How to Write a Research Paper Conclusion: Examples and Checklist
Login
Sign upSign up for free
28 Nov 2023··4 min read
How to Write a Conclusion for a Research Paper
This article discusses various tips and strategies to help you write an engaging and impactful conclusion for your research paper.
Struggling with how to write a conclusion for a research paper? You’re not alone—writers often leave the ending to the last minute, then either repeat the introduction or bolt on new ideas. This guide keeps your section order intact and deepens every part with frameworks, templates, mini‑examples, and checklists so your conclusion ties the argument together, signals significance, and leaves readers with a clear afterimage—without overreach or new claims.
Role of the Conclusion in a Research Paper
The conclusion is the paper’s final act: it resolves the narrative arc, connects back to the research question, and makes the so‑what explicit.
Reiterate the thesis (in new words) and confirm how the evidence supports it.
Close the loop to the introduction (echo the opening hook, problem, or anecdote) to create symmetry.
Articulate contribution precisely—what changes in knowledge or practice?
Signal implications (theory, method, policy, practice) scoped to your evidence.
Offer forward paths (limitations → next steps) without diluting closure.
Example 1 (climate policy): “Our difference‑in‑differences estimates indicate policy X reduced emissions by 20% (2018–2024), addressing the short‑term rebound concern raised in the introduction.”
Example 2 (digital mental health): “A 15% efficacy gain for guided apps clarifies where blended care outruns self‑help tools.”
Summarizing Key Findings and Arguments
Summaries aren’t lists. They are compressed reasoning that show how your major results jointly support the claim.
Lift 3–5 core findings (no new numbers) that map directly to the thesis.
Group by logic (mechanism, comparison, boundary condition) rather than by section.
Use synthesis verbs (establish, clarify, reconcile, delimit) instead of “shows.”
Keep the synthesis concise. Include enough of the main findings to support the conclusion without replaying statistical detail.
Transition to significance using therefore/however.
Finding
Argument link
Impact (one line)
Costs fell 25%
Supports efficiency thesis
Feasible at scale with current infra
Effect strongest in low‑resource sites
Boundary condition
Targets for policy roll‑out
Example checklist: ✅ Highlight main result; ✅ Link to claim; ❌ Add new dataset.
Stating the Significance of Your Findings
This is where you answer “why should anyone care?” without grandstanding. Think in tiers of significance.
Theory: refine or support a model? clarify mechanisms?
Method: new measure? better design? generalizable protocol?
Practice/Policy: what should practitioners or policymakers do differently?
Scope the claim (who/where/when) to avoid overgeneralization.
Name uncertainties that temper the takeaway.
Level
Phrase template
Mini‑example
High (policy)
“Findings support adopting … in contexts with …”
“Adopt late start times where commute burden is low.”
Medium (theory)
“Results align with … by clarifying …”
“Aligns with thermal‑stress model; noise partially mediates.”
Low (method)
“We provide a replicable measure for …”
“GIS buffer + actigraphy protocol.”
Providing Closure without Introducing New Information
Closure means resolution + resonance, not new directions disguised as results.
Answer the research question explicitly in one sentence.
Echo the introduction (statistic, question, vignette) with an answer or counterpoint.
Signal edges (“within these settings…” “given our measures…”) to avoid scope creep.
Avoid presenting new findings or introducing sources for the first time; support the takeaway with evidence already developed in the paper.
Cadence test: read aloud; last two sentences should sound inevitable, not abrupt.
Close‑the‑loop pattern: finish where you started, now with answers.
Example Conclusion Paragraph
Use these models to adapt to your paper type.
Argumentative (policy): restate claim → synthesize support → practical implication → measured call to action.
Empirical: restate aim → primary result(s) in plain language → scope/limits → next study (method + population).
Design/Methods: restate problem → what your tool/protocol changes → where it works best → hand‑off to adopters.
Review paper: state what is settled/contested → priority gaps → agenda.
<Empirical conclusion template (120–160 words)>
We set out to [aim]. Synthesizing results across [datasets/experiments], we found [primary outcome in plain language]. Together, these findings support [thesis/claim] while delimiting it to [population/settings]. Given [limitation], a priority is to [specific next step: design, measure, sample]. Within these bounds, [one-line implication].
Example 1 (argumentative): “Therefore, expanding community solar is not only compatible with grid stability but cost‑effective for low‑income neighborhoods; regulators should prioritize tariffs that reward midday production.”
Example 2 (empirical): “Our data indicate a 30% improvement in triage accuracy; the effect concentrates in clinics with nurse‑led intake, suggesting targeted scaling rather than universal deployment.”
Common Mistakes to Avoid in Conclusions
Dodging these pitfalls improves credibility and reader satisfaction.
New evidence appears—move it earlier or into an appendix.
Emotional language (“groundbreaking”, “revolutionary”)—replace with measured claims.
Copy‑paste thesis—paraphrase and integrate nuance.
Vagueness—use concrete nouns and verbs; avoid “thing”, “some”, “very”.
Overlength—follow the assignment or journal word limit; prioritize synthesis and implications.
Mistake
Fix
Quick test
New claims
Move to Discussion
No new citation appears
Hype
Swap adjectives for numbers/scope
Evidence ↔ claim match
Thesis verbatim
Rephrase; integrate findings
Different wording, same meaning
Restating the Problem and Discussing Implications
Bring the paper full circle by revisiting the problem in fresh words, then drawing out implications with the right granularity.
Restate problem concisely and align it to your findings (“this study clarifies/limits/extends…”).
Link findings → solution with causal language only if design warrants it; otherwise use “associated with”, “consistent with”.
Short‑term vs long‑term: one immediate step, one strategic direction.
Actionability: identify stakeholders (researchers, practitioners, policy makers) and what each should adjust.
Tailor by paper type (argumentative vs empirical) to keep tone appropriate.
Paper type
Implication focus
Mini‑example
Argumentative
Persuasive call or policy lever
“Adopt opt‑out organ donation with guardrails.”
Empirical
Next study design / deployment
“Test effect in multi‑site RCT with nurse‑led intake.”
Strategies for an Effective and Memorable Conclusion
Memorability comes from precision + resonance, not volume.
Quote or anecdote only if it crystallizes the contribution (avoid fresh arguments).
Close‑the‑loop: mirror your introduction’s hook, now resolved.
Concrete language: swap abstractions for specifics.
Peer test: ask a peer to write your conclusion’s one‑line takeaway; if they can’t, tighten it.
Cite a source in the conclusion if needed to support a claim, following the required style. Do not use the final paragraph to introduce a new line of evidence; discuss that evidence in the body first.
Final Checklist
Thesis restated (paraphrased, not pasted)
3–5 core findings synthesized
Significance stated at the right level (theory/method/policy)
