so make sure you leverage technology to help you here.

By following these steps, you ensure that your theoretical research paper is not only structurally sound but also intellectually robust and poised to make a significant contribution to academic knowledge.

Remember, a well-crafted theoretical paper influences ongoing debates and paves the way for new inquiries and methodologies in the field.

Tips When Writing A Theoretical Research Paper

If you are looking to start writing your first theoretical research paper, here are some tips to help make the process easier:

Establish a Robust Theoretical Framework

Your research should start with a solid theoretical framework that consists of concepts and theories relevant to the research problem you are investigating.

If your topic concerns social media’s influence on mental health, you might integrate theories from psychology and communications. This framework not only shapes your study but also helps to interpret your findings.

Conduct a Thorough Literature Review

Dive deep into existing theory and scholarly research, examining studies that both support and contradict your hypothesis.

This comprehensive review not only furnishes you with a nuanced understanding of your topic but also positions your research within the broader academic conversation. 

Formulate Clear Research Questions

Theoretical research thrives on well-defined research questions. These questions should be rooted in the theoretical framework you’ve chosen and aim to explore the key variables and their relationships in your study.

Precision here will guide your entire research process, ensuring that every part of your paper contributes toward answering these questions.

Choose Appropriate Research Methods

Deciding on the right research methods is crucial. Ensure that the techniques you select align well with your theoretical assumptions and research questions, whether you opt for:

• qualitative research,
• intervention research, or
• a mixed methods approach, 

This alignment is necessary to gather valid and reliable data that supports or challenges your theoretical model.

Apply a Conceptual Framework If Needed

Sometimes, a single theoretical framework may not suffice, especially in interdisciplinary research. In such cases, developing a conceptual framework that integrates multiple theories could be more effective.

This approach was applied in a study about the educational split between Southern and Northern Sudan, where political science and educational theory provided a richer understanding of the regional disparities.

Discuss Methodology Transparently

When you write the discussion part of your paper, be transparent about your methodology. Explaining the meaning behind your choice of research design and how it’s used for your particular study adds credibility to your work.

It shows that your research methods and theoretical foundation are not just arbitrarily chosen but are thoughtfully aligned with the overall objectives of your research.

Interpret Results Within the Theoretical Framework

Finally, when presenting your results, always relate them back to the theoretical framework you set out with.

This not only reinforces the relevance of your findings within the academic field but also helps in validating or challenging theoretical assumptions. 

It’s here in the discussion section where you can engage deeply with the framework, proposing modifications or confirming its validity based on your findings.

Theoretical Research Paper: Not Rocket Science

Writing a theoretical research paper requires a meticulous blend of theory, critical thinking, and structured methodology.

By following the outlined steps, from developing a strong theoretical framework to effectively discussing your findings, you equip yourself with the tools to produce insightful and scholarly work.

Remember, the strength of your paper lies in how well you can integrate theory with your analytical insights, paving the way for further research and contributing to your field’s body of knowledge.

Dr Andrew Stapleton has a Masters and PhD in Chemistry from the UK and Australia. He has many years of research experience and has worked as a Postdoctoral Fellow and Associate at a number of Universities. Although having secured funding for his own research, he left academia to help others with his YouTube channel all about the inner workings of academia and how to make it work for you.

Thank you for visiting Academia Insider.

We are here to help you navigate Academia as painlessly as possible. We are supported by our readers and by visiting you are helping us earn a small amount through ads and affiliate revenue - Thank you!

2024 © Academia Insider

What are you looking for?

How to make a theoretical contribution to the field.

One of the core questions that early career researchers grapple with is how new theories are built and developed. In this blog post, Dr. Miriam Rahali outlines some of the tools that can be used to advance theory in the field of children’s media studies.

Approaches to developing a conceptual paper

So you’ve chosen a general topic , and have narrowed the scope of your research interest. You’ve done the introductory reading , and have selected the two or three theories that are most influential on your thinking. But when it comes time to articulate the theoretical contribution of your study, you start to struggle.

You’re not alone – many of us, particularly early career researchers, find theory development especially challenging. And it’s not only within the field of childhood media studies but also across disciplines. As previously discussed , it may be that scholars encounter similar problems because there is no one way to develop theory. Generating new theory is multi-faceted and complex – whether we’re looking to link work across disciplines, bridge existing theories in new and interesting ways, update theory for the digital age or broaden the scope of our thinking.

Creating new knowledge happens by building upon carefully chosen sources of information. Like the literature review process , developing a theoretical paper requires a systematic approach. However, as opposed to the ‘gap-spotting’ method of a literature review, advancing theory requires challenging and updating the status quo of the knowledge base. I will now outline some of the processes that may serve to stimulate theoretical innovation.

1. Summarise and synthesise

When undertaking a project without empirical data, conceptual clarity and logical coherence are ever more paramount. As this multi-step process will show, analytical rigour is a prerequisite for high-level theorising. After having identified the key theories and concepts related to your research interest, it could be a useful exercise to not only create a brief summary but also to justify the selection by outlining the claims, grounds, and warrants of the selected theoretical arguments:

Claims: What is the explicit thesis?

Grounds: What reasoning is employed?

Warrants: What are the presuppositions that link grounds to claims? What assumptions need to be challenged?

By marshalling logical and epistemological evidence, you are building the foundations for a convincing argument. Furthermore, by explicating the steps of the theoretical argument and delineating the conceptual underpinnings, you may be more apt to discover the commonalities between perspectives – which will enable you to construct an innovative conceptualisation.

2. Draw theoretical connections

Upon completion of the previous step, you may come to realise that a particular theory is incomplete and that an additional theory is needed to ‘bridge the gap’, or address a shortcoming in the literature. This is often the objective of a literature review, but with regard to theory-building, identifying omissions can enhance a holistic understanding of the phenomenon. As a result, you may be better positioned to integrate theory in a new way by coherently linking piecemeal concepts across diverse bodies of literature. The theoretical linkage allows you to build a case for your theoretical statement.

As you think of your own topic in relation to children’s media research, you might want to ask yourself what tradition it fits into, and whether or not you can identify how one concept links to another. For example, this may include research that shows how children learn digital skills to connect with friends online and studies about upward social comparison on social networking sites. Your theoretical linkage would help you advance the argument that increased social media use may be connected to lower self-esteem.  

The first step in simplifying this process is synthesising what is already known with what is new, so it would be useful to develop a network of theories or a visualisation of their connections. In Unlocked potential: open-access tools to jump-start the literature review process , I review some digital tools for both constructing and visualising citation networks in order to identify the most influential works in your field (with a specific emphasis on open-access articles).

3. Update existing theories

Many classic theoretical canons in child development emerged in the late 20th century, but since then, real innovation has occurred. As a network of scholars , it is our responsibility to craft new and improved conceptualisations in an evolving and complex world. The media industry is particularly fast-changing, so existing theories are likely to be refined in order to reflect the contemporary landscape. The challenge becomes making pre-digital work relevant to the current context or proposing new alternatives that remedy the alleged theoretical deficiencies. As you’re selecting classic texts, ask yourself why you are reading this now, and why it is of current interest to scholars in the field. This may generate questions that not only revitalise old discussions but also advance current conversations and stimulate new debates.

4. Reconcile tensions within and between theories

As I’ve just described, generating a new theory can be the result of synthesising and updating existing theoretical insights, or drawing connections between disparate ideas. However, after careful conceptual mapping, you may reach a ‘stop’ sign when you arrive at the ‘intersection’ of two or more ideas. The paradigms may be incommensurate, and therefore it may not be possible to integrate. For example, Bourdieu’s and Foucault’s approaches to power can appear to be irreconcilable on account of clashing epistemologies. In order to effect a productive theoretical encounter between incommensurate paradigms, you have to get creative!

Because social science is often constructed as a matter of logic (or as a method following specific procedures), the creative aspect is not often acknowledged. However, in addition to precise definitions and rigorous, analytical thinking, the use of creative techniques may bring the added benefit of being able to reconcile existing tensions.

The generation of new theory could be based on new empirical data, leading you away from previously held ideas and into new terrain. There are also several tools that focus on breaking new ground, from borrowing and blending , to abduction , to the use of metaphors and analogies (which has always helped me to not only reroute the abstract to a more concrete, accessible realm but also provide theoretical unity and coherence).

Theory-building can be a daunting process, but hopefully, this blog post provides a few ideas for breaking it down into a more manageable task. Much research in the field of children’s media studies has shown an emphasis on empirical data , but don’t be held back by a (perceived) lack of attention to theory building. There are many benefits to adding theory as a device in your researcher’s toolkit, not least of which is providing a clearer direction for future research in our field.

• print Print

Guest author

Dr. Miriam Rahali is a Visiting Researcher at the Department of Media and Communications, LSE. In addition to media, her interests include children, gender, and consumer behaviour. Miriam holds an undergraduate degree from Columbia University, New York, a Master’s degree in Special Education, and a PhD from LSE. She has worked on inclusive education in various roles within academia and the third sector.

Leave a comment

Share your feedback with us.

Please tell us how much you've liked your visit on the CO:RE Knowlegde Base so far.

Please share your email address with us, if you would like to be available for questions regarding your feedback.

Cookie preferences

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

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

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

Translation service

Translate the website in your local language, powered by Google Translate.

External Media, e.g., videos, podcasts, etc

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

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

How to phrase potential contributions in thesis proposal?

I am pursuing PhD in Computer Science. I am working on writing my PhD dissertation proposal.

My main contribution in my work is going to be about data classification and prediction model.

How should I phrase my potential contributions / tasks in which technical contribution is about clustering/classification and prediction?

I am also planning to propose potential performance improvement in clustering / classification techniques that currently exist in my domain. What all should I plan to achieve? How can I go about phrasing it in the proposal?

I know most answers cannot be specific to my question but any pointer towards direction that I should take...where to look for answer etc. regarding this is much appreciated...

• computer-science

• Hi and welcome to Academia.SE! I've removed the questions about doing data analysis from your post, because these are off topic at Academia.SE. You may be able to ask them on Cross Validated instead. (Also, on StackExchange sites we ask that you write only one question per post .) –  ff524 Commented Jan 8, 2015 at 23:18
• 8 any pointer towards direction that I should take — Picture me pointing at your advisor. –  JeffE Commented Jan 9, 2015 at 4:58

2 Answers 2

"If the proposed research is successful, there will be three main contributions. First,.... Second, ... Third,..."

What you need to fill in is the specific nature of your contributions. It's not enough to say that your algorithms will be "better" or "interesting" or even "useful". You might use these questions to form a list of specific contributions:

• Will you be discovering something new about the problem of data classification and prediction that no one knew before, or only understood poorly?
• Will you be combining two or more methods that had never been combined before?
• Will you be simplifying the problem in some non-trivial way? Or expanding it? Generalizing it? Making it more specific or concrete?
• Will you be formalizing the analysis in ways that have not before? What will your formal analysis be proving?
• Are you applying an algorithm or formalism from another domain, that has never been done before in this one?
• Are you demonstrating through experiments or other empirical research the viability of theoretical methods that have little empirical support?

Finally, imagine that you have completed your dissertation, and maybe you have published articles based on it. Now imagine what other researchers might need to use your work and build on it, and therefore to cite it. Why would future researchers need to use your work or build on it?

one rhetorical framework you can use is this one: problem X exists; model Y has been proposed previously; i propose model Z, which solves X better than Y in certain cases.

JeffE is right to point you towards your advisor. helping you develop an answer to this question is a big part of her job.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged phd thesis writing computer-science ..

• Featured on Meta
• Site maintenance - Mon, Sept 16 2024, 21:00 UTC to Tue, Sept 17 2024, 2:00...
• User activation: Learnings and opportunities
• Join Stack Overflow’s CEO and me for the first Stack IRL Community Event in...

Hot Network Questions

• Trying to find air crash for a case study
• Booking flight from Nairobi to Bahamas with 1 layover in Germany
• AES-256 file encryption in c#
• Why does a capacitor act as an open circuit under a DC circuit?
• Boon of combat prowess when you can only attack once
• Browse a web page through SSH? (Need to access router web interface remotely, but only have SSH access to a different device on LAN)
• Python script to renumber slide ids inside a pptx presentation
• How to make a soundless world
• Would a scientific theory of everything be falsifiable?
• How to normalise note lengths when analysing music
• I am an imaginary variance
• Positivity for the mild solution of a heat equation on the torus
• Do I have to use a new background that's been republished under the 2024 rules?
• Is Sagittarius A* smaller than we might expect given the mass of the Milky Way?
• Where are the DC-3 parked at KOPF?
• Smallest root of a degree 3 polynomial
• Solaris 11 cbe: no more updates?
• A word like "science/scientific" that can be used for ALL academic fields?
• ASCII 2D landscape
• Is it ok for a plugin to extend a class in some other module without declaring the other module as a dependency?
• How do I annotate a molecule on Chemfig?
• Enumerate in Beamer
• Offline autocue prog for Windows?
• What would a planet need for rain drops to trigger explosions upon making contact with the ground?

• my research
• contributions and comments

thesis knowhow – “the contribution” can create coherence

My Nordic colleagues often say that the thesis has to have a red thread , a line of argument that holds things together.

So what’s this red thread? Think of the red thread as a sturdy rope that guides the reader up the rocky mountain that is the thesis, making sure that they don’t fall down a crevasse or take a side track that leads nowhere.

One way to approach the red thread is to think about it through the prism of the contribution. So, to the next question. What’s “the contribution”?

Well, think about the contribution as the answer to the awkward question, “What did your research find out?”

Most of us have had the experience of being asked to sum up a complex and lengthy research project in a couple of sentences – and it’s – well – awkward to give a pithy and precise answer.  I like to call it the supermarket queue question. It’s the moment when you have to reluctantly give a short and easily comprehensible answer about your research results and why they matter.

Your answer to the awkward question is “the contribution”. We have produced a something worth knowing from our research, and it speaks with, and to, what is already known about our particular topic. The contribution is our offering to the scholarly conversation.

While the contribution can wait for a Grand Reveal at the end of the thesis, it’s often better if it doesn’t.  Let me explain.

Keeping an eye on the contribution can be really helpful when thinking about the thesis red thread. It can really help, when you are writing, to think about each of the various sections in relation to the contribution. And then, don’t keep it to yourself, make that connection clear to the reader.

I’ll illustrate this by pointing to some of the moves that most theses have to make, and the ways in which they relate to contribution. This is not an exhaustive elaboration – but I hope it’s enough to indicate how a focus on the contribution adds up to a red thread.

• The beginning of the thesis usually establishes what the research is going to be about and why it is needed. The potential significance of the contribution is explained. The explanation about why the contribution is needed creates the warrant for the research.
• The knowledge basis on which the contribution is to be made is outlined for the reader. The writer discusses the literatures that the research uses – theories/concepts and a priori definitions and assumptions, arguing why this literatures selection is important for this particular research. This literatures work locates the contribution in its field(s) and indicates what existing research might be extended or challenged.
• When the thesis addresses methodology and methods, the writer explains the production of ‘evidence’ through which the contribution is to be made , how the contribution relies on an accepted research tradition, why the research is thorough, ethical and trustworthy.
• The research results are reported in order to show key chunks of ‘stuff’, that when put together, are the foundation, or ‘evidence’, for the contribution .
• What is often called ‘ discussion’ moves beyond description and analysis to provide an explanation of the results. Separate pieces of analysis are brought together and connected to the relevant literatures to show what the research offers that is additional, what is the same, what challenges what. The contribution is now at the point where it can be expressed as the first part of the answer to the supermarket queue question – What have you found? This is what my research says and means.
• The conclusion to the thesis goes back to the original question and the reasons for doing the research. At the top of the guide rope, you look back down to see the origin of the climb. The contribution is now summarised as a kind of I-said-we-needed-to-know-this-and-now-we-do; this is often called the claims . The contribution is usually expressed as one or more points – these economically name the bodies of work which are extended/challenged by your inquiry. Depending on the discipline and research, the key contribution points may also be connected to policy and/or practice. Then the so-what and now-what of the contribution are laid out for the reader. The implications that arise from this contribution – policy, practice, further research – are spelled out. This is why the contribution matters.

So if you follow this line of argument through the thesis, the contribution becomes the organiser. It becomes the red thread.

And knowing the red thread stands you in good stead. The viva and written examination are all about the contribution. Every aspect of the viva is directed to assessing the significance of the contribution and how it was produced. And it doesn’t stop there. Very often, the contribution made in the doctorate forms the  basis for further research work. It becomes a red thread through your cv and ongoing research agenda.

It’s worth finding the answer to that awkward supermarket queue question then.

Image credit: Alex Schulz. Flickr Commons

Share this:

About pat thomson

7 responses to thesis knowhow – “the contribution” can create coherence.

Thanks for this really helpful advice. Coming up to writing my thesis I’ll refer back to this to keep me on the read thread.

Like Liked by 1 person

Thanks Pat, clearly articulated for the rookie and thesis supervisor…these signposts will make my supervision easier, hopefully

A brilliant distillation of the essential requirements for the final thesis – which should of course be a guide from the start! Thanks so much Pat!

Pingback: Stitching the days: a stitch diary as a reflective tool, by Clare Danek « White Rose College of the Arts & Humanities

Pingback: Comment écrire un chapitre de livre - Raul Pacheco-Vega, PhD - écrire un livre sur soi - Comment écrire un livre ?

Thank you, Pat, it is beneficial both for scholar and adviser

Pingback: Developing a coherent argument throughout a book or dissertation/thesis using The Red Thread (Throughline – Global Narrative) – Raul Pacheco-Vega, PhD

Leave a comment Cancel reply

• Search for:

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Email Address:

patter on facebook

Recent Posts

• writing from the PhD part one
• category is – limitations, part 2 – the thesis conclusion
• Category is – “limitations” Part One
• Getting over bad/limited advice – journal article introductions
• what do you do for your reader?
• on bad writing advice, again
• do you read – or talk – your conference paper?
• your conference paper – already published or work in progress?
• a musing on email signatures
• creativity and giving up on knowing it all
• white ants and research education
• Anticipation

SEE MY CURATED POSTS ON WAKELET

Top posts & pages.

• writing a bio-note
• aims and objectives - what's the difference?
• looping - a free writing strategy​ for generating ideas
• headings and subheadings – it helps to be specific
• I can't find anything written on my topic... really?
• bad research questions
• tiny texts - small is powerful
• writing from the PhD part one
• 20 reading journal prompts
• five ways to structure a literature review
• Entries feed
• Comments feed
• WordPress.com

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

What Constitutes a Methodological Contribution?

• Journal of Management 48(7):014920632210882
• 48(7):014920632210882

• University of Denver

• Northern Arizona University
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

• University of Vermont

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag
• Mohsin Malik

• Hum Resource Manag J

• Geoffrey Wood

• INT J HYDROGEN ENERG

• J Knowl Manag
• Dr Sumedha Dutta

• Eur Manag J

• Yucheng Zhang
• Zhongwei Hou
• Michael J. Zyphur
• EUR J MARKETING
• Joe F. Hair Jr

• IND MANAGE DATA SYST

• Alain Yee Loong Chong

• Catherine Welch

• J. Myles Shaver

• Scott G. Johnson

• Scott Sonenshein
• Martha S. Feldman
• Paul D. Bliese

• Spenser Essman

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, making a meaningful contribution to theory.

International Journal of Operations & Production Management

ISSN : 0144-3577

Article publication date: 7 September 2015

The need to make a “theoretical contribution” is a presumed mandate that permeates any researcher’s career in the Social Sciences, yet all too often this remains a source of confusion and frustration. The purpose of this paper is to reflect on, and further develops, the principal themes discussed in the “OM Theory” workshop in Dublin in 2011 and the special sessions at the 2011 and the 2013 EurOMA Conferences in Cambridge and Dublin.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper presents six short essays that explore the role and use of theory in management research, and specifically ask what is a good or meaningful contribution to theory. The authors comment on the current state of theory in Operations Management (OM) (Harry Boer), the type of theories the authors have in OM (Chris Voss), the role of theory in increasing the general understanding of OM problems (Roger Schmenner), whether the authors can borrow theories from other fields or actually have theory “of our own” (Matthias Holweg), the different ways in which a contribution to theory can be made (Martin Kilduff), and how to construct a theoretical argument (Mark Pagell).

The authors argue that theory is fundamental to OM research, but that it is not the inevitable starting point; discovery and observation are equally important and often neglected avenues to contributing to theory. Also, there is no one right way to making a contribution, yet consistency between ontology, epistemology, and claimed contribution is what matters. The authors further argue that the choice of theory is critical, as a common mistake is trying to contribute to high-level theories borrowed from other fields. Finally, the authors recommend using theory parsimoniously, yet with confidence.

Originality/value

The paper presents a collection of viewpoints of senior scholars on the need for, and use of, theory in OM research.

• Advanced manufacturing technology (AMT)

Boer, H. , Holweg, M. , Kilduff, M. , Pagell, M. , Schmenner, R. and Voss, C. (2015), "Making a meaningful contribution to theory", International Journal of Operations & Production Management , Vol. 35 No. 9, pp. 1231-1252. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-03-2015-0119

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2015, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Related articles

All feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation

What is a Theoretical Framework? | A Step-by-Step Guide

Published on 14 February 2020 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 10 October 2022.

A theoretical framework is a foundational review of existing theories that serves as a roadmap for developing the arguments you will use in your own work.

Theories are developed by researchers to explain phenomena, draw connections, and make predictions. In a theoretical framework, you explain the existing theories that support your research, showing that your work is grounded in established ideas.

In other words, your theoretical framework justifies and contextualises your later research, and it’s a crucial first step for your research paper , thesis, or dissertation . A well-rounded theoretical framework sets you up for success later on in your research and writing process.

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

Why do you need a theoretical framework, how to write a theoretical framework, structuring your theoretical framework, example of a theoretical framework, frequently asked questions about theoretical frameworks.

Before you start your own research, it’s crucial to familiarise yourself with the theories and models that other researchers have already developed. Your theoretical framework is your opportunity to present and explain what you’ve learned, situated within your future research topic.

There’s a good chance that many different theories about your topic already exist, especially if the topic is broad. In your theoretical framework, you will evaluate, compare, and select the most relevant ones.

By “framing” your research within a clearly defined field, you make the reader aware of the assumptions that inform your approach, showing the rationale behind your choices for later sections, like methodology and discussion . This part of your dissertation lays the foundations that will support your analysis, helping you interpret your results and make broader generalisations .

• In literature , a scholar using postmodernist literary theory would analyse The Great Gatsby differently than a scholar using Marxist literary theory.
• In psychology , a behaviourist approach to depression would involve different research methods and assumptions than a psychoanalytic approach.
• In economics , wealth inequality would be explained and interpreted differently based on a classical economics approach than based on a Keynesian economics one.

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

To create your own theoretical framework, you can follow these three steps:

• Identifying your key concepts
• Evaluating and explaining relevant theories
• Showing how your research fits into existing research

1. Identify your key concepts

The first step is to pick out the key terms from your problem statement and research questions . Concepts often have multiple definitions, so your theoretical framework should also clearly define what you mean by each term.

To investigate this problem, you have identified and plan to focus on the following problem statement, objective, and research questions:

Problem : Many online customers do not return to make subsequent purchases.

Objective : To increase the quantity of return customers.

Research question : How can the satisfaction of company X’s online customers be improved in order to increase the quantity of return customers?

2. Evaluate and explain relevant theories

By conducting a thorough literature review , you can determine how other researchers have defined these key concepts and drawn connections between them. As you write your theoretical framework, your aim is to compare and critically evaluate the approaches that different authors have taken.

After discussing different models and theories, you can establish the definitions that best fit your research and justify why. You can even combine theories from different fields to build your own unique framework if this better suits your topic.

Make sure to at least briefly mention each of the most important theories related to your key concepts. If there is a well-established theory that you don’t want to apply to your own research, explain why it isn’t suitable for your purposes.

3. Show how your research fits into existing research

Apart from summarising and discussing existing theories, your theoretical framework should show how your project will make use of these ideas and take them a step further.

You might aim to do one or more of the following:

• Test whether a theory holds in a specific, previously unexamined context
• Use an existing theory as a basis for interpreting your results
• Critique or challenge a theory
• Combine different theories in a new or unique way

A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation. As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.

There are no fixed rules for structuring your theoretical framework, but it’s best to double-check with your department or institution to make sure they don’t have any formatting guidelines. The most important thing is to create a clear, logical structure. There are a few ways to do this:

• Draw on your research questions, structuring each section around a question or key concept
• Organise by theory cluster
• Organise by date

As in all other parts of your research paper , thesis, or dissertation , make sure to properly cite your sources to avoid plagiarism .

To get a sense of what this part of your thesis or dissertation might look like, take a look at our full example .

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work based on existing research, a conceptual framework allows you to draw your own conclusions, mapping out the variables you may use in your study and the interplay between them.

A literature review and a theoretical framework are not the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably. While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work, a literature review critically evaluates existing research relating to your topic. You’ll likely need both in your dissertation .

A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a  literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation . As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2022, October 10). What is a Theoretical Framework? | A Step-by-Step Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved 9 September 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/the-theoretical-framework/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a literature review | guide, template, & examples, how to write a results section | tips & examples, how to write a discussion section | tips & examples.

Contributing to theory: opportunities and challenges

• Published: 16 March 2020
• Volume 10 , pages 49–55, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

• Jay B. Barney   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0875-6702 1  

3943 Accesses

6 Citations

6 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Scholars looking to make original theoretical contributions typically must address at least three challenges: Defining what constitutes an original theoretical contribution, positioning a paper in ongoing theoretical conversations, and critiquing prior published work. Based on experiences at the Academy of Management Review, approaches for addressing these challenges are discussed.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Scholarship with Wisdom: An Introduction

The burgeoning role of literature review articles in management research: an introduction and outlook

Conclusion: Studying Scholarship in Changing Times…

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence

The Academy of Management also publishes two journals that focus on empirical papers—the Academy of Management Journal and the Academy of Management Discoveries —and one journal that focuses on academic essays—the Academy of Management Perspectives . Editorial statements for each of the Academy of Management journals can be found on the Academy of Management website.

How the “problematization” process has unfolded, and is continuing to unfold, in the field of strategic management is discussed by Mahoney and Qian ( 2013 ). A survey reported in Bartunek et al. ( 2006 ) identifies 17 articles that were nominated as “interesting” by two or more AMJ review board members in a survey conducted in the fall of 2004. These 17 articles may be examples of “revolutionary science.”

www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/07-why-stephen-king-spends-months-or-even-years-writing-opening-sentences/278043/ accessed March 19, 2019.

That a paper should have only one main research question does not mean that a paper can have only one research proposition. It does mean that the multiple propositions in a paper must all speak to multiple dimensions of a single research question. Also, a single research question may have multiple parts that must be addressed if the implications of answering that question are to be fully resolved.

Sometimes it is possible to introduce a second or even third research question in the discussion section of the paper. However, typically, the main purpose of including these research questions in the discussion is to call for additional research.

“Exhaustive” can also be read as “exhausting.”

There should be no cheating—no micro-fonts and no quarter-inch margins.

Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2011). Generating research questions through problematization. Academy of Management Review, 36 , 247–271.

Google Scholar  

Barney, J. B. (2018a). Editor’s comments: Theory contributions and the AMR review process. Academy of Management Review, 43 , 1–4.

Article   Google Scholar  

Barney, J. B. (2018b). Editor’s comments: Positioning a theory paper for publication. Academy of Management Review, 43 (3), 345–348.

Barney, J. B. (2020a). Positioning papers for publication. In T. Clark, M. Wright, & D. Ketchen (Eds.), How to get published in the best Management Journals (2nd ed.). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Barney, J. B. (2020b). Editor’s comments: Publishing dialogue papers in AMR . Forthcoming.

Bartunek, J. M., Rynes, S. L., & Ireland, R. D. (2006). What makes management research interesting? Academy of Management Journal, 49 , 9–15.

Busse, C., Kach, A., & Wagner, S. (2017). Boundary conditions: What are they, how to explore them, why we need them, and when to consider them. Organizational Research Methods, 20 , 574–609.

Corley, K., & Gioia, D. (2011). Building a theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 36 , 12–32.

Davis, M. (1971). That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy and Social Science, 1 , 309–344.

Fulmer, I. S. (2012). Editor’s comments: The craft of writing theory articles—Variety and similarity in AMR. Academy of Management Review, 37 , 327–331.

Hitt, M., & Smith, K. (2005). Introduction: The process of developing management theory. In K. Smith & M. Hitt (Eds.), Great minds in management (pp. 1–8). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Huff, A. (1999). Writing for scholarly publication. Thousand oaks, CA: Sage. Ragins, R. 2012. Editor’s comments: Reflections on the craft of clear writing. Academy of Management Review, 37 : 493–501.

Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Mahoney, J., & Qian, L. (2013). Market frictions as building blocks of an organizational economics approach to strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 34 , 1019–1041.

Ragins, B.R. (2012). Editor's Comments: Reflections on the Craft of Clear Writing. Academy of Management Review, 37 (4):493–501.

Smith, K., & Hitt, M. (Eds.). (2005). Great minds in management . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Suddaby, R. (2010). Editor’s comments: Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review, 35 , 346–358.

Weick, K. (1989). Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Academy of Management Review, 14 , 516–531.

Whetten, D. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14 , 490–495.

Wright, M., Ketchen, D., & Clark, T. (Eds.). (2020). How to get published in the best management journals (2nd ed.). Northampton: Elgar.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Academy of Management Review, Eccles School of Business, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA

Jay B. Barney

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jay B. Barney .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Barney, J.B. Contributing to theory: opportunities and challenges. AMS Rev 10 , 49–55 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00163-y

Download citation

Received : 20 November 2019

Accepted : 14 February 2020

Published : 16 March 2020

Issue Date : June 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00163-y

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

• Theory development
• Theoretical contributions
• Positioning papers
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

What is Theoretical Contribution? A Narrative Review

• et al. See more

Theoretical contribution is a process which is based on the theory development and advancement in existing theory with some logics and facts. This study has focused on some theoretical contribution related question and their answers through the narrative review of literature. This study will highlight what is the theory? And what are the major building blocks of theory? How authors can contribute in theory? The answers for these questions during theoretical studies will enhance the impact of paper and also increase the chance of publication. This study also suggested how theoretical concepts can be practical implemented in the society and organizations to enhance organizational performance and validate the theory.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

CITATION STYLE

Zhou, J., Shafique, M. N., Adeel, A., Nawaz, S., & Kumar, P. (2017). What is Theoretical Contribution? A Narrative Review. Sarhad Journal of Management Sciences , 3 (2), 261–271. https://doi.org/10.31529/sjms.2017.3.2.6

Readers' Seniority

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 42

Lecturer / Post doc 11

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

Researcher 3

Readers' Discipline

Business, Management and Accounting 25

Social Sciences 12

Engineering 5

Computer Science 3

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Research paper

What Is a Theoretical Framework? | Guide to Organizing

Published on October 14, 2022 by Sarah Vinz . Revised on November 20, 2023 by Tegan George.

A theoretical framework is a foundational review of existing theories that serves as a roadmap for developing the arguments you will use in your own work.

Theories are developed by researchers to explain phenomena, draw connections, and make predictions. In a theoretical framework, you explain the existing theories that support your research, showing that your paper or dissertation topic is relevant and grounded in established ideas.

In other words, your theoretical framework justifies and contextualizes your later research, and it’s a crucial first step for your research paper , thesis , or dissertation . A well-rounded theoretical framework sets you up for success later on in your research and writing process.

Table of contents

Why do you need a theoretical framework, how to write a theoretical framework, structuring your theoretical framework, example of a theoretical framework, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about theoretical frameworks.

Before you start your own research, it’s crucial to familiarize yourself with the theories and models that other researchers have already developed. Your theoretical framework is your opportunity to present and explain what you’ve learned, situated within your future research topic.

There’s a good chance that many different theories about your topic already exist, especially if the topic is broad. In your theoretical framework, you will evaluate, compare, and select the most relevant ones.

By “framing” your research within a clearly defined field, you make the reader aware of the assumptions that inform your approach, showing the rationale behind your choices for later sections, like methodology and discussion . This part of your dissertation lays the foundations that will support your analysis, helping you interpret your results and make broader generalizations .

• In literature , a scholar using postmodernist literary theory would analyze The Great Gatsby differently than a scholar using Marxist literary theory.
• In psychology , a behaviorist approach to depression would involve different research methods and assumptions than a psychoanalytic approach.
• In economics , wealth inequality would be explained and interpreted differently based on a classical economics approach than based on a Keynesian economics one.

To create your own theoretical framework, you can follow these three steps:

• Identifying your key concepts
• Evaluating and explaining relevant theories
• Showing how your research fits into existing research

1. Identify your key concepts

The first step is to pick out the key terms from your problem statement and research questions . Concepts often have multiple definitions, so your theoretical framework should also clearly define what you mean by each term.

To investigate this problem, you have identified and plan to focus on the following problem statement, objective, and research questions:

Problem : Many online customers do not return to make subsequent purchases.

Objective : To increase the quantity of return customers.

Research question : How can the satisfaction of company X’s online customers be improved in order to increase the quantity of return customers?

2. Evaluate and explain relevant theories

By conducting a thorough literature review , you can determine how other researchers have defined these key concepts and drawn connections between them. As you write your theoretical framework, your aim is to compare and critically evaluate the approaches that different authors have taken.

After discussing different models and theories, you can establish the definitions that best fit your research and justify why. You can even combine theories from different fields to build your own unique framework if this better suits your topic.

Make sure to at least briefly mention each of the most important theories related to your key concepts. If there is a well-established theory that you don’t want to apply to your own research, explain why it isn’t suitable for your purposes.

3. Show how your research fits into existing research

Apart from summarizing and discussing existing theories, your theoretical framework should show how your project will make use of these ideas and take them a step further.

You might aim to do one or more of the following:

• Test whether a theory holds in a specific, previously unexamined context
• Use an existing theory as a basis for interpreting your results
• Critique or challenge a theory
• Combine different theories in a new or unique way

A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation. As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.

There are no fixed rules for structuring your theoretical framework, but it’s best to double-check with your department or institution to make sure they don’t have any formatting guidelines. The most important thing is to create a clear, logical structure. There are a few ways to do this:

• Draw on your research questions, structuring each section around a question or key concept
• Organize by theory cluster
• Organize by date

It’s important that the information in your theoretical framework is clear for your reader. Make sure to ask a friend to read this section for you, or use a professional proofreading service .

As in all other parts of your research paper , thesis , or dissertation , make sure to properly cite your sources to avoid plagiarism .

To get a sense of what this part of your thesis or dissertation might look like, take a look at our full example .

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

Research bias

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

 (AI) Tools

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

While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work based on existing research, a conceptual framework allows you to draw your own conclusions, mapping out the variables you may use in your study and the interplay between them.

A literature review and a theoretical framework are not the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably. While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work, a literature review critically evaluates existing research relating to your topic. You’ll likely need both in your dissertation .

A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a  literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation . As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.

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.

Vinz, S. (2023, November 20). What Is a Theoretical Framework? | Guide to Organizing. Scribbr. Retrieved September 14, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/theoretical-framework/

Is this article helpful?

Sarah's academic background includes a Master of Arts in English, a Master of International Affairs degree, and a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science. She loves the challenge of finding the perfect formulation or wording and derives much satisfaction from helping students take their academic writing up a notch.

Other students also liked

What is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, what is a conceptual framework | tips & examples, get unlimited documents corrected.

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