How to Write a Discussion

The purpose of this section is to evaluate the results of your research through comparison with the results obtained in other scientific works on this issue. To write a high-quality discussion, it is necessary to follow the following algorithm.

STEP 1

The first paragraph of your discussion should contain a very concise statement of the research problem (the formulation of the research problem should not be repeated word for word with the corresponding section) and a concise summary of the main results of the study obtained in the “Results” section. It is appropriate to use the following terms of reference: 

The results show that…

The obtained results indicate that…

The results of the work indicate that…

The results indicate that…

The conducted analysis … showed that …

The obtained results support the assumption that…

Importantly! If we asked several research questions, then the summary results should be given for each research question separately!

STEP 2

It is necessary to give a concise interpretation of the obtained results:

• indicate what results were expected, if research hypotheses were indicated;
• be sure to highlight unexpected results, if any, and provide their explanation;
• to compare own results with other scientific works.

The last point is the most important in the discussion. We have to make match/no match comparisons, that is, to indicate which works support our theory and which do not.

It is very important to highlight the most significant and unexpected results!

It is appropriate to use the following terms of reference: 

The obtained results contradict the work of Petrenko (2022)…

The obtained results … (specify which ones) … coincide with the works of Petrenko (2022), Nesterenko (2023), Shvets and Koval (2019).

The results of the study showed … which was confirmed in the works of Petrenko (2022), Nesterenko (2023), Shvets and Koval (2019).

The hypothesis/assumption about … was confirmed by the obtained research results, which coincides with (contradicts) the conclusions of Petrenko (2022), Nesterenko (2023), Shvets and Koval (2019).

Importantly! If we asked several research questions, then the comparison of the results should be carried out for each research question separately!

STEP 3

This is the most important point of the discussion. In the previous step, you compared your own results with other scientific works on the research issue.

Now you need to clearly state what results you obtained for the first time, that is, indicate the scientific novelty. This point is mandatory, as it emphasizes the scientific value and significance of your work.

It is also necessary to clearly formulate the practical value of the obtained results, indicating the potential directions of their implementation in practice.

It is appropriate to use the following terms of reference:

The obtained results opened a new perspective on …

The obtained data contributed to…

First received…

It was established for the first time that…

Taking into account the previous results of the researchers, a new view was obtained on …

Unlike previous studies, it was found/obtained/results include…

The scientific novelty of the results lies in…

The practical value of the results lies in…

The obtained results can be implemented in the activity…

The results of the study should be taken into account when making a decision about…

The practical significance of the obtained results lies in…

The obtained results may be useful for…

STEP 4 

At this step, you need to indicate the limitations of your research. Example:

small data sample/number of respondents;

problems during the survey;

limitations of the methods you used during the research;

geographical limitations, when the research was conducted in a certain region;

for a review article, the criteria for including scientific sources in the sample (range of publication years, country, keywords, etc.) serve as a limitation, which must be indicated as research limitations.

It is also very important to indicate how the given limitations affected the obtained results!

It is appropriate to use the following terms of reference:

The reliability of the obtained results was affected by …

Due to the lack of sufficient data, it is not possible to establish…

The choice of research methods was limited due to…

The following aspects … were not investigated because …

Recommendations

The discussion should not be too long, so the optimal length of this section should be 600-1000 words.

Comparison with the works of other authors is a must, so this section should contain at least 10 references for a research article, and at least 20 references for a review article.

The purpose of this section is to justify and prove the fact that your research contains scientific novelty. Therefore, it is necessary to make a comparison with the works that were published in the last 5 years (at least 50% of them should be in the last 3 years). This requirement does not apply to seminal works in the field, such as Peter Drucker’s work on management, or Sigmund Freud’s work on psychology.