apa itu research significance

• Privacy Policy

Home » Significance of the Study – Examples and Writing Guide

Significance of the Study – Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Significance of the Study

Definition:

Significance of the study in research refers to the potential importance, relevance, or impact of the research findings. It outlines how the research contributes to the existing body of knowledge, what gaps it fills, or what new understanding it brings to a particular field of study.

In general, the significance of a study can be assessed based on several factors, including:

• Originality : The extent to which the study advances existing knowledge or introduces new ideas and perspectives.
• Practical relevance: The potential implications of the study for real-world situations, such as improving policy or practice.
• Theoretical contribution: The extent to which the study provides new insights or perspectives on theoretical concepts or frameworks.
• Methodological rigor : The extent to which the study employs appropriate and robust methods and techniques to generate reliable and valid data.
• Social or cultural impact : The potential impact of the study on society, culture, or public perception of a particular issue.

Types of Significance of the Study

The significance of the Study can be divided into the following types:

Theoretical Significance

Theoretical significance refers to the contribution that a study makes to the existing body of theories in a specific field. This could be by confirming, refuting, or adding nuance to a currently accepted theory, or by proposing an entirely new theory.

Practical Significance

Practical significance refers to the direct applicability and usefulness of the research findings in real-world contexts. Studies with practical significance often address real-life problems and offer potential solutions or strategies. For example, a study in the field of public health might identify a new intervention that significantly reduces the spread of a certain disease.

Significance for Future Research

This pertains to the potential of a study to inspire further research. A study might open up new areas of investigation, provide new research methodologies, or propose new hypotheses that need to be tested.

How to Write Significance of the Study

Here’s a guide to writing an effective “Significance of the Study” section in research paper, thesis, or dissertation:

• Background : Begin by giving some context about your study. This could include a brief introduction to your subject area, the current state of research in the field, and the specific problem or question your study addresses.
• Identify the Gap : Demonstrate that there’s a gap in the existing literature or knowledge that needs to be filled, which is where your study comes in. The gap could be a lack of research on a particular topic, differing results in existing studies, or a new problem that has arisen and hasn’t yet been studied.
• State the Purpose of Your Study : Clearly state the main objective of your research. You may want to state the purpose as a solution to the problem or gap you’ve previously identified.
• Contributes to the existing body of knowledge.
• Addresses a significant research gap.
• Offers a new or better solution to a problem.
• Impacts policy or practice.
• Leads to improvements in a particular field or sector.
• Identify Beneficiaries : Identify who will benefit from your study. This could include other researchers, practitioners in your field, policy-makers, communities, businesses, or others. Explain how your findings could be used and by whom.
• Future Implications : Discuss the implications of your study for future research. This could involve questions that are left open, new questions that have been raised, or potential future methodologies suggested by your study.

Significance of the Study in Research Paper

The Significance of the Study in a research paper refers to the importance or relevance of the research topic being investigated. It answers the question “Why is this research important?” and highlights the potential contributions and impacts of the study.

The significance of the study can be presented in the introduction or background section of a research paper. It typically includes the following components:

• Importance of the research problem: This describes why the research problem is worth investigating and how it relates to existing knowledge and theories.
• Potential benefits and implications: This explains the potential contributions and impacts of the research on theory, practice, policy, or society.
• Originality and novelty: This highlights how the research adds new insights, approaches, or methods to the existing body of knowledge.
• Scope and limitations: This outlines the boundaries and constraints of the research and clarifies what the study will and will not address.

Suppose a researcher is conducting a study on the “Effects of social media use on the mental health of adolescents”.

The significance of the study may be:

“The present study is significant because it addresses a pressing public health issue of the negative impact of social media use on adolescent mental health. Given the widespread use of social media among this age group, understanding the effects of social media on mental health is critical for developing effective prevention and intervention strategies. This study will contribute to the existing literature by examining the moderating factors that may affect the relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes. It will also shed light on the potential benefits and risks of social media use for adolescents and inform the development of evidence-based guidelines for promoting healthy social media use among this population. The limitations of this study include the use of self-reported measures and the cross-sectional design, which precludes causal inference.”

Significance of the Study In Thesis

The significance of the study in a thesis refers to the importance or relevance of the research topic and the potential impact of the study on the field of study or society as a whole. It explains why the research is worth doing and what contribution it will make to existing knowledge.

For example, the significance of a thesis on “Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare” could be:

• With the increasing availability of healthcare data and the development of advanced machine learning algorithms, AI has the potential to revolutionize the healthcare industry by improving diagnosis, treatment, and patient outcomes. Therefore, this thesis can contribute to the understanding of how AI can be applied in healthcare and how it can benefit patients and healthcare providers.
• AI in healthcare also raises ethical and social issues, such as privacy concerns, bias in algorithms, and the impact on healthcare jobs. By exploring these issues in the thesis, it can provide insights into the potential risks and benefits of AI in healthcare and inform policy decisions.
• Finally, the thesis can also advance the field of computer science by developing new AI algorithms or techniques that can be applied to healthcare data, which can have broader applications in other industries or fields of research.

Significance of the Study in Research Proposal

The significance of a study in a research proposal refers to the importance or relevance of the research question, problem, or objective that the study aims to address. It explains why the research is valuable, relevant, and important to the academic or scientific community, policymakers, or society at large. A strong statement of significance can help to persuade the reviewers or funders of the research proposal that the study is worth funding and conducting.

Here is an example of a significance statement in a research proposal:

Title : The Effects of Gamification on Learning Programming: A Comparative Study

Significance Statement:

This proposed study aims to investigate the effects of gamification on learning programming. With the increasing demand for computer science professionals, programming has become a fundamental skill in the computer field. However, learning programming can be challenging, and students may struggle with motivation and engagement. Gamification has emerged as a promising approach to improve students’ engagement and motivation in learning, but its effects on programming education are not yet fully understood. This study is significant because it can provide valuable insights into the potential benefits of gamification in programming education and inform the development of effective teaching strategies to enhance students’ learning outcomes and interest in programming.

Examples of Significance of the Study

Here are some examples of the significance of a study that indicates how you can write this into your research paper according to your research topic:

Research on an Improved Water Filtration System : This study has the potential to impact millions of people living in water-scarce regions or those with limited access to clean water. A more efficient and affordable water filtration system can reduce water-borne diseases and improve the overall health of communities, enabling them to lead healthier, more productive lives.

Study on the Impact of Remote Work on Employee Productivity : Given the shift towards remote work due to recent events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, this study is of considerable significance. Findings could help organizations better structure their remote work policies and offer insights on how to maximize employee productivity, wellbeing, and job satisfaction.

Investigation into the Use of Solar Power in Developing Countries : With the world increasingly moving towards renewable energy, this study could provide important data on the feasibility and benefits of implementing solar power solutions in developing countries. This could potentially stimulate economic growth, reduce reliance on non-renewable resources, and contribute to global efforts to combat climate change.

Research on New Learning Strategies in Special Education : This study has the potential to greatly impact the field of special education. By understanding the effectiveness of new learning strategies, educators can improve their curriculum to provide better support for students with learning disabilities, fostering their academic growth and social development.

Examination of Mental Health Support in the Workplace : This study could highlight the impact of mental health initiatives on employee wellbeing and productivity. It could influence organizational policies across industries, promoting the implementation of mental health programs in the workplace, ultimately leading to healthier work environments.

Evaluation of a New Cancer Treatment Method : The significance of this study could be lifesaving. The research could lead to the development of more effective cancer treatments, increasing the survival rate and quality of life for patients worldwide.

When to Write Significance of the Study

The Significance of the Study section is an integral part of a research proposal or a thesis. This section is typically written after the introduction and the literature review. In the research process, the structure typically follows this order:

• Title – The name of your research.
• Abstract – A brief summary of the entire research.
• Introduction – A presentation of the problem your research aims to solve.
• Literature Review – A review of existing research on the topic to establish what is already known and where gaps exist.
• Significance of the Study – An explanation of why the research matters and its potential impact.

In the Significance of the Study section, you will discuss why your study is important, who it benefits, and how it adds to existing knowledge or practice in your field. This section is your opportunity to convince readers, and potentially funders or supervisors, that your research is valuable and worth undertaking.

Advantages of Significance of the Study

The Significance of the Study section in a research paper has multiple advantages:

• Establishes Relevance: This section helps to articulate the importance of your research to your field of study, as well as the wider society, by explicitly stating its relevance. This makes it easier for other researchers, funders, and policymakers to understand why your work is necessary and worth supporting.
• Guides the Research: Writing the significance can help you refine your research questions and objectives. This happens as you critically think about why your research is important and how it contributes to your field.
• Attracts Funding: If you are seeking funding or support for your research, having a well-written significance of the study section can be key. It helps to convince potential funders of the value of your work.
• Opens up Further Research: By stating the significance of the study, you’re also indicating what further research could be carried out in the future, based on your work. This helps to pave the way for future studies and demonstrates that your research is a valuable addition to the field.
• Provides Practical Applications: The significance of the study section often outlines how the research can be applied in real-world situations. This can be particularly important in applied sciences, where the practical implications of research are crucial.
• Enhances Understanding: This section can help readers understand how your study fits into the broader context of your field, adding value to the existing literature and contributing new knowledge or insights.

Limitations of Significance of the Study

The Significance of the Study section plays an essential role in any research. However, it is not without potential limitations. Here are some that you should be aware of:

• Subjectivity: The importance and implications of a study can be subjective and may vary from person to person. What one researcher considers significant might be seen as less critical by others. The assessment of significance often depends on personal judgement, biases, and perspectives.
• Predictability of Impact: While you can outline the potential implications of your research in the Significance of the Study section, the actual impact can be unpredictable. Research doesn’t always yield the expected results or have the predicted impact on the field or society.
• Difficulty in Measuring: The significance of a study is often qualitative and can be challenging to measure or quantify. You can explain how you think your research will contribute to your field or society, but measuring these outcomes can be complex.
• Possibility of Overstatement: Researchers may feel pressured to amplify the potential significance of their study to attract funding or interest. This can lead to overstating the potential benefits or implications, which can harm the credibility of the study if these results are not achieved.
• Overshadowing of Limitations: Sometimes, the significance of the study may overshadow the limitations of the research. It is important to balance the potential significance with a thorough discussion of the study’s limitations.
• Dependence on Successful Implementation: The significance of the study relies on the successful implementation of the research. If the research process has flaws or unexpected issues arise, the anticipated significance might not be realized.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Community Blog

Keep up-to-date on postgraduate related issues with our quick reads written by students, postdocs, professors and industry leaders.

What is the Significance of the Study?

• By DiscoverPhDs
• August 25, 2020

• what the significance of the study means,
• why it’s important to include in your research work,
• where you would include it in your paper, thesis or dissertation,
• how you write one
• and finally an example of a well written section about the significance of the study.

What does Significance of the Study mean?

The significance of the study is a written statement that explains why your research was needed. It’s a justification of the importance of your work and impact it has on your research field, it’s contribution to new knowledge and how others will benefit from it.

Why is the Significance of the Study important?

The significance of the study, also known as the rationale of the study, is important to convey to the reader why the research work was important. This may be an academic reviewer assessing your manuscript under peer-review, an examiner reading your PhD thesis, a funder reading your grant application or another research group reading your published journal paper. Your academic writing should make clear to the reader what the significance of the research that you performed was, the contribution you made and the benefits of it.

How do you write the Significance of the Study?

When writing this section, first think about where the gaps in knowledge are in your research field. What are the areas that are poorly understood with little or no previously published literature? Or what topics have others previously published on that still require further work. This is often referred to as the problem statement.

The introduction section within the significance of the study should include you writing the problem statement and explaining to the reader where the gap in literature is.

Then think about the significance of your research and thesis study from two perspectives: (1) what is the general contribution of your research on your field and (2) what specific contribution have you made to the knowledge and who does this benefit the most.

For example, the gap in knowledge may be that the benefits of dumbbell exercises for patients recovering from a broken arm are not fully understood. You may have performed a study investigating the impact of dumbbell training in patients with fractures versus those that did not perform dumbbell exercises and shown there to be a benefit in their use. The broad significance of the study would be the improvement in the understanding of effective physiotherapy methods. Your specific contribution has been to show a significant improvement in the rate of recovery in patients with broken arms when performing certain dumbbell exercise routines.

This statement should be no more than 500 words in length when written for a thesis. Within a research paper, the statement should be shorter and around 200 words at most.

Significance of the Study: An example

Building on the above hypothetical academic study, the following is an example of a full statement of the significance of the study for you to consider when writing your own. Keep in mind though that there’s no single way of writing the perfect significance statement and it may well depend on the subject area and the study content.

Here’s another example to help demonstrate how a significance of the study can also be applied to non-technical fields:

The significance of this research lies in its potential to inform clinical practices and patient counseling. By understanding the psychological outcomes associated with non-surgical facial aesthetics, practitioners can better guide their patients in making informed decisions about their treatment plans. Additionally, this study contributes to the body of academic knowledge by providing empirical evidence on the effects of these cosmetic procedures, which have been largely anecdotal up to this point.

The statement of the significance of the study is used by students and researchers in academic writing to convey the importance of the research performed; this section is written at the end of the introduction and should describe the specific contribution made and who it benefits.

The Thurstone Scale is used to quantify the attitudes of people being surveyed, using a format of ‘agree-disagree’ statements.

The purpose of research is to enhance society by advancing knowledge through developing scientific theories, concepts and ideas – find out more on what this involves.

Thinking about applying to a PhD? Then don’t miss out on these 4 tips on how to best prepare your application.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Browse PhDs Now

Fieldwork can be essential for your PhD project. Use these tips to help maximise site productivity and reduce your research time by a few weeks.

Are you always finding yourself working on sections of your research tasks right up until your deadlines? Are you still finding yourself distracted the moment

Kyle’s in the first year of his PhD at the University of Texas in Austin. His research interests are in the development of algorithms for advanced mobility for legged robotics and computer vision for exploration of extreme environments.

Carlos is a third year PhD student at the Centre for Doctoral Training in Intelligent Games and Games Intelligence (IGGI), as part of the University of York and Goldsmiths, University of London.

Join Thousands of Students

Arti Signifikan, Contoh, dan Penggunaannya dalam Penelitian

Signifikan adalah salah satu kata dalam bahasa Indonesia yang mungkin jarang kamu gunakan dalam percakapan sehari-hari. Pasalnya, kata ini cenderung digunakan dalam tata bahasa dengan kalimat yang baku dan formal.

Arti Signifikan

Signifikan merupakan bahasa serapan dari bahasa Inggris, yaitu significant . Menurut Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia, signifikan berarti penting atau berarti.

Signifikan adalah salah satu bentuk kata sifat, sehingga dapat bersifat positif (signifikan) atau negatif (tidak signifikan). Hampir menyerupai arti menurut KBBI, dalam Tesaurus Bahasa Indonesia tertulis, signifikan memiliki arti benar, berarti, bermakna, istimewa, penting, relevan, dan substansial.

ADVERTISEMENT

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

Dalam suatu perbincangan atau kalimat, kata signifikan dapat digunakan untuk menggambarkan suatu hal yang penting dan jelas. Dalam beberapa ungkapan, kata ini banyak ditemukan dalam susunan kalimat yang membahas tentang pengaruh dari suatu hal.

Arti Signifikan dalam Penelitian

Kata signifikan juga cenderung ditemukan dalam tulisan ilmiah. Utamanya, kata signifikan digunakan untuk menjelaskan data hasil penelitian.

Data yang digunakan untuk penelitian tidak boleh berasal dari sumber yang kredibilitasnya masih diragukan. Untuk itu, data-data tersebut perlu diuji terlebih dahulu agar kemudian dapat digunakan dalam penelitian.

Mengutip artikel ilmiah berjudul Signifikan atau Sangat Signifikan, salah satu uji yang dilakukan dalam penelitian adalah uji statistik. Pada uji inilah kata signifikan digunakan sebagai label uji statistik untuk memberikan keterangan terhadap angka hasil uji statistik.

Contohnya adalah label "signifikan", "sangat signifikan", dan "tidak signifikan". Label ini digunakan dalam menjelaskan hasil pengujian hipotesis yang dapat diterima atau ditolak.

Dengan kata lain, Dr. Indra Jaya dan Ardat Ahmad dalam buku Biostatistik menyebut, arti signifikan dalam penelitian adalah tingkat kepercayaan hasil penelitian yang kita lakukan. Biasanya, dijelaskan dalam taraf persen tertentu yang angkanya ditentukan oleh peneliti.

Contoh Penggunaan Kata Signifikan

Berikut beberapa contoh kalimat yang menggunakan kata signifikan di antaranya yakni:

• Masyarakat Jakarta yang terjangkit virus COVID-19 meningkat secara signifikan.
• Otot-otot lengannya mengalami perkembangan yang signifikan setelah ditangani pelatih fisik yang profesional.
• Kemampuannya dalam menulis meningkat secara signifikan setelah ia banyak berlatih.
• Keuntungan dari penjualan hariannya terus meningkat signifikan setelah menggunakan cara-cara modern yang sesuai kecenderungan anak-anak milenial.
• Gaya kepemimpinannya di dalam organisasi berdampak secara positif dan signifikan terhadap loyalitas anggota organisasi.
• Walaupun berbagai cara sudah dilakukan, upaya tersebut seperti sia-sia karena perkembangannya yang tidak signifikan.
• Di usia remaja, pertumbuhan tinggi anak laki-laki sangat terlihat signifikan.
• Akibat pandemi COVID-19 yang cepat menyebar di seluruh negara, pembelian masker dan hand sanitizer meningkat signifikan.
• Jelaskan pengaruh signifikan yang diakibatkan karena kekurangan minum air putih dan jarang berolahraga!

Demikianlah penjelasan mengenai arti signifikan , contoh kalimat, dan penggunaannya dalam penelitian. Semoga bisa dipahami, detikers!

Benarkah Bumi Punya Bulan Kedua? Ini Faktanya

Survei: tuntutan jadi sempurna kepada anak juga bikin ortu kelelahan mental, benarkah jupiter menjadi alasan bumi memiliki bulan, 5 kalimat toxic yang tidak diucapkan oleh orang sukses, ini penjelasan pakar, tanda-tanda seorang psikopat menurut ahli, temuan peneliti soal orang utan sembuhkan lukanya sendiri pakai tanaman obat, terminal lucidity, fenomena pasien sakit keras mendadak 'sehat' sebelum meninggal, meningkatkan peringkat perguruan tinggi tanpa jalan pintas.

Universitas Indonesia

Universitas Gadjah Mada

Universitas Syiah Kuala

Universitas Diponegoro

Universitas Sumatera Utara

Apa Itu Research: Mempelajari Konsep dan Pentingnya Penelitian

Mengenal Konsep Research

Research atau penelitian adalah suatu proses pengumpulan data dan informasi yang dilakukan untuk menghasilkan kesimpulan atau temuan baru. Penelitian dilakukan dengan tujuan untuk meningkatkan pengetahuan atau pemahaman dalam suatu bidang, menjawab pertanyaan yang belum terjawab, atau untuk menemukan solusi untuk masalah tertentu. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dapat berbeda-beda tergantung jenis penelitian dan tujuannya.

Penelitian dapat dilakukan dalam berbagai bidang seperti ilmu sosial, ilmu alam, teknologi, kesehatan, dan banyak lagi. Ada dua jenis penelitian yaitu penelitian kualitatif dan penelitian kuantitatif. Penelitian kualitatif fokus pada pemahaman mendalam tentang suatu fenomena atau peristiwa. Sementara itu, penelitian kuantitatif memfokuskan pada pengumpulan dan analisis data berdasarkan angka atau statistik.

Pentingnya Penelitian

Penelitian memiliki peran penting dalam meningkatkan pengetahuan dan pengembangan suatu bidang. Dalam dunia akademik, penelitian seringkali menjadi syarat penting dalam menyelesaikan tugas akhir atau skripsi, dan dalam memperoleh gelar tertentu. Selain itu, penelitian juga dapat menjawab pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang belum terjawab dan memberikan solusi untuk masalah yang ada.

Penelitian juga menjadi bagian penting dalam pengembangan teknologi dan inovasi. Dengan melakukan penelitian, seseorang dapat menemukan ide-ide baru atau cara-cara baru dalam mengembangkan produk atau layanan. Penelitian juga dapat membantu dalam mengidentifikasi masalah-masalah yang ada dalam suatu produk atau layanan, sehingga dapat diperbaiki dan ditingkatkan.

Tahapan Penelitian

Tahapan penelitian terdiri dari beberapa langkah yang harus dilakukan secara sistematis dan terstruktur. Langkah-langkah tersebut antara lain:

• Menentukan topik atau masalah yang akan diteliti
• Mengumpulkan data dan informasi yang relevan
• Menganalisis data yang telah terkumpul
• Membuat kesimpulan atau temuan dari hasil analisis
• Mengkomunikasikan hasil penelitian

Setiap tahapan penelitian harus dilakukan dengan teliti dan terperinci untuk memastikan hasil yang akurat dan valid. Pada tahap menentukan topik atau masalah yang akan diteliti, seorang peneliti harus memahami dengan baik masalah yang ingin diselesaikan dan membuat pertanyaan penelitian yang jelas dan terarah. Pada tahap mengumpulkan data dan informasi, seorang peneliti harus memilih metode pengumpulan data yang sesuai dan memastikan data yang diperoleh valid dan terpercaya.

Metode Penelitian

Metode penelitian adalah suatu cara atau teknik yang digunakan dalam mengumpulkan dan menganalisis data. Ada beberapa metode penelitian yang umum digunakan, di antaranya:

• Survei: pengumpulan data melalui kuesioner atau wawancara
• Observasi: pengumpulan data melalui pengamatan langsung
• Studi kasus: analisis mendalam terhadap sebuah kasus atau fenomena
• Eksperimen: pengumpulan data dengan mengatur variabel tertentu

Pemilihan metode yang tepat sangatlah penting untuk memastikan hasil penelitian yang akurat dan valid. Setiap metode memiliki kelebihan dan kelemahan, sehingga harus dipilih dengan cermat sesuai dengan tujuan penelitian yang ingin dicapai.

Dalam penelitian, pengumpulan data dan informasi dilakukan dengan sistematis dan terstruktur untuk menghasilkan kesimpulan atau temuan baru. Penelitian memiliki peran penting dalam meningkatkan pengetahuan dan pengembangan suatu bidang, memberikan solusi untuk masalah, dan mengidentifikasi masalah yang ada dalam suatu produk atau layanan. Tahapan penelitian terdiri dari menentukan topik atau masalah yang akan diteliti, mengumpulkan data dan informasi, menganalisis data, membuat kesimpulan, dan mengkomunikasikan hasil penelitian. Pemilihan metode yang tepat sangatlah penting untuk memastikan hasil penelitian yang akurat dan valid.

Related video of Apa Itu Research: Mempelajari Konsep dan Pentingnya Penelitian

Significance: recognizing the value of research across national and linguistic boundaries

• Published: 01 May 2014
• Volume 15 , pages 347–354, ( 2014 )

Cite this article

• Kathryn M. Anderson-Levitt 1 , 2  

2834 Accesses

17 Citations

3 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Internationalization of educational publishing promises fresh perspectives and new solutions—but not if US-based editors, reviewers, and readers fail to recognize the significance of research conducted outside the USA. This essay explores the concept of “significance” in the context of peer review of journal articles, and explains why US-based reviewers easily miss the social importance and the intellectual interest of research conducted elsewhere. It points to several steps that can be taken to increase publication of the full global range of educational scholarship.

Similar content being viewed by others

The use of cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education.

The Impact of Peer Assessment on Academic Performance: A Meta-analysis of Control Group Studies

Ethical Considerations of Conducting Systematic Reviews in Educational Research

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

This article concerns the kinds of judgments made by editors of “international” journals and their reviewers when together they decide whether a manuscript submitted to the journal merits publication. Footnote 1 I address this discussion primarily to scholars who seek to publish in international journals, but also to editors of international journals who are concerned about issues of global equity in academic publishing.

The label “international” generally refers to “high impact” research journals published in a “world language,” which usually means English. While the Asia Pacific Education Review fits this definition, the majority of “journals with impact factor” are published in the USA. As of 2007, of the 113 education journals used by Thomson Reuters’ Social Science Citation Index, 61 had originated in the USA, 37 in the UK, and 15 in other countries (Peters 2009 : 243–244). Thus, this article will focus on US-based journals. Footnote 2

Non-US scholars seek to publish in US journals for at least two good reasons. First, like all scholars, they are seeking to reach a wider audience with their research. In addition, many of them are responding to pressure to publish in “high impact” journals (e.g., Larsson 2006 : 192; Uzuner 2008 ). Not everyone accepts the measurement mania that feeds the latter pressure (e.g., Willinsky 2006 ), but it is real. For example, as Lillis and Curry show in an important study of the process by which manuscripts get accepted or rejected by “international” journals, evaluation guides for tenure and promotion from Spain, Hungary, and Slovakia give extra weight to “journals with impact factor” or to “PsychInfo or SCI” (Lillis and Curry 2010 : 50–56).

The drive to publish in international journals takes place within an increasingly global arena of educational research. For example, in 2009, educational research associations from Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, the United States, and 20 other polities founded the World Educational Research Association ( http://www.weraonline.org/ ). The dialog within this association of associations holds an exciting promise for rich, multilingual, variegated ways of framing educational problems, and equally diverse practical solutions, and theoretical tools. However, in the current context of unequal access to “international” journals and of citation indexing biased in favor of US journals, the move to a global arena also poses a real danger that research will become yet more narrowly filtered by the interests of English speakers and particularly by US-based editors, reviewers, and readers. This paper will illustrate how such filtering happens by examining one of the criteria faced by non-US authors who seek to publish in US journals, namely, judgments about the “significance” of their manuscripts.

When a manuscript goes to a peer-reviewed journal, editors, and reviewers refer to several kinds of criteria to evaluate it. These criteria tend to cluster around three basic norms—quality of the research, clarity, and significance. Table  1 illustrates with the case of the journal Comparative Education Review, showing how the guiding questions that the journal asks reviewers to address when evaluating a manuscript cluster around these three norms.

Quality of the research is a minimum requirement for all authors, although it may be more difficult for scholars from lower-income countries to meet this requirement if they lack access to the full range of prior research on their topic, if they have had fewer opportunities for advanced training in research methods, or if they lack the financial resources to carry out more sophisticated research projects (Canagarajah 1996 ; Mweru 2010 ). Clarity refers not only to word choice and the flow of sentences and paragraphs, but also to the rhetorical structure of arguments as taken for granted by particular disciplines in the USA (Bazerman 1988 ; Flowerdew 2008 ; Ollion 2011 : appendix). The criterion of clarity, although of lesser importance than quality, is a hurdle for authors who are not native speakers of English, whether they work in a developing or a developed country (e.g., Uzuner 2008 ), and becomes a serious problem if lack of clarity makes it difficult for reviewers to follow the author’s argument. Finally, even scholars who work in affluent countries and are native speakers of English can encounter hidden barriers when editors and reviewers make judgments about the significance of their research.

Significance

Significance means why a particular study matters, that is, what makes it worth reading or what it contributes to theory or practice. Thus, the Educational Researcher, a flagship journal of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), seeks feature articles and reviews or essays “of broad significance” (“Manuscript submission,” http://edr.sagepub.com/ ), while AERA’s American Educational Research Journal publishes studies and analyses “that constitute significant contributions to the understanding and/or improvement of educational processes and outcomes” (“Manuscript submission,” http://aer.sagepub.com/ ). Similarly, in a study of the peer-review process for allocating grants in the social sciences and humanities, significance was not only a formal criterion established by the granting agencies but also the criterion mentioned most often in interviews by the scholars conducting the reviews (Lamont 2009 ).

I address the question of significance from the perspective of a US-born former editor and current co-editor of US journals who has struggled myself with recognizing the value of unfamiliar work. Footnote 3 As an editor, I have told authors that, since journals receive so many manuscripts based on high-quality research with fairly clear writing, the most important criterion for accepting a manuscript is usually the significance of the work.

When peer reviewers and editors assess the significance of a scholarly work, they actually make two kinds of judgments, one about “social/political” significance and one about “scholarly” significance (Lamont 2009 : 160). In the first case, they ask whether a work is what I will gloss as “important,” that is, whether it addresses the most pressing problems we need to face as members of society. In the second case, reviewers ask whether a work is what I will call “interesting,” that is, whether the ideas it presents are stimulating or provocative, whether they “advance the field.” These are, of course, overlapping categories; a topic may be both important and interesting, or may be considered interesting precisely because it is important. However, because the context of judgments about what is important differs from the context shaping discussions of what is interesting, I discuss these two dimensions separately here.

What counts as important

Reviewers favor studies addressing real and immediate social problems, not only in applied fields like education but across the social sciences and humanities (Lamont 2009 : 172). However, norms for judging what counts as important problems often depend on nation- and region-specific social and political contexts, as illustrated by cross-national variation in the most popular research topics. For example, within anthropology of education, US scholars focus on success and failure among racialized/ethnic and linguistic “minorities” (Delamont and Atkinson 1995 ; Jacquin 2006 ). There are good reasons for the US focus, including a history marked by conquest of indigenous peoples and Africans, waves of immigration and persisting inequalities. However, seen from Mexico, the US word “minority” does not make sense, because anthropologists there are concerned with equity for the majority of the school-aged population (Rockwell 2002 ). Elsewhere, ethnographers are more likely to focus on social class, as in France, where legislation discourages attention to ethnicity (Raveaud and Draelants 2011 ), or to examine inequities defined by local social and historical processes, including migration from the South in Italy (Gobbo 2011 ) or minoritized Roma populations in Central Europe (Eröss 2011 ). In developing countries, external actors may drive the equity concerns, as when interests of the World Bank and USAID give gender equity more prominence as a topic in West Africa than it receives in the USA (Diallo 2011 ).

Not only topic per se but the location where the research took place also affects judgments about its importance. Thus, a study of journal articles in the field of economics showed that the top five journals (two of which are UK-based and three US-based) overwhelmingly favored studies that had been conducted in the USA (Das et al. 2009 ). The chance of acceptance for papers about India, China, and African nations or even about the United Kingdom was so much lower than the chance for a paper about the United States that deciding where to conduct one’s research might actually affect a researcher’s chances for tenure, according to the analysts (Das et al. 2009 ). Lillis and Curry ( 2010 ) suggest an explanation for these findings. They point out US reviewers’ unstated assumption that the United States stands for the whole world, representing the “unmarked” or generic case, whereas other locations are seen as “marked” or particular. In their study of the publishing experiences of European psychologists and educational researchers, they found that reviewers wrote evaluative comments like, “Why did the authors choose to study Hungarian students?” or “Please could they outline why Madrid was chosen as the place of study…” (Lillis and Curry 2010 : 142), whereas the reviewers would probably not have questioned studies set in California or New York City.

National differences in what counts as “important” research mean that reviewers are more likely to question the value of a study on a topic or location that they do not see as central to their own part of the world. As a result, in advice to authors and in decisions about whether to recommend publication, reviewers sometimes steer the literature to focus on problems that the reviewers, not the authors, see as important. Thus, Lillis and Curry found that editors occasionally encouraged the authors of studies set elsewhere to develop an explicit comparison to US literature so that the non-US location, with its “difference” explicitly highlighted, could be used to confirm the presumably generic US findings (2010: 145–147). Not surprising, anticipating that pressure, some non-US scholars filter themselves, as illustrated by a seminar in Spain on how to publish in “journals with impact” in which the speaker advised colleagues to “change the topic” and “approach the topic from an international perspective” (Robinson-García 2012 : slides 25 and 48). Yet “an international perspective” can turn out to mean issues as they are defined locally within the USA.

What counts as interesting

Even in an applied field, reviewers and editors consider not only the practical importance but also the scholarly interest of a work. Journals sometimes discuss this criterion as “contribution to the advancement of knowledge.” For example, recent Anthropology and Education Quarterly reviewer guidelines include among the criteria “potential impact on research and practice” and “significance of the topic for advancing the field of educational anthropology,” while the Reading Research Quarterly advises authors that it seeks “manuscripts that make significant contributions to advancing knowledge and understanding of reading and of literacy, broadly defined.” The interest of a manuscript is also closely aligned with judgments about a work’s “originality” (Lamont 2009 ) and “novelty” (Lillis et al. 2010 ).

Judgments about what is interesting develop in ongoing “disciplinary conversations” (Bazerman 1988 :145), conversations in which scholars engage when they present at conferences and comment on colleagues’ presentations, when they meet to evaluate applications for promotion or for grants, and when they chat about academic issues in university corridors. The conversations extend to written discourse when published in articles, chapters, books, or blogs. Within these conversations in any particular discipline, certain terms come to take prominent roles; for example, terms such as “pedagogical,” “readiness,” and “outcomes” appear often in educational research conferences, in contrast to terms such as “metaphor,” “bricolage,” and “imbrication,” heard frequently at anthropology meetings over the past decade. At the same time, scholars cite certain authors so frequently in disciplinary conversations that the authors come to form a canon. Over time, both key terms and canonical authors come to serve as shorthand references to entire points of view so that, within the relevant discipline one term, such as “Goffmanesque,” or one reference to an author, such as Pierre Bourdieu, evokes a broad theoretical scenario to scholars who have participated in that conversation.

Linguistic barriers play a role in the disciplinary conversations that affect judgments about significance, since linguistic competence constrains who participates in which conversations within what is ostensibly the same discipline. Scholars in many countries are multilingual, and within their local disciplinary discourse community or speech community, it may be the norm to communicate in two, three, or more languages. In contrast, the social science disciplines in the USA operate as virtually monolingual, as can be demonstrated by our citation patterns (Gingras and Mosbah-Natanson 2010 ; Hewings et al. 2012 ; Yitzhaki 1998 ). This monolingualism, compounded by a low rate of book translation into English, isolates US readers from the conversations going on in other languages.

At the same time, linguistic competence is not the only constraint on disciplinary conversations. Citation patterns also reveal national and regional boundaries independent of linguistic borders (Yitzhaki 1998 ). For example, US ethnographers of education cite relatively little British ethnography of education (Delamont and Atkinson 1995 ), while neither British nor US scholars cite much from the large body of Scandinavian work published in English (Larsson 2006 ) or the large body of English-language educational research from India. National boundaries develop in part because disciplines are organized differently from one country to another. Thus, scholars in comparative education attribute the lack of mutual citation between leading German and French education journals not to linguistic barriers but rather to the fact that educational research is historical and hermeneutic in Germany but positivist in France (Schriewer and Keiner 1993 ). Even the names of disciplines and their scope vary significantly across nations; for example, the school-focused study of éducation in France does not correspond with the Danish interest in all things pædagogik , that is, the “moral, social, and cultural formation” of persons across the lifespan (Anderson et al. 2011 : 195), nor does an interest in “didactics” in continental Europe translate easily to the USA (Alexander 2001 ; see also Ouyang 2011 ).

Whether constrained by linguistic barriers or shaped by national differences, where distinct conversations take place even within the same discipline or family of disciplines, distinct canons and concepts emerge. As a result, even in a country like France, which imports and translates much more foreign social science than does the United States (Sapiro 2008 ), practitioners of a discipline like sociology remain relatively ignorant of the outline of sociology as practiced in the USA (Ollion 2011 ). Meanwhile, a mere reference to Bernard Lahire in France speaks volumes to sociologists of education there, while drawing blank looks from their US counterparts, just as the canonical significance of a scholar like Florestan Fernandes in Brazil or of Ebuchi Kazuhiro in Japan escapes US readers (Anderson-Levitt 2011 ). Imagine, then, how easily the significance of a particular citation or of a particular term in a manuscript could escape a reviewer or editor from outside that particular academic community. It is difficult for a reviewer to recognize how an argument “advances the field,” when the field in question is not really the same as the reviewer’s field.

Missing the significance has real effects in a world dominated by US journals. For example, sometimes reviewers, hoping to enhance a manuscript’s perceived significance, press authors to restrict their citations to English-language literature. In doing so, they render relevant literature published in other languages nearly invisible (Hewings et al. 2012 ; compare Canagarajah 1996 ). In the most dramatic cases, reviewers may dismiss outright an entire body of research from another country, as in the European and US reaction to Japanese research in the field of primatology (Asquith 1999 ).

In short, editors, reviewers, and readers can easily miss the significance of research conducted in other parts of the world for two reasons—because they are unfamiliar with the social and historical context that makes the problems studied important and because they do not participate in the linguistically and nationally bounded conversations that define the author’s questions as interesting. As a result, unless US editors change their practice, they—we—will continue to publish supposedly “international” journals that actually conform to the sensibilities of a surprisingly parochial US-based social science. How ironic it would be, given our desire for interesting, “new” and “original” ideas, to keep screening out the arguments that least fit within our current paradigms and therefore ought to be seen as the most novel (Lillis and Curry 2010 : 167). And how limiting, when addressing the most important problems, to continue to let our vision be hemmed in by our local assumptions about the way schooling has to work or about how students learn. What new solutions to our pressing problems would we find if we reconceived inequity as a problem for the majority of the world’s children, as in Mexico, or paid more attention to the moral side of education, as in Denmark?

Changing the current practice

I suggest possible remedies in the following paragraphs. Although the onus for change should be on US editors and reviewers, I will also comment on actions that editors and scholars in Asia and the Pacific might take on their part to improve mutual understanding of one another’s research.

Expanding indexes

To address the larger problem of US and English-language dominance and the distortions created by the obsession with indexes measuring “impact,” scholars and policy makers around the world are taking a number of actions. Many are developing open access repositories and journals, such as the Education Policy Analysis Archives , which can dramatically expand access to and citation of scholarly work (Willinsky 2006 : 29–30). Universities and national resource centers have developed alternative indices such as Latindex ( www.latindex.org ), the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO, www.scielo.org ), the Chinese Social Sciences Index (Su et al. 2012 ), the CJP in Japan (Negishi et al. 2004 ), and the Korea Citation Index (Ko et al. 2011 ). These efforts can lead to new ways to measure impact that rely less on US and UK standards (Fischman et al. 2010 ; Ko et al. 2011 ).

As part of the larger efforts, US scholars can make use of indexes beyond Web of Knowledge and Scopus when called on to review colleagues for tenure and promotion and can take advantage of open-source peer-reviewed research.

Internationalizing editorial boards

Meanwhile, some editors of US-based journals have increased the presence of non-US scholars on editorial boards with the idea that such scholars can function as cultural brokers, interpreting to editors the importance and interest of manuscripts submitted from discourse communities outside the USA. The success of such efforts will depend on how actively the cultural brokers intervene and how willing the editor is to take their advice. At the same time, some Asian and Pacific journals have internationalized their own editorial boards, thus making outside scholars who serve on their boards more familiar with topics, methods, and research literatures cited in their journals. However, as a study of Korean journals in the natural sciences reminds us, internationalizing boards will not necessarily have an effect on the international visibility of the journal or its authors’ work, at least not in the short run (Kim 2010 ).

Educating non-US authors

Much more pro-actively, US editors can choose to educate authors about the expectations of “international” journals, as do editors of the British educational journal Compare . In Compare ’s program, “inside experts” mentor experienced scholars from the global South on “the specific disciplinary conversations that the journal wants to encourage; the implicit ideology of the journal in relation to what counts as a ‘relevant’ contribution to knowledge; what counts as ‘new’ within this particular journal” (Lillis et al. 2010 : 785). Individual scholars in Asia and the Pacific can likewise seek to educate themselves about the norms of US-based journals. For example, large conferences like the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association offer workshops and roundtables on publishing in specific US journals.

However, as facilitators of the Compare program recognize, helping writers meet the expectations of their reviewers does not “challenge dominant practices” (Lillis et al. 2010 : 79). A better model would be the approach taken by the Croatian Medical Journal , where editors not only educate authors before they submit articles for review, but also address larger inequities by committing to publish research from developing countries on topics of interest in the authors’ countries but not to “the mainstream journal audience” (Mišak et al. 2005 : 124).

As for individual scholars, when they understand the peer-review process of “international” journals, they may be better prepared to argue for the “local content” of their manuscripts. Consider an author whose manuscript has made it through the first round of review and are invited to resubmit a revised manuscript. If reviewers have questioned the citation of works that are not in English, rather than eliminate the citations, the author might add English translations of the titles of the works in brackets, direct readers to English-language abstracts of the works when they exist and, in the cover letter to the editor, gently explain that a particular non-English citation is important and much cited in their part of the world. Some editors and reviewers will respond positively to humble but firm responses on a few points the authors show themselves ready to adapt to other suggestions from reviewers.

Educating US reviewers

Meanwhile, to understand and appreciate the topics important in other countries and key citations in other languages, US reviewers need to seek broader contextual knowledge. To contextualize, we must become wider readers. US journal editors can help with the task of broadening readers’ horizons, as Comparative Education Review does by publishing an annual bibliography of worldwide (English-language) articles in the field, and as the French journal Education Comparée does by publishing the tables of contents of other French- and English-language journals.

US readers can also take action as individuals to educate themselves, especially now that electronic technologies make it much easier to follow publications outside the USA. Readers can sign up for free table of content alerts from many parts of the world—for example, from French-language journals like Education et Sociétés at portals like Cairn ( http://www.cairn.info/ ) and the Centre for Open Electronic publishing ( http://www.revues.org/ ), or from Spanish journals at the government-sponsored Repositorio Español de Ciencia y Tecnología ( http://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/index/login ). To follow books on education, we can subscribe to the long-standing Spanish and Portuguese version of the open access electronic journal Education Review/Reseñas Educativas ( http://www.edrev.info/ ).

Even readers who are monolingual in English can glean real insights from these approaches, since abstracts in English are often available and since programs like Google Translate can offer rough glosses of titles. However, to push beyond the literatures of the United Kingdom, Australia, and India, US readers should make the effort to read in languages other than English—and then to cite what they read in the original language as well as in English (Hamel 2007 ). By the same token, we should be rewarding multilingual colleagues and doctoral students for citing and for publishing in languages other than English. A next, albeit daunting, step would be to consider reinstating a foreign language-reading requirement in research-focused education doctorates.

There are also steps that US-based scholarly organizations can take. One is to support more translations of books, chapters, or articles from other languages into English. What US readers may need even more than translations, however, are periodic state-of-the-art reports synthesizing research from other countries or regions on particular topics, to help reviewers place individual manuscripts into their broader context. The American Anthropologist , prompted by the World Council of Anthropological Associations, has just committed to publishing review articles on work from outside the USA in a new section of the journal called “World Anthropology” (Weil 2013 ). Similarly, the Annual Review of Sociology seems to include syntheses from outside the USA fairly regularly. However, US handbooks in educational research less often include such reports from other countries.

Editors in Asia and the Pacific can support and encourage this kind of learning by US readers in at least two ways. First, journal editors should encourage their publishers to set up a system for RSS feed and email alert, as is available for the Asia Pacific Education Review . Second, Asian journals that publish in English can help by publishing occasional state-of-the-art essays. Such essays, if available through open access, could be publicized by the newsletters of “sister” organizations in the same field, such as the electronic newsletter of the Comparative and International Education Society.

Article exchanges: publishing articles reviewed “at home”

Editors of US journal could take a more radical step away from the filtering built into US-based reviews by occasionally accepting (and translating, if necessary) manuscripts that have already been reviewed and judged worthy of publication in the author’s home country. For example, Educational Researcher might publish an article accepted but not published by the leading Brazilian journal, perhaps sending one of its accepted manuscripts to be published in Brazil in an exchange of pages. Footnote 4 Ideally, editors or other cultural brokers would frame such externally reviewed articles with introductions providing a broader context to help US readers appreciate their significance. This is the kind of exchange that could be fostered through interactions across journals and professional organizations, as when representatives of KERA, JERA, and AERA meet through the World Educational Research Association.

Meeting at international conferences

Finally, paradoxical as it seems when open access on the Web and electronic alerts are part of the solution, we need to continue to encourage face-to-face meetings across national boundaries and to make more room in such meetings for communication across languages. Sometimes the solution can be as simple as inviting scholars to speak in their own languages (which we all do with more meaning-rich intonation and gestures than when reading a text in another language) while referring listeners to an outline in English. This is a practice tried with some success at a recent Inter-American Symposium on Ethnography and Education ( http://conferences.gseis.ucla.edu/simposio ). Scholars in rhetoric point out that making convincing arguments in the social sciences requires a great deal of “personal credibility” (Hyland 2011 : 203). Face-to-face interaction still offers the best opportunity to build trust in one another’s scholarship and interest in one another’s work, to the benefit of everyone in the worldwide field of educational research.

An earlier version of this paper appears in the  Education Policy Analysis Archives . The version presented here was developed for the 14th annual meeting of the International Conference on Education Research at Seoul National University. I am grateful for the opportunity to have participated in that conference.

Here “US journals” means peer-reviewed periodicals whose editors usually come from US universities, whatever the location of the publisher, and “non-US scholars” means scholars who work in institutions outside the United States, excluding US-born and educated expatriates. There are actually many degrees of “inside” and “outside,” so that scholars who received doctoral education in the United States but now work outside it have some insider knowledge of the USA, while non-native English speakers who were educated elsewhere but now work inside the United States may face linguistic challenges.

I served as editor of the US-based Anthropology and Education Quarterly in 1994–2000, and currently serve as one of the co-editors of the US-based Comparative Education Review.

This is a solution suggested by journal editors from outside the United States in an open forum at the 2009 American Anthropological Association meeting. The International Political Science Association runs an entire journal, World Political Science Review , by publishing “translations of [already published] prize-winning articles nominated by prominent national political science associations and journals around the world” ( http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/wpsr ), but its system requires readers who deliberately seek out and pay for this transnational journal.

Alexander, R. J. (2001). Border crossings: Towards a comparative pedagogy. Comparative Education, 37 (4), 507–523.

Article   Google Scholar  

Anderson, S., Gulløv, E., & Valentin, K. (2011). Educational anthropology in a welfare state perspective: The case of Scandinavia. In K. M. Anderson-Levitt (Ed.), Anthropologies of education (pp. 193–211). New York: Berghahn Books.

Google Scholar  

Anderson-Levitt, K. M. (2011). Anthropologies and ethnographies of education worldwide. In K. M. Anderson-Levitt (Ed.), Anthropologies of education: A global guide to ethnographic studies of learning and schooling (pp. 1–28). New York: Berghahn Books.

Asquith, P. J. (1999). The “world system” of anthropology and “professional others”. In E. L. Cerroni-Long (Ed.), Anthropological theory in North America (pp. 33–53). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press. http://wac.colostate.edu/books/bazerman_shaping/ .

Canagarajah, A. S. (1996). ‘‘Nondiscursive’’ requirements in academic publishing, material resources of periphery scholars, and the politics of knowledge production. Written Communication, 13 , 435–472.

Das, J., Do, Q.-T., Shaines, K., & Srinivasan, S. (2009). U.S. and them: The geography of academic research. Policy research working paper 5152. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Development research group. Poverty and inequality team & human development and public services team.

Delamont, S., & Atkinson, P. (Eds.). (1995). Fighting familiarity: Essays on education and ethnography . Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Diallo, B. B. (2011). Sociological and ethnographic research in French-speaking sub-Saharan Africa. In K. Anderson-Levitt (Ed.), Anthropologies of education (pp. 279–302). New York: Berghahn Books.

Eröss, G. (2011). Central Europe (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia). In K. Anderson-Levitt (Ed.), Anthropologies of education (pp. 151–166). New York: Berghahn Books.

Fischman, G. E., Alperin, J. P., & Willinsky, J. (2010). Visibility and quality in Spanish-language Latin American scholarly publishing. Information technologies & international development, 6(4). http://itidjournal.org/itid/article/viewArticle/639 ).

Flowerdew, J. (2008). Scholarly writers who use English as an additional language: What can Goffman’s “ Stigma ” tell us? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7 , 77–86.

Gingras, Y., & Mosbah-Natanson, S. (2010). Where are social sciences produced? In UNESCO (Ed.), World social science report (pp. 149–153). Paris: UNESCO & International Social Science Council.

Gobbo, F. (2011). Anthropology of education in Italy. In K. Anderson-Levitt (Ed.), Mapping anthropologies of education (pp. 151–165). New York: Berghahn Books.

Hamel, R. E. (2007). The dominance of English in the international scientific periodical literature and the future of language use in science. AILA Review, 20 , 53–71.

Hewings, A., Lillis, T., & Vladimirou, D. (2012). Who’s citing whose writings? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9 , 102–115.

Hyland, K. (2011). Disciplines and discourses: Social interactions in the construction of knowledge. In D. Starke-Meyerring, A. Paré, N. Artemeva, M. Horne, & L. Yousoubova (Eds.), Writing in knowledge societies . Fort Collins, CO: The WAC Clearinghouse and Parlor Press.

Jacquin, M. (2006). La revue anthropology and education quarterly. Analyse des dix dernières années. Éducation et Sociétés, 17 , 89–104.

Kim, M.-J. (2010). Visibility of Korean science journals: An analysis between citation measures among international composition of editorial board and foreign authorship. Scientometrics, 84 (2), 505–522. doi: 10.1007/s11192-010-0168-x .

Ko, Y., Cho, S.-R., & Park, Y. (2011). A study on the optimization of KCI-based index (Kor-Factor) in evaluating Korean journals. Scientometrics, 88 (1), 61–71. doi: 10.1007/s11192-011-0384-z .

Lamont, M. (2009). How professors think: Inside the curious world of academic judgment . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Larsson, S. (2006). Ethnography in action. How ethnography was established in Swedish educational research. Ethnography and Education, 1 , 177–195.

Lillis, T. M., & Curry, M. J. (2010). Academic writing in a global context: The politics and practices of publishing in English . New York: Routledge.

Lillis, T. M., Magyar, A., & Robinson-Pant, A. (2010). An international journal’s attempts to address inequalities in academic publishing: Developing a writing for publication programme. Compare, 40 (6), 781–800.

Mišak, A., Marušić, M., & Marušić, A. (2005). Manuscript editing as a way of teaching academic writing: Experience from a small scientific journal. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14 (2), 122–131. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.001 .

Mweru, M. (2010). Why Kenyan academics do not publish in international refereed journals. In UNESCO (Ed.), World social science report (pp. 110–111). Paris: UNESCO & International Social Science Council.

Negishi, M., Sun, Y., & Shigi, K. (2004). Citation database for Japanese papers: A new bibliometric tool for Japanese academic society. Scientometrics, 60 (3), 333–351. doi: 10.1023/B:SCIE.0000034378.38698.b2 .

Ollion, É. (2011). De la sociologie en Amérique. Éléments pour une sociologie de la sociologie étasunienne contemporaine. Sociologie, 2 (3), 277–294.

Ouyang, H. (2011). Bamboo shoots after rain: Educational anthropology and ethnography in Mainland China. In K. Anderson-Levitt (Ed.), Anthropologies of education (pp. 235–255). New York: Berghahn Books.

Peters, M. A. (2009). Academic publishing and the political economy of education journals. In B. W. Cope & A. Phillips (Eds.), The future of the academic journal . Oxford: Chandos Publishing.

Raveaud, M., & Draelants, H. (2011). Ethnographies of education in the French-speaking world. In K. M. Anderson-Levitt (Ed.), Anthropologies of education (pp. 131–149). New York: Berghahn Books.

Robinson-García, N. (2012). How to publish in journals with impact? Retrieved July 19, 2012, from http://www.slideshare.net/figaro/how-to-publish-in-journals-with-impact .

Rockwell, E. (2002). Constructing diversity and civility in the United States and Latin America. In B. A. U. Levinson, S. L. Cade, A. Padawer, & A. P. Elvir (Eds.), Ethnography and educational policy across the Americas (pp. 3–19). Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood.

Sapiro, G. (2008). Translatio. Le marché de la traduction en France à l’heure de la mondialisation . Paris: CNRS.

Schriewer, J., & Keiner, E. (1993). Communication patterns and intellectual traditions in educational sciences: France and Germany. Comparative Education Review, 36 , 25–51.

Su, X., Deng, S., & Shen, S. (2012). The design and application value of the Chinese Social Science Citation Index. Scientometrics, 98 , 1567–1582. doi: 10.1007/s11192-012-0921-4 .

Uzuner, S. (2008). Multilingual scholars’ participation in core/global academic communities: A literature review. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7 (4), 250–263.

Weil, J. (2013). The world anthropology section: An introduction. American Anthropologist, 115 (4), 656–657. doi: 10.1111/aman.12054 .

Willinsky, J. (2006). The access principle: The case for open access to research and scholarship . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Yitzhaki, M. (1998). The ‘language preference’ in sociology: Measures of ‘language self-citation’, ‘relative own-language preference indicator’, and ‘mutual use of languages’. Scientometrics, 41 , 243–254.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Michigan–Dearborn, Dearborn, MI, USA

Kathryn M. Anderson-Levitt

UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathryn M. Anderson-Levitt .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Anderson-Levitt, K.M. Significance: recognizing the value of research across national and linguistic boundaries. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev. 15 , 347–354 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-014-9322-0

Download citation

Published : 01 May 2014

Issue Date : September 2014

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-014-9322-0

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

• Academic discourse communities
• Educational research
• English for academic purposes
• Faculty publishing
• Globalization
• Intercultural communication
• Peer evaluation
• Writing for publication
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

The Why: Explaining the significance of your research

In the first four articles of this series, we examined The What: Defining a research project , The Where: Constructing an effective writing environment , The When: Setting realistic timeframes for your research , and The Who: Finding key sources in the existing literature . In this article, we will explore the fifth, and final, W of academic writing, The Why: Explaining the significance of your research.

Q1: When considering the significance of your research, what is the general contribution you make?

According to the Unite for Sight online module titled “ The Importance of Research ”:

“The purpose of research is to inform action. Thus, your study should seek to contextualize its findings within the larger body of research. Research must always be of high quality in order to produce knowledge that is applicable outside of the research setting. Furthermore, the results of your study may have implications for policy and future project implementation.”

In response to this TweetChat question, Twitter user @aemidr shared that the “dissemination of the research outcomes” is their contribution. Petra Boynton expressed a contribution of “easy to follow resources other people can use to help improve their health/wellbeing”.

Eric Schmieder said, “In general, I try to expand the application of technology to improve the efficiency of business processes through my research and personal use and development of technology solutions.” While Janet Salmons offered the response, “ I am a metaresearcher , that is, I research emerging qualitative methods & write about them. I hope contribution helps student & experienced researchers try new approaches.”

Despite the different contributions each of these participants noted as the significance of their individual research efforts, there is a significance to each. In addition to the importance stated through the above examples, Leann Zarah offered 7 Reasons Why Research Is Important , as follows:

• A Tool for Building Knowledge and for Facilitating Learning
• Means to Understand Various Issues and Increase Public Awareness
• An Aid to Business Success
• A Way to Prove Lies and to Support Truths
• Means to Find, Gauge, and Seize Opportunities
• A Seed to Love Reading, Writing, Analyzing, and Sharing Valuable Information
• Nourishment and Exercise for the Mind

Q1a: What is the specific significance of your research to yourself or other individuals?

The first of “ 3 Important Things to Consider When Selecting Your Research Topic ”, as written by Stephen Fiedler is to “choose something that interests you”. By doing so, you are more likely to stay motivated and persevere through inevitable challenges.

As mentioned earlier, for Salmons her interests lie in emerging methods and new approaches to research. As Salmons pointed out in the TweetChat, “Conventional methods may not be adequate in a globally-connected world – using online methods expands potential participation.”

For @aemidr, “specific significance of my research is on health and safety from the environment and lifestyle”. In contrast, Schmieder said “my ongoing research allows me to be a better educator, to be more efficient in my own business practices, and to feel comfortable engaging with new technology”.

Regardless of discipline, a personal statement can help identify for yourself and others your suitability for specific research. Some things to include in the statement are:

• Your reasons for choosing your topic of research
• The aspects of your topic of research that interest you most
• Any work experience, placement or voluntary work you have undertaken, particularly if it is relevant to your subject. Include the skills and abilities you have gained from these activities
• How your choice of research fits in with your future career plans

Q2: Why is it important to communicate the value of your research?

According to Salmons, “If you research and no one knows about it or can use what you discover, it is just an intellectual exercise. If we want the public to support & fund research, we must show why it’s important!” She has written for the SAGE MethodSpace blog on the subject Write with Purpose, Publish for Impact building a collection of articles from both the MethodSpace blog and TAA’s blog, Abstract .

Peter J. Stogios shares with us benefits to both the scientist and the public in his article, “ Why Sharing Your Research with the Public is as Necessary as Doing the Research Itself ”. Unsure where to start? Stogios states, “There are many ways scientists can communicate more directly with the public. These include writing a personal blog, updating their lab’s or personal website to be less technical and more accessible to non-scientists, popular science forums and message boards, and engaging with your institution’s research communication office. Most organizations publish newsletters or create websites showcasing the work being done, and act as intermediaries between the researchers and the media. Scientists can and should interact more with these communicators.”

Schmieder stated during the TweetChat that the importance of communicating the value of your research is “primarily to help others understand why you do what you do, but also for funding purposes, application of your results by others, and increased personal value and validation”.

In her article, “ Explaining Your Research to the Public: Why It Matters, How to Do It! ”, Sharon Page-Medrich conveys the importance, stating “UC Berkeley’s 30,000+ undergraduate and 11,000+ graduate students generate or contribute to diverse research in the natural and physical sciences, social sciences and humanities, and many professional fields. Such research and its applications are fundamental to saving lives, restoring healthy environments, making art and preserving culture, and raising standards of living. Yet the average person-in-the-street may not see the connection between students’ investigations and these larger outcomes.”

Q2a: To whom is it most difficult to explain that value?

Although important, it’s not always easy to share our research efforts with others. Erin Bedford sets the scene as she tells us “ How to (Not) Talk about Your Research ”. “It’s happened to the best of us. First, the question: ‘so, what is your research on?’ Then, the blank stare as you try to explain. And finally, the uninterested but polite nod and smile.”

Schmieder acknowledges that these polite people who care enough to ask, but often are the hardest to explain things to are “family and friends who don’t share the same interests or understanding of the subject matter.” It’s not that they don’t care about the efforts, it’s that the level to which a researcher’s investment and understanding is different from those asking about their work.

When faced with less-than-supportive reactions from friends, Noelle Sterne shares some ways to retain your perspective and friendship in her TAA blog article, “ Friends – How to deal with their negative responses to your academic projects ”.

Q3: What methods have you used to explain your research to others (both inside and outside of your discipline)?

Schmieder stated, “I have done webinars, professional development seminars, blog articles, and online courses” in an effort to communicate research to others. The Edinburg Napier University LibGuides guide to Sharing Your Research includes some of these in their list of resources as well adding considerations of online presence, saving time / online efficiency, copyright, and compliance to the discussion.

Michaela Panter states in her article, “ Sharing Your Findings with a General Audience ”, that “tips and guidelines for conveying your research to a general audience are increasingly widespread, yet scientists remain wary of doing so.” She notes, however, that “effectively sharing your research with a general audience can positively affect funding for your work” and “engaging the general public can further the impact of your research”.

If these are affects you desire, consider CES’s “ Six ways to share your research findings ”, as follows:

• Know your audience and define your goal
• Collaborate with others
• Make a plan
• Embrace plain language writing
• Layer and link, and
• Evaluate your work

Q4: What are some places you can share your research and its significance beyond your writing?

Beyond traditional journal article publication efforts, there are many opportunities to share your research with a larger community. Schmieder listed several options during the TweetChat event, specifically, “conference presentations, social media, blogs, professional networks and organizations, podcasts, and online courses”.

Elsevier’s resource, “ Sharing and promoting your article ” provides advice on sharing your article in the following ten places:

• At a conference
• For classroom teaching purposes
• For grant applications
• With my colleagues
• On a preprint server
• On my personal blog or website
• On my institutional repository
• On a subject repository (or other non-commercial repository)
• On Scholarly Communication Network (SCN), such as Mendeley or Scholar Universe
• Social Media, such as Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter

Nature Publishing Group’s “ tips for promoting your research ” include nine ways to get started:

• Share your work with your social networks
• Update your professional profile
• Utilize research-sharing platforms
• Create a Google Scholar profile – or review and enhance your existing one
• Highlight key and topical points in a blog post
• Make your research outputs shareable and discoverable
• Register for a unique ORCID author identifier
• Encourage readership within your institution

Finally, Sheffield Solutions produced a top ten list of actions you can take to help share and disseminate your work more widely online, as follows:

• Create an ORCID ID
• Upload to Sheffield’s MyPublications system
• Make your work Open Access
• Create a Google Scholar profile
• Join an academic social network
• Connect through Twitter
• Blog about your research
• Upload to Slideshare or ORDA
• Track your research

Q5: How is the significance of your study conveyed in your writing efforts?

Schmieder stated, “Significance is conveyed through the introduction, the structure of the study, and the implications for further research sections of articles”. According to The Writing Center at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, “A thesis statement tells the reader how you will interpret the significance of the subject matter under discussion”.

In their online Tips & Tools resource on Thesis Statements , they share the following six questions to ask to help determine if your thesis is strong:

• Do I answer the question?
• Have I taken a position that others might challenge or oppose?
• Is my thesis statement specific enough?
• Does my thesis pass the “So what?” test?
• Does my essay support my thesis specifically and without wandering?
• Does my thesis pass the “how and why?” test?

Some journals, such as Elsevier’s Acta Biomaterialia, now require a statement of significance with manuscript submissions. According to the announcement linked above, “these statements will address the novelty aspect and the significance of the work with respect to the existing literature and more generally to the society.” and “by highlighting the scientific merit of your research, these statements will help make your work more visible to our readership.”

Q5a: How does the significance influence the structure of your writing?

According to Jeff Hume-Pratuch in the Academic Coaching & Writing (ACW) article, “ Using APA Style in Academic Writing: Precision and Clarity ”, “The need for precision and clarity of expression is one of the distinguishing marks of academic writing.” As a result, Hume-Pratuch advises that you “choose your words wisely so that they do not come between your idea and the audience.” To do so, he suggests avoiding ambiguous expressions, approximate language, and euphemisms and jargon in your writing.

Schmieder shared in the TweetChat that “the impact of the writing is affected by the target audience for the research and can influence word choice, organization of ideas, and elements included in the narrative”.

Discussing the organization of ideas, Patrick A. Regoniel offers “ Two Tips in Writing the Significance of the Study ” claiming that by referring to the statement of the problem and writing from general to specific contribution, you can “prevent your mind from wandering wildly or aimlessly as you explore the significance of your study”.

Q6: What are some ways you can improve your ability to explain your research to others?

For both Schmieder and Salmons, practice is key. Schmieder suggested, “Practice simplifying the concepts. Focus on why rather than what. Share research in areas where they are active and comfortable”. Salmons added, “answer ‘so what’ and ‘who cares’ questions. Practice creating a sentence. For my study of the collaborative process: ‘Learning to collaborate is important for team success in professional life’ works better than ‘a phenomenological study of instructors’ perceptions’”.

In a guest blog post for Scientific American titled “ Effective Communication, Better Science ”, Mónica I. Feliú-Mójer claimed “to be a successful scientist, you must be an effective communicator.” In support of the goal of being an effective communicator, a list of training opportunities and other resources are included in the article.

Along the same lines, The University of Melbourne shared the following list of resources, workshops, and programs in their online resource on academic writing and communication skills :

• Speaking and Presenting : Resources for presenting your research, using PowerPoint to your advantage, presenting at conferences and helpful videos on presenting effectively
• Research Impact Library Advisory Service  (RILAS): Helps you to determine the impact of your publications and other research outputs for academic promotions and grant applications
• Three Minute Thesis Competition  (3MT): Research communication competition that requires you to deliver a compelling oration on your thesis topic and its significance in just three minutes or less.
• Visualise your Thesis Competition : A dynamic and engaging audio-visual “elevator pitch” (e-Poster) to communicate your research to a broad non-specialist audience in 60 seconds.

As we complete this series exploration of the five W’s of academic writing, we hope that you are adequately prepared to apply them to your own research efforts of defining a research project, constructing an effective writing environment, setting realistic timeframes for your research, finding key sources in the existing literature, and last, but not least, explaining the significance of your research.

Share this:

• Share on Tumblr

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

How to Discuss the Significance of Your Research

• 6-minute read
• 10th April 2023

Introduction

Research papers can be a real headache for college students . As a student, your research needs to be credible enough to support your thesis statement. You must also ensure you’ve discussed the literature review, findings, and results.

However, it’s also important to discuss the significance of your research . Your potential audience will care deeply about this. It will also help you conduct your research. By knowing the impact of your research, you’ll understand what important questions to answer.

If you’d like to know more about the impact of your research, read on! We’ll talk about why it’s important and how to discuss it in your paper.

What Is the Significance of Research?

This is the potential impact of your research on the field of study. It includes contributions from new knowledge from the research and those who would benefit from it. You should present this before conducting research, so you need to be aware of current issues associated with the thesis before discussing the significance of the research.

Why Does the Significance of Research Matter?

Potential readers need to know why your research is worth pursuing. Discussing the significance of research answers the following questions:

●  Why should people read your research paper ?

●  How will your research contribute to the current knowledge related to your topic?

●  What potential impact will it have on the community and professionals in the field?

Not including the significance of research in your paper would be like a knight trying to fight a dragon without weapons.

Where Do I Discuss the Significance of Research in My Paper?

As previously mentioned, the significance of research comes before you conduct it. Therefore, you should discuss the significance of your research in the Introduction section. Your reader should know the problem statement and hypothesis beforehand.

Steps to Discussing the Significance of Your Research

Discussing the significance of research might seem like a loaded question, so we’ve outlined some steps to help you tackle it.

Step 1: The Research Problem

The problem statement can reveal clues about the outcome of your research. Your research should provide answers to the problem, which is beneficial to all those concerned. For example, imagine the problem statement is, “To what extent do elementary and high school teachers believe cyberbullying affects student performance?”

Learning teachers’ opinions on the effects of cyberbullying on student performance could result in the following:

●  Increased public awareness of cyberbullying in elementary and high schools

●  Teachers’ perceptions of cyberbullying negatively affecting student performance

Find this useful?

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

●  Whether cyberbullying is more prevalent in elementary or high schools

The research problem will steer your research in the right direction, so it’s best to start with the problem statement.

Step 2: Existing Literature in the Field

Think about current information on your topic, and then find out what information is missing. Are there any areas that haven’t been explored? Your research should add new information to the literature, so be sure to state this in your discussion. You’ll need to know the current literature on your topic anyway, as this is part of your literature review section .

Step 3: Your Research’s Impact on Society

Inform your readers about the impact on society your research could have on it. For example, in the study about teachers’ opinions on cyberbullying, you could mention that your research will educate the community about teachers’ perceptions of cyberbullying as it affects student performance. As a result, the community will know how many teachers believe cyberbullying affects student performance.

You can also mention specific individuals and institutions that would benefit from your study. In the example of cyberbullying, you might indicate that school principals and superintendents would benefit from your research.

Step 4: Future Studies in the Field

Next, discuss how the significance of your research will benefit future studies, which is especially helpful for future researchers in your field. In the example of cyberbullying affecting student performance, your research could provide further opportunities to assess teacher perceptions of cyberbullying and its effects on students from larger populations. This prepares future researchers for data collection and analysis.

Discussing the significance of your research may sound daunting when you haven’t conducted it yet. However, an audience might not read your paper if they don’t know the significance of the research. By focusing on the problem statement and the research benefits to society and future studies, you can convince your audience of the value of your research.

Remember that everything you write doesn’t have to be set in stone. You can go back and tweak the significance of your research after conducting it. At first, you might only include general contributions of your study, but as you research, your contributions will become more specific.

You should have a solid understanding of your topic in general, its associated problems, and the literature review before tackling the significance of your research. However, you’re not trying to prove your thesis statement at this point. The significance of research just convinces the audience that your study is worth reading.

Finally, we always recommend seeking help from your research advisor whenever you’re struggling with ideas. For a more visual idea of how to discuss the significance of your research, we suggest checking out this video .

1. Do I need to do my research before discussing its significance?

No, you’re discussing the significance of your research before you conduct it. However, you should be knowledgeable about your topic and the related literature.

2. Is the significance of research the same as its implications?

No, the research implications are potential questions from your study that justify further exploration, which comes after conducting the research.

 3. Discussing the significance of research seems overwhelming. Where should I start?

We recommend the problem statement as a starting point, which reveals clues to the potential outcome of your research.

4. How can I get feedback on my discussion of the significance of my research?

Our proofreading experts can help. They’ll check your writing for grammar, punctuation errors, spelling, and concision. Submit a 500-word document for free today!

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

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

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

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

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

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

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

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

4-minute read

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

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

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

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

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

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

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

Work Abroad

Study abroad.

• Citizenship

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Health Res Policy Syst

Understanding relevance of health research: considerations in the context of research impact assessment

Mark j. dobrow.

1 Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, 4th Floor, Toronto, ON M5T 3M6 Canada

Fiona A. Miller

2 Alberta Innovates - Health Solutions, Edmonton, Alberta Canada

Adalsteinn D. Brown

Associated data.

Not applicable. No datasets were generated or analysed during the development of the article.

With massive investment in health-related research, above and beyond investments in the management and delivery of healthcare and public health services, there has been increasing focus on the impact of health research to explore and explain the consequences of these investments and inform strategic planning. Relevance is reflected by increased attention to the usability and impact of health research, with research funders increasingly engaging in relevance assessment as an input to decision processes. Yet, it is unclear whether relevance is a synonym for or predictor of impact, a necessary condition or stage in achieving it, or a distinct aim of the research enterprise. The main aim of this paper is to improve our understanding of research relevance, with specific objectives to (1) unpack research relevance from both theoretical and practical perspectives, and (2) outline key considerations for its assessment.

Our approach involved the scholarly strategy of review and reflection. We prepared a draft paper based on an exploratory review of literature from various fields, and gained from detailed and insightful analysis and critique at a roundtable discussion with a group of key health research stakeholders. We also solicited review and feedback from a small sample of expert reviewers.

Conclusions

Research relevance seems increasingly important in justifying research investments and guiding strategic research planning. However, consideration of relevance has been largely tacit in the health research community, often depending on unexplained interpretations of value, fit and potential for impact. While research relevance seems a necessary condition for impact – a process or component of efforts to make rigorous research usable – ultimately, relevance stands apart from research impact. Careful and explicit consideration of research relevance is vital to gauge the overall value and impact of a wide range of individual and collective research efforts and investments. To improve understanding, this paper outlines four key considerations, including how research relevance assessments (1) orientate to, capture and compare research versus non-research sources, (2) consider both instrumental versus non-instrumental uses of research, (3) accommodate dynamic temporal-shifting perspectives on research, and (4) align with an intersubjective understanding of relevance.

Various levels of government in Canada collectively invest multiple billions of dollars in health-related research per annum, above and beyond investments in the management and delivery of healthcare and public health services. In recognition of this sizeable collective commitment, much work has focused on the impact of health research to explore and explain the consequences of these investments and inform strategic planning. Relevance is tacit in the increased attention to the usability and impact of health research. Additionally, research funders increasingly engage in relevance assessment as an input to decision processes; yet, it is unclear whether relevance is a synonym for or predictor of impact, a necessary condition or stage in achieving it, or a distinct aim of the research enterprise. Therefore, the main aim of this paper is to improve our understanding of research relevance as it relates to research quality and research impact, with specific objectives to (1) unpack research relevance from both theoretical and practical perspectives, and (2) outline key considerations for the assessment of research relevance.

Globally, there has been increasing critical assessment of the value of health research investments [ 1 – 3 ], with growing interest in research impact assessment (RIA) in the health sector [ 4 – 6 ]. RIA focuses on understanding how research activity can directly and indirectly advance knowledge, influence decision-making, and effect health and socio-economic outcomes, with a small but growing body of work seeking to develop better measures to evaluate (and ideally attribute) the returns on health research investments [ 6 ]. The Canadian Academy of Health Sciences (CAHS) released a comprehensive report on the subject in 2009 that presented a call for action, with a number of recommendations including establishing collaborative efforts among Canadian research funders to advance frameworks and sets of indicators and metrics for health research impact [ 4 ]. The CAHS impact framework [ 4 ], which drew on the Buxton and Hanney [ 7 ] ‘payback model’, among others, has provided a thoughtful starting point for considering the impact of health research in Canada. Subsequent work by Alberta Innovates – Health Solutions (AIHS) on a Research to Impact Framework (described in Graham et al. [ 8 ]) provides further insights on operationalising RIA frameworks for health research in Canada.

These initiatives are part of a broadly discussed shift in approaches to knowledge production, from an emphasis on investigator-initiated, curiosity driven work judged and guided by scientists, to expanded approaches to knowledge production, drawing on a wider set of actors and approaches, and emphasising relevance and usability. This shift from science produced by and for scientists to knowledge production that is “ socially distributed, application-oriented, trans-disciplinary, and subject to multiple accountabilities ” [ 9 ] has been characterised as a shift from ‘mode 1’ to ‘mode 2’ knowledge regimes. In the language of mode 2, interest in research ‘impact’ expresses a concern for application or consequence, and – in the economic language of return on investment – a concern that the yield is at least equal to the investment in the research itself. Extending this reasoning, interest in research ‘relevance’ may reflect a concern for accountability – linking research to the actor(s) for whom the research is performed and who will, ideally, put it to use.

In Canada, interest in research impact and relevance appears to have been felt most forcefully in the context of health services and policy research, which has long been encouraged to orient to the needs of policymakers, health system planners and related decision makers. More recently, there has been increased attention to ensuring that all forms of health research are ‘patient oriented’ – that is, that the research is prioritised, conducted and applied in ways that are accountable to this important end user. This call has been picked up on several fronts, including by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), which released its Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) in 2011. The SPOR vision “…is to demonstrably improve health outcomes and enhance patients’ health care experience through integration of evidence at all levels in the health care system ” [ 10 ]. In some respects, it represents a fundamental re-orientation for the primary funder of health research in Canada.

Though relevance is tacit in attention to research impact and the wider concern with mode 2 knowledge production, explicit attention to the meaning or measurement of research relevance is limited. The CAHS and AIHS frameworks, for example, acknowledge ‘relevance’ of health research but do not clearly define the term nor describe approaches for assessing it [ 4 , 8 ]. Rather, these frameworks emphasise the role of broad stakeholder engagement approaches and feedback mechanisms as methods for addressing relevance. For example, the AIHS framework notes the challenge of, and need to, move “ …beyond the collection of traditional scientific indicators […] to include measures of greater interest to the broader stakeholder community… ” [ 8 ] without stating explicitly how “ greater interest ” or related concepts such as relevance should be judged. As currently constructed, these RIA frameworks provide important advances in how we think about the impact of health research, but they were not intended to provide guidance specifically to the assessment of the relevance of health research.

Despite this lack of specific guidance on research relevance from a scholarly or measurement perspective, attention to it as a practical component of health research funding and organisation is evolving. There is, for example, growing use of ‘relevance assessment’ by research funders. The Canadian Health Services Research Foundation, in particular, was an innovator in incorporating relevance review into its applied research funding programmes, including promoting partnerships and knowledge translation (KT) with health system stakeholders [ 11 ]. Current applications for funding from the Institute of Gender and Health at CIHR go through ‘relevance review’ ( http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/45212.html ). Similarly, applications for Ontario’s Health System Research Fund are judged based on ‘internal review of relevance and impact’ ( http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/ministry/research/cihr.aspx ). However, given the lack of conceptual clarity on research relevance, and in particular, how relevance assessment aligns with and differs from impact assessment, there is a critical gap in our understanding that has implications for both its contemporary and ongoing application and our ability to make sound research investment decisions.

This work was commissioned by the Ontario SPOR SUPPORT (Support for People and Patient-Oriented Research and Trials) Unit (OSSU) – one of several units established at provincial and regional levels across Canada to work with CIHR in pursuing the SPOR. Like other research organisations, OSSU saw the need to consider the relevance of the research it supported, and it established both scientific and relevance advisory committees as part of its original governance structure [ 12 ], tasking the latter to “ …develop a measure, or small set of strategic measures, that serves to inspire the Ontario research, implementation, provider and patient communities to come together to make a difference for patients ” [ 12 ]. In the spirit of research and scholarship, OSSU then asked what exactly this commitment to research ‘relevance’ entailed.

Our approach to answering this question involved the scholarly strategy of review and reflection. As with the early investigations into research impact assessment, we were surprised to find so little reflexive attention to the topic within the health research community [ 13 ]. We prepared a draft paper based on an exploratory review of literature from various fields, and gained from detailed and insightful analysis and critique at a roundtable discussion with a small group of key health research stakeholders. We also solicited review and feedback from a small sample of expert reviewers.

The structure of our paper is as follows. First, to ‘unpack’ the concept of relevance, we review theoretical literature and then consider practical work both from within and outside the health sector, to ask what has been argued and concluded about the nature of relevance and its appropriate assessment. Next, we outline a series of forward-looking considerations for assessing research relevance and conclude with reflections on how research relevance assessment fits with evolving interest in RIA.

Unpacking relevance

Theoretical perspectives.

Before considering the relevance of health research, we need to step back and consider what we mean by the term ‘relevance’. A range of descriptors is often used to define relevance, including ‘pertinent to…’, ‘bearing upon…’, ‘connected with…’, or ‘appropriate to…’, ‘…the matter at hand’, as well as ‘germane’, ‘apropos’, ‘material’, ‘applicable’ and ‘satisfactory’. A large body of dedicated theoretical work on relevance, drawn from many fields and perspectives, such as computer science, information science, statistics/probability theory, artificial intelligence, cognitive science, epistemology, linguistics and jurisprudence [ 14 ], reflects its importance but also the challenge for establishing a common understanding of the term [ 14 , 15 ]. For example, Gärdenfors [ 16 ], in his discussion on the logic of relevance, noted that “ …relevance ought to be a central concept in the philosophy of science… ” given the position that “ …it is only relevant information that is of any importance… ” (p. 351). However, from a ‘research’ relevance perspective, the theoretical work on relevance has been linked to ‘information’, ‘evidence’, ‘reasoning’, ‘argument’ and ‘decision’ [ 15 – 18 ], each presenting variable framing that impedes practical definition or consistent comprehension of the term. Floridi [ 14 ] recently suggested that existing theories are “ …utterly useless when it comes to establish the actual relevance of some specific piece of information ” (p. 69), and goes on to advance a ‘subjectivist’ interpretation, with relevance judged by the questioner. While a subjectivist approach to relevance is intuitively appealing, its contribution to the assessment of research relevance presents particular challenges that we will discuss later in the paper.

Another approach to unpacking relevance is to consider the theoretical model behind the broad-based research strategies that have governed research investments and policies in high-income countries since the end of the Second World War. For the better part of the 20th century, a linear model was the dominant conceptual framework, whereby basic research was viewed as a necessary input for applied research, which then led to development and production [ 19 , 20 ]. In the late 1990s, an alternate thesis was introduced when Stokes proposed a new model for broad-based research strategy – known as Pasteur’s Quadrant – that highlighted the conceptual relationship between the ‘quest to understand’ and ‘practical needs’ [ 21 ]. While some research is clearly focused on advances in basic research (e.g. Niels Bohr’s foundational research on atomic structure and quantum theory), and some research is clearly focused on applied problems (e.g. Thomas Edison’s practical inventions), Stokes emphasised the potential for use-inspired basic research (e.g. Louis Pasteur’s foundational research on microbiology that addressed contemporaneous population health challenges). Pasteur’s Quadrant invokes consideration of ‘relevance’ with some commentators framing the two-by-two relationship as the relevance for advancement of basic knowledge and the relevance for immediate application [ 22 ]. Stokes’ model adds conceptual insight on the role of relevance when considering the value of research to society, however, it was not intended to specifically conceptualise the term and does not distinguish it from other related concepts such as research impact or value. Therefore, to provide further insights, we next consider relevance in practical settings.

Health sector perspectives

In the health sector, the idea that research should be ‘relevant’ is commonplace. Commitments to ‘knowledge translation’ and the ‘knowledge to action cycle’ [ 23 ] emphasise issues of relevance and provide considerable insight into approaches to ensuring research usability and use. At the same time, the health research community has given disproportionate attention to issues of research quality, with an emphasis on internal validity that may downplay external validity and suggest some tension between rigour and relevance. Thus, though the concept of relevance is of central importance to the health research enterprise, the failure to unpack it or explore it both theoretically and practically leaves room for misunderstanding and misapplication.

In the health sector, research relevance often arises as a practical question of the ‘fit’ between a body of knowledge or research approach and a specific field or issue (e.g. public health, primary healthcare, healthcare access, genomics, alternative healthcare, healthcare reform in rural areas). The results of two recent International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research task forces take this approach. The task forces developed questionnaires to assess the relevance and credibility of research other than randomised controlled trials (e.g. observational research, meta-network analysis) to inform healthcare decision-making [ 24 , 25 ]. Both make similar observations about relevance, reinforcing the subjectivist approach noted earlier, and can be summarised by the following statement by Berger et al. [ 24 ]:

“ Relevance addresses whether the results of the study/apply [sic] to the setting of interest to the decision maker. It addresses issues of external validity similar to the population, interventions, comparators, outcomes, and setting framework from evidence based medicine. There is no correct answer for relevance. Relevance is determined by each decision maker, and the relevance assessment determined by one decision maker will not necessarily apply to other decision makers. Individual studies may be designed with the perspective of particular decision makers in mind (e.g. payer or provider) ” (p.148, emphasis added).

Research relevance in health is also noted in discussion and debate regarding the value of qualitative research relative to the more established forms of quantitative health research. For example, Mays and Pope [ 26 ] suggest that qualitative research can be assessed “… by two broad criteria: validity and relevance ”. Their further discussion provides some insight into the several ways that research might be relevant, suggesting that:

“[r] esearch can be relevant when it either adds to knowledge or increases the confidence with which existing knowledge is regarded. Another important dimension of relevance is the extent to which findings can be generalised beyond the setting in which they were generated ” [ 27 ].

The work of Mays and Pope positions research relevance amidst the longstanding tension between internal and external validity. This tension reflects opposing foci on internal validity as the quality/rigour of research methodology and external validity as the applicability/transferability of research to other settings or contexts. While external validity is not the only measure of relevance – as research may remain relevant to some contexts even when not generalisable to others – it is an important component, and one that has not always attracted sufficient attention. For example, the Canadian health research community has focused considerable practical attention on internal validity as a critical component of evidence for clinical and health policy decisions. Evidence-based medicine, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Canadian and United States task forces on preventive healthcare/services and a long list of aligned groups have developed and established many tools to assess the quality of research evidence (e.g. GRADE [ 28 ]), with a predominant focus on issues of internal validity, and an emphasis on evidence hierarchies that is sometimes seen to be incompatible with ‘real world’ relevance. The relative lack of similar approaches or tools that focus on external validity in health research is notable, though movements to marshal evidence in support of sound public policy, such as the Campbell Collaboration, have attended to issues of external validity in other areas of health and social policy [ 29 ]. Further, there are emerging approaches and tools for documenting the external validity of health research and facilitating its use [ 30 ]. For example, WHO has supported the development of workbooks to contextualise health systems guidance for different contexts [ 31 ] and the field of local applicability and transferability of research has emerged to facilitate the adaptation of interventions from one setting to another, including the development of some well-documented tools like RE-AIM [ 32 ].

Alongside these emerging approaches and tools sits the established field of KT. KT has a strong history in Canada with a distinctive feature being a reliance on stakeholder engagement to support a commitment to improve research relevance. For example, the AIHS framework relies heavily on KT and stakeholder engagement approaches as part of its RIA, describing the mobilisation of knowledge through “ …a process of interactions, feedback, and engagement using a variety of mechanisms (e.g. collaborations, partnerships, networks, knowledge brokering) with relevant target audiences (i.e. actors and performers) across the health sector ” ([ 8 ] p. 362). Experience in stakeholder engagement, particularly with clinical, management and policy decision-makers, has become fairly extensive and there is now increased attention on engaging patients as core stakeholders in health research. If relevance is truly subjective, then KT efforts (including engagement, dissemination, promotion, communication) would appear to represent reasonable approaches for articulating, conveying and improving research relevance. However, if there are underlying elements of relevance that are more universal, then there is a risk that KT efforts – and subjectivist approaches to ensuring relevance – are akin to commercial marketing or communication strategies where the aim is to ‘sell’ more product and/or generate more influence that may not align with a more objective lens.

In sum, the health research community in Canada has a longstanding history of critically appraising research quality based on study design and research methodology, with greater emphasis on internal rather than external validity. As the same time, there is established expertise in KT, emphasising engagement with research users and adaptation to settings or contexts of use – approaches that may imply a subjectivist interpretation of relevance. Thus, while relevance is an important concept for the health research enterprise, its use is largely tacit and taken for granted.

Non-health sector perspectives

To unpack relevance further we consider some non-health sector perspectives that give attention to the term, often with formal definitions or taxonomies established. Examples include the legal, financial accounting, education and web search (information retrieval) sectors, each of which are briefly described below.

From a legal perspective, relevance has a specific meaning that relates to the admissibility of evidence in terms of its probative value (i.e. the extent to which evidence contributes to proving an important matter of fact) [ 33 ]. For example, a common objection to legal testimony or evidence is that it is ‘irrelevant’ [ 34 ]. Legal processes for considering the admissibility or legal-relevance of evidence are firmly established, requiring explicit declaration of evidentiary sources and direct consideration of that evidence as it relates both to a specific case and related historical precedents, something that is undeveloped in the health sector [ 35 ]. It is the formality, explicitness and retrospective nature of this process, which is directly associated with a specific case (or decision), that is characteristic of the consideration of relevance in the legal context.

Financial accounting provides another perspective on relevance. In this field, relevance is viewed as a fundamental component of generally accepted accounting principles. Relevance and materiality are emphasised such that accountants and auditors focus on financial information that meets the decision-making needs of users and is expected to affect their decisions. In financial accounting, ‘value relevance’ provides a more focused perspective on relevance, defined as “ …the ability of information disclosed by financial statements to capture and summarise firm value. Value relevance can be measured through the statistical relations between information presented by financial statements and stock market values or returns ” [ 36 ]. Similar to the legal perspective, the financial accounting perspective on relevance is set with a formal context, where the focal point (i.e. financial performance) is clear and principles (i.e. generally accepted accounting principles) and processes (i.e. financial reporting and auditing) are clearly established and monitored.

Education provides a slightly more expansive approach to operationalising relevance, given the more general aim of the enterprise. In the United States, the Glossary of Education Reform [ 37 ] notes that “ …the term relevance typically refers to learning experiences that are either directly applicable to the personal aspirations, interests, or cultural experiences of students (personal relevance) or that are connected in some way to real-world issues, problems, and contexts (life relevance) ”. They further state that “ personal relevance occurs when learning is connected to an individual student’s interests, aspirations, and life experiences ”, while “ life relevance occurs when learning is connected in some way to real-world issues, problems, and contexts outside of school ”. A similar framing of relevance in this context suggests that it “…extends the learning beyond the classroom by teaching students to apply what they are learning to real world situations ” [ 38 ]. While the education sector also makes numerous references to a ‘rigour and relevance’ dyad [ 39 ] in contrast to the dominance of the internal validity focus in healthcare, it is the prominent dual focus on ‘personal’ relevance (with its subjectivist orientation) and ‘life’ or ‘real world’ relevance (with its more universal orientation) that seems to most clearly define the education sector’s perspective on relevance.

One of the most intensive and competitive sectors focusing on relevance is the web search (or information retrieval) field. This includes dominant search engines such as Google and Bing, as well as a wide range of commercial and social media sites such as Amazon, eBay, Facebook and LinkedIn, that compete either directly or indirectly on their ability to identify relevant information in response to user queries. Therefore, the ability of these organisations to advance the theory and practice related to relevance is fundamental to their success. For example, Google was built upon the effectiveness of its search algorithm, which is in a constant state of evolution. Both explicit and implicit approaches to assess relevance are used to contribute to search algorithm refinements [ 40 ]. The explicit approach focuses on ‘relevance ratings’, whereby evaluators (e.g. human raters) are contracted to assess the degree of ‘helpfulness’ of search results paired to specific search queries [ 41 ]. The implicit approach to assess relevance monitors and aggregates search behaviour of millions of users who are likely unaware that their behaviour is being assessed. Google has more recently advanced ‘personalised relevance’, which uses past individual search behaviour to personalise/tailor future search results for the same individual. Pariser has critiqued this concept as “ the filter bubble ” [ 42 ], warning that Google’s intent to optimise search algorithms for personal relevance creates a “ …personal ecosystem of information… ” that limits the diversity of search results and promotes insularity. This personal relevance is situated within the pervasiveness of social media, which facilitates the advancement of ‘social relevance’. Personal and social relevance highlight two important orientations towards relevance – one built on increasingly detailed understanding of individual preferences and the other reflecting the growing power and increasing accessibility of crowd-sourced perspectives. Overall, web search has made important contributions to how we understand and operationalise relevance, including the use of increasingly sophisticated explicit and implicit feedback mechanisms and the ability to draw upon and analyse big data sets. Web search has also exposed the contrasting orientations of personal and social relevance that underscore the challenges of combining or integrating different relevance assessments.

These non-health sector perspectives on relevance highlight several considerations. First, they reinforce general findings that point to perspective, decision context, timeliness and precision of focus or ‘fit’ as key elements of relevance. Additionally, they highlight a few distinctive considerations. The formalistic contexts of financial accounting and law emphasise issues such as precedent and legitimacy, implying that relevance in a research sense might require the demonstration of some legitimate or credible association between research and its use or user, among other considerations. Further, the complex consumerist world of social media highlights some of the challenges of a purely subjectivist definition of relevance. Whereas the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research guidance takes a subjectivist stance in suggesting that, “[t] here is no correct answer for relevance ” [ 24 ], the “ filter bubble ” criticised by Pariser [ 42 ] suggests otherwise. Relevance solely to the personally-perceived interests of a research user is unlikely to adequately serve the collective commitments to health and health equity that are especially germane to the health research enterprise.

Forward-looking considerations for assessing the relevance of health research

To this point, we have endeavoured to unpack relevance from theoretical and practical perspectives. In light of these insights and in the context of persistent interest in research impact assessment and evolving interest in research relevance, we now turn to some specific forward-looking considerations for research relevance assessment (RRA).

Relevance of research versus everything else

The first consideration for RRA is the acknowledgement that research is only one of many sources of insight to inform the needs or actions of research users. A research user is influenced by a wide range of political, legal, media, economic and other contextual information, interactions and experiences, as well as prevailing organisational governance, leadership, culture and values that all serve to complement (and often dominate) any insights that might be derived from research [ 43 ]. This reality implies that ‘relevance’ has a different meaning for researchers and research users. Researchers are typically interested in the relevance of a specific research product or activity for identifiable actions of (potentially) multiple research users; relevance is here judged relative to both the perceived needs of research users, and the extent and content of other related research. In contrast, research users are typically focused on identifying multiple relevant inputs to guide a specific action, only some of which may be research; relevance is here judged relative to both the research user’s needs and the form and content of the other inputs.

Given these distinct orientations to research relevance, RRA needs to be explicit about its comparative lens. Clear distinctions should be made between relevance based on the merits of the research product or activity (researcher lens) and relevance based on the relative value of research compared to other research and non-research sources (research user lens). RRA provides an opportunity to build more robust ways to characterise and assess the contribution of research to research users, including a more systematic and transparent articulation of anticipated research uses (akin to the Research Councils UK’s ‘Pathways to Impact’ [ 44 ] or descriptions of planned study design and methodological approach published in study protocols/registrations for randomised controlled trials or systematic reviews).

Beyond instrumental uses of research

The considerations noted above rely heavily on instrumental uses of research. Theoretically derived definitions of relevance, such as Floridi’s [ 14 ], tend to focus on the response to a specified question. This suggests a direct and tangible connection between research and its ‘use’. However, as Weiss [ 43 ] and others have observed, most types of research use are not instrumental, where use is documented and explicitly addresses a specific query or challenge for a research user. Rather, research use tends to be more conceptual, where use is indirect and evolves over time, or symbolic, where use may be politically or tactically motivated [ 43 ]. Research may also create externalities or unintended effects. For example, general research activity might support an engaged learning environment, interactive research relationships, and additional research-related discourse that provides benefits that are not attributable to any specific research product or activity. This has important ramifications for how research is funded and the role that relevance can play in that assessment. Ultimately, RRA needs to go beyond a singular understanding of research use as instrumental use, to develop better methods for capturing and assessing the relevance of the many non-instrumental uses of research.

The temporal factor

Another closely related consideration for RRA is the temporal context. Almost all research is conducted in a temporally defined period. Yet, while the quality of research is typically characterised by its methodology, which is a static feature typically not subject to temporal variation (e.g. the assessed quality of a randomised controlled trial should be consistent over time), relevance of research can be considered at any time (e.g. prior to the initiation of a research study or at different points in time post-completion) and is therefore subject to dynamic perceptions as they pertain to evolving action or decision contexts. Cohen [ 15 ] suggests that “ …relevance, like reasoning, has a prospective dimension as well as a retrospective one. It helps prediction as well as explanation ” (p. 182). The important insight is that, in contrast to research quality, the relevance of a specific research product can change over time, making assessment of research relevance more challenging.

This requires RRA to acknowledge the temporal factor and its associated implications for research relevance. At minimum, RRA should specify the temporal context as either pre-research (e.g. proposal/funding stage) or post-research (e.g. after research results have been produced). RRA at the pre-research stage focuses on proposed inputs and hypothetical outputs and outcomes, and may be more likely to overestimate instrumental research use and underestimate non-instrumental use. RRA at the post-research stage focuses mainly on the importance and value of actual outputs and tangible results, and may capture more non-instrumental research use. The pre-research stage is clearly aligned with research funding/investment processes, while the post-research stage can contribute to retrospective return-on-investment calculations and more general research impact assessment. However, employing this simple temporal categorisation should not lead us to lose sight of the dynamic, iterative nature of research relevance and the opportunity to assess it at interim and ongoing stages that captures re-interpretations or re-applications of research findings over time.

Moving from a subjective to an intersubjective understanding of relevance

An underlying theme in our review of relevance is subjectivity. Consider the broad scientific paradigms of positivism and interpretivism that are typically respectively aligned with research quality and research relevance. Research quality can be viewed as relating to characteristics or features that are assessed objectively, while research relevance may be seen as subjectively adjudicated. The subjective focus emphasises the variability of different perspectives and contexts and the suggestion that anyone can have a different take on the relevance of a specific research product or activity. For RRA, this reinforces a user-centred orientation to relevance assessment that privileges the judgment of the interrogator and raises the key question regarding who is positioned as the main arbiter of research relevance.

However, while relevance may never be characterised as universal, it could be argued that it is not purely subjective either. Rather, relevance may be more consistent with an intersubjective understanding that emphasises the extent of agreement or shared understanding among individual subjective perspectives representing a way to bridge the personal and the universal. The intersubjective view, while not presenting an objective approach to measuring relevance, does provide a road towards a meaningful and structured assessment of research relevance. It also emphasises the importance of representation in forging the intersubjective judgments that guide the research enterprise.

This paper has unpacked research relevance from different perspectives and outlined key considerations for its assessment. Alongside research impact assessment, research relevance seems increasingly important in justifying research investments and guiding strategic research planning. Indeed, judgments of ‘relevance’ are becoming a key component of the health research enterprise. However, consideration of relevance has been largely tacit in the health research community, often depending on unexplained interpretations of value, fit and potential for impact. Reviewing the various uses of relevance in health research, the concept is sometimes used as a synonym for research impact or positioned as a reliable predictor of later consequence. In many ways, research relevance seems a necessary condition for impact – a process or component of efforts to make rigorous research usable. However, relevance is not a necessary or sufficient condition to achieve impact. We expect that research that is relevant, and thus accountable to specific and legitimate users, will be impactful, but this may not necessarily be the case where other factors intervene. Additionally, we may expect that research that is impactful will be appropriately accountable – but again, this is not necessarily the case. Ultimately, relevance stands apart from research impact. Like rigour, relevance is a complementary but distinctive dimension of what it is that ensures ‘the good’ in health research.

While ‘relevance’ is ever-present, understanding of the concept in terms of health research is emergent and not well codified. To improve our understanding, this paper outlines four key considerations, including how research relevance assessments (1) orientate to, capture and compare research versus non-research sources, (2) consider both instrumental versus non-instrumental uses of research, (3) accommodate dynamic temporal-shifting perspectives on research, and (4) align with an intersubjective understanding of relevance. We believe careful and explicit consideration of research relevance, guided by transparent principles and processes is vital to gauge the overall value and impact of a wide range of individual and collective research efforts and investments. We hope this paper generates more discussion and debate to facilitate progress.

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge and appreciate the contributions of participants of a roundtable discussion to gather feedback on an earlier version of this paper. Participants included Simon Denegri, National Director for Public Participation and Engagement in Research, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) UK, and Chair of INVOLVE, UK; Lee Fairclough, Vice-President, Quality Improvement, Health Quality Ontario; Michael Hillmer, Director, Planning, Research and Analysis Branch, Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care; John McLaughlin, Chief Science Officer and Senior Scientist, Public Health Ontario; Allison Paprica, Director, Strategic Partnerships, ICES; Michael Schull, President and CEO, ICES; and Vasanthi Srinivasan, Executive Director, Ontario Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) SUPPORT Unit (OSSU). We also want to thank John Lavis of the McMaster Health Forum for his very helpful comments on an earlier draft. Though we owe these individuals and organisations many thanks for their insights and support, we alone are responsible for the final product.

This work was commissioned by the Ontario SPOR Support Unit (OSSU). The executive director of the OSSU was one of the participants in a roundtable discussion to gather feedback on an earlier version of this paper, but beyond that, the OSSU did not have any role in the design of the study, collection, analysis or interpretation of the data, or writing of the manuscript.

Availability of data and materials

Authors’ contributions.

ADB acquired funding for the study. MJD, FAM and ADB conceptualised the study. MJD, FAM, CF and ADB participated in the review and writing of the manuscript. MJD, FAM and ADB participated in the roundtable discussion. MJD, FAM and ADB reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript (CF passed away prior to submission of the manuscript).

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Publisher’s note.

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

Abbreviations

This article is dedicated to the memory of Dr Cy Frank, our co-author and esteemed colleague, whose untimely death occurred midway through development of this work. Among his many interests, Dr Frank was a champion for improving understanding of research impact assessment and provided many insights on the concept of research relevance, some of which we expand upon in this article. His many contributions to the health sector will live on, but he will be greatly missed.

Contributor Information

Mark J. Dobrow, Email: [email protected] .

Fiona A. Miller, Email: [email protected] .

Adalsteinn D. Brown, Email: [email protected] .

What Is Background in a Research Paper?

So you have carefully written your research paper  and probably ran it through your colleagues ten to fifteen times. While there are many elements to a good research article, one of the most important elements for your readers is the background of your study.

What is Background of the Study in Research

The background of your study will provide context to the information discussed throughout the research paper . Background information may include both important and relevant studies. This is particularly important if a study either supports or refutes your thesis.

Why is Background of the Study Necessary in Research?

The background of the study discusses your problem statement, rationale, and research questions. It links  introduction to your research topic  and ensures a logical flow of ideas.  Thus, it helps readers understand your reasons for conducting the study.

Providing Background Information

The reader should be able to understand your topic and its importance. The length and detail of your background also depend on the degree to which you need to demonstrate your understanding of the topic. Paying close attention to the following questions will help you in writing background information:

• Are there any theories, concepts, terms, and ideas that may be unfamiliar to the target audience and will require you to provide any additional explanation?
• Any historical data that need to be shared in order to provide context on why the current issue emerged?
• Are there any concepts that may have been borrowed from other disciplines that may be unfamiliar to the reader and need an explanation?

Related: Ready with the background and searching for more information on journal ranking? Check this infographic on the SCImago Journal Rank today!

Is the research study unique for which additional explanation is needed? For instance, you may have used a completely new method

How to Write a Background of the Study

The structure of a background study in a research paper generally follows a logical sequence to provide context, justification, and an understanding of the research problem. It includes an introduction, general background, literature review , rationale , objectives, scope and limitations , significance of the study and the research hypothesis . Following the structure can provide a comprehensive and well-organized background for your research.

Here are the steps to effectively write a background of the study.

1. Identify Your Audience:

Determine the level of expertise of your target audience. Tailor the depth and complexity of your background information accordingly.

2. Understand the Research Problem:

Define the research problem or question your study aims to address. Identify the significance of the problem within the broader context of the field.

3. Review Existing Literature:

Conduct a thorough literature review to understand what is already known in the area. Summarize key findings, theories, and concepts relevant to your research.

4. Include Historical Data:

Integrate historical data if relevant to the research, as current issues often trace back to historical events.

5. Identify Controversies and Gaps:

Note any controversies or debates within the existing literature. Identify gaps , limitations, or unanswered questions that your research can address.

6. Select Key Components:

Choose the most critical elements to include in the background based on their relevance to your research problem. Prioritize information that helps build a strong foundation for your study.

7. Craft a Logical Flow:

Organize the background information in a logical sequence. Start with general context, move to specific theories and concepts, and then focus on the specific problem.

8. Highlight the Novelty of Your Research:

Clearly explain the unique aspects or contributions of your study. Emphasize why your research is different from or builds upon existing work.

Here are some extra tips to increase the quality of your research background:

Example of a Research Background

Here is an example of a research background to help you understand better.

The above hypothetical example provides a research background, addresses the gap and highlights the potential outcome of the study; thereby aiding a better understanding of the proposed research.

What Makes the Introduction Different from the Background?

Your introduction is different from your background in a number of ways.

• The introduction contains preliminary data about your topic that  the reader will most likely read , whereas the background clarifies the importance of the paper.
• The background of your study discusses in depth about the topic, whereas the introduction only gives an overview.
• The introduction should end with your research questions, aims, and objectives, whereas your background should not (except in some cases where your background is integrated into your introduction). For instance, the C.A.R.S. ( Creating a Research Space ) model, created by John Swales is based on his analysis of journal articles. This model attempts to explain and describe the organizational pattern of writing the introduction in social sciences.

Points to Note

Your background should begin with defining a topic and audience. It is important that you identify which topic you need to review and what your audience already knows about the topic. You should proceed by searching and researching the relevant literature. In this case, it is advisable to keep track of the search terms you used and the articles that you downloaded. It is helpful to use one of the research paper management systems such as Papers, Mendeley, Evernote, or Sente. Next, it is helpful to take notes while reading. Be careful when copying quotes verbatim and make sure to put them in quotation marks and cite the sources. In addition, you should keep your background focused but balanced enough so that it is relevant to a broader audience. Aside from these, your background should be critical, consistent, and logically structured.

Writing the background of your study should not be an overly daunting task. Many guides that can help you organize your thoughts as you write the background. The background of the study is the key to introduce your audience to your research topic and should be done with strong knowledge and thoughtful writing.

The background of a research paper typically ranges from one to two paragraphs, summarizing the relevant literature and context of the study. It should be concise, providing enough information to contextualize the research problem and justify the need for the study. Journal instructions about any word count limits should be kept in mind while deciding on the length of the final content.

The background of a research paper provides the context and relevant literature to understand the research problem, while the introduction also introduces the specific research topic, states the research objectives, and outlines the scope of the study. The background focuses on the broader context, whereas the introduction focuses on the specific research project and its objectives.

When writing the background for a study, start by providing a brief overview of the research topic and its significance in the field. Then, highlight the gaps in existing knowledge or unresolved issues that the study aims to address. Finally, summarize the key findings from relevant literature to establish the context and rationale for conducting the research, emphasizing the need and importance of the study within the broader academic landscape.

The background in a research paper is crucial as it sets the stage for the study by providing essential context and rationale. It helps readers understand the significance of the research problem and its relevance in the broader field. By presenting relevant literature and highlighting gaps, the background justifies the need for the study, building a strong foundation for the research and enhancing its credibility.

The presentation very informative

It is really educative. I love the workshop. It really motivated me into writing my first paper for publication.

an interesting clue here, thanks.

thanks for the answers.

Good and interesting explanation. Thanks

Thank you for good presentation.

Hi Adam, we are glad to know that you found our article beneficial

The background of the study is the key to introduce your audience to YOUR research topic.

Awesome. Exactly what i was looking forwards to 😉

Hi Maryam, we are glad to know that you found our resource useful.

my understanding of ‘Background of study’ has been elevated.

Hi Peter, we are glad to know that our article has helped you get a better understanding of the background in a research paper.

thanks to give advanced information

Hi Shimelis, we are glad to know that you found the information in our article beneficial.

When i was studying it is very much hard for me to conduct a research study and know the background because my teacher in practical research is having a research so i make it now so that i will done my research

Very informative……….Thank you.

The confusion i had before, regarding an introduction and background to a research work is now a thing of the past. Thank you so much.

Thanks for your help…

Thanks for your kind information about the background of a research paper.

Thanks for the answer

Very informative. I liked even more when the difference between background and introduction was given. I am looking forward to learning more from this site. I am in Botswana

Hello, I am Benoît from Central African Republic. Right now I am writing down my research paper in order to get my master degree in British Literature. Thank you very much for posting all this information about the background of the study. I really appreciate. Thanks!

The write up is quite good, detailed and informative. Thanks a lot. The article has certainly enhanced my understanding of the topic.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• AI in Academia
• Infographic
• Manuscripts & Grants
• Reporting Research
• Trending Now

Can AI Tools Prepare a Research Manuscript From Scratch? — A comprehensive guide

As technology continues to advance, the question of whether artificial intelligence (AI) tools can prepare…

Abstract Vs. Introduction — Do you know the difference?

Ross wants to publish his research. Feeling positive about his research outcomes, he begins to…

• Old Webinars
• Webinar Mobile App

Demystifying Research Methodology With Field Experts

Choosing research methodology Research design and methodology Evidence-based research approach How RAxter can assist researchers

• Manuscript Preparation
• Publishing Research

How to Choose Best Research Methodology for Your Study

Successful research conduction requires proper planning and execution. While there are multiple reasons and aspects…

Top 5 Key Differences Between Methods and Methodology

While burning the midnight oil during literature review, most researchers do not realize that the…

How to Draft the Acknowledgment Section of a Manuscript

Discussion Vs. Conclusion: Know the Difference Before Drafting Manuscripts

Sign-up to read more

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

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

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

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

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

• Cerita Pemilih
• Entrepreneur
• Artificial intelligence
• Cryptocurrency
• Ruang Kelas
• Ilmu Alam & Tekno
• Ilmu Sosbud
• Travel Story
• SEMUA RUBRIK
• TOPIK PILIHAN
• KRIS BPJS Kesehatan, Orang Miskin Dilarang Sakit?
• Menyoal Efektivitas Kegiatan Study Tour di Sekolah
• Kegiatan Study Tour di Sekolah, Haruskah Dilarang?
• Jalur Sepeda di Jakarta, Terlambat Puluhan Tahun?
• Debat Kusir Jumlah Kementerian!
• Jenis Obat yang Disimpan di Lemari Pendingin

Monolog: Tujuan

Mencari Tujuan

Kenaikan Tuhan Yesus dan Mencari Tujuan Hidup

Tujuan Abadi

Research-Based Learning: Menghubungkan Penelitian dan Instruksi

Kolaborasi Manfaat Wakaf dan Asuransi

Manusia yang ingin SELALU menulis segala sesuatu yang BERMANFAAT.

Selanjutnya

Tujuan dan Manfaat Penelitian, Research Objectives and Benefits Java Coding Game

a.   TUJUAN PENELITIAN Tujuan penelitian ini adalah membuat media pembelajaran edukatif “ Java Coding Game ” The purpose of this research is to create educational learning media "Java Coding Game" b. MANFAAT PENELITIAN Hasil dari penelitian ini diharapkan memberikan manfa’at bagi bagi pembuat program yang masih pemula rasanya memang cukup sulit memulai jika melihat banyak aturan bahasa program yang cukup banyak. Begitu juga bagi mereka yang telah mahir atau mereka yang bergelut di dunia IT yang kompleks namun tak hanya menggeluti dunia kode program namun juga bidang yang lainnya, kadang kita akan lupa pada sebagian aturan program dalam membentuk sebuah sistem program yang kompleks. The results of this study are expected to provide benefit to the program makers who are beginners it's really quite difficult to start if you see a lot of programming languages rules that quite a lot. So also for those who have advanced or they are wrestling in the world of complex IT world but not only cultivate the program code but also other fields, sometimes we will not forget in most program rules in forming a system of complex programs. yahoo scanner

javacompiler

Javacodingpractice, javacodinggame, javacodingstandart, javacodingconvention, javacodingbestpractices, javadownload, javarockinland, javatutorial, artikel lainnya.

LAPORKAN KONTEN

Apakah perbedaan antara objective of the research, significance of the research, dan scope of the research ?.

SEORANG PENGGUNA TELAH BERTANYA 👇

Ini jawaban terbaik 👇.

Tujuan penelitian = tujuan yang ingin dicapai melalui penelitian

pentingnya penelitian = kegunaan/fungsi melakukan penelitian

ruang lingkup penelitian = cakupan objek penelitian yang luas

Was this helpful?

Postingan Terkait:

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