What should I write in the Conclusions?
Remember how the purpose of the paper is to contribute knowledge? In the Conclusions (or whatever you end up calling them), you tell the reader what exactly your study contributed in terms of relevant knowledge.
You can usually link your contributions back to two places in your Introduction:
-
Societal contributions: A useful starting point is the first paragraph of the Introduction, where you defined the broader context and problem your study addresses. By explaining what your study contributes to addressing that problem, you go full circle.
-
Scientific contributions: Circle back to the knowledge gap(s) you presented in your Introduction, and explain how these have now been addressed.
My study doesn't have a societal contribution
Not every study has both. If your Introduction doesn’t open with a societal or practical problem, the scientific contributions are enough. Societal contributions are more common in applied and interdisciplinary research.
Should I write Conclusions, Implications or Recommendations?
What you write depends on your study and your journal:
- Conclusions: if your results are solid, this is often a useful section.
- Research recommendations: if your conclusions are less solid, or your focus is on where the field should go: where do we need to look next?
- Implications: if your work is application-focused: what does this mean in practice, for example as management recommendations?
Look at a few recent papers in your target journal to see which heading they use and what they include.
Don't skip the Study Contributions
Even if your journal doesn’t have a dedicated section for Conclusions/Implications/etc., you will still need to think about what your study contributes. Depending on your field and journal, these contributions can also appear in:
- the very end of the Introduction
- the abstract
- a highlights/key takeaways section below the abstract
- the beginning of the Discussion
- the cover letter you write when you submit your paper