Tips for Writing Your Best Psychology Research Paper

When it comes to reading academic research reports in the behavioral sciences, I'm no different than anyone else. I often find myself thinking "what is the point?" Reading academic papers is not always rainbows, balloons, and unicorns.

As a teacher and researcher, I regularly provide commentary on student research papers, with the primary goal of helping students best express complex ideas. Based on this experience, here is something of a checklist of issues to think about when writing a psychology research report.

Write as you speak.

So often, I read student papers that sound much more like someone trying to sound smart than like someone trying to communicate ideas. You made it into college—you're likely plenty smart. Don't worry about using big words.

The point of summarizing your research is to present it to others so that they understand what you are saying.

One way to achieve this outcome is simply to write as you speak. When you speak to others, you are trying to get them to understand something. This same goal is true when you are writing a scientific research report. Sure, avoid informalities, slang, and profanity in scientific writing—but beyond that, I suggest that you simply write how you speak.

Never copy and paste so much as a letter from another source.

In this day and age, it is common for students to copy and paste content from others' papers into their own. From there, students will often edit, modify, etc. Regarding this practice, I say this: Never do that! Not only does this practice have you dancing dangerously on the edge of plagiarism, but it is just a poor way to communicate.

When it comes to summarizing ideas from past researchers, your best bet is to read their work to the point that you really understand it and then to write your ideas out as if you are describing the ideas to a friend or family member. Doing so will ensure that your voice comes through.

Only summarize parts of past research that are relevant to your own research.

Sometimes, students feel that they have to summarize everything that they find in a relevant article connected with their research. Not so.

Imagine that you are writing a paper about how academic self-esteem (belief in oneself in academic contexts) relates to academic success (e.g., grade point average).

Now suppose that in your review of past work on this topic, you find a paper that summarizes five different studies that another researcher conducted on this topic. Imagine that one of the five studies examined the relationship between general self-esteem and academic self-esteem. Now imagine that this particular issue is unrelated to your own study. In this case, it would be a mistake to elaborate on this particular feature of this past work in detail.

Sometimes it feels like a student describing irrelevant details of others' work is intentionally trying to add length to their paper. Honestly, don't ever do that! Only include content that is relevant to your point. If there is a part of a prior paper that is not related to the point of your work, don't include it.

Avoid writing superfluous details about past studies (sample sizes, specific statistical findings, and ancillary findings) that do not relate to your own work.

Here's something that students often do not know. When very in-the-weeds details about a prior study make it into your paper, it comes across as a rookie mistake.

Such details often include the sample size from a prior study (e.g., "In Smith and Johnson's (2019) study, 632 young adult participants from a large, midwestern university were studied..."). Honestly, no one cares! In your own research report, describe your sample in detail—but not such details of past work.

Describing samples of other studies in detail in your own paper automatically puts the reader in zone-out mode.

This same rule applies to statistical findings from past studies. Suppose that Smith and Johnson found that high academic self-esteem corresponded to high GPAs in a sample of students from a community college. That's all you need to say! If you go on and describe the r-value and the p-value and the N of that prior research, you are once again inviting your reader to go into zone-out mode.

Include a brief summary at the end of your Introduction that includes clearly specified hypotheses.

The whole point of your Introduction is to get the reader to see the problem that you are studying and to see the value of studying that problem. A strong way to communicate all of this is to make sure to specify your hypotheses (or predictions) clearly in a section that completes your Introduction. Summarizing your specific predictions in detail in this section helps to provide a bridge between your Introduction and your Methods sections.

Make sure that each variable in your study is described in your Introduction so that the reader knows why it is included.

When a variable shows up in your Methods section that was not introduced in the Introduction, the reader will automatically be confused. The reader may think, "Wait, what? The intro didn't say anything about this variable. I have no idea what the relevance is here!" Each variable included in your Methods section should be described in some detail in your Introduction section—especially as it relates to the main predictions of your study.

Include sub-sections in your Introduction to help guide your reader to your broader points.

Reading scientific papers is not easy. One way to help make your presentation easier on your reader is by including sub-sections in your Introduction. APA style fully allows you to include as many sub-sections as you want in your Introduction.

You can create sections for each variable that you study in your project. You can create sections that describe past work related to the topic, etc. A sub-section will usually have between two and five paragraphs, just as a rule of thumb. Doing this will help in making your ideas clear to your reader.

Refer to hypotheses in words and not by some arbitrary numbers.

Near the end of the Introduction, as noted above, it is best practice to demarcate your specific hypotheses. Sometimes, a researcher will describe these in numbered form (e.g., Hypothesis 1: We predict that high levels of academic self-esteem will be positively related to cumulative grade point average. Hypothesis 2...).

In the hypothesis section of your Introduction, it is fine to number your hypotheses in this way. That said, later in your paper, it is not good practice to refer to your hypotheses by number. For instance, in your results section, you can imagine saying something like, "Hypothesis 1 was supported by a correlation."

By the time I get to the Results section, I usually don't recall which particular prediction comprised "Hypothesis 1." It's best practice to refer to your hypotheses in terms of the actual, relevant content. You could call it "the hypothesis suggesting that academic self-esteem is positively related to GPA." Such an approach will make it so that your reader is not flipping back to a prior section.

In your Methods section, describe each measuring instrument in detail and include academic citations that point to the full scale when appropriate.

In your Methods section, it is best practice to describe each measure in enough detail so that your audience has a solid idea as to how the measuring instrument works.

For instance, if you use a published scale of general self-esteem in your study, you should not only provide the full academic citation to this scale, but you should also give one example item (e.g., "Here is an example item: 'Generally speaking, I like myself.'") and you should describe the measuring system in sufficient detail (e.g., are the items on a 1-5 Likert scale, anchored with Strong Disagree and Strongly Agree? If so, say that.). This basic process should be used for each measuring instrument included in your study.

Never end your paper with a limitation of your work.

Life is hard enough and there are endless critics out there. It is appropriate to describe limitations to your work in your Discussion section, but it is not great practice to end your paper with limitations of your work. That could leave the reader with something we call the recency effect—where they primarily remember the final information that was presented. You don't want your reader to walk away thinking that the main point of your work is that you had a small sample size in your research, for instance. Your ending should bring the paper full circle and focus on the value of your work as well as potential implications.

Bottom Line

In my work as a psychology professor, I both produce psychological research reports and I read and comment on many student papers that summarize research. In my efforts to help students hone their skills in this realm, I recently published a book: Own Your Psychology Major (Geher, 2019), which helps guide students on various facets of the field of psychology, including the presentation of research findings.

People often find the process of scientific writing a bit non-intuitive. Following the tips above can help behavioral scientists at all levels communicate their ideas clearly, with the goal of having their ideas heard. Ultimately, this is the goal of all writing, including scientific writing.