How to Write the Discussion of a Research Article?

On 22 July 2026, I wrote an article on how to write the Introduction of a research article. As a follow-up article, here I share a guideline how to write the Discussion section of a research paper. I initially developed this instruction for the young researchers conducting social research with me, and trying to write a complete article by themselves for the first time.

There are indeed different aways to write a Discussion section by aligning with the norms and expectations of your discipline, research group, thesis supervisor, and/or host institution. The following guideline will help you to rethink what you are doing (as you write a Discussion), how you are doing it, and why you are doing it. This and other guidelines listed at the end of this article may help you in the beginning of your academic writing career, before you develop your own writing process and style!

Please feel free to leave a comment at the bottom of this article page: What do you think about this guideline; does any point resonate with you; do you have a different way to write your Discussion. Tell us your thoughts and experiences.

 

A Brief Guide to Writing the Discussion Section of a Journal Article

There are two basic ways to write the Discussion section: 1) Results and Discussion as one combined section, and 2) Results and Discussion as two separate sections.

 

1) Results and Discussion as one combined section:

i) In each sub-section of the Results section, first give the findings of the research. Then in separate following paragraph(s) ‘compare’ these findings with the previous similar studies (e.g., Hasan & Irfanullah, 2022).

ii) Also, explain ‘why’ your findings are similar or different from previous (national/global) studies.

iii) You may also write about the ‘implications’ of your findings and of the above similarities and differences (e.g., Sultana et al., 2023). But it is probably better to write that in the last paragraph of the Results and Discussion section or in a separate Conclusion section.

iv) In many articles, this section is often called Recommendations, and identified as a separate section from the Conclusion (e.g., Jahan et al., 2025). In others, in may be merged with the Conclusion section (e.g., Hasan & Irfanullah, 2022). Such diversity in writing style depends on the journal’s guidelines and your disciplines’ commonly accepted norms.

 

2) Results and Discussion as two separate sections:

i) Based on the Results section, authors need to identify 3 to 5 major ‘discussion threads’. We can also call them themes, issues or dimensions.

ii) These discussion threads could be of two types:

a) These threads could be ‘directly related to the themes’ authors have already identified in the Results section. But, in the Discussion section, you use different wordings while writing these sub-headings. For example, if a Results sub-heading is “Social Capital”, the corresponding Discussion sub-heading might be “Social networks are crucial to build resilience in resettlements”. One useful example of this style can be found in an article on ‘climate change-induced losses & damages’ by Bhowmik et al. (2024).

b) Alternatively, these threads could be more comprehensive, integrated, or overarching in nature.  Here, a discussion thread could look like a keyword, or a more elaborate statement, depending on the authors' research context; but it does not directly correspond to the Results’ sub-sections. For example, if the Results section talks about five livelihood capitals of a coastal community in five different sub-sections, the Discussion section may have a sub-heading “Infrastructure defines the resilience of coastal community”. This assumes that out of the five livelihoods capitals, the ‘physical capital’ dominates thus demands further discussion. Two useful examples of this style can be found in an article on ‘nature-based solutions’ by Imran et al. (2025) and in another one on ‘roof-top solar panel systems’ by Jahan et al. (2025).

iii) There are three basic steps to write the text under Discussion section whether you follow the above (a) or (b).

Step 1: Under each 'discussion thread', first, you should briefly set the context of this thread using global literature on that identified thread/issue/dimension. Explain what does it mean. But you must not use this to write a ‘second’ Introduction!

Step 2: You should then relate that thread to your own findings. But don’t just repeating what is already written in the Results section. Write those major issues which are so important that these need interpretation in the Discussion section.

Step 3: You now should interpret your above findings using relevant national/global literature. Talk about the similarities, differences, and if there is anything that cannot be explained.

iv) Follow this three-step structure in all the threads, issues, or dimensions you identified for the Discussion section.

v) For each step, one or more paragraphs can be written, as needed. Imran et al. (2025) offers a good example of this three-step style.

vi) For the Conclusion section, consult the suggestions listed under Section 1 (iii & iv) above.

 

In this article, I have tried to capture some specific ideas that may help you to structure your Discussion better.  Those of you who are interested to learn more, here are some relevant resources available on the Rising Scholars website to encourage you to write an effective Discussion section for your research article.

How to read a scientific paper- Research4Life

Discussion and conclusion: How to write effective discussion sections

Preparing the Four Main Parts of a Scientific Paper (IMRAD): Concise Advice

Facilitation Kit: Writing a Journal Article Reporting Research

 

Thumbnail and text image: Depot Visual for Unsplash