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
Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:
See an example
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 June 25, 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, what is your plagiarism score.
It is for sure that your research will have some limitations and it is normal. However, it is critically important for you to be striving to minimize the range of scope of limitations throughout the research process. Also, you need to provide the acknowledgement of your research limitations in conclusions chapter honestly.
It is always better to identify and acknowledge shortcomings of your work, rather than to leave them pointed out to your by your dissertation assessor. While discussing your research limitations, don’t just provide the list and description of shortcomings of your work. It is also important for you to explain how these limitations have impacted your research findings.
Your research may have multiple limitations, but you need to discuss only those limitations that directly relate to your research problems. For example, if conducting a meta-analysis of the secondary data has not been stated as your research objective, no need to mention it as your research limitation.
Research limitations in a typical dissertation may relate to the following points:
1. Formulation of research aims and objectives . You might have formulated research aims and objectives too broadly. You can specify in which ways the formulation of research aims and objectives could be narrowed so that the level of focus of the study could be increased.
2. Implementation of data collection method . Because you do not have an extensive experience in primary data collection (otherwise you would not be reading this book), there is a great chance that the nature of implementation of data collection method is flawed.
3. Sample size. Sample size depends on the nature of the research problem. If sample size is too small, statistical tests would not be able to identify significant relationships within data set. You can state that basing your study in larger sample size could have generated more accurate results. The importance of sample size is greater in quantitative studies compared to qualitative studies.
4. Lack of previous studies in the research area . Literature review is an important part of any research, because it helps to identify the scope of works that have been done so far in research area. Literature review findings are used as the foundation for the researcher to be built upon to achieve her research objectives.
However, there may be little, if any, prior research on your topic if you have focused on the most contemporary and evolving research problem or too narrow research problem. For example, if you have chosen to explore the role of Bitcoins as the future currency, you may not be able to find tons of scholarly paper addressing the research problem, because Bitcoins are only a recent phenomenon.
5. Scope of discussions . You can include this point as a limitation of your research regardless of the choice of the research area. Because (most likely) you don’t have many years of experience of conducing researches and producing academic papers of such a large size individually, the scope and depth of discussions in your paper is compromised in many levels compared to the works of experienced scholars.
You can discuss certain points from your research limitations as the suggestion for further research at conclusions chapter of your dissertation.
My e-book, The Ultimate Guide to Writing a Dissertation in Business Studies: a step by step assistance offers practical assistance to complete a dissertation with minimum or no stress. The e-book covers all stages of writing a dissertation starting from the selection to the research area to submitting the completed version of the work within the deadline. John Dudovskiy
The limitations of the study are those characteristics of design or methodology that impacted or influenced the application or interpretation of the results of your study. They are the constraints on generalizability and utility of findings that are the result of the ways in which you chose to design the study and/or the method used to establish internal and external validity.
Always acknowledge a study's limitations. It is far better for you to identify and acknowledge your study’s limitations than to have them pointed out by your professor and be graded down because you appear to have ignored them.
Keep in mind that acknowledgement of a study's limitations is an opportunity to make suggestions for further research. If you do connect your study's limitations to suggestions for further research, be sure to explain the ways in which these unanswered questions may become more focused because of your study.
Acknowledgement of a study's limitations also provides you with an opportunity to demonstrate to your professor that you have thought critically about the research problem, understood the relevant literature published about it, and correctly assessed the methods chosen for studying the problem. A key objective of the research process is not only discovering new knowledge but also to confront assumptions and explore what we don't know.
Claiming limitiations is a subjective process because you must evaluate the impact of those limitations . Don't just list key weaknesses and the magnitude of a study's limitations. To do so diminishes the validity of your research because it leaves the reader wondering whether, or in what ways, limitation(s) in your study may have impacted the findings and conclusions. Limitations require a critical, overall appraisal and interpretation of their impact. You should answer the question: do these problems with errors, methods, validity, etc. eventually matter and, if so, to what extent?
Structure: How to Structure the Research Limitations Section of Your Dissertation . Dissertations and Theses: An Online Textbook. Laerd.com.
All studies have limitations . However, it is important that you restrict your discussion to limitations related to the research problem under investigation. For example, if a meta-analysis of existing literature is not a stated purpose of your research, it should not be discussed as a limitation. Do not apologize for not addressing issues that you did not promise to investigate in your paper.
Here are examples of limitations you may need to describe and to discuss how they possibly impacted your findings. Descriptions of limitations should be stated in the past tense.
Possible Methodological Limitations
Possible Limitations of the Researcher
Brutus, Stéphane et al. Self-Reported Limitations and Future Directions in Scholarly Reports: Analysis and Recommendations. Journal of Management 39 (January 2013): 48-75; Senunyeme, Emmanuel K. Business Research Methods . Powerpoint Presentation. Regent University of Science and Technology.
Information about the limitations of your study are generally placed either at the beginning of the discussion section of your paper so the reader knows and understands the limitations before reading the rest of your analysis of the findings, or, the limitations are outlined at the conclusion of the discussion section as an acknowledgement of the need for further study. Statements about a study's limitations should not be buried in the body [middle] of the discussion section unless a limitation is specific to something covered in that part of the paper. If this is the case, though, the limitation should be reiterated at the conclusion of the section.
If you determine that your study is seriously flawed due to important limitations , such as, an inability to acquire critical data, consider reframing it as a pilot study intended to lay the groundwork for a more complete research study in the future. Be sure, though, to specifically explain the ways that these flaws can be successfully overcome in later studies.
But, do not use this as an excuse for not developing a thorough research paper! Review the tab in this guide for developing a research topic . If serious limitations exist, it generally indicates a likelihood that your research problem is too narrowly defined or that the issue or event under study is too recent and, thus, very little research has been written about it. If serious limitations do emerge, consult with your professor about possible ways to overcome them or how to reframe your study.
When discussing the limitations of your research, be sure to:
Remember that the method you chose may be the source of a significant limitation that has emerged during your interpretation of the results [for example, you didn't ask a particular question in a survey that you later wish you had]. If this is the case, don't panic. Acknowledge it, and explain how applying a different or more robust methodology might address the research problem more effectively in any future study. A underlying goal of scholarly research is not only to prove what works, but to demonstrate what doesn't work or what needs further clarification.
Brutus, Stéphane et al. Self-Reported Limitations and Future Directions in Scholarly Reports: Analysis and Recommendations. Journal of Management 39 (January 2013): 48-75; Ioannidis, John P.A. Limitations are not Properly Acknowledged in the Scientific Literature. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 60 (2007): 324-329; Pasek, Josh. Writing the Empirical Social Science Research Paper: A Guide for the Perplexed . January 24, 2012. Academia.edu; Structure: How to Structure the Research Limitations Section of Your Dissertation . Dissertations and Theses: An Online Textbook. Laerd.com; What Is an Academic Paper? Institute for Writing Rhetoric. Dartmouth College; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University.
Don't Inflate the Importance of Your Findings! After all the hard work and long hours devoted to writing your research paper, it is easy to get carried away with attributing unwarranted importance to what you’ve done. We all want our academic work to be viewed as excellent and worthy of a good grade, but it is important that you understand and openly acknowledge the limitiations of your study. Inflating of the importance of your study's findings in an attempt hide its flaws is a big turn off to your readers. A measure of humility goes a long way!
Negative Results are Not a Limitation!
Negative evidence refers to findings that unexpectedly challenge rather than support your hypothesis. If you didn't get the results you anticipated, it may mean your hypothesis was incorrect and needs to be reformulated, or, perhaps you have stumbled onto something unexpected that warrants further study. Moreover, the absence of an effect may be very telling in many situations, particularly in experimental research designs. In any case, your results may be of importance to others even though they did not support your hypothesis. Do not fall into the trap of thinking that results contrary to what you expected is a limitation to your study. If you carried out the research well, they are simply your results and only require additional interpretation.
A Note about Sample Size Limitations in Qualitative Research
Sample sizes are typically smaller in qualitative research because, as the study goes on, acquiring more data does not necessarily lead to more information. This is because one occurrence of a piece of data, or a code, is all that is necessary to ensure that it becomes part of the analysis framework. However, it remains true that sample sizes that are too small cannot adequately support claims of having achieved valid conclusions and sample sizes that are too large do not permit the deep, naturalistic, and inductive analysis that defines qualitative inquiry. Determining adequate sample size in qualitative research is ultimately a matter of judgment and experience in evaluating the quality of the information collected against the uses to which it will be applied and the particular research method and purposeful sampling strategy employed. If the sample size is found to be a limitation, it may reflect your judgement about the methodological technique chosen [e.g., single life history study versus focus group interviews] rather than the number of respondents used.
Huberman, A. Michael and Matthew B. Miles. Data Management and Analysis Methods. In Handbook of Qualitative Research. Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994), pp. 428-444.
FIND US ON
Home » Implications in Research – Types, Examples and Writing Guide
Table of Contents
Implications in research refer to the potential consequences, applications, or outcomes of the findings and conclusions of a research study. These can include both theoretical and practical implications that extend beyond the immediate scope of the study and may impact various stakeholders, such as policymakers, practitioners, researchers , or the general public.
The format of implications in research typically follows the structure below:
Types of Implications in Research are as follows:
These are the implications that a study has for advancing theoretical understanding in a particular field. For example, a study that finds a new relationship between two variables can have implications for the development of theories and models in that field.
These are the implications that a study has for solving practical problems or improving real-world outcomes. For example, a study that finds a new treatment for a disease can have implications for improving the health of patients.
These are the implications that a study has for advancing research methods and techniques. For example, a study that introduces a new method for data analysis can have implications for how future research in that field is conducted.
These are the implications that a study has for ethical considerations in research. For example, a study that involves human participants must consider the ethical implications of the research on the participants and take steps to protect their rights and welfare.
These are the implications that a study has for informing policy decisions. For example, a study that examines the effectiveness of a particular policy can have implications for policymakers who are considering whether to implement or change that policy.
These are the implications that a study has for society as a whole. For example, a study that examines the impact of a social issue such as poverty or inequality can have implications for how society addresses that issue.
Forms of Implications are as follows:
These refer to the positive outcomes or benefits that may result from a study’s findings. For example, a study that finds a new treatment for a disease can have positive implications for patients, healthcare providers, and the wider society.
These refer to the negative outcomes or risks that may result from a study’s findings. For example, a study that finds a harmful side effect of a medication can have negative implications for patients, healthcare providers, and the wider society.
These refer to the immediate consequences of a study’s findings. For example, a study that finds a new method for reducing greenhouse gas emissions can have direct implications for policymakers and businesses.
These refer to the broader or long-term consequences of a study’s findings. For example, a study that finds a link between childhood trauma and mental health issues can have indirect implications for social welfare policies, education, and public health.
The following are some of the reasons why implications are important in research:
Here are some examples of implications in research:
Writing implications in research involves discussing the potential outcomes or consequences of your findings and the practical applications of your study’s results. Here are some steps to follow when writing implications in research:
The purposes of implications in research include:
Here are some specific situations of when to write implications in research:
Implications are an important part of research that can provide a range of advantages. Here are some of the key advantages of implications in research:
Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer
A discussion of qualitative & quantitative research design, the tqf qualitative research proposal: limitations.
The following is a modified excerpt from Applied Qualitative Research Design: A Total Quality Framework Approach (Roller & Lavrakas, 2015, p. 344).
The Total Quality Framework (TQF) research proposal has been discussed in several articles appearing in Research Design Review . In “A Quality Approach to the Qualitative Research Proposal,” the importance of critical thinking in proposal writing and the essential eight sections of the TQF research proposal — built around the central role of quality design — are introduced. Three articles in RDR focus on the Design section of the proposal — one article discussing Scope and Data Gathering (i.e., the Credibility component of the TQF), another article reflecting specifically on method and mode , and a third article concerning the ethical considerations of the proposed study. Beyond the Design section, RDR also includes articles on the Background & Literature Review and Research Team sections of the TQF proposal.
Another section of the TQF research proposal is devoted to Limitations. In this section, the proposal author will methodically apply the TQF to produce a critique of the proposed research design in ways that are consistent with what has been discussed in the Design section of the proposal. That is, the Limitations section will contain subsections on Credibility (Scope and Data Gathering), Analyzability (Processing and Verification), Transparency , and Usefulness . In each of these subsections the researcher will acknowledge the likely limitations of the study design that is being proposed, and briefly opine on the likely implications of these limitations to the overall usefulness of the research.
No qualitative (or quantitative) research study is perfect (with only strengths and no drawbacks). By readily (and unhesitatingly) acknowledging that there are limitations in the proposed design, the proposal writer takes the “high road” and thereby strengthens the case that the proposed design is the best one possible, given the funding, time, and other resources that are available to support the study. It also demonstrates that the researcher will be cognizant of these limitations in formulating conclusions and making recommendations based on the study’s findings.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .
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.
Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .
Department of Anaesthesiology, Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
Writing the proposal of a research work in the present era is a challenging task due to the constantly evolving trends in the qualitative research design and the need to incorporate medical advances into the methodology. The proposal is a detailed plan or ‘blueprint’ for the intended study, and once it is completed, the research project should flow smoothly. Even today, many of the proposals at post-graduate evaluation committees and application proposals for funding are substandard. A search was conducted with keywords such as research proposal, writing proposal and qualitative using search engines, namely, PubMed and Google Scholar, and an attempt has been made to provide broad guidelines for writing a scientifically appropriate research proposal.
A clean, well-thought-out proposal forms the backbone for the research itself and hence becomes the most important step in the process of conduct of research.[ 1 ] The objective of preparing a research proposal would be to obtain approvals from various committees including ethics committee [details under ‘Research methodology II’ section [ Table 1 ] in this issue of IJA) and to request for grants. However, there are very few universally accepted guidelines for preparation of a good quality research proposal. A search was performed with keywords such as research proposal, funding, qualitative and writing proposals using search engines, namely, PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus.
Five ‘C’s while writing a literature review
A proposal needs to show how your work fits into what is already known about the topic and what new paradigm will it add to the literature, while specifying the question that the research will answer, establishing its significance, and the implications of the answer.[ 2 ] The proposal must be capable of convincing the evaluation committee about the credibility, achievability, practicality and reproducibility (repeatability) of the research design.[ 3 ] Four categories of audience with different expectations may be present in the evaluation committees, namely academic colleagues, policy-makers, practitioners and lay audiences who evaluate the research proposal. Tips for preparation of a good research proposal include; ‘be practical, be persuasive, make broader links, aim for crystal clarity and plan before you write’. A researcher must be balanced, with a realistic understanding of what can be achieved. Being persuasive implies that researcher must be able to convince other researchers, research funding agencies, educational institutions and supervisors that the research is worth getting approval. The aim of the researcher should be clearly stated in simple language that describes the research in a way that non-specialists can comprehend, without use of jargons. The proposal must not only demonstrate that it is based on an intelligent understanding of the existing literature but also show that the writer has thought about the time needed to conduct each stage of the research.[ 4 , 5 ]
The contents or formats of a research proposal vary depending on the requirements of evaluation committee and are generally provided by the evaluation committee or the institution.
In general, a cover page should contain the (i) title of the proposal, (ii) name and affiliation of the researcher (principal investigator) and co-investigators, (iii) institutional affiliation (degree of the investigator and the name of institution where the study will be performed), details of contact such as phone numbers, E-mail id's and lines for signatures of investigators.
The main contents of the proposal may be presented under the following headings: (i) introduction, (ii) review of literature, (iii) aims and objectives, (iv) research design and methods, (v) ethical considerations, (vi) budget, (vii) appendices and (viii) citations.[ 4 ]
It is also sometimes termed as ‘need for study’ or ‘abstract’. Introduction is an initial pitch of an idea; it sets the scene and puts the research in context.[ 6 ] The introduction should be designed to create interest in the reader about the topic and proposal. It should convey to the reader, what you want to do, what necessitates the study and your passion for the topic.[ 7 ] Some questions that can be used to assess the significance of the study are: (i) Who has an interest in the domain of inquiry? (ii) What do we already know about the topic? (iii) What has not been answered adequately in previous research and practice? (iv) How will this research add to knowledge, practice and policy in this area? Some of the evaluation committees, expect the last two questions, elaborated under a separate heading of ‘background and significance’.[ 8 ] Introduction should also contain the hypothesis behind the research design. If hypothesis cannot be constructed, the line of inquiry to be used in the research must be indicated.
It refers to all sources of scientific evidence pertaining to the topic in interest. In the present era of digitalisation and easy accessibility, there is an enormous amount of relevant data available, making it a challenge for the researcher to include all of it in his/her review.[ 9 ] It is crucial to structure this section intelligently so that the reader can grasp the argument related to your study in relation to that of other researchers, while still demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. It is preferable to summarise each article in a paragraph, highlighting the details pertinent to the topic of interest. The progression of review can move from the more general to the more focused studies, or a historical progression can be used to develop the story, without making it exhaustive.[ 1 ] Literature should include supporting data, disagreements and controversies. Five ‘C's may be kept in mind while writing a literature review[ 10 ] [ Table 1 ].
The research purpose (or goal or aim) gives a broad indication of what the researcher wishes to achieve in the research. The hypothesis to be tested can be the aim of the study. The objectives related to parameters or tools used to achieve the aim are generally categorised as primary and secondary objectives.
The objective here is to convince the reader that the overall research design and methods of analysis will correctly address the research problem and to impress upon the reader that the methodology/sources chosen are appropriate for the specific topic. It should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.
In this section, the methods and sources used to conduct the research must be discussed, including specific references to sites, databases, key texts or authors that will be indispensable to the project. There should be specific mention about the methodological approaches to be undertaken to gather information, about the techniques to be used to analyse it and about the tests of external validity to which researcher is committed.[ 10 , 11 ]
The components of this section include the following:[ 4 ]
Population refers to all the elements (individuals, objects or substances) that meet certain criteria for inclusion in a given universe,[ 12 ] and sample refers to subset of population which meets the inclusion criteria for enrolment into the study. The inclusion and exclusion criteria should be clearly defined. The details pertaining to sample size are discussed in the article “Sample size calculation: Basic priniciples” published in this issue of IJA.
The researcher is expected to give a detailed account of the methodology adopted for collection of data, which include the time frame required for the research. The methodology should be tested for its validity and ensure that, in pursuit of achieving the results, the participant's life is not jeopardised. The author should anticipate and acknowledge any potential barrier and pitfall in carrying out the research design and explain plans to address them, thereby avoiding lacunae due to incomplete data collection. If the researcher is planning to acquire data through interviews or questionnaires, copy of the questions used for the same should be attached as an annexure with the proposal.
This addresses the strength of the research with respect to its neutrality, consistency and applicability. Rigor must be reflected throughout the proposal.
It refers to the robustness of a research method against bias. The author should convey the measures taken to avoid bias, viz. blinding and randomisation, in an elaborate way, thus ensuring that the result obtained from the adopted method is purely as chance and not influenced by other confounding variables.
Consistency considers whether the findings will be consistent if the inquiry was replicated with the same participants and in a similar context. This can be achieved by adopting standard and universally accepted methods and scales.
Applicability refers to the degree to which the findings can be applied to different contexts and groups.[ 13 ]
This section deals with the reduction and reconstruction of data and its analysis including sample size calculation. The researcher is expected to explain the steps adopted for coding and sorting the data obtained. Various tests to be used to analyse the data for its robustness, significance should be clearly stated. Author should also mention the names of statistician and suitable software which will be used in due course of data analysis and their contribution to data analysis and sample calculation.[ 9 ]
Medical research introduces special moral and ethical problems that are not usually encountered by other researchers during data collection, and hence, the researcher should take special care in ensuring that ethical standards are met. Ethical considerations refer to the protection of the participants' rights (right to self-determination, right to privacy, right to autonomy and confidentiality, right to fair treatment and right to protection from discomfort and harm), obtaining informed consent and the institutional review process (ethical approval). The researcher needs to provide adequate information on each of these aspects.
Informed consent needs to be obtained from the participants (details discussed in further chapters), as well as the research site and the relevant authorities.
When the researcher prepares a research budget, he/she should predict and cost all aspects of the research and then add an additional allowance for unpredictable disasters, delays and rising costs. All items in the budget should be justified.
Appendices are documents that support the proposal and application. The appendices will be specific for each proposal but documents that are usually required include informed consent form, supporting documents, questionnaires, measurement tools and patient information of the study in layman's language.
As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used in composing your proposal. Although the words ‘references and bibliography’ are different, they are used interchangeably. It refers to all references cited in the research proposal.
Successful, qualitative research proposals should communicate the researcher's knowledge of the field and method and convey the emergent nature of the qualitative design. The proposal should follow a discernible logic from the introduction to presentation of the appendices.
Conflicts of interest.
There are no conflicts of interest.
BMC Nursing volume 23 , Article number: 432 ( 2024 ) Cite this article
Metrics details
Mental illness stigma is often common among mentally ill patients. This stigma can come from others or the patients themselves, which is called ‘self-stigma’. The present study explored the widespread impacts of self-stigma on adult patients with depression. Additionally, this review compared the severity of self-stigma levels among psychiatric disorders and to review and update thoughts about self-stigma of depression.
An etiology and risk systematic review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) approach as a guideline. The search process was performed via research databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL. The inclusion criteria are studies include participants diagnosed with depressive disorders, both genders, participants’ exposure to mental illness self-stigma, participants’ experience of self-stigma consequences and any geographical site or clinical settings are included, the type of the included studies must be observational studies. The included studies were limited to the English language studies that were published from 2016 and onwards. Patients with depression under the age of eighteen and patients diagnosed with multiple mental illnesses were excluded. The JBI critical appraisal checklist were adopted to assess the risk of bias.
In December 2022, a comprehensive search yielded eight cross-sectional studies that were included in this systematic review, involving a total of 783 patients diagnosed with depression, and 28 studies were excluded for not fulfilling the inclusion criteria of the review. The findings were extracted and synthesized through textual narrative synthesis into three main categories negatively affected by self-stigma of depression. These are: (1) the impact on the quality of life, (2) the impact on self-esteem and (3) the impact on self-worth. Moreover, in regard to the comparison of self-stigma levels among psychiatric disorders, self-stigma for people with schizophrenia was higher than self-stigma of depression.
Self-stigma of depression has negatively impacted multiple aspects of the patient’s life. Thus, the review brings the following recommendations: increase community awareness, educate the healthcare providers, include the topic of mental illness stigma in academic curriculums. The main limitation of the review is the limited number of included studies.
The research proposal for this review has been registered to Prospero (ID number: CRD42022366555).
Peer Review reports
Depression is a mood disorder in which people exhibit constant feelings of sadness, decreased pleasure and a loss of daily functioning [ 1 ]. Depression affects about 3.8% of the world’s population [ 2 ]. Furthermore, it is the leading cause of suicide [ 3 ]. For instance, the United States reported that 40% to 80% of adults who attempted to commit suicide were found to have been diagnosed with depressive disorder [ 4 ]. The global rate of depression among adults is estimated to be 10.7% [ 2 ]. The mental and psychological changes often appear in adulthood [ 5 ]. Consequently, the peak age of onset for mental illnesses occurs at this time [ 6 ]. Thus, adult patients with depressive disorders become more susceptible to stigma [ 7 ], which increases their risk of experiencing the negative effects of mental illness stigma [ 8 ]. Depression is strongly associated with self-stigma. The prevalence of self-stigma among patients with depression revealed a significant rate of 29% [ 9 ]. The self-stigma, however, is discussed more with schizophrenic disorder rather than mood disorders such as depression. Patients with schizophrenia suffer more intensely and regularly from self-stigma than patients with other mental illnesses [ 10 ]. Additionally, the level of self-stigmatization is altered among psychiatric disorders.
Mental illness stigma (MIS) is defined as a negative combination of biases, discrimination and stereotypes towards people diagnosed with mental illness [ 11 ]. The MIS produces daily life challenges to psychiatric patients. These challenges could include negative attitudes such as negative self-perceptions and negative public behaviors [ 12 ]. MIS is divided into four forms: personal, public, perceived and self-stigma. First, personal stigma is a person’s opinions, feelings and manners towards individuals with mental disabilities [ 8 ]. Second, public stigma refers to negative beliefs and attitudes from the general public towards patients with mental illness [ 13 ]. Third, associated with public stigma is perceived stigma, which refers to the person’s view and concern of others’ reactions towards individuals with mental disabilities [ 8 ]. Fourth, self-stigma which is also called ‘internalized stigma’, is described by the patient’s feeling of shame, low self-esteem and embarrassment towards having a mental and psychological problem [ 14 ]. Furthermore, A study highlighted that once psychiatric patients acknowledge that they need to seek mental healthcare services, this might lower their self-esteem, which consequently forms their self-stigma [ 14 ]. Therefore, self-stigma will disturb the occupational and social life of the patients [ 14 , 15 , 16 ]. Moreover, the self-stigma of depression (SSD) has been associated with the interruption of quality of life (QoL), suicidal ideation and reduced professional and social roles in the patient’s life [ 17 ]. Limited studies, however, have directly focused on the SSD [ 17 ]. In contrast, public stigma is studied more because it reflects the judgment and discrimination that the general population has toward individuals with mental illness [ 18 ]. Thus, public stigma is the most researched and studied type of stigma. The MIS has transformed over the ages. For instance, in 1955, 1956, and 1976, documents show a lack of public understanding about psychiatric disorders and a refusal to discuss cases of mental illness [ 19 ]. Mental illness stigma, however, decreased and the seeking of mental healthcare services increased between 1996 and 2006 [ 19 ]. Moreover, a recent displayed a remarkable reduction in public stigma towards depression [ 20 ]. The published research in the field of self-stigma of depression is still limited to studies concerning testing, examining the scales of self-stigma and studying the relationship between depression and self- stigma. Few of the published studies have addressed the impact of self-stigma on patients with depression. As mentioned earlier, public stigma is more researched than self-stigma, and self- stigma is discussed more in patients with schizophrenia than in patients with depression. Based on the searching process using the systematic reviews’ databases, the subject of the impact of self-stigma on adult patients with depression was barely covered and discussed. The authors of this review, however, found some studies focused on the effect of self-stigma on mental illnesses in general without specifying a particular mental illness, such as depressive disorders. Therefore, this review considered investigating the impact of SSD on adult patients. Further, there is an overlap between depression symptoms and self-stigma effects [ 20 ]. Therefore, the systematic reviews must be conducted by including studies that use reliable scales to measure the SSD, in order to differentiate between symptoms of depression and outcomes of self- stigma. Thus, this review intended to study the impact of self-stigma on participants who were identified as having SSD.
As mentioned earlier, since the stigma has changed over the ages, the need to conduct a reviews about MIS is needed. Therefore, the regular producing and publication of studies about mental illness stigma are required to cope with the changes in MIS. Hence, a search of the systematic reviews’ databases was conducted. This search showed several research papers concerning MIS in general, but limited research focused on the effect of self-stigma on patients with depressive disorders. Thus, there was a noticeable lack of published systematic reviews explicitly concentrated on identifying the impact of self-stigma on adult patients with depression. The current study’s purpose is to answer the following research question ‘what is the general impact of self-stigma on adult patients with depressive disorders?’. In addition to fulfilling the discussed gaps in the background with three intentions: (1) to identify the impact of self-stigma on patients with depressive disorders, (2) to review and update thoughts about self-stigma of depression, (3) to compare the level of depression self-stigma to the self- stigma of other common mental illnesses in order to recognize to what extent self-stigma effects depression.
The systematic reviews for etiology and/or risk is utilized for this review. This kind of review is established to determine the relationship between specific exposure or risks and outcomes [ 21 ]. Furthermore, this type of review is used to determine the extent and impact between an exposure and a health outcome [ 22 ]. The research proposal for this review has been registered to Prospero (ID number: CRD42022366555). However, there is adjustment on the current review, that made it differ from the registered protocol. Researchers should consider modifying and expanding inclusion and exclusion criteria and minor changes to the research question after a deep understanding of the research topic [ 23 ]. This modification concerned the research question which has been slightly modified to become as follows: ‘the general impact of self-stigma on adult patients with depressive disorders’ instead of ‘the experience and impact of stigma in adult patients with depressive disorders’. The purpose for this change is to keep the research question focused on the impact only rather than experiences and to narrow the research question by specifying the type of stigma.
The traditional ‘PICO’ framework for systematic reviews of effectiveness does not align, however, with questions relating to risk and etiology [ 21 ]. A systematic review of etiology and risk should follow the ‘PEO’ framework, which indicates Population, Exposure of interest (independent variable) and Outcome (dependent variable) [ 21 , 22 ]. The research question for this review is as follows: ‘What is the general impact of self-stigma on adult patients with depressive disorders’. Thus, the ‘PEO’ question framework is appropriately used as follow; P, Adult patients with depression disorders, E, Self-stigma of mental illness and O , General impact on the patients’ lives. The population category in this review is clearly stated as adult patients ages eighteen years and above who have been clinically diagnosed with one of the depressive disorders. The exposure is an independent variable, which is the patients’ exposure to self-stigma. The outcome of the present study is the general impact of self-stigma on adult patients with depression. The term ‘general impact’ includes many aspects in which self-stigma could affect patients’ lives, such as the quality of life and cognitive ability. The inclusion and exclusion criteria of the primary included studies are illustrated in Table 1 .
The search procedure initially started in February 2022 and ended in June 2022. The databases utilised were limited to: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). The published and unpublished research that fulfilled the research criteria and that was related to the review topic was reviewed. The search included scanning the research results’ titles, abstracts. The suggested search strategy of the ‘three-phase process’ by the JBI was adopted for this review. First, an initial search was conducted in MEDLINE to identify all the possible keywords associated with the current research topic. Second, the previous step to all the included databases was applied with caution toward each specific database’s characteristic of searching methods. Third, the references list of the collected studies was scanned to find additional studies to prepare for the appraisal step. The authors of the current study examined the titles and abstracts of the search results and excluded research that obviously did not meet the inclusion criteria for this review. Full-text articles were retrieved and carefully inspected to ensure they contained the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality tool used to assess the primary studies for this review is the JBI critical appraisal checklist for analytical cross-sectional studies. Two independent reviewers appraised the quality of the selected studies. The JBI checklist was modified by removing two questions related to the confounding factors, since the included studies have not reported the presence of confounding. The studies were critically appraised based on the following criteria:
Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined?
Were the study subjects and the setting described in detail?
Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way?
Were objective, standard criteria used for measurement of the condition?
Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way?
Was appropriate statistical analysis used?
In this review, some of the included studies are dissimilar regarding participants and methods of assessing the exposure, which makes it inappropriate for the author to apply meta-analysis approach. Therefore, A textual narrative synthesis approach was utilised for this review. This approach aimed to collect the data based on categories derived from the studies’ findings [ 25 ]. This approach was selected intentionally as the research area has not been investigated before through a systematic review. Furthermore, narrative synthesis assists in searching systematically and classifying the data for the first time [ 26 ]. Moreover, according to the JBI framework the textual combination of data is recommended when the included studies are diverse in terms of population, methods, or findings [ 25 ]. Furthermore, any clarification or missing data regarding the included studies was resolved by contacting the authors. For instance, the authors of one of the included studies (Hasan and Musleh, 2018) [ 27 ] were contacted to seek clarification about the tool they used to assess self-stigma, because this will assist the authors of this review to properly evaluating and critiquing the paper. Lastly, the steps of this review have been reported through PRISMA 2020 checklists for abstract and main text.
The search process resulted in the identification of 302 studies. The titles and abstracts were scanned for the total identified studies. Thirty-six studies appeared suitable for this review; however, after comparing them with the inclusion criteria for the current review, eight studies were included and twenty-eight were excluded for not fulfilling the inclusion criteria. The search process was done with the library team’s assistance at the University of Nottingham. The research characteristics of the included studies are illustrated in Table 2 . The sequence of the search results’ process is illustrated through PRISMA 2020 flow diagram in Fig. 1 .
Search results
The results of this review showed that there is a significant impact of depression self-stigma on QoL with a variant impact on the aspects of social relations, school, and study. Low self-esteem was reported as an impact of depression self-stigma; however, a single study indicates that low self-esteem is a symptom of depression, which could be due to depression itself or self-stigma. Self-blame and worthlessness were shown as an effect of self-stigma as the patients reported that they prevented themselves from taking an action in at least one life domain due to their mental illness condition. Concerning the comparison of self-stigma levels among patients with mental illness, most studies showed that schizophrenia was higher in experiencing self-stigma of MIS. A summary of the results was represented in Table 3 .
This section represents and integrates the findings of the included studies that investigated the effect of self-stigma on the life aspects of patients with depression. The following domains were presented in this section: quality of life, self-esteem and self-worthiness. In addition, a comparison of the level of self- stigma of depression with the self-stigma of other mental illnesses was discussed.
The following studies showed the impact of self-stigma of depression on the QoL.
In this study, the overall outcome of ISMI scale showed high significant correlation with all the domains of Q-LES-Q except of the school/study domain. In addition, two subscales from the ISMI scale (stereotype endorsement and stigma resistance) were not significantly correlated with the majority of the Q-LES-Q domains (see Table 4 ). The stereotype endorsement subscale was intended to measure the participants admitting to the common stereotypes of a patient with mental and psychological disorders, such as “psychiatric patients can not contribute and associate with the community because they are mentally ill” [ 28 ]. Stereotype endorsement was significantly correlated with the all the domains of Q-LES-Q except of the physical health, school/study, leisure, and social activities domains. The stigma resistance subscale was placed to determine the patient’s experience of resisting self-stigma of mental illness, such as “despite having a mental condition, I can live a happy and fulfilling life” [ 28 ]. This subscale correlated with all the domains of Q-LES-Q, but not with physical health, leisure time, social activities, and general domain.
The overall result corresponded to the previous study of Holubova et al. (2016b) [ 29 ]. All the subscales of self-stigma were significantly negatively correlated with all the QoL domains except for the domain of school/study (see Table 4 ). This study indicates that patients who self-stigmatize tend to label themselves as “inferior, incompetent at fulfilling their needs and roles, limited in their skills and general life functioning and unable to succeed in life” (Holubova et al. 2016a, p. 3027) [ 15 ]. The patients’ self-evaluation of their mental status appears to have an impact on their perception of ability to function in many aspects of life.
In this study, the total result of self-stigma was significantly negatively correlated with three domains of WHO QoL (satisfaction with psychological health, physical health and environment) (see Table 5 ). The correlation with satisfaction with social relations, however, was also negative but not significant. The majority of QoL subscales negatively correlated in a highly significant manner with the discrimination subscale. The discrimination subscale of the self‐stigma scale was significantly negatively correlated with all the domains of the WHO QoL, except one domain about the satisfaction with social relations. In addition, the subscales of stigma of disclosure and positive aspects of stigma were negative, although they did not reach statistical significance. The other subscale is assessing the positive aspects of stigma, such as, “my mental health problems have made me more accepting of other people” [ 31 ]. Garg and Kaur (2020) highlight that SSD has a negative impact on QoL [ 30 ]. “Stigma causes a significant reduction in hope, self‐esteem, socio‐occupational functioning, life opportunities resulting in shame, guilt, social isolation, and segregation” (Garg and Kaur, 2020, p. 128) [ 30 ].
The social relationships are part of the QoL. This study showed an increase in self-stigma between divorced and single participants. Grambal et al. (2016) assumed that more self-stigmatised patients have problems starting and maintaining a close relationship. Consequently, there is a positive correlation between self-stigma and difficulties in establishing social relationships.
Hence, all the included studies showed an impact of self-stigma on the QoL. Holubova et al. (2016a) and Holubova et al. (2016b) agreed that self-stigma is significantly negatively correlated with QoL except in the school and study domain [ 15 , 29 ]. Garg and Kaur (2020) indicate the significant influence of self-stigma on the QoL except for the insignificant impact on the social relationships [ 30 ]. However, Grambal et al. (2016) place emphasis on the impact and relation of self-stigma on social relationships. The studies’ results concerning the impact of self-stigma on QoL are displayed in Table 4 .
The following studies showed an impact of depression self-stigma on self-esteem.
This study confirmed lower levels of self-esteem were significantly associated with self-stigma of depression. Specifically, SSMIS subscales (stereotype agreement and self-concurrence) were significantly negatively correlated with self-esteem. Stereotype agreement occurs when psychiatric patients support and agree with the common public stereotypes (e.g., mentally ill patients are weak). Self-concurrence is when the psychiatric patients apply and admit the cultural beliefs and views to him or herself (e.g., I am feeble because I have a psychiatric disorder) [ 34 ]. Moreover, in this study self- concurrence had the greatest relationship with low self-esteem.
This study indicates that low self-esteem is one of the symptoms of depression. Therefore, depression and self-stigma have similar effect on self-esteem. This means depression in isolation could lead to low self- esteem. Additionally, self-stigma might lead to low self-esteem as well.
Two of the included studies displayed the impression of self-stigma of depression on self-worthiness and self-blame.
This study showed that self-stigma of depression works as an obstacle to obtain professional career, social interaction and functional recovery that resulted in the following findings. 76% of participants with depression informed anticipated discrimination and stopped themselves in at least one life domain (such as making friends) due to their expectation of discrimination from others. 70% of the participants had hidden their mental illness from others. 54% had prevented themselves from having a close personal relationship. 32% anticipated discrimination, and they did not apply for jobs. 10% anticipated discrimination, and they did not complete their education. The previous findings confirmed that patients had self-worthlessness due to self-stigma of depression.
In this study, participants reported a higher response towards negative stereotypes, followed by patients’ self-blame for their mental condition, and a lower response for the factor ‘inability to recover’, which indicates that patients believe they will not improve.
This section will review the results of the included studies that concerned the comparison of self-stigma between depression and other mental illnesses. The following studies already discussed the matter of comparing self-stigma among mental illnesses, in addition to the main research aim; investigating the self-stigma impact.
The overall ISMI score showed that participants with schizophrenia experienced high level of self-stigma more than participants with depression, specifically in the subscales for stereotype endorsement and perceived discrimination. The differences in alienation and social withdrawal subscales between schizophrenia and depression were markedly close, but schizophrenia was higher than depression.
In this research, the participants with BPD showed the highest the level of self-stigma of all compared psychiatric disorders (schizophrenia, depression and anxiety). All subscales of ISMI showed the highest rate among participants with BPD except for one subscale (stigma resistance). Depression had the highest rate in stigma resistance among all the diagnostic groups.
This study aimed to compare depression, schizophrenia and anxiety. Hasan and Musleh (2018) indicated that the first subscale factor ‘negative stereotypes’ was considerably higher in schizophrenia than in depression and anxiety. Furthermore, negative stereotypes were significantly higher in depression than anxiety. Regarding the second subscale factor ‘patient blame’, depression was higher than both diagnostic groups (schizophrenia and anxiety). In the third subscale factor ‘inability to recover’, schizophrenia scored significantly higher than depression and anxiety. Hence, two of the included studies showed that self-stigma of schizophrenia was higher than self-stigma of depression and anxiety disorder. One study, however, showed that the level of self-stigma in BPD was higher than in schizophrenia, depression and anxiety disorder.
All the included studies assessed and addressed the impact of self-stigma on adult patients with depression. The impact was found to lower three aspects of the participants’ life and personality: QoL, self-worthiness and self-esteem. The QoL and self-worthiness were negatively influenced by the self-stigma of depression. Self-esteem varied slightly; some studies claimed that self- stigma led to low self-esteem, and a single study stated that depression in isolation could lead to lower self-esteem without self-stigma. Regarding the self-stigma comparison, most of the included studies found that schizophrenia patients showed higher levels of self-stigmatization. However, an individual study indicated that patients with BPD have higher levels of self-stigma, followed by schizophrenia, then, depression. Nevertheless, depressive disorder reported higher levels of patients’ self-blame and stigma resistance. A previous study found that self-stigma was associated with low QoL among patients with depressive disorders [ 37 ]. In general, internalized stigma led to lower QoL regardless of the type of mental illness. Further, the fact of being a person who sought psychiatric help could develop a negative self-image. As deduced from this review, the hospitalized patients reported higher levels of internalized stigma, which accordingly exposed them to the consequences of self-stigma, such as poor QoL [ 29 ]. In regard to social life, this review explored patients’ challenges while attempting to establish a social relationship. A study examined the impact of social interaction (SI) on 104 adult patients with severe mental illnesses [ 38 ]. This study found that negative SI significantly led to lower QoL, while supportive SI was related to higher QoL [ 38 ]. Further, they found that perceived stigma fairly liaised between negative SI and poor QoL [ 38 ]. The difference between negative and supportive SI on the patients’ QoL justifies why this review reported variant results about the impact of SSD on social life. Perhaps some participants received supportive SI and public acceptance, unlike others. Moreover, patients who received negative SI might prevent themselves from social interaction or building social relationships since they predict discrimination based on a previous experience. Anticipating discrimination is reported in this review as a behaviour observed by patients with depression who are identified to have SSD. This behaviour will encourage patients to hide their mental illness to prevent discrimination. Concealing mental illness by psychiatric patients is often appears with self-stigma of mental illness and it is the opposite of ‘stigma disclosure’. This review showed that hiding stigma is common in depressive disorders. Patients with depression tend to hide their mental illness due to their feelings of shame and self-stigmatization, which creates challenges and burdens for the patients while they try to cope with their lives and hide their mental disabilities. Hence, the elimination of mental illness stigma could be obtained by revealing the mental illness history of the affected person [ 18 ]. In regard to the self-esteem, a study reported high levels of self- esteem in self-stigmatized patients who received peer support [ 39 ]. Furthermore, family and peer support played a significant role in reducing self-stigma. The current review showed high levels of self- stigmatization among patients with depression who lived with their unsupportive parents in Asian and Middle Eastern countries. A recent systematic review aimed to investigate the frequency of mental illness self-stigma in different cultural and geographic areas [ 40 ]. The study found that the highest frequency was in South-East Asia (39.7%) and the Middle East (39%). Mental health problems are often neglected and hidden in Asian culture because admitting mental illness is usually associated with shame, stigmatization and lack of family support [ 41 ]. Furthermore, McGuire and Pace (2018) studied the impact of self-stigma of depression between Christians and non-Christian participants diagnosed with depression [ 42 ]. The study showed an increased level of self-stigma in the Christian group, which reveals that religious and cultural beliefs impacted the self- stigma of depression. Regarding self-worth, Corrigan, Larson and Rusch (2009) identified the “Why Try” effect of self-stigma [ 43 ]. This effect occurred when people with psychiatric disorders considered themselves unworthy or unqualified to achieve life goals due to their application of public mental illness stereotypes to themselves [ 44 ]. Corrigan et al. (2009) [ 43 ] showed that negative self-worth was observed highly in patients with depression and linked with offensive stereotypes to themselves [ 34 ]. An example of the patient’s thought is “someone like me is just not worth to be successful in life” [ 43 ]. Correspondingly, the findings of the current review reported reduction in self-worth due to SSD. The forms of self-worthlessness include the patients’ refusal to get a job and to blame themselves for their mental illness. In this review, the level of self-stigma was altered among mental illnesses, but most of the included studies reported a high level of internalized stigma in schizophrenia, except one study reported high level of stigma on BPD, which could be due to the disorder’s symptoms as it is identified by disturbance of self-image, thoughts, and mood. This increased self-stigmatization in schizophrenia could be due to the evident influence of the public stigma on patients with psychotic disorders. Moreover, the public considered psychotic patients more dangerous and aggressive [ 45 ]. Moreover, schizophrenia is characterized by hallucinations and delusions, which are obvious symptoms that easily produce public stigma, unlike nonpsychotic [ 46 ]. Therefore, the effect of public stigma will extend to disturbed self-perception, which will result in high levels of internalized stigma. Some published studies, however, reported that nonpsychotic disorders had higher levels of self-stigma compared to psychotic disorders. A tested and confirmed hypothesis indicate that patients with nonpsychotic disorders such as depression were aware of the negative public stereotypes, making them experience self-stigma more intensely than psychotic patients [ 47 ]. From the same perspective, in this review self-stigma resistance was reported as high in depression. Also, a study showed that greater stigma resistance was found among patients with depression [ 48 ]. Stigma resistance in mental health is defined as the ability to remain unresponsive to mental illness stigma [ 28 ]. The resistance was associated with reduced self-stigma, increased self-esteem and improved QoL [ 49 ]. The presence of self-stigma resistance among patients with depression could be due to the patients’ awareness of public stigma since patients are aware they will be able to cope with internalised stigma. Some of the included studies, however, reported low stigma resistance, which could be interpreted as a response of depression symptoms such as feelings of worthlessness, anhedonia and irritable mood. Self-blaming is usually linked to depression. A study showed that more than 80% of patients with depression reported self-blaming for failing to achieve life duties such as losing jobs or social relations [ 50 ]. Thus, these reasons for self-blaming indicated poor QoL, which is mentioned earlier in this review as an impact of self-stigma. Clearly, self-stigma leads indirectly to self-blaming, and depression demonstrated a higher rate of self-blaming due to internalized stigma. Generalization of the research results is critical when applying the findings to population, settings, and times other than those in the original study. A research evidence can only be applied outside the contexts studied when the settings and population are similar to the original study, otherwise there would be no evidence-based practice [ 51 ]. Regarding this study, the culture was an obstacle to generalizing the study findings. The Asian studies in this review reported an impact of self- stigma on self-esteem and self-worth. In contrast, none of the European studies mentioned the effects of self-stigma on self-esteem or self-worth. Consequently, the self-stigma was affected by the culture, traditions and beliefs of the patients’ societies. For example, Asians tend to live with their families, making psychiatric patients more exposed to public stigma by their families, leading to self-esteem disturbance. In addition, three of the included studies in this review have confirmed cultural differences encountered while investigating the impact of self-stigma among patients with depression. Furthermore, A study confirmed cross-cultural differences in the relationship between mental illness self-stigma and other concepts, such as masculine sex norms and negative ideas toward seeking mental help [ 52 ]. Consequently, due to cultural differences, the findings of this review could not be globally generalized. Nonetheless, it could be locally generalized based on each cultural type and geographical site.
All the included studies that contributed to the outcomes of this review were observational (cross-sectional) studies. Cross-sectional studies are best used in health research to assess and investigate the exposure and outcome of a particular health issue [ 53 ]. Cross-sectional studies, however, are prone to some biases [ 54 ]. For example, the included studies of this review measured the self-stigma of mentally ill patients at one point during the interview or questionnaire, regardless of the patient’s compliance to medications, which were found to influence the onset and severity of self-stigma. According to this review, patients who adhered to medications experienced less self-stigma and more stigma resistance.
The main limitation of this review is that the issue of self-stigma of depression was not sufficiently discussed and covered in previous research. In contrast, the researchers broadly discussed the impact of self-stigma on patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder (BD). This attention could be due to increasing public stigma, which leads to increased internalized stigma for patients with schizophrenia and BD. Therefore, the researcher will be encouraged to study more about the self-stigma of schizophrenia or BD. Furthermore, four of the included studies stated that their study is the first of its type acknowledging the impact of self-stigma on patients with depression [ 27 , 30 , 32 , 36 ]. This explains the limited number of included studies in this review. A strong point of this research is that it included recent studies despite the limited number of published papers on the topic. Thus, the need for the current study was essential and required. All the included studies comprised a sample from both genders. The ratio number of males and females was not close in most studies. Three studies reported insignificant differences between the genders. The remaining studies did not mention the differences they found. That could affect the reliability of the study. A study indicated that females with mental illnesses tend to self- stigmatize themselves more than males [ 55 ]. Additional limitations arise from the omission of techniques aimed at minimizing errors of data extraction, which has not been done due to the time constraints for this review. Another limitation pertains to the restricted scope of searching within identified databases, disregarding the inclusion of gray literature that has not been explored. Finally, the inclusion criteria of the study settings were broad, which was considered a limitation since it found that the hospitalized patients stigmatized themselves more than the psychiatric patients who visited the outpatient clinics.
The current review satisfactorily answered the research question and met the objectives. The review explored the impact of SSD. The impact was demonstrated from the QoL to the profound intrapersonal effect on self-esteem and self-worthiness. The QoL was negatively affected and reflected on negative stereotypes by the patients themselves, which led to poor functioning in life. In addition, due to self- stigmatization, patients with depression tend to hide their mental illness, which is associated indirectly with decreasing the QoL. Moreover, self-stigma has a significantly negative impact on social life.
However, some studies have proven that it insignificantly negatively affects. Furthermore, SSD had a slightly negative effect on academic performance. Intrapersonal impact depicted lower levels of self-esteem and self-worthiness associated with SSD. This study has proven that the lower self-esteem level is hard to decide as an impact of SSD since it is a symptom of depression. Self-worthiness affected the patients by stopping them in at least one life domain. They anticipated discrimination and prevented themselves from taking decisions and getting better opportunities. Moreover, patients with depression reported self-blame for their mental condition. Studying the impact from a global perspective allowed the author to know the majority of the effects of SSD and understand the cultural differences affecting it. The Asian and Middle Eastern cultures showed increasing rates and severity of self-stigma of depression. This study emphasized that public and perceived stigma are associated with the formation of self-stigma. Further, the published studies in this area were heterogeneous regarding the self-stigma scales used, so generating systematic reviews and meta-analysis is recommended based on a unified self-stigma scale used in all of the included studies since this will provide accurate and reliable findings.
The research recommendations and clinical implications of this review were summarized and presented in Figs. 2 and 3 .
The research recommendations
The clinical implications
Data is provided within the manuscript or supplementary information files and The datasets analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Bipolar Disorder
Borderline Personality Disorder
Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature
Excerpta Medica Database
Joanna Briggs Institute
Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online
Mental Illness Stigma
Quality of Life
Social Interaction
Self-stigma of Depression
World Health Organization
Sadock B, Sadock V, Ruiz P. Kaplan and Sadock’s comprehensive textbook of psychiatry. 10th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2017.
Google Scholar
Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME). Global health data exchange. IHME; 2019. Available at: https://vizhub.healthdata.org/gbd-results/?params=gbd-api-2019-permalink/d780dffbe8a381b25e1416884959e88b . Accessed 11 Aug 2022.
Munoz R, Beardslee W, Leykin Y. Major depression can be prevented. Am Psychol. 2012;67(4):285. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027666 . Accessed 15 Aug 2022.
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Conwell Y. Management of suicidal behavior in the elderly. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 1997;20(3):667. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0193-953x(05)70336-1 . Accessed 19 Aug 2022.
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). Depression. NIMH; 2018. Available at: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/depression . Accessed 14 Aug 2022.
Hertzman C, Boyce T. How experience gets under the skin to create gradients in developmental health. Annu Rev Public Health. 2010;31:329-following347. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.012809.103538 .
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Festa C, Ginsburg G. Parental and peer predictors of social anxiety in youth. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2011;42(3):291–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-011-0215-8 . Accessed 17 Aug 2022.
Lynch H, McDonagh C, Hennessy E. Social anxiety and depression stigma among adolescents. J Affect Disord. 2021;281:744–50.
Du N, Chong ESK, Wei D, Liu Z, Mu Z, Deng S, Huang YT. Prevalence, risk, and protective factors of self-stigma for people living with depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2023;332:327–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2023.04.013 . ISSN 0165-0327.
Chang C, Wu T, Chen C, Lin C. Comparing self-stigma between people with different mental disorders in Taiwan. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2016;204(7):547–53.
Corrigan P, Shapiro J. Measuring the impact of programs that challenge the public stigma of mental illness. Clin Psychol Rev. 2010;30(8):907–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.06.004 . Accessed 16 Aug 2022.
VandenBos G. APA dictionary of psychology. Washington, D.C: American Psychological Association Publishing; 2015.
Book Google Scholar
Corrigan PW, Powell KJ, Rüsch N. How does stigma affect work in people with serious mental illnesses? Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2012;35(5):381–4. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0094497 . Accessed 17 Aug 2022.
Latalova K, Kamaradova D, Prasko J. Perspectives on perceived stigma and self-stigma in adult male patients with depression. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2014;10:1399–405. https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S54081 . Accessed 13 Aug 2022.
Holubova M, Prasko J, Matousek S, Latalova K, Marackova M, Vrbova K, Grambal A, Slepecky M, Zatkova M. Comparison of self-stigma and quality of life in patients with depressive disorders and schizophrenia spectrum disorders - a cross-sectional study. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2016;12:3021–30.
World Health Organization (WHO). Depression and other common mental disorders. WHO; 2017. Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/254610/WHO-MSD-MER-2017.2-eng.pdf . Accessed 15 Aug 2022.
Musa A, Ashraf J, Tsai F, Abolmagd S, Liu C, Hussain H, Voslarova E, Khalil MA, Wolitzky- Taylor KB, Lee D, Sugar J, Pendi K, Lee J, Abdelmaksoud R, Adel N, Baron D. Depression severity and depression stigma among students: a survey of universities in five countries. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2020;208(11):884. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0000000000001226 . Accessed 14 Aug 2022.
Corrigan PW, Rao D. On the self-stigma of mental illness: stages, disclosure, and strategies for change. Can J Psychiatry. 2012;57(8):464–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674371205700804 . Accessed 13 Jul 2022.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM). Ending discrimination against people with mental and substance use disorders: the evidence for stigma. 1st ed. Washington, D.C: The National Academic Press; 2016.
Pescosolido B, Halpern-Manners A, Luo L, Perry B. Trends in public stigma of mental illness in the US, 1996–2018. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(12). https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.40202 . Accessed 21 Aug 2022.
Moola S, Munn Z, Sears K, Sfetcu R, Currie M, Lisy K, Tufanaru C, Qureshi R, Mattis P, Mu P. Conducting systematic reviews of association (etiology): The Joanna Briggs Institute’s approach. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(3):163–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000064 . Accessed 21 June 2022.
Munn Z, Stern C, Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Jordan Z. What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):5.
Aslam S, Emmanuel P. Formulating a researchable question: a critical step for facilitating good clinical research. Indian J Sex Transm Dis AIDS. 2010;31(1):47–50. https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7184.69003 . Accessed 24 June 2022.
Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, Moher D, Becker BJ, Sipe TA, Thacker SB. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. J Am Med Assoc. 2000;283(15):2008–12. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.283.15.2008 . Accessed 25 June 2022.
Article CAS Google Scholar
Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI); 2020. Available at: https://synthesismanual.jbi.global . Accessed 26 June 2022.
Ryan R. Data synthesis and analysis. Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review. 2013. Available at: https://cccrg.cochrane.org/sites/cccrg.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/AnalysisRestyled.pdf . Accessed 30 June 2022.
Hasan AA, Musleh M. Self-stigma by people diagnosed with schizophrenia, depression and anxiety: cross-sectional survey design. Perspect Psychiatr Care. 2018;54(2):142–8.
Ritsher JB, Otilingam PG, Grajales M. Internalized stigma of mental illness: psychometric properties of a new measure. Psychiatry Res. 2003;121(1):31–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2003.08.008 . Accessed 10 Jul 2022.
Holubova M, Prasko J, Ociskova M, Marackova M, Grambal A, Slepecky M. Self- stigma and quality of life in patients with depressive disorder: a cross-sectional study. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2016;12:2677–87.
Garg R, Kaur H. Quality of life among patients with depression: Impact of self-stigma. Indian J Soc Psychiatry. 2020;36(2):125–9.
Article Google Scholar
King M, Dinos S, Shaw J, Watson R, Stevens S, Passetti F, Weich S, Serfaty M. The stigma scale: development of a standardised measure of the stigma of mental illness. Br J Psychiatry. 2007;190(3):248–54.
Grambal A, Prasko J, Kamaradova D, Latalova K, Holubova M, Marackova M, Ociskova M, Slepecky M. Self-stigma in borderline personality disorder - cross-sectional comparison with schizophrenia spectrum disorder, major depressive disorder, and anxiety disorders. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2016;12:2439–48. https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S114671 . PMID: 27703362; PMCID: PMC5036602.
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Abo-Rass F, Werner P, Shinan-Altman S. Self-stigma formation process among younger and older Israeli Arabs diagnosed with depression. Aging Ment Health. 2021;25(6):1071–6.
Watson AC, Corrigan P, Larson JE, Sells M. Self-stigma in people with mental illness. Schizophr Bull. 2007;33(6):1312–8.
Shimotsu S, Horikawa N. Self-stigma in depressive patients: association of cognitive schemata, depression, and self-esteem. Asian J Psychiatr. 2016;24:125–9.
Patra BN, Patil V, Balhara Y, Khandelwal SK. Self-stigma in patients with major depressive disorder: an exploratory study from India. Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2022;68(1):147–54.
Yen C, Chen C, Lee Y, Tang T, Ko C, Yen J. Association between quality of life and self-stigma, insight, and adverse effects of medication in patients with depressive disorders. Depress Anxiety. 2009;26(11):1033–9.
Yanos PT, Rosenfield S, Horwitz AV. Negative and supportive social interactions and quality of life among persons diagnosed with severe mental illness. Community Ment Health J. 2001;37:405–19. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017528029127 . Accessed 17 Aug 2022.
Verhaeghe M, Bracke P, Bruynooghe K. Stigmatization and self-esteem of persons in recovery from mental illness: the role of peer support. Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2008;54(3):206–18.
Dubreucq J, Plasse J, Franck N. Self-stigma in serious mental illness: a systematic review of frequency, correlates, and consequences. Schizophr Bull. 2021;47(5):1261–87. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbaa181 . Accessed 12 Aug 2022.
Jimenez DE, Bartels SJ, Cardenas V, Alegría M. Stigmatizing attitudes toward mental illness among racial/ethnic older adults in primary care. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2013;28(10):1061–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.3928 . Accessed 2 Aug 2022.
McGuire JM, Pace AC. Self-stigma of depression in Christians versus the general population. Ment Health Relig Cult. 2018;21(6):601–8.
Corrigan PW, Larson JE, Rusch N. Self-stigma and the “why try” effect: impact on life goals and evidence-based practices. World Psychiatry. 2009;8(2):75–8.
Corrigan PW, Bink AB, Schmidt A, Jones N, Rüsch N. What is the impact of self- stigma? Loss of self-respect and the “why try” effect. J Ment Health. 2016;25(1):10–5.
Ellison N, Mason O, Scior K. Bipolar disorder and stigma: a systematic review of the literature. J Affect Disord. 2013;151(3):805–20.
American Psychiatric Association (APA). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.). 2022.
Ihalainen N, Löyttyniemi E, Välimäki M. Self-stigma among clients of outpatient psychiatric clinics: a cross-sectional survey. PLoS One. 2022;17(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269465 . Accessed 31 Jul 2022.
Brohan E, Gauci D, Sartorius N, Thornicroft G, GAMIAN-Europe Study Group. Self- stigma, empowerment and perceived discrimination among people with bipolar disorder or depression in 13 European countries: the GAMIAN-Europe study. J Affect Disord. 2011;129(1–3):56–63.
Sibitz I, Unger A, Woppmann A, Zidek T, Amering M. Stigma resistance in patients with schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull. 2011;37(2):316–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbp048 . Accessed 27 Jul 2022.
Zahn R, Lythe KE, Gethin JA, Green S, Deakin JF, Young AH, Moll J. The role of self-blame and worthlessness in the psychopathology of major depressive disorder. J Affect Disord. 2015;186:337–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2015.08.001 . Accessed 31 Jul 2022.
Polit DF, Beck CT. Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47(11):1451–8.
Bathje GJ, Marston HN. Encyclopedia of critical psychology, self-stigmatization. New York: Springer; 2014.
Sedgwick P. Cross sectional studies: advantages and disadvantages. BMJ. 2014;348(2):2276–2276.
Setia MS. Methodology series module 3: cross-sectional studies. Indian J Dermatol. 2016;61(3):261–4. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5154.182410 . Accessed 12 Aug 2022.
Girma E, Tesfaye M, Froeschl G, Möller-Leimkühler AM, Dehning-SMüller N. Facility based cross-sectional study of self stigma among people with mental illness: towards patient empowerment approach. J Ment Health Syst. 2013;7(1):21.
Download references
Not Applicable.
No funding.
Alan Pringle is deceased.
Faculty of Nursing and Applied Medical Sciences, College of Applied Medical Science in Jubail, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU), Jubail Industrial City, Saudi Arabia
Refah Alqahtani
Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, Nottingham University, Nottingham City, UK
Alan Pringle
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
The authors, RA and AP, collaborated in establishing the research protocol and defining the inclusion criteria for the study. RA took on the responsibility of screening the identified databases and initially selecting the relevant studies. Subsequently, both RA and AP jointly reviewed and finalized the selection of included studies. The critical appraisal of the studies was conducted by both RA and AP. RA performed the data extraction and data synthesis, while AP reviewed and revised the data extraction and data synthesis. Finally, RA conduct the conclusion of the study, while AP go through a deep revision for the whole research paper.
Correspondence to Refah Alqahtani .
Ethics approval and consent to participate.
Not applicable.
Competing interests.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary material 1., supplementary material 2., supplementary material 3..
Supplementary Material 4.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Reprints and permissions
Cite this article.
Alqahtani, R., Pringle, A. The general impact of self-stigma of mental illness on adult patients with depressive disorders: a systematic review. BMC Nurs 23 , 432 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02047-z
Download citation
Received : 02 February 2024
Accepted : 28 May 2024
Published : 25 June 2024
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02047-z
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
ISSN: 1472-6955
June 24, 2024
The final FY 2025 Fringe Benefit Rates are available in SAGE, as well as in the Fringe Benefit Rate table . Use these updated rates on multi-year sponsored program proposal budgets to best reflect anticipated costs.
If you submitted a proposal using the previously published (preliminary) rates for budget years beyond FY25, upon award, you may re-budget as necessary to account for these changes. In most cases, this will not require sponsor approval.
Go to the Budget Settings on the left navigation, expand the Data & Calculations section and “Refresh Benefit Rates”.
Review the GIM 3 Benefit Rate policy or contact your department’s OSP reviewer . SAGE Budget questions? Contact [email protected]
Not Seeing the New Rates on the Research Website?
If you don’t see the newest rates in the Benefit Rate Table you may need to clear your web browser cache. Review instructions for some popular browsers:
Or support offices.
© 2024 University of Washington | Seattle, WA
A Straightforward How-To Guide (With Examples)
By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Reviewed By: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | August 2019 (Updated April 2023)
Writing up a strong research proposal for a dissertation or thesis is much like a marriage proposal. It’s a task that calls on you to win somebody over and persuade them that what you’re planning is a great idea. An idea they’re happy to say ‘yes’ to. This means that your dissertation proposal needs to be persuasive , attractive and well-planned. In this post, I’ll show you how to write a winning dissertation proposal, from scratch.
Before you start:
– Understand exactly what a research proposal is – Ask yourself these 4 questions
The 5 essential ingredients:
The research proposal is literally that: a written document that communicates what you propose to research, in a concise format. It’s where you put all that stuff that’s spinning around in your head down on to paper, in a logical, convincing fashion.
Convincing is the keyword here, as your research proposal needs to convince the assessor that your research is clearly articulated (i.e., a clear research question) , worth doing (i.e., is unique and valuable enough to justify the effort), and doable within the restrictions you’ll face (time limits, budget, skill limits, etc.). If your proposal does not address these three criteria, your research won’t be approved, no matter how “exciting” the research idea might be.
PS – if you’re completely new to proposal writing, we’ve got a detailed walkthrough video covering two successful research proposals here .
Before starting the writing process, you need to ask yourself 4 important questions . If you can’t answer them succinctly and confidently, you’re not ready – you need to go back and think more deeply about your dissertation topic .
You should be able to answer the following 4 questions before starting your dissertation or thesis research proposal:
If you can’t answer these questions clearly and concisely, you’re not yet ready to write your research proposal – revisit our post on choosing a topic .
If you can, that’s great – it’s time to start writing up your dissertation proposal. Next, I’ll discuss what needs to go into your research proposal, and how to structure it all into an intuitive, convincing document with a linear narrative.
Research proposals can vary in style between institutions and disciplines, but here I’ll share with you a handy 5-section structure you can use. These 5 sections directly address the core questions we spoke about earlier, ensuring that you present a convincing proposal. If your institution already provides a proposal template, there will likely be substantial overlap with this, so you’ll still get value from reading on.
For each section discussed below, make sure you use headers and sub-headers (ideally, numbered headers) to help the reader navigate through your document, and to support them when they need to revisit a previous section. Don’t just present an endless wall of text, paragraph after paragraph after paragraph…
Top Tip: Use MS Word Styles to format headings. This will allow you to be clear about whether a sub-heading is level 2, 3, or 4. Additionally, you can view your document in ‘outline view’ which will show you only your headings. This makes it much easier to check your structure, shift things around and make decisions about where a section needs to sit. You can also generate a 100% accurate table of contents using Word’s automatic functionality.
Your research proposal’s title should be your main research question in its simplest form, possibly with a sub-heading providing basic details on the specifics of the study. For example:
“Compliance with equality legislation in the charity sector: a study of the ‘reasonable adjustments’ made in three London care homes”
As you can see, this title provides a clear indication of what the research is about, in broad terms. It paints a high-level picture for the first-time reader, which gives them a taste of what to expect. Always aim for a clear, concise title . Don’t feel the need to capture every detail of your research in your title – your proposal will fill in the gaps.
In this section of your research proposal, you’ll expand on what you’ve communicated in the title, by providing a few paragraphs which offer more detail about your research topic. Importantly, the focus here is the topic – what will you research and why is that worth researching? This is not the place to discuss methodology, practicalities, etc. – you’ll do that later.
You should cover the following:
Importantly, you should aim to use short sentences and plain language – don’t babble on with extensive jargon, acronyms and complex language. Assume that the reader is an intelligent layman – not a subject area specialist (even if they are). Remember that the best writing is writing that can be easily understood and digested. Keep it simple.
Note that some universities may want some extra bits and pieces in your introduction section. For example, personal development objectives, a structural outline, etc. Check your brief to see if there are any other details they expect in your proposal, and make sure you find a place for these.
Next, you’ll need to specify what the scope of your research will be – this is also known as the delimitations . In other words, you need to make it clear what you will be covering and, more importantly, what you won’t be covering in your research. Simply put, this is about ring fencing your research topic so that you have a laser-sharp focus.
All too often, students feel the need to go broad and try to address as many issues as possible, in the interest of producing comprehensive research. Whilst this is admirable, it’s a mistake. By tightly refining your scope, you’ll enable yourself to go deep with your research, which is what you need to earn good marks. If your scope is too broad, you’re likely going to land up with superficial research (which won’t earn marks), so don’t be afraid to narrow things down.
In this section of your research proposal, you need to provide a (relatively) brief discussion of the existing literature. Naturally, this will not be as comprehensive as the literature review in your actual dissertation, but it will lay the foundation for that. In fact, if you put in the effort at this stage, you’ll make your life a lot easier when it’s time to write your actual literature review chapter.
There are a few things you need to achieve in this section:
When you write up your literature review, keep these three objectives front of mind, especially number two (revealing the gap in the literature), so that your literature review has a clear purpose and direction . Everything you write should be contributing towards one (or more) of these objectives in some way. If it doesn’t, you need to ask yourself whether it’s truly needed.
Top Tip: Don’t fall into the trap of just describing the main pieces of literature, for example, “A says this, B says that, C also says that…” and so on. Merely describing the literature provides no value. Instead, you need to synthesise it, and use it to address the three objectives above.
Now that you’ve clearly explained both your intended research topic (in the introduction) and the existing research it will draw on (in the literature review section), it’s time to get practical and explain exactly how you’ll be carrying out your own research. In other words, your research methodology.
In this section, you’ll need to answer two critical questions :
In other words, this is not just about explaining WHAT you’ll be doing, it’s also about explaining WHY. In fact, the justification is the most important part , because that justification is how you demonstrate a good understanding of research design (which is what assessors want to see).
Some essential design choices you need to cover in your research proposal include:
This list is not exhaustive – these are just some core attributes of research design. Check with your institution what level of detail they expect. The “ research onion ” by Saunders et al (2009) provides a good summary of the various design choices you ultimately need to make – you can read more about that here .
In addition to the technical aspects, you will need to address the practical side of the project. In other words, you need to explain what resources you’ll need (e.g., time, money, access to equipment or software, etc.) and how you intend to secure these resources. You need to show that your project is feasible, so any “make or break” type resources need to already be secured. The success or failure of your project cannot depend on some resource which you’re not yet sure you have access to.
Another part of the practicalities discussion is project and risk management . In other words, you need to show that you have a clear project plan to tackle your research with. Some key questions to address:
A good way to demonstrate that you’ve thought this through is to include a Gantt chart and a risk register (in the appendix if word count is a problem). With these two tools, you can show that you’ve got a clear, feasible plan, and you’ve thought about and accounted for the potential risks.
Tip – Be honest about the potential difficulties – but show that you are anticipating solutions and workarounds. This is much more impressive to an assessor than an unrealistically optimistic proposal which does not anticipate any challenges whatsoever.
The final step is to edit and proofread your proposal – very carefully. It sounds obvious, but all too often poor editing and proofreading ruin a good proposal. Nothing is more off-putting for an assessor than a poorly edited, typo-strewn document. It sends the message that you either do not pay attention to detail, or just don’t care. Neither of these are good messages. Put the effort into editing and proofreading your proposal (or pay someone to do it for you) – it will pay dividends.
When you’re editing, watch out for ‘academese’. Many students can speak simply, passionately and clearly about their dissertation topic – but become incomprehensible the moment they turn the laptop on. You are not required to write in any kind of special, formal, complex language when you write academic work. Sure, there may be technical terms, jargon specific to your discipline, shorthand terms and so on. But, apart from those, keep your written language very close to natural spoken language – just as you would speak in the classroom. Imagine that you are explaining your project plans to your classmates or a family member. Remember, write for the intelligent layman, not the subject matter experts. Plain-language, concise writing is what wins hearts and minds – and marks!
And there you have it – how to write your dissertation or thesis research proposal, from the title page to the final proof. Here’s a quick recap of the key takeaways:
Hopefully, this post has helped you better understand how to write up a winning research proposal. If you enjoyed it, be sure to check out the rest of the Grad Coach Blog . If your university doesn’t provide any template for your proposal, you might want to try out our free research proposal template .
This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Research Proposal Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .
Thank you so much for the valuable insight that you have given, especially on the research proposal. That is what I have managed to cover. I still need to go back to the other parts as I got disturbed while still listening to Derek’s audio on you-tube. I am inspired. I will definitely continue with Grad-coach guidance on You-tube.
Thanks for the kind words :). All the best with your proposal.
First of all, thanks a lot for making such a wonderful presentation. The video was really useful and gave me a very clear insight of how a research proposal has to be written. I shall try implementing these ideas in my RP.
Once again, I thank you for this content.
I found reading your outline on writing research proposal very beneficial. I wish there was a way of submitting my draft proposal to you guys for critiquing before I submit to the institution.
Hi Bonginkosi
Thank you for the kind words. Yes, we do provide a review service. The best starting point is to have a chat with one of our coaches here: https://gradcoach.com/book/new/ .
Hello team GRADCOACH, may God bless you so much. I was totally green in research. Am so happy for your free superb tutorials and resources. Once again thank you so much Derek and his team.
You’re welcome, Erick. Good luck with your research proposal 🙂
thank you for the information. its precise and on point.
Really a remarkable piece of writing and great source of guidance for the researchers. GOD BLESS YOU for your guidance. Regards
Thanks so much for your guidance. It is easy and comprehensive the way you explain the steps for a winning research proposal.
Thank you guys so much for the rich post. I enjoyed and learn from every word in it. My problem now is how to get into your platform wherein I can always seek help on things related to my research work ? Secondly, I wish to find out if there is a way I can send my tentative proposal to you guys for examination before I take to my supervisor Once again thanks very much for the insights
Thanks for your kind words, Desire.
If you are based in a country where Grad Coach’s paid services are available, you can book a consultation by clicking the “Book” button in the top right.
Best of luck with your studies.
May God bless you team for the wonderful work you are doing,
If I have a topic, Can I submit it to you so that you can draft a proposal for me?? As I am expecting to go for masters degree in the near future.
Thanks for your comment. We definitely cannot draft a proposal for you, as that would constitute academic misconduct. The proposal needs to be your own work. We can coach you through the process, but it needs to be your own work and your own writing.
Best of luck with your research!
I found a lot of many essential concepts from your material. it is real a road map to write a research proposal. so thanks a lot. If there is any update material on your hand on MBA please forward to me.
GradCoach is a professional website that presents support and helps for MBA student like me through the useful online information on the page and with my 1-on-1 online coaching with the amazing and professional PhD Kerryen.
Thank you Kerryen so much for the support and help 🙂
I really recommend dealing with such a reliable services provider like Gradcoah and a coach like Kerryen.
Hi, Am happy for your service and effort to help students and researchers, Please, i have been given an assignment on research for strategic development, the task one is to formulate a research proposal to support the strategic development of a business area, my issue here is how to go about it, especially the topic or title and introduction. Please, i would like to know if you could help me and how much is the charge.
This content is practical, valuable, and just great!
Thank you very much!
Hi Derek, Thank you for the valuable presentation. It is very helpful especially for beginners like me. I am just starting my PhD.
This is quite instructive and research proposal made simple. Can I have a research proposal template?
Great! Thanks for rescuing me, because I had no former knowledge in this topic. But with this piece of information, I am now secured. Thank you once more.
I enjoyed listening to your video on how to write a proposal. I think I will be able to write a winning proposal with your advice. I wish you were to be my supervisor.
Dear Derek Jansen,
Thank you for your great content. I couldn’t learn these topics in MBA, but now I learned from GradCoach. Really appreciate your efforts….
From Afghanistan!
I have got very essential inputs for startup of my dissertation proposal. Well organized properly communicated with video presentation. Thank you for the presentation.
Wow, this is absolutely amazing guys. Thank you so much for the fruitful presentation, you’ve made my research much easier.
this helps me a lot. thank you all so much for impacting in us. may god richly bless you all
How I wish I’d learn about Grad Coach earlier. I’ve been stumbling around writing and rewriting! Now I have concise clear directions on how to put this thing together. Thank you!
Fantastic!! Thank You for this very concise yet comprehensive guidance.
Even if I am poor in English I would like to thank you very much.
Thank you very much, this is very insightful.
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.
The Center for Public Education and Community Engagement (CPECE), housed in the College of Education at Texas Christian University (TCU), invites community organizations and academic researchers to submit community-based research proposals for three-year project funding.
These projects aim to foster collaboration between TCU and local communities, focusing on creating positive social change and addressing issues faced by marginalized communities. This initiative is based on the belief that everyone can contribute to positive social change.
Faculty and community-based organizations, including non-profit organizations, grassroots initiatives, schools, community groups, and social enterprises are encouraged to apply jointly.
Proposals require equal partnerships, co-creation of knowledge, and the importance of centering the knowledge and experiences of marginalized communities.
Successful proposals will challenge traditional models of academic research, build long-term partnerships, and ensure lasting community benefits beyond the three-year funding period.
For more information regarding proposal criteria and to submit proposals visit CPECE Call for Community-Based Research Propsals .
Women's Economic Symposium empowers and educate attendees about career development, marketplace acumen and economic independence.
TCU College of Education hosts Scripps Regional Spelling Bee, highlighting the skills of 25 young spellers from second through eighth grades.
Professor Cynthia Savage’s role as associate dean of undergraduate studies has recently expanded. She now serves as the associate dean of teacher education, assessment and undergraduate studies in the College of Education at TCU.
TCU’s College of Education is set to host the inaugural Maestro Conference on Saturday, May 18, at 8 a.m. at the Dee J. Kelly Alumni & Visitors Center. The event aims to support and develop Latinx male educators through an action-packed day comprised of dynamic speakers, professional development sessions, networking and community-building opportunities.
TCU education course transcends academic boundaries by propelling students into the core of societal issues and community-driven solutions. Utilizing field visits and guest lectures, the course immerses students in the real-world challenges prevalent in diverse communities surrounding Fort Worth, Texas.
Tell us about the person and their story. Please include any contact information you may have for them.
University of Notre Dame
Lucy Family Institute for Data and Society
NOMINATION DEADLINE: August 1, 2024
The Lucy Family Institute for Data & Society seeks nominations for our annual Lucy Societal Impact Awards (“ The Lucies “) to recognize individuals or teams whose work exemplifies the Institute’s vision to inspire collaborative, equitable, and impactful data innovations as a global force for good .
We will award up to three individuals or teams who have worked to advance data-driven convergence research, translational solutions, and/or education to ethically address society’s wicked problems.
Work should include significant contributions within the civic, industry, academic, or research arena with impact at either the regional (South Bend/Elkhart) or global (United States and beyond) level.
The Institute will work with teams that are selected as finalists to create a project video summary that will be shown at the Lucy Annual Celebration in October 2024.
We welcome nominations for project teams that are composed of both Notre Dame and external candidates, but the work must be led or co-led by a Notre Dame faculty or staff member. The team may include students or postdoctoral scholars.
External awardees may include any individual or representative within industry, community, NGO, civic, or other project collaborators. This includes but is not limited to, faculty or staff from another academic/research institution.
Responses to each question are limited to 150 words or fewer.
Deadline: Aug 1, 2024 at 5:00 PM ET.
Please direct any questions to the 2024 Lucy Annual Celebration Chair, Dr. Matthew Sisk ( [email protected] ).
A recent study suggests that blending human labor with robotics leads to greater efficiency.
A study of automation usage in warehouse and logistics companies around the world suggests that blending human labor with robotics leads to greater efficiency than full automation alone. While scalable robotic systems can handle up to 1,000 tasks per hour, they often face limitations where additional robots don’t improve performance. Human-robot collaboration, employed by companies like DHL and CEVA, enhances productivity, reduces worker fatigue, and increases job satisfaction. The incremental approach of integrating human roles with automated systems not only keeps operations cost effective but also leverages human adaptability for continuous improvements.
In every sphere of business, the use of automation is growing. In warehouses and distribution, for instance, the worldwide market revenue for robotics automation is projected to grow from $7.91 billion in 2021 to more than $51 billion by 2030, according to one Statista forecast .
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Common types of limitations and their ramifications include: Theoretical: limits the scope, depth, or applicability of a study. Methodological: limits the quality, quantity, or diversity of the data. Empirical: limits the representativeness, validity, or reliability of the data. Analytical: limits the accuracy, completeness, or significance of ...
The limitations of the study are those characteristics of design or methodology that impacted or influenced the interpretation of the findings from your research. Study limitations are the constraints placed on the ability to generalize from the results, to further describe applications to practice, and/or related to the utility of findings ...
Identify the limitations: Start by identifying the potential limitations of your research. These may include sample size, selection bias, measurement error, or other issues that could affect the validity and reliability of your findings. Be honest and objective: When describing the limitations of your research, be honest and objective.
In research, studies can have limitations such as limited scope, researcher subjectivity, and lack of available research tools. Acknowledging the limitations of your study should be seen as a strength. It demonstrates your willingness for transparency, humility, and submission to the scientific method and can bolster the integrity of the study.
Research limitations are one of those things that students tend to avoid digging into, and understandably so. No one likes to critique their own study and point out weaknesses. Nevertheless, being able to understand the limitations of your study - and, just as importantly, the implications thereof - a is a critically important skill. In this post, we'll unpack some of the most common ...
The ideal way is to divide your limitations section into three steps: 1. Identify the research constraints; 2. Describe in great detail how they affect your research; 3. Mention the opportunity for future investigations and give possibilities. By following this method while addressing the constraints of your research, you will be able to ...
Here's an example of a limitation explained in a research paper about the different options and emerging solutions for delaying memory decline. These statements appeared in the first two sentences of the discussion section: "Approaches like stem cell transplantation and vaccination in AD [Alzheimer's disease] work on a cellular or molecular level in the laboratory.
Research Limitations. Research limitations are, at the simplest level, the weaknesses of the study, based on factors that are often outside of your control as the researcher. These factors could include things like time, access to funding, equipment, data or participants.For example, if you weren't able to access a random sample of participants for your study and had to adopt a convenience ...
3. Identify your limitations of research and explain their importance. 4. Provide the necessary depth, explain their nature, and justify your study choices. 5. Write how you are suggesting that it is possible to overcome them in the future. Limitations can help structure the research study better.
Your professor may assign the task of writing a research proposal for the following reasons: Develop your skills in thinking about and designing a comprehensive research study; ... ANOTHER NOTE: This section is also where you describe any potential limitations to your proposed study. While it is impossible to highlight all potential limitations ...
Limitations. Limitations of a dissertation are potential weaknesses in your study that are mostly out of your control, given limited funding, choice of research design, statistical model constraints, or other factors. In addition, a limitation is a restriction on your study that cannot be reasonably dismissed and can affect your design and results.
Step 1. Identify the limitation (s) of the study. This part should comprise around 10%-20% of your discussion of study limitations. The first step is to identify the particular limitation (s) that affected your study. There are many possible limitations of research that can affect your study, but you don't need to write a long review of all ...
1 Answer to this question. Answer: In a proposal, limitations are the constraints of the study, that is, aspects of the study not covered for various reasons. These could pertain to subjects, geography, data, and so on. For instance, one limitation could be that the study will only look at people of a certain age group or income level.
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".
re impressive to reviewers than ignoring them.A fourfold approach can be used when presenting limitations as outlined in the Figure 13.1: (1) describe the potential limitation, (2) describe the potential impact of the limitation on your study findings, (3) discuss alternatives and why they were not selected, and (4) describe the methods that ...
The purpose of the research proposal (its job, so to speak) is to convince your research supervisor, committee or university that your research is suitable (for the requirements of the degree program) and manageable (given the time and resource constraints you will face). The most important word here is "convince" - in other words, your ...
Research limitations in a typical dissertation may relate to the following points: 1. Formulation of research aims and objectives. You might have formulated research aims and objectives too broadly. You can specify in which ways the formulation of research aims and objectives could be narrowed so that the level of focus of the study could be ...
Writing a Research Proposal; Acknowledgements; Definition. ... A Note about Sample Size Limitations in Qualitative Research. Sample sizes are typically smaller in qualitative research because, as the study goes on, acquiring more data does not necessarily lead to more information. This is because one occurrence of a piece of data, or a code, is ...
Identify limitations: Identify the limitations of the study and how they may affect the generalizability of the findings. Suggest directions for future research: ... Here are some specific situations of when to write implications in research: Research proposal: When writing a research proposal, it is important to include a section on the ...
It puts the proposal in context. 3. The introduction typically begins with a statement of the research problem in precise and clear terms. 1. The importance of the statement of the research problem 5: The statement of the problem is the essential basis for the construction of a research proposal (research objectives, hypotheses, methodology ...
In this section, the proposal author will methodically apply the TQF to produce a critique of the proposed research design in ways that are consistent with what has been discussed in the Design section of the proposal. That is, the Limitations section will contain subsections on Credibility (Scope and Data Gathering), Analyzability (Processing ...
A proposal needs to show how your work fits into what is already known about the topic and what new paradigm will it add to the literature, while specifying the question that the research will answer, establishing its significance, and the implications of the answer. [ 2] The proposal must be capable of convincing the evaluation committee about ...
The main limitation of the review is the limited number of included studies. The research proposal for this review has been registered to Prospero (ID number: CRD42022366555). Mental illness stigma is often common among mentally ill patients. This stigma can come from others or the patients themselves, which is called 'self-stigma'.
WASHINGTON, D.C. (June 21, 2024) — MBA's President and CEO Bob Broeksmit, CMB, issued the following statement regarding the Federal Housing Finance Agency's (FHFA) conditional approval of Freddie Mac's new proposal to purchase certain closed-end second mortgages: "MBA appreciates FHFA's detailed responsiveness to the key questions we outlined in our comment letter regarding the ...
Use these updated rates on multi-year sponsored program proposal budgets to best reflect anticipated costs. If you submitted a proposal using the previously published (preliminary) rates for budget years beyond FY25, upon award, you may re-budget as necessary to account for these changes. In most cases, this will not require sponsor approval.
Make sure you can ask the critical what, who, and how questions of your research before you put pen to paper. Your research proposal should include (at least) 5 essential components : Title - provides the first taste of your research, in broad terms. Introduction - explains what you'll be researching in more detail.
Successful proposals will challenge traditional models of academic research, build long-term partnerships, and ensure lasting community benefits beyond the three-year funding period. For more information regarding proposal criteria and to submit proposals visit CPECE Call for Community-Based Research Propsals .
If yes, you are required to include a PDF or Word document of your NASA Research License as part of your proposal package submission. As described in section 3 of this solicitation, the offeror meets the following requirements completely: ... All 10 parts of the proposal narrative are included in part order and the page limitation is met.
The Lucy Societal Impact Awards. The Lucy Family Institute for Data & Society seeks nominations for our annual Lucy Societal Impact Awards ("The Lucies") to recognize individuals or teams whose work exemplifies the Institute's vision to inspire collaborative, equitable, and impactful data innovations as a global force for good.. We will award up to three individuals or teams who have ...
A study of automation usage in warehouse and logistics companies around the world suggests that blending human labor with robotics leads to greater efficiency than full automation alone. While ...