how to write motivation of research

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

What Are Research Objectives and How to Write Them (with Examples)

Table of Contents

Introduction

Research is at the center of everything researchers do, and setting clear, well-defined research objectives plays a pivotal role in guiding scholars toward their desired outcomes. Research papers are essential instruments for researchers to effectively communicate their work. Among the many sections that constitute a research paper, the introduction plays a key role in providing a background and setting the context. 1 Research objectives, which define the aims of the study, are usually stated in the introduction. Every study has a research question that the authors are trying to answer, and the objective is an active statement about how the study will answer this research question. These objectives help guide the development and design of the study and steer the research in the appropriate direction; if this is not clearly defined, a project can fail!

Research studies have a research question, research hypothesis, and one or more research objectives. A research question is what a study aims to answer, and a research hypothesis is a predictive statement about the relationship between two or more variables, which the study sets out to prove or disprove. Objectives are specific, measurable goals that the study aims to achieve. The difference between these three is illustrated by the following example:

• Research question : How does low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) compare with a placebo device in managing the symptoms of skeletally mature patients with patellar tendinopathy?
• Research hypothesis : Pain levels are reduced in patients who receive daily active-LIPUS (treatment) for 12 weeks compared with individuals who receive inactive-LIPUS (placebo).
• Research objective : To investigate the clinical efficacy of LIPUS in the management of patellar tendinopathy symptoms.

This article discusses the importance of clear, well-thought out objectives and suggests methods to write them clearly.

What is the introduction in research papers?

Research objectives are usually included in the introduction section. This section is the first that the readers will read so it is essential that it conveys the subject matter appropriately and is well written to create a good first impression. A good introduction sets the tone of the paper and clearly outlines the contents so that the readers get a quick snapshot of what to expect.

A good introduction should aim to: 2,3

• Indicate the main subject area, its importance, and cite previous literature on the subject
• Define the gap(s) in existing research, ask a research question, and state the objectives
• Announce the present research and outline its novelty and significance
• Avoid repeating the Abstract, providing unnecessary information, and claiming novelty without accurate supporting information.

Why are research objectives important?

Objectives can help you stay focused and steer your research in the required direction. They help define and limit the scope of your research, which is important to efficiently manage your resources and time. The objectives help to create and maintain the overall structure, and specify two main things—the variables and the methods of quantifying the variables.

A good research objective:

• defines the scope of the study
• gives direction to the research
• helps maintain focus and avoid diversions from the topic
• minimizes wastage of resources like time, money, and energy

Types of research objectives

Research objectives can be broadly classified into general and specific objectives . 4 General objectives state what the research expects to achieve overall while specific objectives break this down into smaller, logically connected parts, each of which addresses various parts of the research problem. General objectives are the main goals of the study and are usually fewer in number while specific objectives are more in number because they address several aspects of the research problem.

Example (general objective): To investigate the factors influencing the financial performance of firms listed in the New York Stock Exchange market.

Example (specific objective): To assess the influence of firm size on the financial performance of firms listed in the New York Stock Exchange market.

In addition to this broad classification, research objectives can be grouped into several categories depending on the research problem, as given in Table 1.

Table 1: Types of research objectives

Characteristics of research objectives

Research objectives must start with the word “To” because this helps readers identify the objective in the absence of headings and appropriate sectioning in research papers. 5,6

• A good objective is SMART (mostly applicable to specific objectives):
• Specific—clear about the what, why, when, and how
• Measurable—identifies the main variables of the study and quantifies the targets
• Achievable—attainable using the available time and resources
• Realistic—accurately addresses the scope of the problem
• Time-bound—identifies the time in which each step will be completed
• Research objectives clarify the purpose of research.
• They help understand the relationship and dissimilarities between variables.
• They provide a direction that helps the research to reach a definite conclusion.

How to write research objectives?

Research objectives can be written using the following steps: 7

• State your main research question clearly and concisely.
• Describe the ultimate goal of your study, which is similar to the research question but states the intended outcomes more definitively.
• Divide this main goal into subcategories to develop your objectives.
• Limit the number of objectives (1-2 general; 3-4 specific)
• Assess each objective using the SMART
• Start each objective with an action verb like assess, compare, determine, evaluate, etc., which makes the research appear more actionable.
• Use specific language without making the sentence data heavy.
• The most common section to add the objectives is the introduction and after the problem statement.
• Add the objectives to the abstract (if there is one).
• State the general objective first, followed by the specific objectives.

Formulating research objectives

Formulating research objectives has the following five steps, which could help researchers develop a clear objective: 8

• Identify the research problem.
• Review past studies on subjects similar to your problem statement, that is, studies that use similar methods, variables, etc.
• Identify the research gaps the current study should cover based on your literature review. These gaps could be theoretical, methodological, or conceptual.
• Define the research question(s) based on the gaps identified.
• Revise/relate the research problem based on the defined research question and the gaps identified. This is to confirm that there is an actual need for a study on the subject based on the gaps in literature.
• Identify and write the general and specific objectives.
• Incorporate the objectives into the study.

Advantages of research objectives

Adding clear research objectives has the following advantages: 4,8

• Maintains the focus and direction of the research
• Optimizes allocation of resources with minimal wastage
• Acts as a foundation for defining appropriate research questions and hypotheses
• Provides measurable outcomes that can help evaluate the success of the research
• Determines the feasibility of the research by helping to assess the availability of required resources
• Ensures relevance of the study to the subject and its contribution to existing literature

Disadvantages of research objectives

Research objectives also have few disadvantages, as listed below: 8

• Absence of clearly defined objectives can lead to ambiguity in the research process
• Unintentional bias could affect the validity and accuracy of the research findings

Key takeaways

• Research objectives are concise statements that describe what the research is aiming to achieve.
• They define the scope and direction of the research and maintain focus.
• The objectives should be SMART—specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound.
• Clear research objectives help avoid collection of data or resources not required for the study.
• Well-formulated specific objectives help develop the overall research methodology, including data collection, analysis, interpretation, and utilization.
• Research objectives should cover all aspects of the problem statement in a coherent way.
• They should be clearly stated using action verbs.

Frequently asked questions on research objectives

Q: what’s the difference between research objectives and aims 9.

A: Research aims are statements that reflect the broad goal(s) of the study and outline the general direction of the research. They are not specific but clearly define the focus of the study.

Example: This research aims to explore employee experiences of digital transformation in retail HR.

Research objectives focus on the action to be taken to achieve the aims. They make the aims more practical and should be specific and actionable.

Example: To observe the retail HR employees throughout the digital transformation.

Q: What are the examples of research objectives, both general and specific?

A: Here are a few examples of research objectives:

• To identify the antiviral chemical constituents in Mumbukura gitoniensis (general)
• To carry out solvent extraction of dried flowers of Mumbukura gitoniensis and isolate the constituents. (specific)
• To determine the antiviral activity of each of the isolated compounds. (specific)
• To examine the extent, range, and method of coral reef rehabilitation projects in five shallow reef areas adjacent to popular tourist destinations in the Philippines.
• To investigate species richness of mammal communities in five protected areas over the past 20 years.
• To evaluate the potential application of AI techniques for estimating best-corrected visual acuity from fundus photographs with and without ancillary information.
• To investigate whether sport influences psychological parameters in the personality of asthmatic children.

Q: How do I develop research objectives?

A: Developing research objectives begins with defining the problem statement clearly, as illustrated by Figure 1. Objectives specify how the research question will be answered and they determine what is to be measured to test the hypothesis.

Q: Are research objectives measurable?

A: The word “measurable” implies that something is quantifiable. In terms of research objectives, this means that the source and method of collecting data are identified and that all these aspects are feasible for the research. Some metrics can be created to measure your progress toward achieving your objectives.

Q: Can research objectives change during the study?

A: Revising research objectives during the study is acceptable in situations when the selected methodology is not progressing toward achieving the objective, or if there are challenges pertaining to resources, etc. One thing to keep in mind is the time and resources you would have to complete your research after revising the objectives. Thus, as long as your problem statement and hypotheses are unchanged, minor revisions to the research objectives are acceptable.

Q: What is the difference between research questions and research objectives? 10

Q: Are research objectives the same as hypotheses?

A: No, hypotheses are predictive theories that are expressed in general terms. Research objectives, which are more specific, are developed from hypotheses and aim to test them. A hypothesis can be tested using several methods and each method will have different objectives because the methodology to be used could be different. A hypothesis is developed based on observation and reasoning; it is a calculated prediction about why a particular phenomenon is occurring. To test this prediction, different research objectives are formulated. Here’s a simple example of both a research hypothesis and research objective.

Research hypothesis : Employees who arrive at work earlier are more productive.

Research objective : To assess whether employees who arrive at work earlier are more productive.

To summarize, research objectives are an important part of research studies and should be written clearly to effectively communicate your research. We hope this article has given you a brief insight into the importance of using clearly defined research objectives and how to formulate them.

• Farrugia P, Petrisor BA, Farrokhyar F, Bhandari M. Practical tips for surgical research: Research questions, hypotheses and objectives. Can J Surg. 2010 Aug;53(4):278-81.
• Abbadia J. How to write an introduction for a research paper. Mind the Graph website. Accessed June 14, 2023. https://mindthegraph.com/blog/how-to-write-an-introduction-for-a-research-paper/
• Writing a scientific paper: Introduction. UCI libraries website. Accessed June 15, 2023. https://guides.lib.uci.edu/c.php?g=334338&p=2249903
• Research objectives—Types, examples and writing guide. Researchmethod.net website. Accessed June 17, 2023. https://researchmethod.net/research-objectives/#:~:text=They%20provide%20a%20clear%20direction,track%20and%20achieve%20their%20goals .
• Bartle P. SMART Characteristics of good objectives. Community empowerment collective website. Accessed June 16, 2023. https://cec.vcn.bc.ca/cmp/modules/pd-smar.htm
• Research objectives. Studyprobe website. Accessed June 18, 2023. https://www.studyprobe.in/2022/08/research-objectives.html
• Corredor F. How to write objectives in a research paper. wikiHow website. Accessed June 18, 2023. https://www.wikihow.com/Write-Objectives-in-a-Research-Proposal
• Research objectives: Definition, types, characteristics, advantages. AccountingNest website. Accessed June 15, 2023. https://www.accountingnest.com/articles/research/research-objectives
• Phair D., Shaeffer A. Research aims, objectives & questions. GradCoach website. Accessed June 20, 2023. https://gradcoach.com/research-aims-objectives-questions/
• Understanding the difference between research questions and objectives. Accessed June 21, 2023. https://board.researchersjob.com/blog/research-questions-and-objectives

R Discovery is a literature search and research reading platform that accelerates your research discovery journey by keeping you updated on the latest, most relevant scholarly content. With 250M+ research articles sourced from trusted aggregators like CrossRef, Unpaywall, PubMed, PubMed Central, Open Alex and top publishing houses like Springer Nature, JAMA, IOP, Taylor & Francis, NEJM, BMJ, Karger, SAGE, Emerald Publishing and more, R Discovery puts a world of research at your fingertips.  

Try R Discovery Prime FREE for 1 week or upgrade at just US$72 a year to access premium features that let you listen to research on the go, read in your language, collaborate with peers, auto sync with reference managers, and much more. Choose a simpler, smarter way to find and read research – Download the app and start your free 7-day trial today !  

Related Posts

What is Research Impact: Types and Tips for Academics

Research in Shorts: R Discovery’s New Feature Helps Academics Assess Relevant Papers in 2mins 

Writing a Research Proposal on Motivation: What, Why, and How [+Sample]

You’re in college, nearing the end of your degree. Or maybe you plan on applying for a PhD program or writing a dissertation.

One way or another, you will only succeed with a stellar research proposal on motivation .

This article explores the purpose and structure of a compelling research proposal. You’ll learn how to write it, what elements to include, and what mistakes to avoid to impress a committee. A sample from our research proposal writing service is also here to make your writing journey pleasant.

Ready to go?

What Is a Research Proposal?

A research proposal is a structured document outlining your planned study on a specific topic. It describes what you’ll investigate, how you will conduct your research, and why it’s worth researching (its significance to the academic community).

In plain English, it’s a detailed plan for your future research.

Whether it’s a research proposal on motivation or any other field, this document allows you to present your ideas to a committee when seeking grant funding or approval for your research project. Given its heavy structure and time-consuming nature, some scholars pay for a research paper to get a complete draft and focus more on defending it to the university board.

A research proposal aims at presenting your plan for the scientific investigation you intend to conduct. You need this document to either get funding for the research or get it approved by your supervisor so that you can move forward and do it.

In some cases, it’s a part of your graduate school application.

You write a research proposal to:

• Demonstrate the relevance of your project (showing that it’s original and significant to the academic community).
• Provide context so that the committee sees that you understand the topic, are familiar with the current state of research on it, and know the field.
• Show that you have a methodology (you’ve thought about the tools and procedures needed to conduct your research).
• Confirm that you can complete the project within your funding limits and deadlines.

The difference between a research proposal and a research plan:

In short, it’s the audience. Whereas you write a research plan to organize your thoughts and ensure that you remember all the details, a research proposal convinces others that your work is worth conducting.

A proposal includes numerous elements, but you can still handle them. First and foremost, state your research problem and explain its significance to the field. Review the existing literature on the topic so that the committee can see that your study is within the context.

Then, outline your methodology: How do you plan to conduct the research?

Support it with a theoretical framework of your approach, a timeline, and the budget required for the study. Specify potential implications and expected outcomes, clearly communicating your research’s objectives and significance.

(When it’s ready, you might want to scan it through an AI checker essay to ensure that it’s original and comprehensive enough.)

How long should a research proposal be?

The length of your research proposal depends on the university guidelines, the field of study, and the academic level you get. So, always check with your institution before you start planning a proposal.

Some universities are okay with a rough outline, while others require a detailed proposal showcasing the first several chapters of your future thesis or dissertation. In general, Masters-level proposals are between 2,000-3,000 words , while PhD-level ones are more detailed, ranging from 5,000-8,000 words .

Your Research Proposal: Elements to Include

How do you format a research proposal on motivation if you are unwilling to buy research paper online ?

Provide a structured outline of your future work, including the following elements:

• A title page , with your research paper’s heading, your name, and your affiliations
• An abstract , summarizing your proposal and highlighting your research problem, methodology, and potential impact
• An introduction , overviewing the problem and its significance
• Research objectives
• A literature review , contextualizing your research within the existing works on the topic
• Methodology and a timeline , outlining your research methods and providing an estimated schedule for it
• A budget , outlining the expected cost (if any)
• Ethical considerations , addressing any issues you may have during the research
• Expected outcomes and contributions , also explaining their potential impact
• References , aka the list of sources you’ll use
• Appendices , i.e., any materials supporting your research

How to Write a Research Proposal on Motivation

Writing a research proposal on motivation requires self-discipline, time management, and skills in crafting a coherent and comprehensive project presentation.

Keep reading to find a detailed description of what to include in every element of your research proposal.

#1. Title Page

Choose a concise yet descriptive title for your research; make it relevant to your topic yet intriguing enough to evoke curiosity in academics so that they keep investigating your work.

Format a separate title page to introduce your research project to a committee. Here is what to include:

• Your proposed title
• Your name, institution, and department
• Your supervisor’s name

The content of the title page may vary from institution to institution. Some also require your study’s date (year), and others don’t need the name of your department. The formatting will also vary depending on your citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.)

The takeaway: Check with your institution’s guidelines before designing a title page for your proposal.

#2. Abstract

If your research proposal is long, include an abstract for readers to understand its context. A table of contents will also come in handy, as it helps the audience to navigate your work.

What do you need to mention in a research proposal’s abstract?

• Your research question or problem
• The objectives you plan to achieve
• The methodology you’ll employ
• The expected outcomes

#3. Introduction

This section introduces your topic and emphasizes its relevance and significance to the field. Think of it as the pitch for your research project: Give the necessary context for readers and outline your research question and problem statement.

An introduction should be concise; keep it a few paragraphs long, and include the following information there:

• The target audience for your topic (policymakers, scientists, etc.)
• What the academic community already knows about it
• What is missing
• The new insights your research will contribute to the field
• Why your research is worth doing

#4. Research Objectives

Outline specific and clear objectives aligning with your research question. Ensure that they are well-defined, measurable, and achievable; otherwise, you’ll fail the project. This section of your proposal will help the readers understand the direction of your investigation and what you intend to accomplish.

Also, mind the difference between research aims and research objectives :

It’s a broad statement about the general purpose of your research.

Write it in the introduction section of your proposal, at the end of your problem statement. Research objective:

It’s more specific. 

Objectives indicate the particular ways you’ll solve your research problem.

#5. Literature Review

The literature review is another essential ingredient of a winning research proposal on motivation . It’s your opportunity to synthesize all the existing research related to your aims.

Present a clear discussion of what the existing research says concerning your objectives. How to do that:

• Recap the literature on your topic: Use Google Scholar to find resources, visit your university’s library, check reference lists from journal articles, review related dissertations, etc.
• Catalog and synthesize. (Reference management software can help with that.)
• Outline the list of literature you’ll review (chronologically by date or thematically by theme).
• Summarize each and write down how their points relate to the research question you’ll investigate in your work.

Why write a literature review in your research proposal?

Three reasons:

• To show that you know and understand the current state of the research (who said what, how it all fits together, etc.)
• To reveal and demonstrate the gap in the existing research for the readers to see that there’s a need for the investigation that you’re going to be doing (It’s about the justification of your study)
• To inform your research design decisions based on the methodological approaches of previous researchers in your field

#6. Methodology and Timeline

This section describes the overall approach you’ll employ to the research. How will you investigate the problem and answer your research questions?

Here’s what to include:

• Your research type: quantitative or qualitative; original data or source analysis; descriptive or experimental research design
• The subject of your investigation: who or what you’ll study; how you’ll choose them or it; where and when you’ll collect the data
• Research methods you’ll use: experiments, surveys, observation, interviews, etc.

Also, provide a detailed timeline for the audience (your supervisor, committee, etc.) to understand how much time you need to complete the project and what milestones and activities you’ll have during the process.

Break the research into smaller tasks and assign time frames for each. Ensure that you cover every step, from the initial phase to the submission.

Here’s an example of a detailed timeline your research project might have:

Some guides on the topic call this section of a research proposal “Practicalities.” It can be a few different things which vary from institution to institution, but they are anything related to the practical components of pulling off your research project.

Not every piece of research requires additional resources, but if you are applying for funding, you’ll need to estimate the cost of your project and include it in your proposal.

Identify everything you’ll need for the research: laboratory equipment, specific software, databases, travel costs to go somewhere and collect the data, assistants, etc. This will allow you to determine the required budget.

In your proposal, mention how much money (and what resources) you need, why this cost is necessary, and how you calculated that particular amount.

#8. Ethical Considerations

Are there any potential limitations or ethical considerations for your research project? What can influence its results?

In your proposal, address any issues that may arise during your work on the project and describe the measures you’ll take to maintain ethical standards. These measures include ensuring participants’ privacy, obtaining informed consent, and adhering to data protection regulations.

#9. Expected Outcomes and Contributions

Explain what outcomes or results you expect from your research. What are its potential implications for your field of study? This section is critical to your proposal’s argument because it showcases precisely why your research is necessary.

Emphasize what your research will contribute and why it matters.

Cover the following:

• How your work can challenge existing theories in the field
• The practical value it will provide to the academic community
• How your investigations will build the foundation for future research
• What problems your research results can help to solve
• How others can implement your findings in their settings

#10. References (Bibliography)

You need a comprehensive reference list at the end of your research proposal, as it will demonstrate your research skills to a committee. One of those skills in an academic environment is technically correct referencing .

So, make sure you understand the referencing requirements from your institution (APA, Harvard, MLA, you name it) and adhere to this citation style throughout your proposal and in the reference list.

Ensure that your references are 100% on point. Please note that your references aren’t only those you mentioned in the literature review section; they are any resources you referred to throughout your research proposal — in the introduction, your methodological section, and others.

Long story short, ensure a flow of citations throughout your document. It will build a solid reference list in your research proposal.

#11. Appendices

Appendices in a research proposal serve as additional supporting materials for the main text. Here, you can add data tables, questionnaires, survey instruments, interview transcripts, technical specifications, letters of permission, consent forms, and other supplementary information.

Appendices provide your document with further depth, sharing comprehensive details that reviewers can refer to.

Research Proposal: A Sample

For you to better understand the nature of a research proposal on motivation , here is a research proposal sample from our writers. They’ve crafted it for this article, so it’s original and okay to use for inspiration or as a template for your future work:

The Influence and Significance of the Self-Determination Theory (Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation) Involvement in Educational Process

Motivation is one of the factors, which encourage the person to the commitment of some actions and play a crucial role as the psychological determinant. There is plenty of different theories, which try to explain mechanisms of motivation and its affection on various aspects of life. The Self-determination theory (Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation) consists of two points of a view on the psychological triggers. The essence of this theory is developed throughout the duality of the psychological determinants, which function as a prompt for the further concernment of a person. This theory has wide applicability regarding an educational process and may serve as a model for practical implementation. The variety of ways of involvement of teaching methods based on the Self-determination theory (Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation) have not had proper functional usage in the real paradigm of a current educational system. The evaluation of the influence of teaching according to principles of this theoretical approach suppose to show a considerable advancement of student motivation. The specific testing and the student’s rate would provide the coherent results of the practical involvement of the Self-determination theory (Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation) and create a space for further investigation as well. The analysis of the data within the involvement of psychological approach to the evaluation of student’s results helps to understand the weakness of this particular research and in theory itself.

Introduction

The motivation composes a critical aspect of the successful completion of any activity. And the importance of the proper application of methods which are aimed to advance the motivational level of students plays a key role in the entire pattern of an educational process. For the centuries professors and psychologists discussed the advantages and possible ways of realization of different theoretical approaches in the frames of a current educational system. Before the discussion of the influence of particular models of motivational advancement, it is necessary to understand the importance of motivation itself. Motivation composes a considerable significance to an individual as a psychological phenomenon. Exactly due to the motivation person can commit some action, such an approach to the evaluation of motivation is called the self-determinative. Another important point here consists of the variety of theoretical approaches, which are aimed to describe and evaluate distinct motivational paradigms.

The matter here is that the appearance of motivation is a complicated process, which could be realized within external triggers and inner intentions of an individual. Each professor is able to find a personal approach to students and advance their motivational level by some other means. However, the Self-determination theory (Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation) is one of the most applicable to the pattern of an educational process. As it was mentioned before, the motivation is possible to treat ambivalently, as an inner paradigm and as a suite of different outside influences. The application of such a theory in the pattern of an educational process would help to understand its practical meaning and possible ways of further investigation. The analysis of results would show the functional significance of this approach and contributes to defining perspectives for the entire educational system.

Literature review

Before the evaluation of the background knowledge about the Self-determination theory (Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation) into the pattern of an education system, it is necessary to understand the entire scope of importance of this aspect into the attitude of students towards education. As it was mentioned before, the motivation is a very complicated phenomenon, which is necessary to analyze from two different sides at once. According to Ames “A qualitative approach to student motivation is concerned with how students think about themselves in relation to learning activities and to the process of learning itself. The salience of specific goals in classroom structures can orient students toward qualitatively different patterns.”(268) So to say, the motivation of students compose one of the most important aspects of a successful educational process.

Discussing self-determination as the main theory in the paradigm of development of motivation. As it was mentioned before, the affection on the motivation could be caused by some internal or some external factors. The self-determination theory claims that Intrinsic and Extrinsic component together create the motivation in the form, which is appropriate to whatever activity. This concept is developed exactly from the different types of emotional and psychological triggers, which may appear during some activity. Ryan and Deci in their work underline the differences between two main types of motivation, which, as the result of their balance, help to develop the collective self-determination motivation of a person towards some particular activity or process (55). This conception has critical importance regarding involvement in the educational system. Frequently, self-determination could serve as the single argument for the student in the decision-making about school performance. That is why the proper pattern of a correlation and successful involvement of some models of teaching has a critical role in the motivation of students.

The discussion of practical importance of the self-determination theory implementation in a standard educational process paradigm should be based on the balanced corporation of Intrinsic (personal attitude towards the activity, the individualistic desire to active performance, etc.) and Extrinsic (the specific combination of incentives and triggers, which are aimed to affect the person and advance personal motivation) motivation. The investigation provided by Noels et al. has a practical character. It had more linguistic nature and was developed with the aim to describe the correlation between the teacher’s working attitude and the further context of a student’s course performance. Even with a distinct principal purpose, this research could serve as the excellent theoretical base for the investigation of the Self-determination theory (Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation) impact into the pattern of an education system. The matter here is that the motivation has a variation character and the result of the Extrinsic motivation affection on a student is possible to observe in different ways.

Also, the full description of possible perspectives of the Self-Determination theory concerning current educational system was discussed in work by Deci, Edward et al., where the authors described the method in different ways, discussing it as a factor of a behavioral regulator, aspects of some human needs, etc. Also, the authors provide an evaluative analysis of various works based on motivation and its impact on the educational process. According to the authors, there is a considerable difference between results of students, who possess proper amount of Intrinsic motivation and continually obtained the outside influence, which formed the stable Extrinsic motivation, comparing to students, who did not have such specific approach towards their motivation. Such paradigm of research, which had Deci, Edward et al. is based on the belief of several recent decades about the considerable impact of external motivation on the development of self-determination and formation of a concernment in some process as well. The authors underline, that the self-determinative theory “…supports for competence (e.g., optimal challenges and performance feedback) and relatedness (e.g., parental involvement and peer acceptance) facilitate motivation. However, such supports will facilitate intrinsic motivation and integrated internalization only to the extent that autonomy-supportive rather than controlling interpersonal contexts accompany them” (333). On the other words, there is a close connection between Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation. The matter here is that the previous paradigms of student’s inducement partly had a mistaken character.

The correlation between inside and outside triggers in very high, it is possible to trace the entire pattern of such connection in the experiments of different authors mentioned above. That is why the educational system should pay considerable attention to the various approaches to the personal involvement of students in the educational process. The problem of low rate and performance level among students is possible to fix within the means of particular changes in the theoretical approach of teaching itself. The studies by Deci, Edward et al. and Ryan and Deci could serve as the excellent example of the practical application of different approaches developed on the based of the Self-determination theory (Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation).

Taking into the account the research question and the background information mentioned above, it is possible to suppose the most appropriate method of the investigation here as qualitative. Regarding current education system, there is a need to provide a practical evaluation of a self-determinative motivational theory affection on students performance in the result of particular outside triggers, which should stimulate the development of an individual concernment of a student in the rate and personal advancement as well.

Before the practical study itself, it is possible to apply The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) developed by Duncan and McKeachie, which always provides a correct and coherent statistical information (119). The next step should consist of a division of student into two groups: one, which should obtain the additional motivational triggers from the outside (including a specific atmosphere during the classes, professor’s performance, etc.) and the second group should continue the stable pattern of courses teaching.

After the space of a year of the practical involvement of experiment paradigm, it is necessary to provide The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) developed by Duncan and McKeachie one again (119). The results of both tests should be compared and correlated with the rate of every particular student in each experimental group.

The results of this study would show a considerable difference between two groups participated in the study. According to the background information and the research question, discussed above, it is possible to suppose positive changes in the attitude of the first group of students towards their educational performance and considerable advancement of student’s rate, comparing to the second group of students. The analysis of tests, rate and the general level of well being of students would show a substantial practical effect of the Self-determination theory (Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation) in the pattern of an educational system.

It is hard to deny the importance of motivation in the pattern of an educational process. But at the same time, the question of involvement of different motivational theories in reality of a current educational system is investigated poorly. This practical study would contribute to the general paradigm of changes, which should be realized in the further educational reforms. There is plenty of different approaches for a motivation advancement in the frames of the current education system. However, the importance of the Self-determination theory (Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation) has not many practical pieces of evidence. The matter here is, that the great number of psychologists, for example, Deci and Ryan in their works underline the functional advantage of the Self-determination theory (Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation) comparing to the other motivational theories. That is why it is possible to suppose this research as a significant contribution to the psychological view of the paradigm of the further development of an educational system.

The matter here is, that, as other practical investigations, this one contains some number of weaknesses, which is necessary to take into the account during the analysis of result and the evaluation of the practical importance of the study itself. The limitations in participants number might cause the weaknesses. Also, there is a chance of issues related to the time limitations. So to say, the time limit may appear as too short for the arriving of any results, which would satisfy the requirements of the research question. These factors and some others require additional improvement in the further investigations, based on this research. That is why the following development of this study is obvious and should be provided with the necessary changes, which would be determined according to the weaknesses of this particular investigation.

Works Cited

Ames, Carole. “Classrooms: Goals, Structures, and Student Motivation.” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol 84, no. 3, 1992, pp. 261-271. American Psychological Association (APA), doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261. Deci, Edward L. et al. “Motivation and Education: The Self-Determination Perspective.” Educational Psychologist, vol 26, no. 3-4, 1991, pp. 325-346. Informa UK Limited, doi:10.1080/00461520.1991.9653137. Deci, Edward L., and Richard M. Ryan. “Self-Determination.” The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2010. Wiley Online Library, doi:10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0834. Duncan, Teresa Garcia, and Wilbert J. McKeachie. “The Making of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire.” Educational psychologist, 40.2, 2005, pp. 117-128. Noels, Kimberly A. et al. “Perceptions of Teachers’ Communicative Style and Students’ Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation.” The Modern Language Journal, vol. 83, no. 1, 1999, pp. 23-34. Wiley-Blackwell, doi:10.1111/0026-7902.00003. Ryan, Richard M., and Edward L. Deci. “Intrinsic And Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions.” Contemporary Educational Psychology, vol. 25, no. 1, 2000, pp. 54-67. Elsevier BV, doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020.

Mistakes to Avoid When Designing Your Research Proposal

When crafting a research proposal on motivation or any other subject, it’s critical to make it specific and concise. It’s formal writing, and the overly broad or flowery descriptions inherent to narrations aren’t acceptable here.

Below are the most common pitfalls to avoid when writing a research proposal:

• Wordiness. Keep it brief and to the point
• The absence of a strong argument for your research. Make it persuasive so that the audience says “Yes” to your work
• An overly broad research topic. Narrow it down so the reader can see its significance to the academic community
• Including too many issues in your proposal, distracting from its central purpose
• A weak theoretical foundation for your study
• Failing to connect your research problem to existing studies on the subject
• Poorly articulated research aims and methodology
• Failing to plan the research project and manage the risks
• Sloppily presenting your research proposal to a committee
• Failing to follow your university’s specific criteria

Need Help With Your Research Proposal?

With all of the above, you will be okay with crafting your research proposal on motivation . Decide on the research question, ensure that it’s relevant and significant to the field, and come up with a methodology and the expected results — and you have it!

And remember:

We have professional research papers for sale (just in case you need help with your own). Feel free to place an order and provide the instructions and deadlines; our writers will gladly assist you!

Photo by RonRatte from Pixabay

2 thoughts on “ Writing a Research Proposal on Motivation: What, Why, and How [+Sample] ”

HOW TO DOWNLOAD IT

You can’t download the paper and use it as your own. You can order a similar paper sample from us.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

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

What our customers say

Our website uses secure cookies. More details

Get professional help from best writers right from your phone

Grab our 3 e-books bundle for $27 FREE

8 Most Effective Ways to Increase Motivation for Thesis Writing 

Writing a master’s or doctoral thesis is a tough job, and many students struggle with writer’s block and putting off work. The journey requires not just skill and knowledge but a sustained motivation for thesis writing. Here are eight essential strategies to help you find and maintain your motivation to write your thesis throughout the thesis writing process.

Know why you lack motivation

It’s important to understand whether you’re just avoiding writing (procrastination) or if you genuinely don’t feel interested in it (lack of motivation). Procrastination is when you delay writing even though you want to finish it, while a lack of motivation for thesis writing is when you have no interest in writing at all. Knowing the difference helps you find the right solution. Remember, not feeling motivated doesn’t mean you can’t write; it just might be less enjoyable.

Recognize external vs. internal motivation

In the early stages of your academic journey, things like job prospects or recognition may motivate you to write your thesis. These are external motivators. Over time, they might become less effective. That’s why it’s important to develop internal motivators, like a real passion for your topic, curiosity, or wanting to make a difference in your field. Shifting to these internal motivators can keep you energized about your thesis writing for a longer period.

Develop a writing plan

As you regularly spend time on your thesis, you’ll start to overcome any initial resistance. Planning and thinking about your work will make the next steps easier. You might find yourself working more than 20 minutes some days. As you progress, plan for longer thesis writing periods and set goals for completing each chapter.

Don’t overwhelm yourself

Getting stuck is normal in thesis or dissertation writing. Don’t view these challenges as impossible obstacles. If you’re frustrated or unsure, take a break for a few days. Then, consult your advisor or a mentor to discuss your challenges and find ways to move forward effectively.

Work on your thesis daily

Try to spend 15-20 minutes daily on tasks related to your thesis or dissertation. This includes reading, researching, outlining, and other preparatory activities. You can fit these tasks into short breaks throughout your day, like waiting for appointments, during commutes, or even while cooking.

Understand that thesis writing motivation changes

Realize that thesis writing motivation isn’t always the same; it changes over time. Your drive to write will vary with different stages of your research and life changes. Knowing that motivation can go up and down helps you adapt. When you feel less motivated, focus on small, doable parts of your work instead of big, intimidating goals.

Recharge your motivation regularly

Just like you need to rest and eat well to keep your body energized, your motivation for thesis writing needs to be refreshed too. Do things that boost your mental and creative energy. This could be talking with colleagues, attending workshops, or engaging in hobbies that relax you. Stay aware of your motivation levels and take action to rejuvenate them. This way, you can avoid burnout and keep a consistent pace in your thesis work.

Keep encouraging yourself

Repeating encouraging phrases like “I will finish my thesis by year’s end” or “I’ll complete a lot of work this week” can really help. Saying these affirmations regularly can focus your energy and keep you on track with your thesis writing motivation .

Remember, the amount you write can vary each day. Some days you might write a lot, and other days less. The key is to keep writing, even if it’s just rough ideas or jumbled thoughts. Don’t let the need for perfection stop you. Listening to podcasts where researchers talk about their writing experiences can also be inspiring and motivate you in your writing journey.

Paperpal is an AI writing assistant that help academics write better, faster with real-time suggestions for in-depth language and grammar correction. Trained on millions of research manuscripts enhanced by professional academic editors, Paperpal delivers human precision at machine speed.

Try it for free or upgrade to  Paperpal Prime , which unlocks unlimited access to premium features like academic translation, paraphrasing, contextual synonyms, consistency checks and more. It’s like always having a professional academic editor by your side! Go beyond limitations and experience the future of academic writing.  Get Paperpal Prime now at just US$19 a month!

Related Reads:

How to make your thesis supervision work for you.

• 6 Tips for Post-Doc Researchers to Take Their Career to the Next Level
• How to Write a Conclusion for Research Papers (with Examples)
• Presenting Research Data Effectively Through Tables and Figures

CACTUS Joins Hands with Taylor & Francis to Simplify Editorial Process with a Pioneering AI Solution

You may also like, how to cite in apa format (7th edition):..., academic integrity vs academic dishonesty: types & examples, the ai revolution: authors’ role in upholding academic..., the future of academia: how ai tools are..., how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write a phd research proposal, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide), five things authors need to know when using..., 7 best referencing tools and citation management software....

How to Write the Rationale for a Research Paper

• Research Process
• Peer Review

A research rationale answers the big SO WHAT? that every adviser, peer reviewer, and editor has in mind when they critique your work. A compelling research rationale increases the chances of your paper being published or your grant proposal being funded. In this article, we look at the purpose of a research rationale, its components and key characteristics, and how to create an effective research rationale.

Updated on September 19, 2022

The rationale for your research is the reason why you decided to conduct the study in the first place. The motivation for asking the question. The knowledge gap. This is often the most significant part of your publication. It justifies the study's purpose, novelty, and significance for science or society. It's a critical part of standard research articles as well as funding proposals.

Essentially, the research rationale answers the big SO WHAT? that every (good) adviser, peer reviewer, and editor has in mind when they critique your work.

A compelling research rationale increases the chances of your paper being published or your grant proposal being funded. In this article, we look at:

• the purpose of a research rationale
• its components and key characteristics
• how to create an effective research rationale

What is a research rationale?

Think of a research rationale as a set of reasons that explain why a study is necessary and important based on its background. It's also known as the justification of the study, rationale, or thesis statement.

Essentially, you want to convince your reader that you're not reciting what other people have already said and that your opinion hasn't appeared out of thin air. You've done the background reading and identified a knowledge gap that this rationale now explains.

A research rationale is usually written toward the end of the introduction. You'll see this section clearly in high-impact-factor international journals like Nature and Science. At the end of the introduction there's always a phrase that begins with something like, "here we show..." or "in this paper we show..." This text is part of a logical sequence of information, typically (but not necessarily) provided in this order:

Here's an example from a study by Cataldo et al. (2021) on the impact of social media on teenagers' lives.

Note how the research background, gap, rationale, and objectives logically blend into each other.

The authors chose to put the research aims before the rationale. This is not a problem though. They still achieve a logical sequence. This helps the reader follow their thinking and convinces them about their research's foundation.

Elements of a research rationale

We saw that the research rationale follows logically from the research background and literature review/observation and leads into your study's aims and objectives.

This might sound somewhat abstract. A helpful way to formulate a research rationale is to answer the question, “Why is this study necessary and important?”

Generally, that something has never been done before should not be your only motivation. Use it only If you can give the reader valid evidence why we should learn more about this specific phenomenon.

A well-written introduction covers three key elements:

• What's the background to the research?
• What has been done before (information relevant to this particular study, but NOT a literature review)?
• Research rationale

Now, let's see how you might answer the question.

1. This study complements scientific knowledge and understanding

Discuss the shortcomings of previous studies and explain how'll correct them. Your short review can identify:

• Methodological limitations . The methodology (research design, research approach or sampling) employed in previous works is somewhat flawed.

Example : Here , the authors claim that previous studies have failed to explore the role of apathy “as a predictor of functional decline in healthy older adults” (Burhan et al., 2021). At the same time, we know a lot about other age-related neuropsychiatric disorders, like depression.

Their study is necessary, then, “to increase our understanding of the cognitive, clinical, and neural correlates of apathy and deconstruct its underlying mechanisms.” (Burhan et al., 2021).

• Contextual limitations . External factors have changed and this has minimized or removed the relevance of previous research.

Example : You want to do an empirical study to evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of tourists visiting Sicily. Previous studies might have measured tourism determinants in Sicily, but they preceded COVID-19.

• Conceptual limitations . Previous studies are too bound to a specific ideology or a theoretical framework.

Example : The work of English novelist E. M. Forster has been extensively researched for its social, political, and aesthetic dimensions. After the 1990s, younger scholars wanted to read his novels as an example of gay fiction. They justified the need to do so based on previous studies' reliance on homophobic ideology.

This kind of rationale is most common in basic/theoretical research.

2. This study can help solve a specific problem

Here, you base your rationale on a process that has a problem or is not satisfactory.

For example, patients complain about low-quality hospital care on weekends (staff shortages, inadequate attention, etc.). No one has looked into this (there is a lack of data). So, you explore if the reported problems are true and what can be done to address them. This is a knowledge gap.

Or you set out to explore a specific practice. You might want to study the pros and cons of several entry strategies into the Japanese food market.

It's vital to explain the problem in detail and stress the practical benefits of its solution. In the first example, the practical implications are recommendations to improve healthcare provision.

In the second example, the impact of your research is to inform the decision-making of businesses wanting to enter the Japanese food market.

This kind of rationale is more common in applied/practical research.

3. You're the best person to conduct this study

It's a bonus if you can show that you're uniquely positioned to deliver this study, especially if you're writing a funding proposal .

For an anthropologist wanting to explore gender norms in Ethiopia, this could be that they speak Amharic (Ethiopia's official language) and have already lived in the country for a few years (ethnographic experience).

Or if you want to conduct an interdisciplinary research project, consider partnering up with collaborators whose expertise complements your own. Scientists from different fields might bring different skills and a fresh perspective or have access to the latest tech and equipment. Teaming up with reputable collaborators justifies the need for a study by increasing its credibility and likely impact.

When is the research rationale written?

You can write your research rationale before, or after, conducting the study.

In the first case, when you might have a new research idea, and you're applying for funding to implement it.

Or you're preparing a call for papers for a journal special issue or a conference. Here , for instance, the authors seek to collect studies on the impact of apathy on age-related neuropsychiatric disorders.

In the second case, you have completed the study and are writing a research paper for publication. Looking back, you explain why you did the study in question and how it worked out.

Although the research rationale is part of the introduction, it's best to write it at the end. Stand back from your study and look at it in the big picture. At this point, it's easier to convince your reader why your study was both necessary and important.

How long should a research rationale be?

The length of the research rationale is not fixed. Ideally, this will be determined by the guidelines (of your journal, sponsor etc.).

The prestigious journal Nature , for instance, calls for articles to be no more than 6 or 8 pages, depending on the content. The introduction should be around 200 words, and, as mentioned, two to three sentences serve as a brief account of the background and rationale of the study, and come at the end of the introduction.

If you're not provided guidelines, consider these factors:

• Research document : In a thesis or book-length study, the research rationale will be longer than in a journal article. For example, the background and rationale of this book exploring the collective memory of World War I cover more than ten pages.
• Research question : Research into a new sub-field may call for a longer or more detailed justification than a study that plugs a gap in literature.

Which verb tenses to use in the research rationale?

It's best to use the present tense. Though in a research proposal, the research rationale is likely written in the future tense, as you're describing the intended or expected outcomes of the research project (the gaps it will fill, the problems it will solve).

Example of a research rationale

Research question : What are the teachers' perceptions of how a sense of European identity is developed and what underlies such perceptions?

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology , 3(2), 77-101.

Burhan, A.M., Yang, J., & Inagawa, T. (2021). Impact of apathy on aging and age-related neuropsychiatric disorders. Research Topic. Frontiers in Psychiatry

Cataldo, I., Lepri, B., Neoh, M. J. Y., & Esposito, G. (2021). Social media usage and development of psychiatric disorders in childhood and adolescence: A review. Frontiers in Psychiatry , 11.

CiCe Jean Monnet Network (2017). Guidelines for citizenship education in school: Identities and European citizenship children's identity and citizenship in Europe.

Cohen, l, Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education . Eighth edition. London: Routledge.

de Prat, R. C. (2013). Euroscepticism, Europhobia and Eurocriticism: The radical parties of the right and left “vis-à-vis” the European Union P.I.E-Peter Lang S.A., Éditions Scientifiques Internationales.

European Commission. (2017). Eurydice Brief: Citizenship education at school in Europe.

Polyakova, A., & Fligstein, N. (2016). Is European integration causing Europe to become more nationalist? Evidence from the 2007–9 financial crisis. Journal of European Public Policy , 23(1), 60-83.

Winter, J. (2014). Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning: The Great War in European Cultural History . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

The AJE Team

See our "Privacy Policy"

Ensure your structure and ideas are consistent and clearly communicated

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

How to Write a PhD Motivation Letter

• Applying to a PhD

A PhD motivation letter is a document that describes your personal motivation and competence for a particular research project. It is usually submitted together with your academic CV to provide admissions staff with more information about you as an individual, to help them decide whether or not you are the ideal candidate for a research project.

A motivation letter has many similarities to a cover letter and a personal statement, and institutions will not ask you to submit all of these. However, it is a unique document and you should treat it as such. In the context of supporting a PhD application, the difference is nuanced; all three documents outline your suitability for PhD study. However, compared to a cover letter and personal statement, a motivation letter places more emphasis on your motivation for wanting to pursue the particular PhD position you are applying for.

Academic cover letters are more common in UK universities, while motivation letters are more common abroad.

A motivation letter can play a key part in the application process . It allows the admission committee to review a group of PhD applicants with similar academic backgrounds and select the ideal candidate based on their motivations for applying.

For admission staff, academic qualifications alone are not enough to indicate whether a student will be successful in their doctorate. In this sense, a motivational letter will allow them to judge your passion for the field of study, commitment to research and suitability for the programme, all of which better enables them to evaluate your potential.

How Should I Structure My Motivation Letter?

A strong motivation letter for PhD applications will include:

• A concise introduction stating which programme you are applying for,
• Your academic background and professional work experience,
• Any key skills you possess and what makes you the ideal candidate,
• Your interest and motivation for applying,
• Concluding remarks and thanks.

This is a simplistic breakdown of what can be a very complicated document.

However, writing to the above structure will ensure you keep your letter of motivation concise and relevant to the position you are applying for. Remember, the aim of your letter is to show your enthusiasm and that you’re committed and well suited for the programme.

To help you write a motivation letter for a PhD application, we have outlined what to include in the start, main body, and closing sections.

How to Start a Motivation Letter

Introduction: Start with a brief introduction in which you clearly state your intention to apply for a particular programme. Think of this as describing what the document is to a stranger.

Education: State what you have studied and where. Your higher education will be your most important educational experience, so focus on this. Highlight any relevant modules you undertook as part of your studies that are relevant to the programme you are applying for. You should also mention how your studies have influenced your decision to pursue a PhD project, especially if it is in the same field you are currently applying to.

Work experience: Next summarise your professional work experience. Remember, you will likely be asked to submit your academic CV along with your motivation letter, so keep this section brief to avoid any unnecessary repetition. Include any other relevant experiences, such as teaching roles, non-academic experience, or charity work which demonstrates skills or shows your suitability for the research project and in becoming a PhD student.

Key skills: Outline your key skills. Remember the admissions committee is considering your suitability for the specific programme you are applying for, so mention skills relevant to the PhD course.

Motivation for applying: Show your enthusiasm and passion for the subject, and describe your long-term aspirations. Start with how you first became interested in the field, and how your interest has grown since. You should also mention anything else you have done which helps demonstrate your interest in your proposed research topic, for example:

• Have you attended any workshops or seminars?
• Do you have any research experience?
• Have you taught yourself any aspects of the subject?
• Have you read any literature within the research area?

Finally, describe what has convinced you to dedicate the next 3-4 years (assuming you are to study full time) of your life to research.

How to End a Motivation Letter

Concluding the motivation letter is where most people struggle. Typically, people can easily describe their academic background and why they want to study, but convincing the reader they are the best candidate for the PhD programme is often more challenging.

The concluding remarks of your motivation letter should highlight the impacts of your proposed research, in particular: the new contributions it will make to your field, the benefits it will have on society and how it fits in with your aspirations.

With this, conclude with your career goals. For example, do you want to pursue an academic career or become a researcher for a private organisation? Doing so will show you have put a lot of thought into your decision.

Remember, admissions into a PhD degree is very competitive, and supervisors invest a lot of time into mentoring their students. Therefore, supervisors naturally favour those who show the most dedication. Your conclusion should remind the reader that you are not only passionate about the research project, but that the university will benefit from having you.

Finally, thank the reader for considering your application.

Finding a PhD has never been this easy – search for a PhD by keyword, location or academic area of interest.

Motivation Letter Format

There are some basic rules to follow when writing a successful motivation letter. These will mimic the standard format for report writing that the supervisor will be familiar with:

• Use a sans serif font (e.g. Arial or Times New Roman),
• Use a standard font size (e.g. 12pt) and black font colour,
• Keep your writing professional throughout and avoid the use of informal language,
• Write in the first person,
• Address your motivation letter to a named person such as the project supervisor, however, this could also be the person in charge of research admissions,
• Structure your letter into paragraphs using the guidance above, such as introduction, academic history, motivation for research, and concluding remarks.

How Long Should a Motivation Letter Be?

A good rule of thumb for PhD motivation letters is to keep it to around one side of A4. A little longer than one page is acceptable, but two pages is generally considered too long. This equates to approximately 400-600 words.

Things to Avoid when Writing Your Motivational Letter

Your motivational letter will only be one of the several documents you’ll be asked to submit as part of your PhD application. You will almost certainly be asked to submit an Academic CV as well. Therefore, be careful not to duplicate any of the information.

It is acceptable to repeat the key points, such as what and where you have studied. However, while your CV should outline your academic background, your motivation letter should bring context to it by explaining why you have studied what you have, and where you hope to go with it. The simplest way to do this is to refer to the information in your CV and explain how it has led you to become interested in research.

Don’t try to include everything. A motivation letter should be short, so focus on the information most relevant to the programme and which best illustrates your passion for it. Remember, the academic committee will need to be critical in order to do their jobs effectively , so they will likely interpret an unnecessarily long letter as in indication that you have poor written skills and cannot communicate effectively.

You must be able to back up all of your statements with evidence, so don’t fabricate experiences or overstate your skills. This isn’t only unethical but is likely to be picked up by your proposed PhD supervisor or the admissions committee.

Whilst it is good to show you have an understanding of the field, don’t try to impress the reader with excessive use of technical terms or abbreviations.

PhD Motivation Letter Samples – A Word of Caution

There are many templates and samples of motivation letters for PhDs available online. A word of caution regarding these – although they can prove to be a great source of inspiration, you should refrain from using them as a template for your own motivation letter.

While there are no rules against them, supervisors will likely have seen a similar letter submitted to them in the past. This will not only prevent your application from standing out, but it will also reflect poorly on you by suggesting that you have put minimal effort into your application.

Browse PhDs Now

Join thousands of students.

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

• {{item.title}} {{item.title}} 0" aria-label="Find options under this page" @click="mobchildshow(true, item.title)" class="more-menu">
• {{subitem.title}}

Writing a research proposal

How to write a research proposal.

For many subjects, writing a research proposal is a key part of your postgraduate research degree application. This is your opportunity to demonstrate your knowledge and how you want to contribute to the subject.  

We use the proposal to match your interest with an appropriate supervisor to make sure you have the best support during your degree. We are looking for originality and relevance when assessing the overall quality of your application, including your suitability for this level of study.  

We highly recommend that you explore which academic researchers are working in your subject area and contact them first with any questions, this is a good opportunity to firm up your ideas, further explore the topic and talk with others in your field.  

What is a research proposal?  

A research proposal is a concise and coherent document, usually between 1500 – 2000 words, maximum 4 x A4 pages. You should outline your proposed research project, why it is of relevance (rationale), what research questions are you going to ask, what you hope to achieve (aims and objectives) and how you plan to carry out your research (methodology).   

Step-by-step 

This page is your comprehensive guide to writing a research proposal and will cover seven key elements of a proposal:  

Working title

You should include a title for your thesis in the proposal.

Your title may change as you further your research, but at this stage it's important to state succinctly what your research will cover.

Introduction

Briefly identify your idea, what is your ‘research question’?

It could be the theory you want to test, or a more open question. It would be useful to give examples, 3-5 research questions from recently completed PhDs in a relevant field. You should discuss the context around your research topic, such as current debates and issues. The important thing here is that you introduce your research project with clarity and in a way that stimulates your reader’s interest.

Demonstrate the significance of your research project.

To do this, explain why your research is important, what makes it original and how it will contribute to existing knowledge within its field.

Aims and objectives

What are you hoping to achieve with your research?

Try and produce four or five bullet points of objectives for each aim, which demonstrate your understanding of how to meet your research aims. You can use the SMART acronym to support you in creating objectives, which involves making your objectives: specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time specific.

Literature Review

Demonstrate your knowledge and awareness of relevant literature

A literature review is a discussion and evaluation of academic literature or a relevant body of knowledge (for practice-based research). You should use this section of your proposal to show that you are familiar with work in your chosen topic area and that your research will contribute something new and/or meaningful to it.

Methodology

Explain how you plan to carry out your research

The methodology section of your research proposal is where you explain how you plan to carry out your research. This should include the research techniques and methods you will use, why these are most appropriate and how you will implement them. You should also include a discussion of the research strategy (general approach) you will adopt, with appropriate justification, including the analytical approach. The section should also contain the range of research findings that will be gathered from the research and how you will analyse or evaluate this. For practice based research, include how will your portfolio of artefacts, code, software, compositions, computer games etc. articulate the originality of your research?

Reference all the materials you used in the preparation your proposal

You may also list references that you didn't directly draw upon, to demonstrate awareness of literature relating to your proposed material.

Support from academic staff in drafting your research proposal

Your research proposal will be read by academics with an interest in your field of research. You are therefore encouraged to contact members of academic staff informally prior to submitting your application to discuss to your research proposal. This can often speed up the applications process, as you can identify the member(s) of staff you have spoken to on your research degree application form.

Use the Huddersfield Research Portal to browse academic staff profiles and search using key words to find staff members who share your research interests.

Changing aspects of your research proposal after gaining a place as a research student

Your research proposal is your starting point, and we understand that as your idea develop s , your proposed research is likely to change. As such, you will not be obliged to adhere to the specifics of your proposal if you are offered a place as a research degree candidate at Huddersfield. However, as the proposal is the foundation of your working relationship with your supervisor(s), you will need to discuss any changes with them first. 

Useful tips for writing a research proposal

• Maintain a focus in your proposal: Your research proposal should be clear and concise, outlining your research idea and its benefits to your chosen field of study, in a way that the reader can clearly understand. Remember, your proposal is just the starting point and an outline and does not need to be overly complicated.
• Share your proposal: Ask someone you trust (a friend, family member, tutor) to read your proposal and provide some feedback. Do they understand what your research is about? Do they think your aims and objectives are achievable? Does your research engage them?
• Align your proposal topic with University research themes: Whilst it is important to choose a research topic that you are passionate about, your proposal will be assessed (in part) on its fit with our University research themes. You therefore need to choose a topic which aligns with topics of interest to the University or academic school you hoping to work within and make it clear how your project matches up with them.
• Be realistic in your proposal: Your proposal is assessed not only on its quality, originality and fit with our research themes but also the likelihood of completion, so make sure that the scope of your research project is reasonable and realistic .
• Take your time when writing your proposal: There are a lot of elements to a high-quality research proposal, so take the time to ensure that you meet them all. At the University of Huddersfield, there are three opportunities for enrolling onto a research degree programme during the academic year (October, January, and April), meaning less time pressure when working on your proposal and application.

Once you have written your proposal, what next?

Once you have written your research proposal you will need to complete an application form. Look at our how to apply webpage for more information.

How to apply for a research degree

Our step-by-step guide will help you to make the most out of your application for a research degree

Scholarships and funding

Explore our funding options, including scholarships and Doctoral Loans.

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process
• Writing Strong Research Questions | Criteria & Examples

Writing Strong Research Questions | Criteria & Examples

Published on October 26, 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on November 21, 2023.

A research question pinpoints exactly what you want to find out in your work. A good research question is essential to guide your research paper , dissertation , or thesis .

All research questions should be:

• Focused on a single problem or issue
• Researchable using primary and/or secondary sources
• Feasible to answer within the timeframe and practical constraints
• Specific enough to answer thoroughly
• Complex enough to develop the answer over the space of a paper or thesis
• Relevant to your field of study and/or society more broadly

Table of contents

How to write a research question, what makes a strong research question, using sub-questions to strengthen your main research question, research questions quiz, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research questions.

You can follow these steps to develop a strong research question:

• Choose your topic
• Do some preliminary reading about the current state of the field
• Narrow your focus to a specific niche
• Identify the research problem that you will address

The way you frame your question depends on what your research aims to achieve. The table below shows some examples of how you might formulate questions for different purposes.

Using your research problem to develop your research question

Note that while most research questions can be answered with various types of research , the way you frame your question should help determine your choices.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Research questions anchor your whole project, so it’s important to spend some time refining them. The criteria below can help you evaluate the strength of your research question.

Focused and researchable

Feasible and specific

Complex and arguable

Relevant and original

Chances are that your main research question likely can’t be answered all at once. That’s why sub-questions are important: they allow you to answer your main question in a step-by-step manner.

Good sub-questions should be:

• Less complex than the main question
• Focused only on 1 type of research
• Presented in a logical order

Here are a few examples of descriptive and framing questions:

• Descriptive: According to current government arguments, how should a European bank tax be implemented?
• Descriptive: Which countries have a bank tax/levy on financial transactions?
• Framing: How should a bank tax/levy on financial transactions look at a European level?

Keep in mind that sub-questions are by no means mandatory. They should only be asked if you need the findings to answer your main question. If your main question is simple enough to stand on its own, it’s okay to skip the sub-question part. As a rule of thumb, the more complex your subject, the more sub-questions you’ll need.

Try to limit yourself to 4 or 5 sub-questions, maximum. If you feel you need more than this, it may be indication that your main research question is not sufficiently specific. In this case, it’s is better to revisit your problem statement and try to tighten your main question up.

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Methodology

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

The way you present your research problem in your introduction varies depending on the nature of your research paper . A research paper that presents a sustained argument will usually encapsulate this argument in a thesis statement .

A research paper designed to present the results of empirical research tends to present a research question that it seeks to answer. It may also include a hypothesis —a prediction that will be confirmed or disproved by your research.

As you cannot possibly read every source related to your topic, it’s important to evaluate sources to assess their relevance. Use preliminary evaluation to determine whether a source is worth examining in more depth.

This involves:

• Reading abstracts , prefaces, introductions , and conclusions
• Looking at the table of contents to determine the scope of the work
• Consulting the index for key terms or the names of important scholars

A research hypothesis is your proposed answer to your research question. The research hypothesis usually includes an explanation (“ x affects y because …”).

A statistical hypothesis, on the other hand, is a mathematical statement about a population parameter. Statistical hypotheses always come in pairs: the null and alternative hypotheses . In a well-designed study , the statistical hypotheses correspond logically to the research hypothesis.

Formulating a main research question can be a difficult task. Overall, your question should contribute to solving the problem that you have defined in your problem statement .

However, it should also fulfill criteria in three main areas:

• Researchability
• Feasibility and specificity
• Relevance and originality

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, November 21). Writing Strong Research Questions | Criteria & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 9, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-questions/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to define a research problem | ideas & examples, how to write a problem statement | guide & examples, 10 research question examples to guide your research project, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Stack Exchange Network

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

Q&A for work

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

How to explain things in the motivation section of a mathematical paper without proper definitions?

I want to start a chapter in my dissertation by motivating a mathematical operator by showing why it is interesting to look at it and what I can contribute to understand it better. However, I actually need to introduce some mathematical objects in order to correctly state everything.

I think it is a rather bad Idea to start first with a section of introducing the mathematical concepts (like measure theory) and then start the actual motivation. But if I do it opposite, then I am at a loss for words.

For example, in my motivation I would need to use a additive-finite measure space, a operator, the space of mu-integrable functions and a stochastic process.

How would you suggest to cope with such a situation?

• mathematics

• 3 As long as the terms are standard, you can probably safely use them without defining them in detail (especially in the introduction). –  Tobias Kildetoft Commented May 4, 2015 at 13:18
• 2 I know mathematicians don't like to hear that, but still: if you can't explain why it's interesting in natural language, you (probably) don't have a motivation (that appeals to non-experts) beyond curiosity . That's fair, but why pretend? –  Raphael Commented May 5, 2015 at 0:22

6 Answers 6

When I was a Ph.D. student working on my own dissertation, I went to the university writing center for help and had a revelatory experience. The person working with me sat down with the first page of my introduction and effectively dissected it to identify the problems without understanding any of my technical jargon. They did this by reading aloud as we discussed, substituting blank/nonsense words for every piece of jargon, e.g.:

Here we apply method X to determine whether adjective thingies can be made to wibble.

This type of substitution forces you to step back from the technical world that you have dedicated so much time and love to, and understand your narrative---or lack thereof.

In your motivation, you need to take a couple of steps back and ask: why does anybody care about additive-finite measure space ("frobs") and how it relates to the space of mu-integrable functions ("greebit-space") or a stochastic process ("wibbling").

You didn't pick these elements at random. There must be some reason why you picked them and how they relate to the bigger community. Are they intended to solve a puzzle that a lot of people care about? Or a small piece of such a puzzle? Do they unite two sets of concepts that people thought were different? Will they help understand string theory or give better tools for interpreting MRI imaging?

You want to be able to write something like this:

People have wondered about how to better understand frobs ever since Richard Feynman first used them to pick the locks in Los Alamos. Although X, Y, and Z attempts have been made, none of them got very far because they were all green-colored. In this dissertation, I examine an alternate path, reducing the problem of frobs to the simpler system of greebit-space by means of an innovative application of wibbling. These results bring us one step closer to solving the problem of frobs, and how they can be better used to quickly and cheaply pick locks.

Now, what I've written is pure gibberish, and your motivation will almost certainly be much longer. The point, however, is this: your goal in a motivation section is to motivate by explaining that there is a problem that people care about and that you have an approach that gives at least a piece of the solution. Explain it in a way that your jargon can just be placeholders in the reader's mind, and it will be fine to leave the complex definitions for later.

• 1 This is a concise and brilliant explanation of what an introductory chapter -- any introductory chapter -- should do. –  henning no longer feeds AI Commented May 5, 2015 at 10:27

When I encounter this problem, I write the introduction as if the readers knew the concepts that I mention, but I include a parenthetical comment or a footnote, after such a concept, along the lines of "This and other concepts used in the introduction will be defined in Section 2."

If you go deeply enough into measure theory and stochastic processes to actually write your dissertation about it, it is safe to assume that readers will be familiar with common concepts. So just assume that people understand what you write about. Do some handwaving if necessary ("we examine an interesting class of operators that are distinguished in that...").

Worry less about correctness than about telling a good story. After all, this is a motivational section. Don't include any definitions, or no more than one if it is utterly necessary. (And then, if you find that a definition is necessary in an introduction section, I'd argue that you probably need to revisit what you want to write in that section, until the definition is not necessary any more.)

Worry about correctness in the main body of your chapter.

In addition to other good points made in the other answers, I think too often people overlook the question of the actual, likely audience/readership for a piece of technical writing. For example, it is unlikely that anyone without at least a rudimentary knowledge of your general subject would look at your thesis at all, so you can safely use the standard, basic terminology to give an introduction and overview of a given chapter. That is, it is not useful to imagine that you are explaining "from scratch" to someone who's completely unacquainted with the topic under discussion, since the reality would be that they'd not instantly assimilate "definitions" in any case.

In other words, contrary to what we sometimes may imagine, there is a context in which we write, and that context is most often richer than we acknowledge. Thus, the work is not to re-establish the basic context, but to make larger points. That is, as in the other answers, I don't want to hear delicate (and possibly pointless) semantic distinctions about word-use, but, rather, about why you are doing what you're doing, etc.

Mathematicians have a tendency to train to hide away they tracks they used to take to get to their goal (apologies to Simon Singh). This means that motivation is the thing they have been trained not to give. As compensation, they give examples, ranging from trivial to realistic to absurd following the definitions.

This is the situation on the ground. The reason is that mathematical objects are often obtained by so many steps of abstraction of originally natural-world concepts that their real-world origin is often obscured or very difficult to intuit (think the - very compact - definition of topology).

Therefore, it is useful to the reader to "recreate" the bridge to reality (which is often possible) and explain which of reality's features are required and which ones are discarded. Measure theory is not so bad in that respect. Basically, you are talking about a kind of "volume". In "nice" spaces, such a vector spaces, you could consider n-forms as volumes (almost literally), but if the space gets nastier, without a concept of tangent spaces and the associated structure, you have to look at which permits you to extend this concept to suitably selected subsets of your space. My favourite to asking the question what you miss if you have no measure is to respond with the Banach-Tarski paradox.

Now the game can also be played on a higher level if you talk to mathematicians who know already a lot of things. You now need to explain how your concepts will fit into what they already know. So, a group theorist may be motivated to look at semigroups by explaining which axioms you drop (and why). Or which phenomenon motivated your definition of semigroup (for instance attempting to model non-invertible operations).

In short: the point is to explain and to motivate what concepts and phenomena in "the universe of the reader" corresponds to properties discarded or generalised (abstractions) or newly studied phenomena in your universe.

It's a delicate balance. You say:

...in order to correctly state everything.

But why are you correctly stating everything if its just a motiational discussion? So you see you have a balancing act whereby you need to give up a little bit of space on the side of correctly stating everything in order to gain some space on the side of being able to flexibly discuss the concepts, ideas, history etc.

This is actually really hard and usually takes much more experience than it did to solve the research problem in the first place. So I think its common for e.g. a graduating PhD student to have the technical knowledge to solve the problem but to find it difficult to articulate where the problem lies within a much bigger field of inquiry.

As you gain more experience you will know when and how to lie . And you will also know much better what counts as standard. When you've just spent years learning the basics of a research field you often feel like things need definitions that don't really. Other experienced mathematicians are probably more comfortable than you think with not fully understanding every detail/remembering every definition but kind of vaguely knowing what such and such an object X is and vaguely what it does and just more or less getting the idea until the later point at which you define everytihng.

To try to give one piece of practical advice: Look for ways to not tell too big a lie. Find places you can say that 'an object X is essentially an object Y together with a parameterization of its involutions' (or whatever) where object Y is something you a sure is more standard.

One example that comes to mind from my education is distributions. I heard both of the following vagueries:

• Distributions are generalized functions.("OK right so I should think of them like functions")
• Distributions are like the abstract dual to functions. You pair a distribution with a function to get a number.

This confused me when I was younger. But after some experience I guess you know the ways in which these are both true and you get that different contexts call for different lies .

The readers who don't know the stuff well will essentially have no choice but to just swallow the lies. Then you get worried about the readers who do know the stuff well. Because then when you tell a lie, they might get offended, like "gah this writer has oversimplified and left out the crucial essence of object X; how will anyone get the important content from watered down motivational discussion!?" So like I said, it's a balancing act.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged thesis mathematics ..

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

Hot Network Questions

• Need help for translating old signs
• How to easily detect new appended data with bpy?
• Function with memories of its past life
• How to make a soundless world
• Does the science work for why my trolls explode?
• What is the oldest open math problem outside of number theory?
• How to deal with coauthors who just do a lot of unnecessary work and exploration to be seen as hard-working and grab authorship?
• Copyright Fair Use: Is using the phrase "Courtesy of" legally acceptable when no permission has been given?
• Existence of 2-fold branched covers
• Trying to find air crash for a case study
• How in the world do I fix this anciently old slop sink? I am okay even with a temporary fix
• Where is DC-3 parked at KOPF?
• How frequently is random number generated when plotting function containing RandomReal?
• Sampling from tail of Normal distribution
• Would a scientific theory of everything be falsifiable?
• Why does counterattacking lead to a more drawish and less dynamic position than defending？
• When I use \llap to overlap words, the space between the overlapped words and the rest of the text is too much: how do I fix it?
• C++ std::function-like queue
• Latin lyrics to "Far away"
• Little spikes on mains AC
• Swapping front Shimano 105 R7000 34x50t 11sp Chainset with Shimano Deore FC-M5100 chainset; 11-speed 26x36t
• Arduino Uno Serial.write() how many bits are actually transmitted at once by UART?
• What was it that Wittgenstein found funny here?
• "There is a bra for every ket, but there is not a ket for every bra"

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
• BMC Med Educ

Promoting positive perceptions of and motivation for research among undergraduate medical students to stimulate future research involvement: a grounded theory study

Belinda w. c. ommering.

1 Center for Innovation in Medical Education, Leiden University Medical Center, Hippocratespad 21, Zone V7-P, PO Box 9600, Leiden, The Netherlands

Marjo Wijnen-Meijer

2 Technical University of Munich, TUM School of Medicine, TUM Medical Education Center, Munich, Germany

Diana H. J. M. Dolmans

3 Department of Educational Development and Research, School of Health Professions Education, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

Friedo W. Dekker

4 Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands

Floris M. van Blankenstein

Associated data.

The data used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Research is of great value to make advancements within the medical field and, ultimately, offer the best possible patient care. Physician-scientists are key in contributing to the development of medicine, as they can bridge the gap between research and practice. However, medicine currently faces a physician-scientist shortage. A possible solution to cultivate physician-scientists is to engage medical students in research in early phases of medical school. Evidence-based strategies to stimulate positive perceptions of and motivation for research among students could help to enhance research engagement. Consequently, understanding of students’ perceptions of and motivation for research is needed. Therefore, this study aimed to identify conditions under which students develop positive perceptions of and motivation for research by answering the following sub-questions: 1) how do first-year medical students perceive research? and 2) which factors contribute to motivation or demotivation for conducting research?

We conducted a qualitative study with individual interviews using a grounded theory approach, involving 13 purposively sampled first-year medical students at Leiden University Medical Center.

Our results suggest that first-year students are already able to identify many aspects of research. Students elaborated on the relevance of research for professional practice and personal development. Furthermore, our results suggest a relationship between perceptions of and motivation for research. Some perceptions were identical to motivating or demotivating factors to conduct research, like the relevance of research for practice and performing statistics respectively. Other motivating factors were, among others, acknowledgment, autonomy, and inspiring role models. Demotivating factors were, among others, lack of autonomy and relevance, and inadequate collaboration.

Conclusions

Our results contribute to the idea that perceptions of research are related to motivation for research, which offers possibilities for interventions to promote motivation for research by making use of student perceptions of research. Consequently, practical implications to stimulate research engagement in early phases of medical school are provided. Moreover, the results contribute to existing motivational theories like Theory of Planned Behavior and Self-Determination Theory within this specific domain.

Scientific research is of great value to make advancements within the medical field and, ultimately, offer the best possible patient care. In order to practice evidence-based medicine, all physicians should be aware of the newest developments and involve scientific knowledge (e.g. research) in clinical decision making [ 1 – 4 ]. In addition, physicians who actually conduct research (i.e. physician-scientists) are needed as well. Physician-scientists devote a substantial amount of their time to both clinical practice and conducting research, and are thereby key in bridging the gap between science and practice [ 5 – 7 ].

Unfortunately, the medical field is facing a global shortage of physician-scientists. The current physician-scientist workforce is aging and a decrease in interest to pursue a scientific career is visible in the United States, Canada, and Europe. Recent literature stresses the urgent need to counteract this decline in the physician-scientist workforce [ 1 , 8 , 9 ].

Engaging students in research during early phases of medical school could help to acquaint students with research, trigger enthusiasm, and direct more students towards a physician-scientist career [ 1 , 7 , 10 , 11 ].

In order to draw pre-clinical students into research during medical school, knowledge and understanding is needed on how they perceive research and the importance of conducting research for clinical practice. The question arises to what extent these young medical students already comprehend what it is to conduct research and how this relates to clinical practice. Additionally, it is important to know what motivates or demotivates students in their consideration to conduct research [ 12 ].

Studies investigating perceptions of and motivation for research among pre-clinical medical students are scarce. Few studies have focused on perceptions of research and its importance for practice among medical students. For instance, there is evidence that students do not realize the importance of research for clinical practice until the clinical phase of medical training, when they encounter real life problems in patient care [ 13 ]. This is in line with previous findings indicating that undergraduate students have a narrow perspective of research and are not aware of the connection between research and practice [ 14 – 16 ]. Nel and colleagues surveyed medical students at the University of Capetown, and found that 61% of the students had positive attitudes towards research [ 17 ]. However, they did not identify the nature of these attitudes. Some of the prior studies also examined motivation for research and suggested that most medical students are motivated to pursue research, but foresee many difficulties and barriers at the same time [ 15 – 17 ]. In one of our earlier studies, we did find students to be highly motivated for research when entering medical school. These results also indicated that pre-clinical students’ beliefs about the value of research were important to influence research motivation [ 18 ]. In turn, research motivation was related to actual research involvement among undergraduate medical students [ 19 ]. This implies that insights into how beginning medical students perceive research could be of great value in directing more medical students towards a physician-scientist career. However, the few conducted studies in this area did not mainly focus on early stages of medical training.

In sum, there seems to be insufficient knowledge about how pre-clinical medical students beginning their medical studies perceive research and how they could be motivated to conduct research. Furthermore, most of the aforementioned studies had a quantitative approach. Since the aim is to engage medical students in research in early phases of medical school, deeper understanding of pre-clinical students’ perceptions and motivation regarding research is valuable, for which a qualitative methodology seems imperative. This could help to identify how positive perceptions of and motivation for research can be promoted early on in medical training. In turn, these insights could help to determine possible interventions and the implementation of evidence-based strategies to enhance interest in research among medical students, thereby cultivating future generations of physician-scientists.

Therefore, this study uses a qualitative grounded theory approach to gather in-depth knowledge on how educators can create conditions under which pre-clinical medical students develop positive perceptions of and motivation for research during early phases of medical school, by answering the following two sub-questions: 1) how do first-year medical students perceive research? And 2) which factors contribute to motivation or demotivation for conducting research?

This study was conducted among one cohort of first-year medical students at Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC). The Netherlands has eight medical schools, which all developed their educational program in line with the Dutch National Blueprint for Medical Education. The schools offer six years of undergraduate and graduate medical education. In the Netherlands, most students start medical school immediately after graduating from secondary school, at the age of 18–19 years [ 20 ]. Consequently, first-year medical students are relatively young and lack any research-related experience [ 21 ]. In this study, students’ only prior experiences with research were a two-week course at the start of their medical training. In this course, students conducted a small research project and were actively involved in gathering and processing data, formulating their own research question, analyzing data and writing a two-page research report [ 22 ].

Research team

The research team comprised of five researchers from different backgrounds. BO is a PhD-candidate in medical education, with a master’s degree in Pedagogical Sciences. FB is senior researcher in medical education. MWM is full professor in medical education. DD is full professor of innovative learning arrangements. FD is full professor in undergraduate research in medical education and clinical epidemiology. BO, MWM, DD and FB have experience with qualitative research approaches and analysis.

We established our research within an interpretivist paradigm, emphasizing the subjective nature in understanding human experiences and creation of reality. According to this paradigm, reality is socially constructed and truth is not grounded within one single objective reality. Rather, there may be multiple ways by different individuals to interpret a single construct or phenomenon [ 23 ]. Within the interpretivist paradigm, there is an emphasis on valuing the unique views of every individual. Consequently, we used a qualitative grounded theory approach as this eminently suits the aim to create deeper understanding of the unique perceptions of each individual in our study, including purposive sampling and constant comparison. Data was iteratively collected and coded, until saturation and consensus among the first and last author (BO & FB) was reached. We used semi-structured individual interviews to identify and elucidate students’ perceptions of and motivation for research.

Participants

All first-year students were informed about the study before the start of a lecture. Students were given the opportunity to apply for participation in this study by signing a registration list, which in total 22 students did. Thereafter, a purposive sampling method (i.e. selective sampling based on the researchers judgment when choosing participants for the study) was applied, aiming to include different types of students in our sample. In our earlier study, all first-year students were surveyed at the beginning of medical school and reported on their research motivation and self-efficacy [ 18 ]. Data of the 22 students who signed the registration list from this questionnaire was used in the sampling procedure, aiming to include diverse types of first-year students scoring differently on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for research, and research self-efficacy. Furthermore, we aimed to include students who were both interested and not interested in entering an extracurricular research-based Honors program in the second year of education. Lastly, gender and age were included in the selection process.

Between March 2017 and September 2017, BO approached the purposive sampled students by e-mail. Data collection and analysis were performed in an iterative manner, eventually resulting in a total of 13 first-year medical students who were invited and all agreed to participate in our study. This study included 10 female (76.9%) and 3 male (23.1%) students, which is representative for the male/female distribution in the whole cohort (i.e. the total number of first-year students starting medical training in 2016). Students were 18 to 20 years, with a mean age of 19.3 years.

Data collection

BO and FB developed an interview guide ( Appendix 1 ), which was checked on followability by discussing it within the research team. BO conducted all interviews, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim line by line. Additionally, a summary was made of the content of the interview, which was then sent to the participant for member checking (i.e. participant check on accuracy). All participants agreed on the content. When participants’ quotes were used to illustrate results, participants were again approached to ask for their permission. Every participant agreed on the use of their quotes.

Data analysis

Data analysis was performed alongside data collection in an iterative manner. All interviews were independently coded by BO and FB using a grounded approach. BO and FB discussed their initial findings in the process of analysis, to reach consensus, and built a codebook (i.e. overview of all themes; Appendix 2 ). Three types of coding as described by Strauss & Corbin were used: open, axial, and selective [ 24 ].

Fragments or sentences of the transcript were coded with an ‘in vivo approach’ (i.e. open coding), followed by interpretative analysis to create overarching categories (i.e. axial coding). Lastly the overarching categories were checked, subsequently followed by the creation of higher-order themes (i.e. selective coding). After the stage of analysis was completed and a codebook with higher-order themes was created, MWM checked followability of the steps that were made in this process. In addition to the completed analysis, BO, FB and MWM independently coded two interviews with the new codebook to test its reliability. All interpretations were then discussed within the entire research team. Data analysis was supported by Atlas-ti 8.0 software (Atlas.ti, GmbH, Berlin, Germany).

Ethical approval

Students gave verbal consent on the audio-recording before the interview and signed an informed consent form after the interview. In compensation for their time, students received a gift certificate of €7.50 to spend in the lunchroom of the LUMC. This study was approved by the Educational Institutional Review Board of the LUMC (IRB reference number: OEC/OG/20180508/2).

We conducted 13 interviews, of which the length varied between 25 and 42 min. Inductive thematic saturation (i.e. no new themes emerged) and theoretical saturation of the themes (i.e. no additional data to develop a theme was found, as the researcher sees similar instances over and over again) [ 25 ] was reached after 11 interviews, after which we conducted two last interviews to check saturation. Because of the rich data, not all subthemes are discussed in detail. An overview of all themes can be seen in Appendix 2 .

How do first-year medical students perceive research?

Five higher-order themes emerged: research processes, research goals, research characteristics, research topics, and research requirements.

Students mainly focused on several parts of the research process , mentioning creating research questions, choosing a method, gathering data, processing data, creating results, drawing conclusions, and reporting outcomes. On the one hand, some students had the perception that research consisted of single, specific parts, reflecting a relatively narrow definition of research.

[Research is] the whole day in the lab or doing your best to persuade people to participate in your research. – S1

On the other hand, in some cases students did connect multiple phases of conducting research, creating a bigger picture of what the process of research entails.

[Research] exists out of, for a large part, pre-work; thinking about what you want to study, how you are going to do that, methods, participants or something like that. And if you have devised the entire research, then you will carry it out, for instance by interviewing like this I think, it depends on the kind of research you’re performing, if you will do tests or something like this, and then thereafter it exists out of processing all your data, of course, drawing conclusions from it, and writing an article about it. – S12

However, students tended to focus on more than only these concrete aspects of doing research. They also mentioned research goals , reflecting on the importance of research for society and healthcare in general. For instance, the valuable role research plays in creating new knowledge or refining existing knowledge, and thereby the improvement of understanding in general.

Some fundamental studies are done for understanding, a sort of, contribution to the general understanding of how something works. – S1

Furthermore, students had more specific goals of research in mind as well, emphasizing the medical context. In particular, students elaborated on developing and improving medicines or illness treatments, but also on improving the organization within the whole hospital. Moreover, students also discussed the role research could play in improving education, which in turn helps to educate and deliver better physicians.

I think that with research, on the one hand, we can gather more knowledge on the emergence of diseases and the human body, but on the other hand we can treat these diseases better or even find a cure. But I also think that, within medical healthcare, there also exists research into, for instance, collaboration between people and the best way to shape a hospital, or the best way to work within teams. – S7

Perceptions of research were also illustrated in different characteristics students assign to research. Students tended to concentrate on negative aspects, like the hard and intensive character of research. The idea that conducting research is hard is mostly related to the lack of or difficulty in finding results.

I think you need to have perseverance [to conduct research], because nine out of ten times you will get a result you actually did not want to have. – S13

Moreover, research is seen as an intensive and complex activity in which different tasks need to be combined, the researcher has many different appointments and several obligations like following rules and administrative work.

You need to be able to make appointments, very many appointments, and you need to make sure to work on your own research, you must write a text, all that taken together, you need to arrange that in a good way to prevent double appointments and to prevent that, because of all the appointments, you can’t write. So, yeah… it seems like a busy thing to me. – S4

Students also commented on research topics, namely healthcare, prevention and organization.

You have health-promoting, which predominantly focuses on prevention areas of research, but you also have research into different diseases and mechanisms. But I think that you can also study the way an organisation works and how they collaborate within medical contexts. – S3

The last higher-order theme that emerged, is one that is not directly linked to research itself. The first-year medical students also described research requirements , illustrating conditions that researchers must meet in order to actually perform their research. Students emphasized the importance of collaboration, finance, and ethical approval.

A researcher is not only doing the research itself, but also busy with financing, arranging to be able to work with other people. I think that next to the research itself, research entails more, a researcher does more than just the research on its own. – S7

Which factors contribute to motivation for conducting research?

Students reported motivators for research from the perspective of personal benefit. For instance, they would be motivated to do research because it would contribute to their personal development . Students mentioned a lack of academic training and challenge in the curriculum, and the need to delve into certain topics instead of just learning facts and receiving knowledge in the broadest sense. Students saw research as a possibility to delve into a topic and learn academic skills at the same time.

I think it [research] is very interesting and I see this as a part of my academic training, which is missing in general medical training in my opinion. – S3

Subsequently, students also mentioned that they would be motivated to do research to comply with their personal needs like their curiosity , need for challenge , and need for variety .

I just want to have some extra challenge, because medical training on itself is just learning, learning, learning. And if you have something next to that more directly linked to practice and you see where you can end up, that motivates me. – S13

Moreover, students felt the need to contribute to knowledge and patient care . They mentioned that it would be motivating for them to conduct research if their research actually meant something for science or healthcare. Students described the process of creating or revising knowledge as motivating, but they mostly elaborated on what research could mean for patients. They related research to, for instance, helping more patients, and finding cures for diseases. These outcomes of research were highly motivating for students.

Especially when I hear that some things are still unknown, where no solutions are available, for instance multiple sclerosis (MS). My aunt has MS, and to see her like that every day, not being able to walk… and that there is no solution for that. In my opinion, there needs to come a cure for that. – S4

Students also mentioned that different parts of conducting research seemed fun, which in turn motivated them to conduct research. They said they especially liked seeing and creating results. Moreover, content was important and the writing process was very appealing to them. The social aspects of research, like collaboration , were motivating as well.

Especially the collaboration with others appeals to me, I like to collaborate with others. And the results at the end, that you made something beautiful together what turns out to be a big part of your career. – S4

Furthermore, reading or hearing about research related work of others and their enthusiasm is inspiring for students (i.e. inspiring role models ) and contributes to their motivation for research.

I had a chemistry teacher and he investigated a very specific topic, a specific protein. And he was so, well a specialist I suppose, very enriched, that he could transfer that in a beautiful way. And actually, I was kind of, very, impressed with that […]. I can get inspired by that. – S10

Students also described the importance of research bringing them external rewards, such as acknowledgments . Students wanted to be able to show that they actually did research and mentioned publications as a possible reward of, and thereby motivating factor for, research. Furthermore students wanted opportunities to build a network and to distinguish themselves from others, and were motivated for research because it could help them in their future career steps, like securing a competitive residency spot.

I think that it depends on what kind of specialism I want to get in. And what is expected of you with regard to research. I have to be honest, it is not a really romantic reason, but yes… – S1

Which factors contribute to demotivation for conducting research?

Students especially focused on the content of research itself and different demotivating parts of conducting research. For instance, research topic could play a large part in demotivating students to conduct research.

With regard to content, it could demotivate me very much I think. Imagine that this is a topic I am not very curious about, I think when I delve into it, really in detail, that I lose all my curiosity. – S1

Furthermore, in a broader sense, students found the difficulties of doing research demotivating. Students especially mentioned processing of data and statistics as uninteresting. These activities within research could really hold students back in their possible choice to conduct research.

All that gathering of data, SPSS. It has become something I fear […]. I think it is terrifying that I don’t know where to begin. – S12

It would also be demotivating for students when their contribution to both research and society is small, for instance when their research is not used in practice. Furthermore, students acknowledged that disappointing results are plausible, but at the same time they strongly felt like this would demotivate them for conducting research.

Moreover, students described a lack of autonomy as demotivating. Especially when students have no choice in what kind of research they perform and when students have to comply to a variety of rules, they did not want to conduct research.

When research would be imposed, than I really would not, like here is a topic, go do your research. That would be very demotivating. – S8

At the same time, a lack of support could be demotivating as well. Students did not want to have the feeling they are doing research alone. It seems like a balance between autonomy and support suits students best. Subsequently, students mentioned an inadequate atmosphere or collaboration within the research group to be very discouraging as well.

When I would be part of a research group with a very bad atmosphere, or when people are not willing to answer a question or help you, that seems very demotivating to me. And that has nothing to do with the research itself, but really the collaboration […]. So I think, mainly, when having the feeling you are alone, without the possibility to call for help, that seems very difficult to me. – S7

We qualitatively explored first-year students’ perceptions of research. Furthermore, we determined motivating and demotivating factors for conducting research. The pre-clinical students differed greatly in their perceptions of and motivation for research, which resulted in rich data with many different aspects. Within this data, some tensions emerged. On the one hand, students were able to describe important steps within the research process. On the other hand, students did tend to emphasize that certain parts of the research process, such as gathering of data and statistical analyses, were not appealing to them. Moreover, students perceived research as useful for clinical practice and personal development. However, students seemed to have negative perceptions in terms of what conducting research actually entails, and emphasized its difficulties and negative aspects.

In-depth analysis elucidated a variety of higher-order themes related to perceptions of research. In contrast to our results, a previous study of third-year medical students’ perceptions concluded that students had a narrow definition of research in the beginning of their third year [ 14 ]. Our results illustrate that first-year undergraduate students can already have broad perceptions of research. A possible explanation for this could be that an authentic learning situation at the beginning of medical training in which pre-clinical students conduct a small research project contributes to students’ knowledge of what research entails and its possibilities for clinical practice [ 22 ]. This is in line with the study by Imafuku and colleagues, showing that students’ initial narrow definition of research was somewhat broadened after their first research experiences [ 14 ].

Going beyond our research questions, our results suggest a relation between perceptions of and motivation for research (Fig. 1 ). This is, among others, illustrated by students’ elaboration on various research goals, mainly focusing on its direct association with clinical practice and patient care. For instance, students viewed research as a way to make progress, develop medicine, create better physicians, and improve patient experiences. This direct association with practice contributed to students’ assumption that research is useful, emerging as a sub-theme of research characteristics. Additionally, these kind of topics were also identified by students as motivating, resulting in the theme ‘contributing to knowledge or patient care’ ( Appendix 2 ). This implies that the social value of research is also something that could motivate students to subsequently conduct research. Therefore, medical schools may create conditions to raise awareness of the usefulness of research for clinical practice early in the curriculum. This could help pre-clinical students to develop positive perceptions of and motivation for research in early stages of medical education.

Main themes regarding student perceptions of research and its relations with motivating and demotivating aspects of conducting research

Nonetheless, there also seems to be a relation between perceptions and demotivation to conduct research. For instance, students tended to think that the biggest part of conducting research entails processing data and performing statistical analyses. Moreover, processing data and statistics also emerged as two subthemes of demotivating factors. This contributed to their idea that research is performed within a unilateral work environment ( Appendix 2 ).

Previous studies showed that student perceptions of research are open to change [ 14 , 26 ]. By targeting and adjusting unrealistic perceptions, such as the notion that research is merely statistics, motivation for research can be influenced. By acquainting pre-clinical students with the broader nature of conducting research, their perceptions can be altered. For example, students explicitly mentioned that writing is a fun aspect of research that contributed to their motivation. Therefore, educators could explicitly mention that this is part of the research process as well and that writing relies on creating results, for which statistical analysis could be necessary. Furthermore, statistics is unknown for many students and may seem frightening. Students are more inclined to pursue an activity when they feel confident about their capability in that domain (i.e. self-efficacy), and mastery of an activity leads to higher self-efficacy beliefs [ 27 ]. Students in pre-clinical phases of medical training lack experience with statistical analyses. Making statistics less ambiguous could also be a solution to motivate more students for conducting research. By letting students apply statistics directly to authentic research questions, even in their first undergraduate year, they can experience the relevance of statistics for creating results and finding answers to important questions. Through repeated practice with statistics, they can master it and self-efficacy beliefs may be enhanced.

Despite the grounded theory approach, parallels between the outcomes of our study and existing theories were visible. When students mentioned perceptions of research that also emerged as motivating or demotivating factors, they already gave an evaluation, connecting a favorable or unfavorable qualification to their perception. This is, for example, illustrated in perceptions of research as primarily being statistics, which students saw as a negative aspect. This seems to be in line with and substantiated by the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). TPB states that attitudes are a prerequisite for motivation, which in turn is related to certain behaviors. According to TPB, attitudes are perceptions of a certain behavior including the evaluation of the behavior (i.e. favorable versus unfavorable) [ 28 ]. This lends support to the idea that perceptions linked to motivation within our data are equal to ‘attitudes’ mentioned as an antecedent for motivation in TPB. Consequently, this also provides evidence for the idea that if perceptions of research are changed, motivation can be influenced as well. In turn, this offers opportunities to develop interventions and implement evidence-based strategies aiming to target student perceptions to motivate more students for research in early stages of medical school.

Our findings regarding autonomy, support, and development that are a necessity for student motivation are in accordance with and substantiated by the Self-Determination Theory (SDT). SDT states that motivation is influenced by three basic psychological needs: autonomy, relatedness, and competence [ 29 ]. These basic psychological needs are in line with the themes that emerged from our data. However, our data imply that influencing motivation entails more than only autonomy, relatedness, and competence (Fig.  2 ). A sense of relevance, e.g. being able to contribute to patient care, seems to have a major influence on motivation as well. Moreover, need for challenge and curiosity were also named as motivational factors. In addition, inspiring role models could be prerequisites for motivation as students emphasized they were inspired and became motivated by the work of others. Not only by reading scientific articles, but also by hearing about research related work from enthusiastic researchers. This provides insights in practical implications, as many educators conduct research as well and can communicate their own work in an enthusiastic way towards students during lectures or seminars. Providing students with opportunities to read articles and get acquainted with work of others seems to be a good possibility to contribute to their motivation as well.

Prerequisites of motivation according to TPB and SDT, added by prerequisites as identified in our study

When looking at our data, neither TPB nor SDT seem to comprehend all prerequisites for motivation. Hence, our study could contribute to the expansion of existing motivational theories like TPB and SDT, as illustrated in Fig. ​ Fig.2 2 .

Practical implications

In order to answer the fundamental question how conditions can be created under which students develop positive perceptions of and motivation for research in early stages of medical school, the emerged themes within the motivating and demotivating factors play a crucial role. Next to embedding research related courses in the curriculum and using educators as inspiring role models, our study provides other practical implications as well. Based on our results, it seems beneficial to create conditions in which students experience autonomy and the ability to work independently. In order to motivate students to conduct research, this seems to be key. Therefore, providing students with research experiences should be designed in such a way that students feel they are in control of their own research projects. Practically, this could be done by giving students multiple options regarding, for instance, the topic of their research. Furthermore, students could be stimulated to take a leading role in the implementation of their research. This not only contributes to feelings of autonomy, but is also related to the effective educational approach of ‘learning by doing’ as has been advocated by many throughout the years [ 30 – 35 ]. This is also reflected in our results, as our pre-clinical students mentioned that they would be motivated for research if they get the opportunity to actually perform research themselves. This stresses the need for more active learning approaches, providing students with research experiences in authentic learning situations in order to motivate more students for research.

Students were also in need of collaboration and wanted the possibility to rely on more experienced researchers. An inadequate atmosphere and lack of support are demotivating factors for students. This indicates the need for a balance between autonomy and support. In practice, this could mean that conditions need to be created in which students are able to become leaders of their research project, while a more experienced researcher closely monitors their development and provides support when needed. Furthermore, students indicated they were motivated when there were possibilities to develop competencies and receive acknowledgment or rewards. It would be beneficial to offer students the chance to work on their learning goals and mastery of research activities. Moreover, stimulating them to present their work in the form of publications or presentations at scientific meetings could enhance motivation for research and confidence [ 36 ]. In this way, students feel acknowledged for their work and are able to build a network. This should be embedded within education and explicitly communicated to students.

Limitations and strengths

This study was conducted in one medical school, which may have implications for generalizability to other contexts. However, to the best of our knowledge, our study is the first to address perceptions of and motivation for research among medical students in early phases of medical training. We used qualitative methodology with an open and grounded approach, which is why we believe we elucidated actual student perceptions without steering towards certain outcomes. Furthermore, we applied thorough purposive sampling by using data of the same cohort of students in an earlier administered questionnaire in order to select a representative and diverse sample. We believe that these measures contributed to the great amount and variety of data in our study. Our findings provide new insights in the way beginning medical students perceive research, as well as factors promoting their motivation to conduct research. The findings contribute to both theory and practice, and may provide guidance for future quantitative research in which the generated hypotheses can be tested. Moreover, our results are in line with multiple existing theories. Therefore, we expect that our results may be applicable to other situations (e.g. educational programs within other countries, (post)graduate medical students) and may apprise education and studies in other contexts.

Future research

It would be beneficial to study perceptions of and motivation for research in different educational programs and contexts in order to provide even more insights into how students’ positive perceptions and motivation for research could be promoted. Also, it would be an interesting future research avenue to conduct this study among medical students in other countries. Furthermore, it would be interesting to investigate the development of medical students’ perceptions of and motivation for research during medical training, in which they gradually engage in clinical practice. Our data suggested a relation between perceptions of and motivation for research, future research could be undertaken to investigate this hypothesis.

Our study demonstrated that first-year students have broad perceptions and definitions of research. Additionally, a broad range of motivating and demotivating factors to conduct research were identified. Our results contribute to the idea that perceptions of research are related to motivation for research, which offers possibilities for interventions and promoting motivation for research through student perceptions. Furthermore, we identified relevance, curiosity, need for challenge, and inspiring role models as prerequisites for motivation in addition to perceptions as stated by TPB and autonomy, relatedness, and competence as stated by SDT. Consequently our study may contribute to expanding existing motivational theories like TPB and SDT. Moreover, conditions were identified under which pre-clinical students develop positive perceptions of and motivation for research during early phases of medical school in order to engage more students in research and make the first step to cultivate future physician-scientists.

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank Désirée Longayroux for her advice and John O’Sullivan for his critical appraisal of the manuscript. Furthermore, we wish to thank the student assistants for transcribing the interviews.

Abbreviations

Interview Guide

Interview guide exists out of 3 topics: background, perceptions of research, and motivation for research. These three subjects will be discussed within the interview. The topics are comprised of numbered questions, which will be asked to start the interview and discussion with the individual students. The sub-questions will only be used when a student does not seem to understand the questions or does not know what to answer (which almost never occurred during the actual interviews).

• What is your educational background?
• Why did you chose Medicine?
• Do you have previous experiences with research? If yes, could you elaborate?

Sub-question:

• What are the activities of a researcher
• What are the abilities you should have to perform research
• What can you do with research?
• For whom is research important?
• Should physicians use research in clinical practice?
• Should physicians conduct research?

What motivates you to conduct research?

What demotivates you to conduct research?

If unknown:

Ask what could motivate or demotivate to conduct research hypothetically

• Elaborating on the counterpart of the first question

Overview of all emerged themes and sub-themes

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed to the design of the study. BO conducted the individual interviews. BO, MWM, and FB were involved in the process of independently coding of the interviews. Additionally, DD and FWD helped to interpret the data. BO wrote the manuscript. All authors contributed to the revision of the manuscript and approved the final version for publication.

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study was approved by the Educational Institutional Review Board of the LUMC (IRB reference number: OEC/OG/20180508/2). Students gave verbal consent on the audio-recording before the interview and signed an informed consent form after the interview.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The second author, prof.dr. Marjo Wijnen-Meijer, is an associate editor for this journal.

Publisher’s Note

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

Writing Motivation in School: a Systematic Review of Empirical Research in the Early Twenty-First Century

• Review Article
• Published: 19 June 2020
• Volume 33 , pages 213–247, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Ana Camacho   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5328-966X 1 ,
• Rui A. Alves   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1657-8945 1 &
• Pietro Boscolo 2  

6834 Accesses

68 Citations

7 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Motivation is a catalyst of writing performance in school. In this article, we report a systematic review of empirical studies on writing motivation conducted in school settings, published between 2000 and 2018 in peer-reviewed journals. We aimed to (1) examine how motivational constructs have been defined in writing research; (2) analyze group differences in writing motivation; (3) unveil effects of motivation on writing performance; (4) gather evidence on teaching practices supporting writing motivation; and (5) examine the impact of digital tools on writing motivation. Through database and hand searches, we located 82 articles that met eligibility criteria. Articles were written in English, focused on students in grades 1–12, and included at least one quantitative or qualitative measure of writing motivation. Across the 82 studies, 24 motivation-related constructs were identified. In 46% of the cases, these constructs were unclearly defined or not defined. Studies showed that overall girls were more motivated to write than boys. Most studies indicated moderate positive associations between motivation and writing performance measures. Authors also examined how students’ writing motivation was influenced by teaching practices, such as handwriting instruction, self-regulated strategy development instruction, and collaborative writing. Digital tools were found to have a positive effect on motivation. Based on this review, we suggest that to move the field forward, researchers need to accurately define motivational constructs; give further attention to understudied motivational constructs; examine both individual and contextual factors; conduct longitudinal studies; identify evidence-based practices that could inform professional development programs for teachers; and test long-term effects of digital tools.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

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

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Assessing Writing Motivation: a Systematic Review of K-5 Students' Self-Reports

Writing motivation and performance in Chinese children

Student, teacher and class-level correlates of flemish late elementary school children’s writing performance.

Items were formulated in the entity version and therefore lower scores indicated more incremental beliefs.

*References with an asterisk mark were included in this review.

*Abbott, J. A. (2000). ‘Blinking out’ and ‘having the touch’: Two fifth-grade boys talk about flow experiences in writing. Written Communication, 17 (1), 53–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088300017001003 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Ainley, M. (2019). Curiosity and interest: Emergence and divergence. Educational Psychology Review, Advance online publication, 31 (4), 789–806. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09495-z .

Alexander, P. (2018). Past as prologue: Educational psychology’s legacy and progeny. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110 , 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000200 .

*Allaire, S., Thériault, P., Gagnon, V., & Lalancette, E. (2013). Elementary students’ affective variables in a networked learning environment supported by a blog: A case study. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 39 (3). https://doi.org/10.21432/t2w88v .

Allen, L. K., Jacovina, M. E., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). Computer-based writing instruction. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd ed., pp. 316–329). New York: The Guilford Press.

Google Scholar  

Alves, R. A. (2019). The early steps in becoming a writer: Enabling participation in a literate world. In J. S. Horst & J. V. K. Torkildsen (Eds.), International handbook of language acquisition (pp. 567–590). London: Routledge.

Alves, R. A., & Limpo, T. (2015). Fostering the capabilities that build writing achievement. In C. M. Connor & P. McCardle (Eds.), Advances in reading intervention: Research to practice to research . Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co..

American Educational Research Association, A. P. A., & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing . Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

*Arens, A. K., & Jansen, M. (2016). Self-concepts in reading, writing, listening, and speaking: A multidimensional and hierarchical structure and its generalizability across native and foreign languages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108 (5), 646–664. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000081 .

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control . New York: Freeman.

*Bayat, S. (2016). The effectiveness of the creative writing instruction program based on speaking activities (CWIPSA). International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 8 (4), 617–628.

*Bayraktar, A. (2013). Nature of interactions during teacher-student writing conferences, revisiting the potential effects of self-efficacy beliefs. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research (50), 63-85.

*Beck, N., & Fetherston, T. (2003). The effects of incorporating a word processor into a year three writing program. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 2003 (1), 139–161.

Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Boscolo, P. (2009). Engaging and motivating children to write. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, J. Riley, & M. Nystrand (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of writing development (pp. 300–312). London: Sage.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Boscolo, P., & Gelati, C. (2019). Best practices in promoting motivation for writing. In S. Graham, C. MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (3rd ed.). New York-London: Guilford.

Boscolo, P., & Hidi, S. (2007). The multiple meanings of motivation to write. In S. Hidi & P. Boscolo (Eds.), Writing and motivation (pp. 1–14). Oxford: Elsevier.

*Boscolo, P., Ariasi, N., Del Favero, L., & Ballarin, C. (2011). Interest in an expository text: How does it flow from reading to writing? Learning and Instruction, 21 (3), 467–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.07.009 .

*Boscolo, P., Gelati, C., & Galvan, N. (2012). Teaching elementary school students to play with meanings and genre. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28(1), 29–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.632730 .

*Bouchamma, Y., & Lapointe, C. (2008). Success in writing and attributions of 16-year-old French-speaking students in minority and majority environments. 54 , 194–209.

*Braaksma, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., & van der Bergh, H. (2018). Effects of hypertext writing and observational learning on content knowledge acquisition, selfefficacy, and text quality: Two experimental studies exploring aptitude treatment interactions. Journal of Writing Research, 9 (3), 259–300. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2018.09.03.02 .

*Bradford, K. L., Newland, A. C., Rule, A. C., & Montgomery, S. E. (2016). Rubrics as a tool in writing instruction: Effects on the opinion essays of first and second graders. Early Childhood Education Journal. 44 (5), 463–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-015-0727-0 .

Bruning, R., & Horn, C. (2000). Developing motivation to write. Educational Psychologist, 35 (1), 25–37. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3501_4 .

Bruning, R., & Kauffman, D. F. (2016). Self-efficacy beliefs and motivation in writing development. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 160–173). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

*Bruning, R., Dempsey, M., Kauffman, D. F., McKim, C., & Zumbrunn, S. (2013). Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105 (1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029692 .

*Brunstein, J. C., & Glaser, C. (2011). Testing a path-analytic mediation model of how self-regulated writing strategies improve fourth graders’ composition skills: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103 (4), 922–938. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024622 .

*Bui, Y. N., Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (2006). The effects of a strategic writing program for students with and without learning disabilities in inclusive fifth-grade classes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21 (4), 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2006.00221.x .

*Camacho, A., & Alves, R. A. (2017). Fostering parental involvement in writing: Development and testing of the program Cultivating Writing. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 30 (2), 253–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9672-6 .

*Chai, H. H. (2010). Adolescent girl writers: “I can be good at it, if I like it”. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 23 (1), 29–40.

*Chan, J. C. Y., & Lam, S.-f (2008). Effects of competition on students’ self-efficacy in vicarious learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78 (1), 95–108. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709907x185509 .

*Chohan, S. K. (2011). Any letter for me? Relationships between an elementary school letter writing program and student attitudes, literacy achievement, and friendship culture. Early Childhood Education Journal, 39 (1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-010-0438-5 .

*Cocuk, H. E., Yanpar Yelken, T., & Ozer, O. (2016). The relationship between writing anxiety and writing disposition among secondary school students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 63 , 335-352. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.63.19

*Collie, R. J., Martin, A. J., & Curwood, J. S. (2016). Multidimensional motivation and engagement for writing: Construct validation with a sample of boys. Educational Psychology, 36 (4), 771–791. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1093607 .

Conradi, K., Jang, B., & McKenna, M. (2014). Motivation terminology in reading research: A conceptual review. Educational Psychology Review, 26 (1), 127–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9245-z .

Cooper, H. (2010). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

*Cordeiro, C., Castro, S. L., & Limpo, T. (2018). Examining potential sources of gender differences in writing: The role of handwriting fluency and self-efficacy beliefs. Written Communication , https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088318788843 .

Costa, A., & Faria, L. (2018). Implicit theories of intelligence and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 9 (829). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00829 .

Daly, J. A., & Wilson, D. A. (1983). Writing apprehension, self-esteem, and personality. Research in the Teaching of English, 17 , 327–341.

De Smedt, F. (2019). Cognitive and motivational challenges in writing: The impact of explicit instruction and peer-assisted writing in upper-elementary grades . Ghent: University of Ghent.

*De Smedt, F., Van Keer, H., & Merchie, E. (2016). Student, teacher and class-level correlates of Flemish late elementary school children’s writing performance. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 29 (5), 833–868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9590-z .

*De Smedt, F., Graham, S., & Van Keer, H. (2018a). The bright and dark side of writing motivation: Effects of explicit instruction and peer assistance. The Journal of Educational Research , 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2018.1461598 .

*De Smedt, F., Merchie, E., Barendse, M., Rosseel, Y., De Naeghel, J., & Van Keer, H. (2018b). Cognitive and motivational challenges in writing: Studying the relation with writing performance across students’ gender and achievement level. Reading Research Quarterly, 53 (2), 249–272. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.193 .

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11 , 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1104_01 .

*deFur, S. H., & Runnells, M. M. (2014). Validation of the adolescent literacy and academic behavior self-efficacy survey. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 40 (3), 255–266.

Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development . Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

Eccles, J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives . San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.

*Edwards, G., & Jones, J. (2018). Boys as writers: Perspectives on the learning and teaching of writing in three primary schools. Literacy, 52 (1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12122 .

*Ehm, J.-H., Lindberg, S., & Hasselhorn, M. (2014). Reading, writing, and math self-concept in elementary school children: Influence of dimensional comparison processes. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 29 (2), 277–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-013-0198-x .

Ekholm, E., Zumbrunn, S., & DeBusk-Lane, M. (2018). Clarifying an elusive construct: A systematic review of writing attitudes. Educational Psychology Review, 30 (3), 827–856. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9423-5 .

Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54 (5–12).

Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70 , 461–475. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.70.3.461 .

*Erdogan, T., & Erdogan, Ö. (2013). A metaphor analysis of the fifth grade students’ perceptions about writing. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22 (4), 347–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-012-0014-4 .

*Gambrell, L. B., Hughes, E. M., Calvert, L., Malloy, J. A., & Igo, B. (2011). Authentic reading, writing, and discussion: An exploratory study of a pen pal project. The Elementary School Journal, 112 (2), 234–258. https://doi.org/10.1086/661523 .

*Goldenberg, L., Meade, T., Midouhas, E., & Cooperman, N. (2011). Impact of a technology-infused middle school writing program on sixth-grade students’ writing ability and engagement. Middle Grades Research Journal, 6 (2), 75–96.

Graham, S. (2006). Writing. In P. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 457–478). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erbaum.

Graham, S. (2018). A revised writer(s)-within-community model of writing. Educational Psychologist, 53 (4), 258–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1481406 .

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2016). A path to better writing: Evidence-based practices in the classroom. The Reading Teacher, 69 (4), 359–365. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1432 .

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2019). Evidence-based practices in writing. In S. Graham, C. MacArthur, & M. Hebert (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (pp. 3–28). New York: The Guilford Press.

Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99 (3), 445–476. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445 .

*Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Fink, B. (2000). Is handwriting causally related to learning to write? Treatment of handwriting problems in beginning writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92 (4), 620–633. https://doi.org/10.1057//0022-0663.92.4.620 .

*Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Mason, L. H. (2005). Improving the writing performance, knowledge, and self-efficacy of struggling young writers: The effects of self-regulated strategy development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30 , 207–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.08.001 .

*Graham, S., Berninger, V., & Fan, W. (2007). The structural relationship between writing attitude and writing achievement in first and third grade students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32 (3), 516–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.01.002 .

*Graham, S., Berninger, V., & Abbott, R. (2012a). Are attitudes toward writing and reading separable constructs? A study with primary grade children. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28 (1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.632732 .

Graham, S., McKeown, D., Kiuhara, S., & Harris, K. R. (2012b). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104 (4), 879–896. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029185 .

Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Santangelo, T. (2015). Research-based writing practices and the common core: Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Elementary School Journal, 115 (4). https://doi.org/10.1086/681964 .

*Graham, S., Harris, K. R., Kiuhara, S. A., & Fishman, E. J. (2017). The relationship among strategic writing behavior, writing motivation, and writing performance with young, developing writers. Elementary School Journal, 118( 1), 82–104. https://doi.org/10.1086/693009 .

*Graham, S., Daley, S. G., Aitken, A. A., Harris, K. R., & Robinson, K. H. (2018). Do writing motivational beliefs predict middle school students’ writing performance? Journal of Research in Reading, 41 (4), 642–656. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12245 .

*Guay, F., Chanal, J., Ratelle, C. F., Marsh, H. W., Larose, S., & Boivin, M. (2010). Intrinsic, identified, and controlled types of motivation for school subjects in young elementary school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80 (4), 711–735. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709910x499084 .

*Gunderson, E. A., Hamdan, N., Sorhagen, N. S., & D'Esterre, A. P. (2017). Who needs innate ability to succeed in math and literacy? Academic-domain-specific theories of intelligence about peers versus adults. Developmental Psychology, 53 (6), 1188–1205. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000282 .

*Hall, A. H., & Axelrod, Y. (2014). “I am kind of a good writer and kind of not”: Examining students’ writing attitudes. Journal of Research in Education, 24 (2), 34–50.

*Hamilton, E. W., Nolen, S. B., & Abbott, R. D. (2013). Developing measures of motivational orientation to read and write: A longitudinal study. Learning and Individual Differences, 28 , 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.04.007 .

Harris, K. R. (2018). Educational psychology: A future retrospective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110 (2), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000267 .

*Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Mason, L. (2006). Improving the writing, knowledge, and motivation of struggling young writers: Effects of self-regulated strategy development with and without peer support. American Educational Research Journal Summer, 43 (2), 295–340. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312043002295 .

Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 1–27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3–30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41 (2), 111–127.

Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2019). Interest development and its relation to curiosity: Needed neuroscientific research. Educational Psychology Review, Advance online publication, 31 (4), 833–852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09491-3 .

*Hidi, S., Berndorff, D., & Ainley, M. (2002). Children’s argument writing, interest and self-efficacy: An intervention study. Learning and Instruction, 12 (4), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(01)00009-3 .

*Hier, B. O., & Mahony, K. E. (2018). The contribution of mastery experiences, performance feedback, and task effort to elementary-aged students’ self-efficacy in writing. School Psychology Quarterly, 33 (3), 408–418. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000226 .

Igo, L. B. (2008). An interview with Roger Bruning. Educational Psychology Review, 20 (2), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9070-y .

*Kanala, S., Nousiainen, T., & Kankaanranta, M. (2013). Using a mobile application to support children’s writing motivation. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 10 (1), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/17415651311326419 .

*Kaplan, A., Lichtinger, E., & Gorodetsky, M. (2009). Achievement goal orientations and self-regulation in writing: An integrative perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101 (1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013200 .

Karchmer-Klein, R. (2019). Writing with digital tools. In S. Graham, C. A. MarArthur, & M. Hebert (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (3rd ed., pp. 185–208). New York: The Guilford Press.

*Kear, D. J., Coffman, G. A., McKenna, M. C., & Ambrosio, A. L. (2000). Measuring attitude toward writing: A new tool for teachers. 54 , 10-23. https://doi.org/10.1598/rt.43.8.3 .

Kellogg, R. T. (1994). The psychology of writing . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

King, D. A. (2004). The scientific impact of nations. Nature, 430 (6997), 311–316. https://doi.org/10.1038/430311a .

Klassen, R. (2002). Writing in early adolescence: A review of the role of self-efficacy beliefs. Educational Psychology Review, 14 (2), 173–203. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014626805572 .

*Korat, O., & Schiff, R. (2005). Do children who read more books know ‘what is good writing’ better than children who read less? A comparison between grade levels and SES groups. Journal of Literacy Research, 37 (3), 289–324. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15548430jlr3703_2 .

Kriegbaum, K., Becker, N., & Spinath, B. (2018). The relative importance of intelligence and motivation as predictors of school achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 25 , 120–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.10.001 .

*Lam, S.-F., & Law, Y.-K. (2007). The roles of instructional practices and motivation in writing performance. Journal of Experimental Education, 75 (2), 145–164. https://doi.org/10.3200/jexe.75.2.145-164 .

*Lan, Y.-F., Hung, C.-L., & Hsu, H.-J. (2011). Effects of guided writing strategies on students’ writing attitudes based on media richness theory. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10 (4), 148–164.

Latif, M. M. M. A. (2019). Unresolved issues in defining and assessing writing motivational constructs: A review of conceptualization and measurement perspectives. Assessing Writing, Advance online publication . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100417 .

Lazowski, R. A., & Hulleman, C. S. (2015). Motivation interventions in education: A meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 86 (2), 602–640. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315617832 .

*Lee, J. (2013). Can writing attitudes and learning behavior overcome gender difference in writing? Evidence from NAEP. Written Communication, 30 (2), 164–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088313480313 .

*Lee, B. K., & Enciso, P. (2017). The big glamorous monster (or Lady Gaga’s adventures at sea): Improving student writing through dramatic approaches in schools. Journal of Literacy Research, 49 (2), 157–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296x17699856 .

*Leroy, C. (2000). “Why we do this is important”: An inner-city girl’s attitudes toward reading and writing in the classroom. Reading Horizons, 41 (2), 69–92.

*Li, X., Chu, S. K. W., Ki, W. W., & Woo, M. (2012). Using a wiki-based collaborative process writing pedagogy to facilitate collaborative writing among Chinese primary school students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28 (1), 159-181. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.889 .

*Li, X., Chu, S. K. W., & Ki, W. W. (2014). The effects of a wiki-based collaborative process writing pedagogy on writing ability and attitudes among upper primary school students in Mainland China. Computers & Education, 77 , 151–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.019 .

*Liao, C. C. Y., Chang, W.-C., & Chan, T.-W. (2018). The effects of participation, performance, and interest in a game-based writing environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34 (3), 211–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12233 .

*Limpo, T., & Alves, R. A. (2013). Modeling writing development: Contribution of transcription and self-regulation to Portuguese students’ text generation quality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105 (2), 401–413. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031391 .

*Limpo, T., & Alves, R. A. (2014). Implicit theories of writing and their impact on students’ response to a SRSD intervention. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84 (4), 571–590. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12042 .

*Limpo, T., & Alves, R. A. (2017). Relating beliefs in writing skill malleability to writing performance: The mediating role of achievement goals and self-efficacy. Journal of Writing Research, 9 (2), 97-125. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2017.09.02.01 .

*Mason, L. H., Meadan, H., Hedin, L. R., & Cramer, A. M. (2012). Avoiding the struggle: Instruction that supports students’ motivation in reading and writing about content material. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28 (1), 70–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.632734 .

*Merisuo-Storm, T. (2006). Girls and boys like to read and write different texts. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50 (2), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830600576039 .

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6 (7), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 .

Murphy, P. K., & Alexander, P. A. (2000). A motivated exploration of motivation terminology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 (1), 3–53. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1019 .

*Nair, S. S., Tay, L. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2013). Students’ motivation and teachers’ teaching practices towards the use of blogs for writing of online journals. Educational Media International, 50 (2), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2013.795351 .

National Center for Education Statistics, NCES. (2012). The nation’s report card: Writing 2011 . Washington, D.C.: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

*Nicolaidou, I. (2012). Can process portfolios affect students’ writing self-efficacy? International Journal of Educational Research, 56 , 10–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.08.002 .

*Nolen, S. B. (2007). Young children’s motivation to read and write: Development in social contexts. Cognition and Instruction, 25 (2), 219–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000701301174 .

Nolen, A. L. (2009). The content of educational psychology: An analysis of top ranked journals from 2003 through 2007. Educational Psychology Review, 21 (3), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9110-2 .

*Olinghouse, N. G., & Graham, S. (2009). The relationship between the discourse knowledge and the writing performance of elementary-grade students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101 (1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013462 .

Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z., & Elmagarmid, A. (2016). Rayyan—A web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 5 (1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 .

Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19 (2), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560308222 .

*Pajares, F. (2007). Empirical properties of a scale to assess writing self-efficacy in school contexts. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 39 (4). https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2007.11909801 .

*Pajares, F., & Cheong, Y. F. (2003). Achievement goal orientations in writing: A developmental perspective. International Journal of Educational Research, 39 (4), 437–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2004.06.008 .

*Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (2001). Gender differences in writing motivation and achievement of middle school students: A function of gender orientation? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26 (3), 366–381. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2000.1069 .

*Pajares, F., Britner, S. L., & Valiante, G. (2000). Relation between achievement goals and self-beliefs of middle school students in writing and science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 (4), 406–422. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1027 .

*Pajares, F., Hartley, J., & Valiante, G. (2001). Response format in writing self-efficacy assessment: Greater discrimination increases prediction. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33 (4), 214–221.

*Pajares, F., Johnson, M. J., & Usher, E. L. (2007). Sources of writing self-efficacy beliefs of elementary, middle, and high school students. Research in the Teaching of English, 42 (1), 104–120.

*Perry, N. E., Nordby, C. J., & VandeKamp, K. O. (2003). Promoting self-regulated reading and writing at home and school. The Elementary School Journal, 103 (4), 317–338. https://doi.org/10.1086/499729 .

Peterson, E. G., & Cohen, J. (2019). A case for domain-specific curiosity in mathematics. Educational Psychology Review, Advance online publication, 31 (4), 807–832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09501-4 .

Pintrich, P. R. (1994). Continuities and discontinuities: Future directions for research in educational psychology. Educational Psychologist, 29 , 137–148.

Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. D. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.

*Potter, E. F., McCormick, C. B., & Busching, B. A. (2001). Academic and life goals: Insights from adolescent writers. The High School Journal, 85 (1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.2001.0018 .

Renninger, K. A., Hidi, S., & Krapp, A. (1992). The role of interest in learning and development . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

*Rosário, P., Högemann, J., Núñez, J. C., Vallejo, G., Cunha, J., Oliveira, V., Fuentes S. Rodrigues, C. (2017). Writing week-journals to improve the writing quality of fourth-graders’ compositions. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 30 (5), 1009–1032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9710-4 .

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 (1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 .

Saddler, B. (2012). Motivating writers: Theory and interventions. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28 (1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.632727 .

*Sessions, L., Kang, M. O., & Womack, S. (2016). The neglected “R”: Improving writing instruction through iPad apps. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 60 (3), 218–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0041-8 .

*Smith, E. V., Jr., Wakely, M. B., De Kruif, R. E. L., & Swartz, C. W. (2003). Optimizing rating scales for self-efficacy (and other) research. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63 (3), 369–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164403063003002 .

Talsma, K., Schüza, B., Schwarzerc, R., & Norrisa, K. (2018). I believe, therefore I achieve (and vice versa): A meta-analytic cross-lagged panel analysis of self-efficacy and academic performance. Learning and Individual Differences , (61), 136–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.11.015 .

Tollefson, J. (2018). China declared world’s largest producer of scientific articles. Nature, 553 (7689), 390–390. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-00927-4 .

Troia, G. A., Shankland, R. K., & Wolbers, K. A. (2012). Motivation research in writing: Theoretical and empirical considerations. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28 (1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.632729 .

*Troia, G. A., Harbaugh, A. G., Shankland, R. K., Wolbers, K. A., & Lawrence, A. M. (2013). Relationships between writing motivation, writing activity, and writing performance: Effects of grade, sex, and ability. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26 (1), 17–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9379-2 .

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO. (2011). UNESCO and education: Everyone has the right to education . Paris: UNESCO.

Valentine, J. C., DuBois, D. L., & Cooper, H. (2004). The relation between self-beliefs and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist, 39 (2), 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_3 .

*Villalón, R., Mateos, M., & Cuevas, I. (2015). High school boys’ and girls’ writing conceptions and writing self-efficacy beliefs: What is their role in writing performance? Educational Psychology, 35 (6), 653-674.

Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement, motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92 (4), 548–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4948-1 .

Wentzel, K., & Miele, D. (2016). Overview. In K. Wentzel & D. Miele (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 1–8). New York: Routledge.

Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6 (1), 49–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02209024 .

*Wijekumar, K., Graham, S., Harris, K. R., Lei, P.-W., Barkel, A., Aitken, A., Ray A. Houston, J. (2018). The roles of writing knowledge, motivation, strategic behaviors, and skills in predicting elementary students’ persuasive writing from source material. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal , 32 6, 1431, 1457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9836-7

*Wilson, J., & Czik, A. (2016). Automated essay evaluation software in English Language Arts classrooms: Effects on teacher feedback, student motivation, and writing quality. Computers & Education, 100 , 94–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.004 .

*Yarrow, F., & Topping, K. J. (2001). Collaborative writing: The effects of metacognitive prompting and structured peer interaction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71 (2), 261–282. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709901158514 .

*Yilmaz Soylu, M., Zeleny, M. G., Zhao, R., Bruning, R. H., Dempsey, M. S., & Kauffman, D. F. (2017). Secondary students' writing achievement goals: Assessing the mediating effects of mastery and performance goals on writing self-efficacy, affect, and writing achievement. Frontiers in Psychology, 8 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01406 .

*Zumbrunn, S., Marrs, S., & Mewborn, C. (2016). Toward a better understanding of student perceptions of writing feedback: A mixed methods study. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 29 (2), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9599-3 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Steve Graham and Hilde Van Keer for invaluable comments on earlier versions of this article. The authors thank also Mariana Silva for contributing to the study quality assessment.

This work was supported by a grant attributed to the first author from the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (grant SFRH/BD/116281/2016).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto, Rua Alfredo Allen, 4200-135, Porto, Portugal

Ana Camacho & Rui A. Alves

Department of Developmental Psychology and Socialization, University of Padova, Padova, Italy

Pietro Boscolo

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana Camacho .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Electronic Supplementary Material

(PDF 804 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Camacho, A., Alves, R.A. & Boscolo, P. Writing Motivation in School: a Systematic Review of Empirical Research in the Early Twenty-First Century. Educ Psychol Rev 33 , 213–247 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09530-4

Download citation

Published : 19 June 2020

Issue Date : March 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09530-4

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

• Systematic review
• Teaching practices
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research