What is the difference between results and discussion?

Results report what you found, objectively, with data. Discussion explains what the findings mean, links them to previous research and theory, and considers implications and limitations.

Should results and discussion be separate chapters?

Often yes in quantitative work. In qualitative work they are sometimes combined because themes are easier to interpret as they are presented. Follow your program's guidelines and your supervisor's advice.

How do I organize the results?

Usually by research question or hypothesis, so each section answers one thing. Begin with a description of the sample, then move through the questions in the order you introduced them.

What if my results are not significant or are unexpected?

Report them honestly and discuss possible explanations, such as sample size, measurement or a real absence of an effect. Unexpected findings are not failures, and examiners value honest interpretation.

How long should the discussion be?

Often similar in length to the results, or slightly longer. The key is that it answers your research questions and links them to the literature, without simply repeating the numbers.

Writing the Results and Discussion Chapters

The results and discussion chapters are where the work of a whole project shows. The results say what you found. The discussion says what it means. Students often blur the two, either burying readers in numbers with no interpretation, or interpreting while they report, so that neither chapter does its job well.

This guide explains how to write each chapter, how to keep them distinct and how to deal with awkward findings. The examples are illustrations only.

Reporting versus interpreting

	Results	Discussion
Purpose	Present the findings	Explain their meaning
Tone	Objective and factual	Analytical and reflective
Content	Data, statistics, themes, quotations	Interpretation, comparison with literature, implications
Tense	Past	Mix of past and present
Avoid	Explanation, speculation	New data

A useful test: in the results chapter, could someone who disagreed with your interpretation still accept every sentence as a fair account of the data? If yes, you have reported cleanly.

Writing the results chapter

Open with the sample

Begin by describing who or what you studied: the final sample size, response rate and key characteristics, often in a table. This tells readers how far to trust and generalize your findings. For qualitative work, give a brief description of participants with codes, not names.

Organize by question

Structure the chapter around your research questions or hypotheses, in the order you presented them. Use a heading for each. This helps readers see how the evidence answers each question. A short introduction can outline the structure, and a brief summary at the end can pull the findings together.

Report quantitative findings

For each question:

State the analysis briefly.
Give the result with the right statistics.
Add an effect size and, where used, a confidence interval.
Point readers to tables and figures for detail.
Say in plain words what the result shows, without yet explaining why.

Students in the spaced practice group scored higher than those in the block group, t(58) = 2.17, p = .034, d = 0.56 (Table 2).

(The numbers are invented.) Our guide to data analysis basics for students explains how to choose and report tests.

Report qualitative findings

Organize by theme, with each introduced by a clear label and a short explanation. Support each theme with short, well-chosen quotations from participants, labeled with a code. Say how widely a theme appeared, in words such as "most", "several" or "a few", and avoid false precision. Tell readers when a theme is based on a minority view. Interpretation is usually light here, with deeper analysis in the discussion, though some qualitative traditions integrate the two.

Use tables and figures well

Number and title each one, and refer to it in the text.
Do not repeat every number in the text. Highlight what matters.
Make them self-explanatory, with labeled axes, units and notes.
Keep the design simple.
Put bulky detail in appendices.

Report all relevant findings

Include results that did not support your hypotheses, not only those that did. Selective reporting misleads readers and is a breach of research integrity. If you ran additional tests, say which were planned and which were exploratory.

Writing the discussion chapter

Start with the answer

Open by restating your main aim and summarizing the key findings in a short paragraph. Many readers will read this first. Say directly how the findings answer each research question.

Interpret the findings

For each main finding, ask:

What does it mean?
Is it consistent with earlier research, and how?
If it differs, why might that be?
What explanations are plausible, and which does your evidence support best?

Link every point back to your literature review. The discussion is where the literature and your data meet. A pattern works well: state the finding, compare it with previous studies, offer an explanation and note any alternative.

The finding that spaced practice improved scores is consistent with earlier laboratory studies (Lee, 2019), and extends them to a classroom setting. One explanation is that spacing forces repeated retrieval, though this study did not measure retrieval directly.

(The citation is invented.)

Handle unexpected or null results

A result that goes against your hypothesis, or finds no effect, is still a finding. Discuss possible reasons honestly: the sample may have been too small to detect an effect, the measure may have been imperfect, the context may have differed from earlier studies or there may truly be no effect. Avoid inventing a story to explain away a result, and avoid saying "this proves there is no effect."

State the implications

Explain what your findings mean for theory, practice, policy or future research. Be proportionate: a single small study cannot overturn a field, but it can add to the evidence, suggest changes to practice or point to a gap. Match your claims to your design.

Acknowledge limitations

Every study has limits, such as sample size, sampling method, measures, setting, timeframe and researcher influence. State the main ones plainly, say how they might affect the findings and note what you did to reduce them. Honest limitations show maturity, and they help readers use your work correctly. Do not undermine your whole project with excessive apology.

Make recommendations

If your project is applied, give practical recommendations that follow from your findings. Suggest directions for future research that address your limitations or the questions your work raised. Avoid recommendations that go beyond your evidence.

Structure at a glance

Chapter	Typical sections
Results	Introduction, sample description, findings by question or theme, summary
Discussion	Summary of key findings, interpretation in light of literature, implications, limitations, recommendations, short conclusion

In some programs, a single combined chapter is used, with each finding followed immediately by its interpretation. Our guide to dissertation structure explained shows where these chapters fit.

Writing style

Be precise. Use exact numbers and clear labels.
Use the past tense for what you did and found.
Keep paragraphs focused on one finding or theme.
Avoid overclaiming. Use words such as "suggests" and "is consistent with".
Be consistent with terms and abbreviations.
Cross-reference tables, figures and your research questions.

Getting feedback

Share a draft of each chapter with your supervisor, and ask whether the findings answer your questions and whether the interpretation follows from the evidence. For an extra reader on a finished chapter, editing for dissertation chapters can improve clarity and consistency.

A short example of the discussion moving from finding to meaning

Suppose your results show that retention was higher among mentored nurses, but only in one of two hospitals. A weak discussion would repeat the numbers and say the program worked.

A stronger one would state the finding, compare it with earlier studies that report mixed results, offer explanations such as differences in mentor time or unit staffing, say which explanation your interview data support best and note that the design cannot rule out others. It would then draw a careful implication: mentoring may help where mentors have protected time, and managers should consider that before launching a program. Each step stays close to the evidence.

Presenting a lot of results without overwhelming the reader

If you have many findings, group them under headings that match your questions, and open each section with a one-sentence summary of what you found. Put full tables in the text only when they carry the main point, and move large tables to appendices with a short reference. Close each section with a sentence that links to the next. Readers should always know which question they are on and what the answer is, even if they skip the detail.

Common mistakes

Interpreting in the results chapter, or reporting new data in the discussion.
Repeating every number from the tables in the text.
Reporting only supportive results.
A discussion that restates results without explaining them.
No link to the literature.
Overclaiming, especially causation.
Hiding limitations, or listing them with no consequences.
Quotations without analysis in qualitative chapters.
Disorganized structure that does not follow the research questions.

A quick checklist

Does the results chapter report without interpreting?
Is it organized by research question or theme?
Are tables and figures numbered, clear and referenced?
Have I reported all relevant findings?
Does the discussion answer each question and link to the literature?
Have I dealt honestly with unexpected results?
Are implications proportionate and limitations clear?

Final thoughts

Write results as an honest report and discussion as an explanation. Keep the line between them clear, organize by your questions and tie your interpretation to the literature. Report what you actually found, including what surprised you, and be honest about what the evidence can support. Readers trust a dissertation that does.