Show that you understand the current state of research on your topic.
The length of a research proposal can vary quite a bit. A bachelor’s or master’s thesis proposal can be just a few pages, while proposals for PhD dissertations or research funding are usually much longer and more detailed. Your supervisor can help you determine the best length for your work.
One trick to get started is to think of your proposal’s structure as a shorter version of your thesis or dissertation , only without the results , conclusion and discussion sections.
Download our research proposal template
Discover proofreading & editing
Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We’ve included a few for you below.
Like your dissertation or thesis, the proposal will usually have a title page that includes:
The first part of your proposal is the initial pitch for your project. Make sure it succinctly explains what you want to do and why.
Your introduction should:
To guide your introduction , include information about:
As you get started, it’s important to demonstrate that you’re familiar with the most important research on your topic. A strong literature review shows your reader that your project has a solid foundation in existing knowledge or theory. It also shows that you’re not simply repeating what other people have already done or said, but rather using existing research as a jumping-off point for your own.
In this section, share exactly how your project will contribute to ongoing conversations in the field by:
Following the literature review, restate your main objectives . This brings the focus back to your own project. Next, your research design or methodology section will describe your overall approach, and the practical steps you will take to answer your research questions.
? or ? , , or research design? | |
, )? ? | |
, , , )? | |
? |
To finish your proposal on a strong note, explore the potential implications of your research for your field. Emphasize again what you aim to contribute and why it matters.
For example, your results might have implications for:
Last but not least, your research proposal must include correct citations for every source you have used, compiled in a reference list . To create citations quickly and easily, you can use our free APA citation generator .
Some institutions or funders require a detailed timeline of the project, asking you to forecast what you will do at each stage and how long it may take. While not always required, be sure to check the requirements of your project.
Here’s an example schedule to help you get started. You can also download a template at the button below.
Download our research schedule template
Research phase | Objectives | Deadline |
---|---|---|
1. Background research and literature review | 20th January | |
2. Research design planning | and data analysis methods | 13th February |
3. Data collection and preparation | with selected participants and code interviews | 24th March |
4. Data analysis | of interview transcripts | 22nd April |
5. Writing | 17th June | |
6. Revision | final work | 28th July |
If you are applying for research funding, chances are you will have to include a detailed budget. This shows your estimates of how much each part of your project will cost.
Make sure to check what type of costs the funding body will agree to cover. For each item, include:
To determine your budget, think about:
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
Statistics
Research bias
Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement .
Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.
I will compare …
A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.
Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.
A PhD, which is short for philosophiae doctor (doctor of philosophy in Latin), is the highest university degree that can be obtained. In a PhD, students spend 3–5 years writing a dissertation , which aims to make a significant, original contribution to current knowledge.
A PhD is intended to prepare students for a career as a researcher, whether that be in academia, the public sector, or the private sector.
A master’s is a 1- or 2-year graduate degree that can prepare you for a variety of careers.
All master’s involve graduate-level coursework. Some are research-intensive and intend to prepare students for further study in a PhD; these usually require their students to write a master’s thesis . Others focus on professional training for a specific career.
Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.
Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.
The best way to remember the difference between a research plan and a research proposal is that they have fundamentally different audiences. A research plan helps you, the researcher, organize your thoughts. On the other hand, a dissertation proposal or research proposal aims to convince others (e.g., a supervisor, a funding body, or a dissertation committee) that your research topic is relevant and worthy of being conducted.
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. & George, T. (2023, November 21). How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved September 3, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-proposal/
Other students also liked, how to write a problem statement | guide & examples, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, "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”
For many academics, each new year brings a flurry of email enquiries about PhD supervision. In my experience these tend to range between a vague notion about a topic (or a few possible topics) and a detailed account of a research idea, usually drawn from a successful MA thesis or an area of professional interest. What I hardly ever get, however, is a proper draft proposal that I can start working up with an applicant.
For me, having at least a rough draft of your proposal before you contact potential supervisors is good practice, for a number of reasons:
If you are planning to apply for Research Council funding, a draft gives you a valuable head start – I also see the process of feedback and amendment for these high-profile applications as an excellent insight into what a student will be like to supervise (I generally ask for several redrafts before I will sign off).
A PhD proposal does not need to be long. In fact, I encourage applicants to be as concise as they can – Research Council application forms generally allow a couple of sides, 10 pt font minimum, so I would stick to that. For a social science PhD, proposals will contain a number of common elements:
A short paragraph describing your topic, stating why it is important. First and foremost, you should be proposing a project which is fresh and interesting rather than repeating previous studies. This doesn’t necessarily mean a completely new topic (and there are no completely original arguments), but it could mean, for instance: looking at an existing topic in a new way; asking slightly different questions; researching a specific population; or bringing together two theories that haven’t been used together, or haven’t been used to explore this topic, before.
The best research in my field tends to be both policy/society-relevant and able to make a contribution to academic debates, so look for a social need and gaps in the relevant literature. Your project should pass the ‘so what?’ test on both intellectual and practical grounds. This is especially the case if you want to work with a marginalised group as an outsider – your study needs to have clear benefits for your participants, and it should be obvious that you are the right person to do it and are doing it for the right reasons (if you’re not sure this is the case, perhaps read this post and reflect). If you’re applying for research funding, your project rationale should also link to the strategic priorities of the funding body.
Two or three specific questions you will answer. They must be ones which have not been asked before in the particular way you will ask them. They should usually be open but narrow, focusing on aspects of issues or relationships between phenomena (e.g. ‘what are the causes of violence against sex workers?’ is too broad, but ‘what are sex workers’ experiences of violence under different legal/regulatory models?’ is more promising). You should also be realistic – what exactly are you going to be able to find out? Be wary of questions which are too ambitious – in social research this often means causal, categorical, or conclusive. Avoid making assumptions that will threaten the validity of your analysis (e.g. ‘how can parents who formula-feed be made aware of the benefits of breastfeeding?) Never ask something you feel you already know.
The trick is to develop research questions which both create a do-able project and account for the complexity of the social world, and to represent these as simply as you possibly can. This is difficult! Your research questions will probably go through several iterations with your prospective supervisor, so they don’t have to be perfect first time.
This is directly linked to your rationale and research questions – a summary of existing relevant work, identifying the gaps (both empirical and theoretical) your project will fill. You may be looking at several areas of literature – some providing general context while others relate to particular issues. In a project on violence against sex workers under different legal/regulatory models, you would probably be making use of general work on violence against women/sexual violence, more specific literature on violence against sex workers (of all genders) and violence against particular groups who may be more at risk within the industry (women of colour and trans women, for example), and literature covering different models of sex industry regulation and their implications. Studies would probably be both empirical and more conceptual in focus.
Don’t just write a list in this section – introduce different bodies of literature, summarise key themes and points, identify gaps, and make explicit how all this frames your particular project. Be clear in your mind about how you are using the literature at hand, and how you might feed back into the literature and make new contributions when you have completed your research.
The conceptual material in your literature review might inform your theoretical framework – the concepts most central to your research project. You might be focusing on gender as a key category of analysis; you might (should) also be taking an intersectional approach. You might be making use of other concepts such as agency or stigma, or developing the work of particular theorists. You need to have an idea of how all this relates together and whether there are any useful connections or knotty contradictions at work.
Your theoretical framework will and should change as you develop your PhD project, coming to fruition when you have finished your data analysis and are (hopefully) ready to say something new. It need not be fully developed in your proposal. In fact, if I see a PhD proposal which has an elaborate theoretical framework already, it often raises questions about whether the student is setting out to confirm things they feel they already know. Nevertheless, your proposal should contain some indication of the theories and concepts you find relevant to your research questions, and (most importantly) some thoughts about how you might operationalise these. How can you identify agency, for example? How might you measure stigma? How can you put intersectionality into practice?
N.B. Not all proposals will have a separate literature review and theoretical framework: if your project is heavily conceptual these might be merged into one longer section, or if you are conducting a large empirical study which will generate an entirely new dataset you may not need to be so focused on the theory.
This is probably the most important part of your proposal – a description of what you are going to do in very precise terms. This should include your your broad methodological approach – is it quantitative or qualitative? Are you using a particular research design, for instance ethnography or case study? Are you situated within a specific epistemological framework, and why? It should also include any specific methodological techniques or elements of research design – for instance, if you are trying to explore the interactions between phenomena, how will you measure and establish these? (e.g. in a qualitative study exploring how breastfeeding impacts on mothers’ experiences of bonding with their babies, you would need to consider how you would tease out the role of breastfeeding from other factors).
Your methodology should give details of your planned sources of data and how you will sample them. Be specific: if you are doing interviews, how many? What types of people will you hope to recruit as participants, and why? If you are working with documents, how many and how will they be selected? You need to give assurances that you are not just cherry-picking your sample to confirm what you feel you already know – for instance, a proposed study on whether the media contains racist bias will be stronger if you are not just working with content from the Daily Mail . You should also give details of how you will negotiate access to your sources, and the more groundwork you can do in advance the better, especially if you are working on sensitive issues or with marginalised communities. Your methods should then be described as accurately as you possibly can, as well as your planned techniques of data analysis, with full attention paid to how you might operationalise your theories.
Your methodology section should be primarily descriptive – your prospective supervisor needs to be confident that you have thought your project through and are in a good position to carry it out. It should also be mostly practical: although reflexivity is essential to qualitative social research, your PhD proposal is probably not the best place to present your autobiography. You need to show that you are conversant with the methodological literature and with other, similar studies, and have thought about your planned project with reference to these. Of course, your methodology will evolve during the course of your project and it is always possible to change it – but it is essential to be thinking like a researcher from the start.
Sometimes this section will be part of your methodology; sometimes it will be separate. If you are doing any research with human subjects you will probably undergo a rigorous ethical review process within your institution, before you are cleared for fieldwork. If your topic is sensitive or you are working with marginalised communities, this can take a while and can involve various requests for amendments. This section is your chance to show that you have engaged with the literature on research ethics and thought about any potential issues for your study: use it to identify these and talk about how you might address them. Power relations, informed consent, anonymity/confidentiality, risk/harm, participant and self-care all need to be covered.
University ethics committees can be conservative; you can take a critical perspective, especially where notions of ‘risk’ and ‘harm’ are concerned, and particularly in relation to the differences between working with more marginalised and more elite groups. However, you should also be aware that this is a bureaucratic process that could potentially stand between you and the successful completion of your research: some hoop-jumping may be necessary.
As the last section, your proposal should present a description of how you will break your research into manageable tasks and deadlines in order to get your PhD finished within the time you have (3-4 years full-time, 6-8 years part-time). It is best to present this in the form of a table, specifying dates by which you will have completed particular tasks. This timeline may change – but it is useful to have done some advance planning to show potential supervisors and funders that you are organised and likely to be able to deliver.
Finally, remember that you should probably try to fit all this on to two sides of A4. This usually includes references, so be strategic/sparing with these, and remember that you can allude to wider reading by using phrases such as ‘such as’, or ‘amongst others’ as part of your citations (this last tip is for PhD proposals only – you must not do this in your final thesis!)
Alison Phipps is Professor of Gender Studies at the University of Sussex. She was Chair of the Feminist and Women's Studies Association UK and Ireland, 2009-2012. You can visit her blog at https://genderate.wordpress.com/ or follow her on Twitter @alisonphipps.
Bisa is entirely self-funded.
Your donations help us to support the International Studies community. Choose to donate towards free memberships for Global South scholars, conference bursaries or student experience events. Then receive updates on how your donation has helped.
Description.
Writing proposals for research funding is a peculiar facet of North American academic culture, and as with all things cultural, its attributes rise only partly into public consciousness. A proposal’s overt function is to persuade a committee of scholars that the project shines with the three kinds of merit all disciplines value, namely, conceptual innovation, methodological rigor, and rich, substantive content. But to make these points stick, a proposal writer needs a feel for the unspoken customs, norms, and needs that govern the selection process itself. These are not really as arcane or ritualistic as one might suspect. For the most part, these customs arise from the committee’s efforts to deal in good faith with its own problems: incomprehension among disciplines, work overload, and the problem of equitably judging proposals that reflect unlike social and academic circumstances.
Privacy overview.
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional | 11 months | The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other. |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance". |
viewed_cookie_policy | 11 months | The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data. |
Guidelines on preparing a thesis proposal to support your application.
These guidelines are intended to assist you in developing and writing a thesis proposal. Applications for admission to a research degree cannot be dealt with unless they contain a proposal.
Your proposal will help us to make sure that:
The process of producing a proposal is usually also essential if you need to apply for funding to pay your fees or support yourself whilst doing your research. Funding bodies will often need to be reassured that you are committed to a viable project at a suitable university.
Your proposal should be typed double-spaced, if possible, and be between 1,000 and 2,000 words. Your PhD proposal can be added under the 'Supporting Documents' section of the Postgraduate Applications Online System .
Your proposal should contain at least the following elements:
For more detailed information on each element of your research proposal, see our extended guidance document .
Examples of Successful PhD Proposals
Applying for a PhD
Our Research Themes
Our Research Areas
Search for PhD opportunities at Sheffield and be part of our world-leading research.
Writing a Research Proposal
This section caters for postgraduate students who are either applying for grants, or seeking acceptance onto a higher research degree programme. It offers some basic advice, a few useful links, and a couple of sample proposals . There are a number of sources of advice on writing a research proposal . Hong Kong University has its own requirements for submissions (see below), and we offer a few examples of successful research degree submissions.
A Format for Research Proposals - a simple set of guidelines for writing a research proposal Guidelines for a Market Research Proposal - a more detailed set of guidelines - a client-driven approach Proposals for Higher Research Degrees (Social Sciences) - a few successful examples to show how it can be done
A guide for writing a research proposal for all MScR, MPhil and PhD degrees in the School of GeoSciences.
If you are applying with your own project, you need to include a research proposal with your application. The proposal should not exceed four (4) pages in length for PhDs and two (2) pages for MScR.
Give an introductory statement explaining what your proposed research topic is and why it is important. | |
Outline existing theoretical and/or empirical debate and state how your proposed research relates to this body of knowledge. | |
What specific issue or question will your proposed research examine? | |
What method, or methods, will you use to answer your research question? | |
Note any ethical issues arising from your research. (ethics can be interpreted in a broad sense as well as, for example, matters of consent and confidentiality). | |
Provide a timetable for your research and the period of writing up your thesis. If you intend to do fieldwork overseas, say what this will entail and how it fits into the timetable. | |
References should fit within the 4 pages (or 2 for MScR) and should not exceed one page. |
Please upload a PDF document in A4, font size 11, Arial or another sans serif font equivalent in size.
The University has provided a comprehensive guide on writing a proposal.
You can view or download it as a PDF:
This article was published on 2024-07-01
Identifying a research problem to investigate requires a preliminary search for and critical review of the literature in order to gain an understanding about how scholars have examined a topic. Scholars rarely structure research studies in a way that can be followed like a story; they are complex and detail-intensive and often written in a descriptive and conclusive narrative form. However, in the social and behavioral sciences, journal articles and stand-alone research reports are generally organized in a consistent format that makes it easier to compare and contrast studies and interpret their findings.
General Reading Strategies
W hen you first read an article or research paper, focus on asking specific questions about each section. This strategy can help with overall comprehension and with understanding how the content relates [or does not relate] to the problem you want to investigate. As you review more and more studies, the process of understanding and critically evaluating the research will become easier because the content of what you review will begin to coalescence around common themes and patterns of analysis. Below are recommendations on how to read each section of a research paper effectively. Note that the sections to read are out of order from how you will find them organized in a journal article or research paper.
1. Abstract
The abstract summarizes the background, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions of a scholarly article or research paper. Use the abstract to filter out sources that may have appeared useful when you began searching for information but, in reality, are not relevant. Questions to consider when reading the abstract are:
2. Introduction
If, after reading the abstract, you believe the paper may be useful, focus on examining the research problem and identifying the questions the author is trying to address. This information is usually located within the first few paragraphs of the introduction or in the concluding paragraph. Look for information about how and in what way this relates to what you are investigating. In addition to the research problem, the introduction should provide the main argument and theoretical framework of the study and, in the last paragraphs of the introduction, describe what the author(s) intend to accomplish. Questions to consider when reading the introduction include:
3. Literature Review
The literature review describes and critically evaluates what is already known about a topic. Read the literature review to obtain a big picture perspective about how the topic has been studied and to begin the process of seeing where your potential study fits within the domain of prior research. Questions to consider when reading the literature review include:
4. Discussion/Conclusion
The discussion and conclusion are usually the last two sections of text in a scholarly article or research report. They reveal how the author(s) interpreted the findings of their research and presented recommendations or courses of action based on those findings. Often in the conclusion, the author(s) highlight recommendations for further research that can be used to develop your own study. Questions to consider when reading the discussion and conclusion sections include:
5. Methods/Methodology
The methods section describes the materials, techniques, and procedures for gathering information used to examine the research problem. If what you have read so far closely supports your understanding of the topic, then move on to examining how the author(s) gathered information during the research process. Questions to consider when reading the methods section include:
6. Results
After reading the above sections, you should have a clear understanding of the general findings of the study. Therefore, read the results section to identify how key findings were discussed in relation to the research problem. If any non-textual elements [e.g., graphs, charts, tables, etc.] are confusing, focus on the explanations about them in the text. Questions to consider when reading the results section include:
7. References
The references list the sources used by the author(s) to document what prior research and information was used when conducting the study. After reviewing the article or research paper, use the references to identify additional sources of information on the topic and to examine critically how these sources supported the overall research agenda. Questions to consider when reading the references include:
NOTE: A final strategy in reviewing research is to copy and paste the title of the source [journal article, book, research report] into Google Scholar . If it appears, look for a "cited by" reference followed by a hyperlinked number under the record [e.g., Cited by 45]. This number indicates how many times the study has been subsequently cited in other, more recently published works. This strategy, known as citation tracking, can be an effective means of expanding your review of pertinent literature based on a study you have found useful and how scholars have cited it. The same strategies described above can be applied to reading articles you find in the list of cited by references.
Specific Reading Strategies
Effectively reading scholarly research is an acquired skill that involves attention to detail and an ability to comprehend complex ideas, data, and theoretical concepts in a way that applies logically to the research problem you are investigating. Here are some specific reading strategies to consider.
As You are Reading
Taking notes as you read will save time when you go back to examine your sources. Here are some suggestions:
Write down thoughts that come to mind that may help clarify your understanding of the research problem. Here are some examples of questions to ask yourself:
Adapted from text originally created by Holly Burt, Behavioral Sciences Librarian, USC Libraries, April 2018.
When is it Important to Read the Entire Article or Research Paper
Laubepin argues, "Very few articles in a field are so important that every word needs to be read carefully." * However, this implies that some studies are worth reading carefully if they directly relate to understanding the research problem. As arduous as it may seem, there are valid reasons for reading a study from beginning to end. Here are some examples:
* Laubepin, Frederique. How to Read (and Understand) a Social Science Journal Article . Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (ISPSR), 2013
Shon, Phillip Chong Ho. How to Read Journal Articles in the Social Sciences: A Very Practical Guide for Students . 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2015; Lockhart, Tara, and Mary Soliday. "The Critical Place of Reading in Writing Transfer (and Beyond): A Report of Student Experiences." Pedagogy 16 (2016): 23-37; Maguire, Moira, Ann Everitt Reynolds, and Brid Delahunt. "Reading to Be: The Role of Academic Reading in Emergent Academic and Professional Student Identities." Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice 17 (2020): 5-12.
An interdisciplinary Stanford team has created and seeks to scale a new Ethics and Society Review (ESR) that prompts researchers seeking funding to consider the ethical and societal impacts of their research and how to mitigate potential harms.
Currently, Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are the main form of ethical review for research done in the United States that involves human subjects. IRBs are groups designated to review and monitor research and ensure the rights and welfare of the people taking part in the study. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s regulations, IRBs have the authority to approve, deny, or require modifications to a research project, but their scope is limited to assessing the impact the of research on the individuals in the study.
The newly proposed ESR fills a critical need by considering how proposed research could have harmful effects on society as well as positive effects. Consider the effects for example of AI algorithms on fairness in sentencing or on who is prioritized for treatments, or the effects of a proposed technology on privacy. If there are negative risks or known negative effects, how might these be anticipated and mitigated?
Earlier this year, the ESR was tested in a pilot program that reviewed proposals submitted by researchers seeking funding from the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI). The first faculty review panel included experts from fields including anthropology, communication, computer science, history, management science and engineering, medicine, philosophy, political science, and sociology. A paper published December 28 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences ( PNAS) details the findings and how the ESR could be applied in other areas of research and institutions elsewhere.
Here, four of the paper’s six co-authors, Michael Bernstein , associate professor of Computer Science in the School of Engineering ; Margaret Levi , the Sara Miller McCune Director of the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences (CASBS ); David Magnus , the Thomas A. Raffin Professor of Medicine and Biomedical Ethics at Stanford Medicine ; and Debra Satz , the Vernon R. and Lysbeth Warren Anderson Dean of the School of Humanities and Sciences discuss how the ESR came to be, why it’s needed, and the impact they hope it will have.
Bernstein: The engine that we usually associate with ethics review—the Institutional Review Board, or IRB—is explicitly excluded from considering long-range societal impact. So, for example, artificial intelligence projects can be pursued, published, and shared without engaging in any structured ethical or societal reflection. But even if many of these projects do not need to engage with IRBs, they need to apply for funding. The ESR is designed as a gate to funding: funding from collaborating grant programs isn't released until the researchers complete the ESR process.
Levi: The ESR depends on a partnership with a funding group that is willing to release funds to successful proposals only after the project investigators provide a statement outlining any problematic ethical implications or societal consequences of their research. Of particular interest to the review panel are mitigation strategies. If the outline is adequate, the funds are released. If the panel deems it necessary, there is iterated discussion with the panel to help figure out where there are problems, trade-offs that need to be addressed, and appropriate mitigation steps. This is more of a collaborative than a compliance model.
Satz: Our current review processes do a good job of protecting individuals from unnecessary risks or harms. But some of our social problems do not show up directly as harms or risks to individuals but instead to social institutions and the general social fabric that knits our lives together. New technologies are upending the way we work and live in both positive and negative ways. Some of the negative effects are not inevitable; they depend on design choices that we can change.
Magnus: Because this is not part of the IRB process, it is easy for researchers to focus solely on the risks to individual participants without consideration of the broader implications of their research. For example, a project that was developing wearable robotic devices did a great job of considering all of the relevant risks that research participants would be exposed to and how to mitigate those. But they did not at all consider the literature on the importance of taking downstream implications of the technology (for example privacy issues that are likely to arise when implemented in real world settings that do not arise in the laboratory research setting) into account in the design process.
Satz: The problems posed by new technologies require input from many fields of knowledge, working together. The problems cannot be adequately addressed by ethicists or philosophers pronouncing from “on high”—removed from those creating and thinking about technology and science. We have found that deliberation among computer scientists, philosophers, political scientists, and others yields a deeper understanding of the challenges and provides better guidance for improving our practices.
Levi: All four of the faculty have been active—in different domains—in promoting standards for research that take into account ethical and societal implications, not just harms to individual subjects and participants. Within Stanford’s Ethics, Society, and Technology Hub , CASBS has been coordinating the implementation and evaluation of the ESR. Betsy Rajala , the program director of CASBS, and Charla Waeiss, a consultant to CASBS, have been the key players and are full partners in the writing of the PNAS paper.
Bernstein: What initially catalyzed this effort was an email that Debra Satz sent about a (rejected) grant that we were on, where she mentioned that IRBs were focused on risks to human subjects rather than risks to human society. Her comment gave words to much of the uncertainty I had faced in my career as a computer scientist, and it rattled around in my brain until I translated it into the basic concept of the ESR—ethics and societal review connected to grant funding. I quickly connected with Margaret Levi, who had been pursuing similar goals in the social sciences and had a strong interest in societal impacts of AI. We pitched it to the leadership of Stanford's HAI; they connected us with David Magnus, who has vast experience in ethics review, and the four of us were off to the races.
Bernstein: Two results surprised me. First, I expected substantial pushback from researchers along the lines of "you're adding red tape!" However, all the respondents to our survey were willing to submit to the ESR again in the future. Second, over half of researchers felt that the process had positively influenced the design of their research project. For a fairly lightweight process to benefit the design of half of projects was a huge—and very pleasant—surprise to me.
Magnus: The biggest challenge is to find a way to make this scalable. It is one thing to do an ESR for 35 or 40 proposals, it is quite another to do 400 or 4,000. We hope this scaffolding will make it easier for researchers to think through the ethical and social issues raised by their research and identify strategies to mitigate any problems. [We also hope this process] becomes a routine part of research.
Levi: We also are eager to collaborate with other universities and firms to see how best to transfer our process broadly. In addition, we are considering ways to help researchers when they discover new ethical implications or societal consequences in the process of their research. In terms of improving the ESR, our plans are two-fold. First, we are determining ways to staff and support the faculty panels so that we are not misusing or over-demanding of faculty time. Second, and perhaps most importantly, we are building the scaffolding that will inform and transform thinking so that considering the ethical implications and societal consequences becomes second nature.
Related: Michael Bernstein , Associate professor of Computer Science
New stanford hydrogel to reduce damage of california wildfires.
Populism and its impact on subsidies under EU Common Agricultural Policies. My current idea is to look at populist groups, movements, speeches, and manifestos, as well as changes in opinions (national votes, or EU-level votes by MEP) either publicly or through legislation, over the past two decades. I will also be looking at the history of subsidy spending to see if there were any cases in which far-right populist movements impacted subsidy spending.
Try to find a few articles or data points ( public opinions, subsidy policy funding, voting) on the influence of populism on EU Common Agricultural Policies.
Discover books, journals, films, primary source collections, government documents, and other materials held at UNC and in the Triangle (you can request materials from Duke, NC State and NC Central) as well as a variety of open access publications.
Joint catalog of materials held at North American and some European National Libraries.
You can request most titles that UNC does not have through Interlibrary Loan . Carolina BLU uses the InterLibrary Loan (ILL) service to request materials from other campus libraries.
https://writingcenter.unc.edu/
Can't find the article, book, or report you need at our library? You can request it from another library through interlibrary loan.
Authors : Christian Ohmann; Maria Panagiotopoulou; Steve Canham; Petr Holub; Kurt Majcen; Gary Saunders; Maddalena Fratelli; Jing Tang; Philip Gribbon; Reagon Karki; Mari Kleemola; Katja Moilanen; Daan Broeder; Walter Daelemans; Pieter Fivez
Addresses : European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN), Bd Saint-Jacques, Paris, France ' European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN), Bd Saint-Jacques, Paris, France ' European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN), Bd Saint-Jacques, Paris, France ' Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure - European Research Infrastructure Consortium (BBMRI-ERIC), Neue Stiftingtalstrasse 2/B/6, Graz, Austria ' Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure - European Research Infrastructure Consortium (BBMRI-ERIC), Neue Stiftingtalstrasse 2/B/6, Graz, Austria ' European Infrastructure for Translational Medicine (EATRIS-ERIC), De Boelelaan 1118, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ' Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCS, Via Mario Negri, Milano, Italy ' Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Haaatmaninkatu, Helsinki, Finland ' Fraunhofer Institute for Translational Medicine and Pharmacology (ITMP), VolksparkLabs, Schnackenburgallee 114, Hamburg, Germany ' Fraunhofer Institute for Translational Medicine and Pharmacology (ITMP), VolksparkLabs, Schnackenburgallee 114, Hamburg, Germany ' Finnish Social Science Data Archive, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland ' Finnish Social Science Data Archive, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland ' Common Language Resources and Technology Infrastructure Network (CLARIN ERIC), Utrecht University, BS Utrecht, The Netherlands ' Department of Linguistics, University of Antwerp, Lange Winkelstraat 40, Antwerp, Belgium ' Antwerp Text Mining Centre (TEXTUA), University of Antwerp, Lange Winkelstraat 40-42, Antwerp, Belgium
Abstract : Usually, the focus of metadata annotation is on the research output rather than the context in which products were generated. The objective of this project was to develop a framework for contextual metadata, involving six research infrastructures (RIs) from two different domains. As a first step semi-structured interviews were performed to assess the current handling of contextual metadata. Then, these results were put into perspective with the main entities of research processes in general, leading to a framework for contextual metadata. From the discussion with the RIs and in alignment with the referenced literature, basic entities related to contextual metadata are defined and organised in a framework. In summary, a considerable amount of contextual metadata information is already covered by the RIs, however, not always explicit but implicit within text descriptions. The RIs involved see contextual metadata as necessary to improve replicability and reliability of research and FAIRness of data.
Keywords : contextual metadata; metadata schema; ontology; information model; EOSC; European Open Science Cloud; life sciences; social sciences & humanities; research infrastructures; interviews; knowledge graph; framework.
DOI : 10.1504/IJMSO.2023.140695
International Journal of Metadata, Semantics and Ontologies, 2023 Vol.16 No.4, pp.261 - 277
Published online: 30 Aug 2024 *
Description: The SBS Dean’s Faculty Travel Fund augments funding for presentations at conferences or workshops that advance faculty research agendas and career trajectories.
Deadline : Applications are due by 5:00 p.m. on October 7 (for travel from August 19, 2024-January 14, 2025) and February 10 (for travel from January 15, 2025-August 15, 2025). You may apply for post-hoc expenses incurred before the application deadline within the eligible travel timeline.
APPLY HERE ON ARIZONA CULTIVATE
Academic Year 2024-2025 Guidelines
Eligible faculty include tenure track (eligible), continuing status (eligible), and career track who have 1.0 FTE appointments in SBS, with at least .40 FTE research in their standard workloads presenting at a conference or workshop to be eligible. (Faculty serving in solely a discussant or chair role are not eligible.) The presentation must focus on the faculty’s research (inclusive of creative activity and the scholarship of teaching and learning). Faculty with philanthropic, grant, or startup funding that could cover the proposed travel are required to use those sources first.
Early- and mid-career faculty (assistant and associate professors) without start-up funds will be prioritized.
Faculty may submit one proposal per competition cycle and receive a maximum of one award per academic year.
Faculty may apply for funds up to $750. Faculty may not be funded for more than 100% for travel expenses from various funding sources. We expect to be able to make 20 awards in academic year 2024-25.
PIs should write proposals that are understandable to an interdisciplinary audience. The following criteria will be considered:
Evidence of the proposed activity to initiate or expand research, scholarship, or creative activity.
Impact of the proposed activity on the applicant’s career advancement, including progress toward promotion and tenure.
Proposals will be reviewed by the SBS Dean’s designees . Decisions will be made within 20 business days of the application deadline.
Cover sheet (electronic form)
Presentation title and abstract (under 200 words, text box)
Proposal narrative describing the significance of the presentation for advancing the faculty’s research and career (under 500 words, text box)
Short CV (maximum of five-pages, PDF upload)
Budget and justification. Include all expected expenses for the proposed travel , and all anticipated fund sources (including the Dean’s Travel Fund request). (Excel template upload)
Documentation of presentation invitation/acceptance (PDF upload)
Submit Applications in Arizona Cultivate: https://azcultivate.arizona.edu/#competitionDetail/1948731
Awards may be used to cover the following:
Airfare
Lodging: Requested daily rates must not exceed those listed in the FSO Meals/Lodging Cost Index .
Meals: Requested daily rates must not exceed those listed in the FSO Meals/Lodging Cost Index . Meal rates are listed in the posted manuals as “M&IE."
Local transportation
Mileage: Requested rates must not exceed those listed in the FSO Transportation policy .
Event registration fees
Workshop fees
Poster printing fees
Membership fees only if membership is required to attend the conference/event
Budget Template can be downloaded on Arizona Cultivate (follow the "Apply Here" button on the page above).
Faculty should work with their business managers to develop the budget. Should the proposal be selected for funding, business managers will be asked to confirm that the submitted information on travel costs and available fund sources is correct.
Within one month of the end date of the supported travel cycle (February 15 for Fall awards and September 15 for Spring awards), the PI must submit a brief final report via Arizona Cultivate, describing the supported activity and outcomes.
Contact your business center for questions about travel costs and budget.
Direct other questions to [email protected] .
Last updated on August 27, 2024
COMMENTS
Like any other genre of writing, a good research proposal takes time, multiple drafts, and a clear understanding of the task at hand. The purpose of a research proposal is a) to persuade your reader of the value of your research. question, b) to show you have a clear idea of where your research sits in existing knowledge, and c) to demonstrate ...
As with writing most college-level academic papers, research proposals are generally organized the same way throughout most social science disciplines. The text of proposals generally vary in length between ten and thirty-five pages, followed by the list of references.
Sample Research Proposals. You will find here two examples of proposals for postgraduate research from the Department of Social Policy and Criminology. They both give good indication of the sorts of things that need to be included. The first, on fathering after divorce or separation, represents first thoughts on the proposed topic, but sets out ...
Table 7-1 Breakdown of the research proposal per semester 136 Table 7-2 Main assessment criteria 141 Figures Figure 3-1 Link between topic, question and conceptual significance 40 Figure 3-2 Logical sequence of a research proposal based on a research question 53 Figure 3-3 Logical sequence of a research proposal based on a
funds basic science research in most fields of science, social science, and engineering, and mathematics (STEM); does not fund clinical or health research. Peer Review: The evaluation of research/creative work or a grant proposal by one or more people with similar competences as the producers of the work or proposers (peers).
The overview, also known as abstract and/or introduction, is the first section that you write for your proposal. Your overview should be a single paragraph that explains to the reader what your whole research will be about. In a nutshell, you will use your abstract to present all the arguments that you will be taking in detail in your thesis or ...
The following books may help you to prepare your research proposal (as well as in doing your research degree). Bell, J. (1999): Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-time Researchers in Education & Social Science, (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Punch, Keith and Wayne McGowan. "Developing and Writing a Research Proposal." In From Postgraduate to Social Scientist: A Guide to Key Skills. Nigel Gilbert, ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2006), 59-81; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International ...
In introducing your problem in a research proposal, you should provide a succinct statement which will help you to remain focused on the issue that you are addressing and how the information you will be discussing is related to that issue. 2. BACKGROUND: create a common ground of understanding. In order for the reader to understand the issue ...
This guide was originally created for AN510 / AR510: Proposal Writing for Social Science Research. Advanced undergraduate and graduate students in other social science and humanities fields may also find this guide helpful as they prepare to write grant proposals, theses or dissertations.
A research proposal describes what you will investigate, why it's important, and how you will conduct your research. Your paper should include the topic, research question and hypothesis, methods, predictions, and results (if not actual, then projected). ... Social/Behavioral Sciences Research Guide InfoGuide URL.
University of Gondar, Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Department of Sociology 19/011/25/2020. 1. Hand Out. Chapter: Writing a Research Proposal. 1.1 Introduction. A research proposal is a document which accounts for the research topic chosen by a researcher. It is a written document which totally describes the investigator's plan ...
ready reference to support social science concentrators as they begin to design their thesis research and prepare their thesis proposal. Note also that this guide is oriented around the thesis proposal document, but many aspects of the proposal format are also relevant to the thesis. Thus , the information in this guide may be used to
Literature Review. This key component of the research proposal is the most time-consuming aspect in the preparation of your research proposal. As described in Chapter 5, the literature review provides the background to your study and demonstrates the significance of the proposed research.Specifically, it is a review and synthesis of prior research that is related to the problem you are setting ...
Research proposal examples. Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We've included a few for you below. Example research proposal #1: "A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management" Example research proposal #2: "Medical Students as Mediators of ...
In writing a research proposal, dissertation, or thesis, elements of literature review can be found in any section or chapter once references are cited in that section or chapter even if it is a single reference that is cited. ... In the social sciences, there are three research methodologies that can be used to conduct academic research. These ...
A PhD proposal does not need to be long. In fact, I encourage applicants to be as concise as they can - Research Council application forms generally allow a couple of sides, 10 pt font minimum, so I would stick to that. For a social science PhD, proposals will contain a number of common elements: Rationale
The basic components of research proposals are the same in humanities and social sciences. How they are phrased and staged varies by discipline and by funding agency. The questions posed below are required by most agencies in some form. If you answer the "maximal" components below, you should be able to write proposals for most funding ...
Every social and behavioral sciences writer (and other scholars who adhere to these principles) advocates these objectives and observes the long-standing standards that their professional groups follow (APA, 2014). ... Purpose of Research Proposals: They justify the need for investigating a research problem and present workable strategies for ...
Pzreworski, Adam, Salomon, Frank, On the Art of Writing Proposals (Social Science Research Council, 1995 rev., 1988). The SSRC makes available interdisciplinary research to inform policy, academic discourse, and the public. These publications are freely accessible and include policy working papers to essays for the general public.
The research proposal - an outline. Your proposal should be typed double-spaced, if possible, and be between 1,000 and 2,000 words. Your PhD proposal can be added under the 'Supporting Documents' section of the Postgraduate Applications Online System. Your proposal should contain at least the following elements:
Writing a Research Proposal. This section caters for postgraduate students who are either applying for grants, or seeking acceptance onto a higher research degree programme. It offers some basic advice, a few useful links, and a couple of sample proposals. There are a number of sources of advice on writing a research proposal.Hong Kong University has its own requirements for submissions (see ...
In this hub I will demonstrate an example of social science research proposal written as a main purpose for scholar competitive submission. Thus, there will be some important elements illustrate on the following hubs as a guidance for my beloved and valued audiences. I hope this research example will assists also inspires other researchers ...
Give an introductory statement explaining what your proposed research topic is and why it is important. 2. Outline of key theory and research on the topic: Outline existing theoretical and/or empirical debate and state how your proposed research relates to this body of knowledge. 3. Main research question
How to Read (and Understand) a Social Science Journal Article. Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (ISPSR), 2013. Shon, Phillip Chong Ho. How to Read Journal Articles in the Social Sciences: A Very Practical Guide for Students. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2015; Lockhart, Tara, and Mary Soliday.
It is one thing to do an ESR for 35 or 40 proposals, it is quite another to do 400 or 4,000. We hope this scaffolding will make it easier for researchers to think through the ethical and social issues raised by their research and identify strategies to mitigate any problems. [We also hope this process] becomes a routine part of research.
Analyzing Quantitative Data is an excellent book for social sciences courses on data analysis and research methods at the upper-undergraduate and graduate levels. It also serves as a valuable reference for applied statisticians and practitioners working in the fields of education, medicine, business and public service who analyze, interpret ...
The Ministry of Education, Research and Innovation Division, Government of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and the Department of Science and Technology (DST), Government of India renewed the Programme of Cooperation (PoC) in Science and Technology, on August 14 th 2022. In terms of the PoC, funding can be made available for selected Joint S&T workshop proposals in bilateral mode ...
International Journal of Metadata, Semantics and Ontologies; 2023 Vol.16 No.4; Read the full-text of this article for free. Title: Proposal for a framework of contextual metadata in selected research infrastructures of the life sciences and the social sciences & humanities Authors: Christian Ohmann; Maria Panagiotopoulou; Steve Canham; Petr Holub; Kurt Majcen; Gary Saunders; Maddalena Fratelli ...
The presentation must focus on the faculty's research (inclusive of creative activity and the scholarship of teaching and learning). ... Faculty may submit one proposal per competition cycle and receive a maximum of one award per academic year. ... Social and Behavioral Sciences Research Institute Douglass Suite 101, 1100 University Blvd ...