• Bipolar Disorder
  • Therapy Center
  • When To See a Therapist
  • Types of Therapy
  • Best Online Therapy
  • Best Couples Therapy
  • Best Family Therapy
  • Managing Stress
  • Sleep and Dreaming
  • Understanding Emotions
  • Self-Improvement
  • Healthy Relationships
  • Student Resources
  • Personality Types
  • Verywell Mind Insights
  • 2023 Verywell Mind 25
  • Mental Health in the Classroom
  • Editorial Process
  • Meet Our Review Board
  • Crisis Support

How to Reference Single and Multiple Authors in APA Format

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

single author research paper example

Emily is a board-certified science editor who has worked with top digital publishing brands like Voices for Biodiversity, Study.com, GoodTherapy, Vox, and Verywell.

single author research paper example

  • Multiple Authors

APA format establishes a number of clear rules for how to list reference works using author information. How you reference different sources varies depending on the number of authors to whom the source is attributed. For example, the way that you reference a single author will differ somewhat from how you reference a source with multiple authors.

Before you create a reference section for a psychology paper, it is important to know how to properly list books, articles, and other sources as well as in-text citations in APA format. The following guidelines can help you prepare a reference section for your APA format paper.

These guidelines are sometimes referred to as APA 7 since the guidebook for APA formatting is the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 7th edition .

APA Format for No Author

Articles and other works that do not provide an author attribution should begin with the title of the work . If the title is a book, list the title in italics. The volume number, issue number (if available), and page numbers should follow journal titles, while book titles should be followed by the publisher's name.

For example:

  • A student guide to APA format. (1997). Psychology Weekly, 8, 13-27.
  • The ultimate APA format guidebook. (2006). Student Press.

For in-text citations or those referenced within the body of the text, you will also use the title, either in italics (for books) or in quotation marks (for articles). For example: Using proper APA format ("A student guide to APA format," 1997).

APA Format for One Author

Works by a single author should list the author's last name and initials. The date of publication should be enclosed in parentheses and followed by the title of the article or book. Books and journal titles should be listed in italics. The volume number, issue number, and page numbers of the article should follow journal titles, while book titles should be followed by the name of the publisher.

  • McCrae, R. R. (1993). Moderated analyses of longitudinal personality stability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65 (3), 577-585.
  • Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.

One-author in-text citations should include the surname without any suffixes (Jr.) and the date of publication in parenthesis. For example: As Bandura (1997) mentions... or (Bandura, 1977). If you are citing different authors with the same last name, include the first initial: (A. Alper, 2004) and (B. Alper, 2005).

APA Format for Multiple Authors

The APA format for multiple authors varies depending on how many authors a publication has.

Two Authors

Works by two authors should list the last names and first initials separated by an ampersand (&). These names should be followed by the date of publication enclosed in parentheses.

If the work is a journal article, the title of the article should immediately follow the publication date. Next, the title of the book or journal should be listed in italics. If the reference is a journal article, provide the volume number, issue number, and page numbers. For books, list the name of the publisher.

  • Kanfer, F. H., & Busemeyer, J. R. (1982). The use of problem-solving and decision-making in behavior therapy . Clinical Psychology Review, 2 (2) , 239-266.
  • Buss, A. H., & Pomin, R. (1975). A temperament theory of personality development . Erlbaum.

In-text citations of works by two authors should include the surnames of both authors separated by the word "and" or by an ampersand if using parenthesis. For example: Studies by Buss and Pomin (1975) support... or (Buss & Pomin, 1975).

Three to 20 Authors

According to APA 7 guidelines, works by three to 20 authors are cited by listing the last names and first initials of each author separated by an ampersand. Author names should be followed by the date of publication enclosed in parentheses.

If the work is a journal article, include the title of the article immediately following the publication date. The title of the book or journal should then be listed in italics. If the reference is a journal article, provide the volume number, issue number, and page numbers. For books, list the name of the publisher.

  • Abma, J. C., Chandra, A., Mosher, W. D., Peterson, L. S., & Piccinino, L. J. (1997). Fertility, family planning, and women’s health: New data from the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth. Vital and Health Statistics, 23 (9), 1-67.
  • Alper, S., Schloss, P. J., Etscheidt, S. K., & Macfarlane, C. A. (1995). Inclusion: Are we abandoning or helping students? Corwin Press.

In-text citations for works by three or more authors should list the first author's name, followed by "et al." in every citation. For example: Alper, et al. (1995) supports...or (Alper, et al, 1995).

However, if you are citing multiple works by similar groups of authors, you may need to include multiple names to avoid confusion. For example: Alper, Schloss, Etscheidt, et al. (1995) discovered...or (Alper, Schloss, Etscheidt, et al., 1995).

Whether citing a source with three, five, seven, or 20 authors, the APA format is the same.

More Than 20 Authors

When a work is credited to more than 20 authors, the reference is listed by providing the names of the first 19 authors followed by . . . and then the final author. The remainder of the reference follows the same format as that for 20 or fewer authors.

Authors' last names and initials are followed by the date of publication enclosed in parentheses. The name of the article is listed immediately after the publication date. The title of the journal or the book title should be provided in italics. The volume number, issue number, and page number should follow journal titles, while book titles should be followed by the publisher's name.

  • Pegion, K., Kirtman, B. P., Becker, E., Collins, D. C., LaJoie, E., Burgman, R., Bell, R., DelSole, R., Min, D., Zhu, Y., Li, W., Sinsky, E., Guan, H., Gottschalck, J., Metzger, E. J., Barton, N. P., Achuthavarier, D., Marshak, J., Koster, R., . . . Kim, H. (2019). The subseasonal experiment (SubX): A multimodel subseasonal prediction experiment.  Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society ,  100 (10), 2043-2061.
  • Arlo, A., Black, B., Clark, C., Davidson, D., Emerson, E., Fischer, F., Grahmann, G., Habib, H., Ianelli, I., Juarez, J., Kobayashi, K., Lee, L., Martin, M., Naim, N., Odelsson, O., Pierce, P., Qiang, Q., Reed, R., Scofield, S., . . . Thatcher, T. (2001). Instructive falsehoods: Examples and sources . Thommel-Reed.

In-text citations should list the first author's name, followed by "et al." in every citation. You can read more about a few different aspects of referencing sources in APA format if you have book references , article references , and electronic sources .

Frequently Asked Questions

How do i cite a website with no author in apa format.

If a website has no author, cite the title (or the first few words of the reference list entry) followed by the year. APA website citations will also include the website name and URL.

How do I cite a publication with no author in APA format?

If there's no author, the title of the work is listed first followed by the volume number, issue number (if available), and page numbers. If it's a book, the title should be in italics and followed by the publisher's name.

How do I cite an author with two last names?

Works by an author with two last names should list both names. If the name is hyphenated, include both names and the hyphen.

American Psychological Association.  Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association  (7th ed.). Washington DC: The American Psychological Association; 2019.

Purdue Online Writing Lab. In-text citations: Author/authors .

Purdue Online Writing Lab. Reference list: Author/authors .

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

APA Citation Style, 7th edition: Journal Article with 1 Author

  • General Style Guidelines
  • One Author or Editor
  • Two Authors or Editors
  • Three to Five Authors or Editors
  • Article or Chapter in an Edited Book
  • Article in a Reference Book
  • Edition other than the First
  • Translation
  • Government Publication
  • Journal Article with 1 Author
  • Journal Article with 2 Authors
  • Journal Article with 3–20 Authors
  • Journal Article 21 or more Authors
  • Magazine Article
  • Newspaper Article
  • Basic Web Page
  • Web page from a University site
  • Web Page with No Author
  • Entry in a Reference Work
  • Government Document
  • Film and Television
  • Youtube Video
  • Audio Podcast
  • Electronic Image
  • Twitter/Instagram
  • Lecture/PPT
  • Conferences
  • Secondary Sources
  • Citation Support
  • Avoiding Plagiarism
  • Formatting Your Paper

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

What is a DOI? A DOI ( digital object identifier ) is a unique alphanumeric string assigned by a registration agency (the International DOI Foundation) to identify content and provide a persistent link to its location on the internet. 

NOTE: It is regarded as the most important part of the citation because it will accurately direct users to the specific article.

Think of it as a "digital fingerprint" or an article's DNA!

The rules for DOIs have been updated in the 7th edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. They should be included as URLs, rather than just the alphanumeric string.

Correct:  

  • http://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-114
  • http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-114

Incorrect:     

  • doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-114
  • Retrieved from http://doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-114
  • FREE DOI Look-up (Cross-Ref)
  • DOI System: FAQ
  • Looking up a DOI
  • DOI Flowchart

Journal Article with One Author

Helpful Tips:

DOI: If a journal article has a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) listed, you will always include this identifier in your reference as a URL.

Online Database: For works from databases that publish works of limited circulation (such as the ERIC database) or original, proprietary material available only in that database (such as UpToDate), include the name of the database or archive and the URL of the work. If the URL requires a login or is session specific, meaning it will not resolve for readers, provide the URL of the database or specific archive home page or login page instead of the URL for the work.

Print: If you viewed a journal article in its print format , be sure to check if it has a DOI listed. If it does not, your reference to the article would end after you provide the page range of the article.

General Format

In-Text Citation (Paraphrase):

(Author Surname, Year)

In-Text Citation (Quotation):

(Author Surname, Year, page number)

References:

Author Surname, First Initial. Second Initial. (Year). Article title: Subtitle. Journal Title, Volume (issue), page range. http://doi.org/xx.xxxxxxxxxx

(Pettigrew, 2009)

(Pettigrew, 2009, p. 61)

Pettigrew, T. F. (2009). Secondary transfer effect of contact: Do intergroup contact effects spread to noncontacted outgroups? Social Psychology, 40 (2), 55-65. http://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335.40.2.55

ePub Ahead of Print

ePub Ahead of Print  articles, also labeled  Advanced Online Publication  articles, may not have a volume number, issue number, or page numbers assigned to them. If you cannot find a fully published version of the article that includes this information, you can cite the article as an advanced online publication, noting its status where you would usually include the volume, issue, and page numbers. If possible, update your reference to the final version of the source when it becomes available.

Muldoon, K., Towse, J., Simms, V., Perra, O., & Menzies, V. (2012). A longitudinal analysis of estimation, counting skills, and mathematical ability across the first school year.  Developmental Psychology . Advance online publication.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028240

Subject Guide

Profile Photo

  • << Previous: Journals
  • Next: Journal Article with 2 Authors >>

Creative Commons License

  • Last Updated: Feb 6, 2024 11:45 AM
  • URL: https://guides.himmelfarb.gwu.edu/APA

GW logo

  • Himmelfarb Intranet
  • Privacy Notice
  • Terms of Use
  • GW is committed to digital accessibility. If you experience a barrier that affects your ability to access content on this page, let us know via the Accessibility Feedback Form .
  • Himmelfarb Health Sciences Library
  • 2300 Eye St., NW, Washington, DC 20037
  • Phone: (202) 994-2850
  • [email protected]
  • https://himmelfarb.gwu.edu

Enago Academy

How to Write a Research Paper in APA Format — A Complete Guide

' src=

Completed your research experiments and collated your results? Does it feel like you have crossed a major hurdle in your research journey? No, not even close! What lies next is — publishing your research work for it to reach the science world! The process of publishing a research paper is so intricate, if you miss one aspect, you could end up struggling with revisions and reworks or getting a rejection! Thus, there is a necessity of following an exceptional mode of writing. The APA style research format comes to a researcher’s rescue.

This article discusses how to effortlessly write an APA style research paper and how it is necessary to understand the basic elements of APA style research paper in order to write an article in APA style research format.

Table of Contents

What Is APA Style?

The APA format is the official style of American Psychological Association (APA) and is commonly used to cite sources in psychology, education and social sciences. APA research paper format is widely used in the research publishing industry.

Students and researchers usually get confused with various research paper writing formats and are unclear about the requirements from the research publication journals. Therefore, the best way to deal with beginning to write a research paper is to first know the journal’s requirement and then follow the guidelines accordingly.

Though the reference section may change over the course of time, the information related to the other sections in APA research paper format is similar and could be referred to, for writing an exemplary research paper.

Guidelines for APA Style Paper (7th edition)

An APA style research format is different as compared to a term paper, a creative writing paper, a composition-style paper, or a thought paper. Throughout the paper you need to apply these guidelines while writing the paper –

Page Layout:

Type the content and keep double-space on standard-sized paper (8.5” x 11”), with 1” margins on all sides.

You should indent the first line of every paragraph 0.5 inches

Include a page number on every page.

You could use an accessible font like Times New Roman 12pt., Arial 11pt., or Georgia 11pt.

APA Research Paper Sections

The APA research paper format is based on seven main components: title page, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and references. The sections in APA-style paper are as follows:

1. Title Page

As per the APA research paper format, the title should be between 10-12 words and should reflect the essence of the paper. After writing the title, write your name followed by name of the college. Furthermore, create a page header using the “View Header” function in MS Word and on the title page include a running head — a short title that appears at the top of pages of published articles (flush left) and page number on the same line (flush right). The running head should not exceed 50 characters, including punctuation and spacing. Moreover, you could use the toolbox to insert a page number, so that it automatically numbers each page.

APA research paper format

2. Abstract

Abstract should contain no more than 120 words , and should be one paragraph written in block format with double spacing. Additionally, state the topic in a sentence or two. Also, provide overview of methods, results, and discussion.

APA research paper format

APA Style – Abstract in APA Style

3. Introduction

An introduction of APA research paper format is the most difficult section to write. A good introduction critically evaluates the empirical knowledge in the relevant area(s) in a way that defines the knowledge gap and expresses your aim for your study and why you conducted it. However, the challenge here is to keep the reader’s interest in reading your paper.

A good introduction keeps readers engaged with your paper. For writing an interesting introduction, researchers should introduce logical flow of ideas which will eventually lead to the research hypothesis . Furthermore, while incorporating references into your introduction, do not describe every single study in complete detail. Summarize the key findings from the article and do not quote from the articles, instead paraphrase the content .

The method section in APA research paper format is straightforward. However, the protocol and requirements should be mentioned precisely. The goal of this section is to describe your study and experiments in detail, so that there is no issue in reproducibility of results and other researchers could duplicate your methods effectively.

This section includes Materials and/or Apparatus and Experiments/Procedures/Protocols. Furthermore, keep the procedures brief and accurate, and make sure to read through so as to not repeat the steps or avoid redundancy.

In this section, you could describe how you analyzed the data and explain your findings. If your data analyses are complex, then break the section into subsections, ideally a subsection for each hypothesis and elaborate the subsections by using statistical analysis and including tables or figures to represent results visually. Most importantly, do not share interpretation of the results here. You can interpret and explain the results in the discussion section.

6. Discussion

Results are interpreted and understood in this section. Discussion section helps understand the research hypothesis better and places the results in the broader context of the literature in the area. This section is the reversal of introduction section, wherein you begin with the specifics and explain the general understanding of the topics.

In discussion, you start with a brief of your main findings, followed by explaining if your research findings support your hypothesis. Furthermore, you could explain how your findings enhance or support the existing literature on the topic. Connect your results with some of the literature mentioned in the introduction to bring your story back to full circle. You could also mention if there are any interesting or surprising findings in your results. Discuss other theories which could help you justify your surprising results.

Explain the limitation of your study and mention all the additional questions that were generated from your study. You could also mention what further research should be conducted on the topic and what are the knowledge gaps in the current body of research. Finally, mention how your results could relate to the larger issues of human existence and highlight “the big picture” for your readers.

7. References

Provide an alphabetical listing of the references. Do not keep extra spaces between references and double-space all the references. The second line of each reference should be intended. You could refer to the examples (mentioned below) to know how to format references correctly.

I. Journal Article:

Only first letter of the first word of the article title is capitalized; the journal name and volume are italicized. If the journal name had multiple words, each of the major words are capitalized.

Example: Ebner-Priemer, U. W., & Trull, T. J. (2009). Ecological momentary assessment of mood disorders and mood dysregulation. Psychological Assessment, 21 , 463-475. doi:10.1037/a0017075

II. Book Chapter:

Only the first letter of the first word of both the chapter title and book title are capitalized.

Example: Stephan, W. G. (1985). Intergroup relations. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 599-658). New York: Random House.

Example: Gray, P. (2010). Psychology (6th ed.). New York: Worth

There are various formats for tables, depending upon the information you wish to include. So, be thorough and provide a table number and title (the latter should be italicized). Tables can be single or double-spaced.

Be sure to mention x- and y-axes clearly. Underneath the figure provide a label and brief caption. The figure caption typically includes variables and units of measurements. Also, include error bars in your bar graphs, and note what the bars represent in the figure caption – Error bars represent one standard error above and below the mean.

VI. In-Text Citation:

  • Mention the authors’ names and publication date while citing sources in your paper.
  • When including the citation as part of the sentence, use AND: “According to Jones and Smith (2003), the…”
  • When the citation is written in parentheses, use &: “Studies have shown that priming can affect actual motor behavior (Jones & Smith, 2003; Kiley, Bailey, & Hammer, 1999). The studies in parentheses should appear alphabetically by first author’s last name, and separate it with semicolons.
  • You should avoid quoting directly, but in case you do – along with the name and date, include the page number.
  • For sources with three or more authors, once you have listed all the authors’ names, you may write “et al.” on subsequent mentions: “Klein et al. (1999) found that…”.
  • Meanwhile, when source has six or more authors, the first author’s last name and “et al.” are used every time the source is cited.

VII. Secondary Source:

It is a term used to describe material that is cited in another source. Avoid using secondary sources in your papers. Try to find the primary source and read it before citing in your work. However, if you must mention a secondary source, refer to the APA style paper example below:

Primary source author’s last name (as cited in secondary source author’s last name, year) argued that…

7 Tips for Writing an Error-free APA Style Research Paper

APA research paper format

  • Although there are exceptions, minimize using first person while writing.
  • Avoid including personal statements or anecdotes.
  • Although there are exceptions, use past tense while writing.
  • Do not use contractions. (e.g., “it does not follow” rather than “it doesn’t follow”)
  • Avoid biased language – Be updated with appropriate terminologies, especially if you are writing a paper that includes gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.
  • Be certain to cite your sources.
  • Try to paraphrase as much as possible, and do not directly quote from source articles.

This article contains only a few aspects of an APA research paper format. There are many APA style rules which can be explored before you begin to write an APA style research paper. Many of the APA research paper format rules are dynamic and subject to change, so it is best to refer to 7 th edition (latest) of the APA Publication Manual and be thorough with every section’s format before writing a research paper.

Have you used an APA research paper format to write your article? Do write to us or comment below and tell us how your experience writing an APA style paper was?

Frequently Asked Questions

The APA format is the official style of American Psychological Association (APA) and is commonly used to cite sources in psychology, education and social sciences.

APA stands for the American Psychological Association. It is a professional organization that focuses on the field of psychology and related disciplines.

Citing sources in APA format involves specific guidelines for different types of sources. In-text Citations: For a paraphrased or summarized idea from a source, include the author's last name and the publication year in parentheses. Example: (Smith, 2021) Reference List Entry for a Journal Article: Only first letter of the first word of the article title is capitalized; the journal name and volume are italicized. If the journal name had multiple words, each of the major words are capitalized. Example: Ebner-Priemer, U. W., & Trull, T. J. (2009). Ecological momentary assessment of mood disorders and mood dysregulation. Psychological Assessment, 21, 463-475. doi:10.1037/a0017075

The APA (American Psychological Association) style is primarily used by researchers, scholars, and students in the social sciences, including psychology, sociology, education, and related fields. However, the APA style is not limited to these disciplines and is also used in other academic and scientific fields when writing research papers or scholarly articles.

As per the 7th edition of APA citation (published in 2020), the last name and first/middle initials for all authors (up to first 20 authors) are mentioned in the bibliography. If there are 21 or more authors, an ellipsis (but no ampersand) is used after the 19th author, and then the final author’s name is added. Generic format: Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title of article. Title of Journal, Volume # (issue number), Pages. https://doi.org/xx.xxx/yyyy Example: Ebner-Priemer, U. W., & Trull, T. J. (2009). Ecological momentary assessment of mood disorders and mood dysregulation. Psychological Assessment, 21, 463-475. doi:10.1037/a0017075

When quoting in APA format, you need to properly incorporate and cite direct quotations from sources. Introduce the Quote: Begin with a signal phrase or an introductory statement to lead into the quote. This helps provide context and relevance for the quotation. Provide In-text Citation: Immediately after the closing quotation mark, include an in-text citation that provides the author's last name, publication year, and, if applicable, page number(s) of the quoted material. Example: (Smith, 2021, p. 25) Cite the Source in the Reference List: Include a corresponding entry in the reference list for the source you are quoting. The format for the reference list entry depends on the type of source being quoted (e.g., book, journal article, website).

' src=

Good explanation given

It was really helpful. Thanks!

nice article

Perfect explanation thank you

It was really amazing perfect

very explanation, i can now make a research paper easier

very god explanation, i can now make a research paper easier

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

single author research paper example

Enago Academy's Most Popular

Content Analysis vs Thematic Analysis: What's the difference?

  • Reporting Research

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Cross-sectional and Longitudinal Study Design

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

Networking in Academic Conferences

  • Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

Embarking on your first academic conference experience? Fear not, we got you covered! Academic conferences…

Research recommendation

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of…

Concept Papers

  • Promoting Research

Concept Papers in Research: Deciphering the blueprint of brilliance

Concept papers hold significant importance as a precursor to a full-fledged research proposal in academia…

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right…

8 Effective Strategies to Write Argumentative Essays

single author research paper example

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

  • 2000+ blog articles
  • 50+ Webinars
  • 10+ Expert podcasts
  • 50+ Infographics
  • 10+ Checklists
  • Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

single author research paper example

According to you, how can AI writing tools improve academic writing accuracy?

MLA 8 Citation Guide

  • TITLE of SOURCE
  • TITLE of CONTAINER
  • OTHER CONTRIBUTORS
  • PUBLICATION DATE
  • Works Cited
  • Journal Article with One Author
  • Journal Article with 2 Authors
  • Journal Article with 3 or more Authors
  • Magazine Article
  • Newspaper Article
  • One Author or Editor
  • Two Authors or Editors
  • Three or More Authors
  • Article or Chapter in an Edited Book
  • Article in a Reference Book
  • Reference Work
  • Basic Web Page
  • Entry in a Reference Work
  • Government or Agency Document
  • YouTube Video
  • Electronic Image
  • Figures and Charts
  • Class Lecture/Notes
  • Secondary Sources

Ask Us 24/7

single author research paper example

Online help is available anytime via our AskUs 24/7 chat service:

Journal Article with One Author (p. 198)

JOURNAL ARTICLE from an Library Database

​Works Cited  List :

Author, First Name. "Title of Article."  Title of Journal , vol. issue no., year, pp. page range. [ Database source, doi or ur l]

Gordon, Laura Suzanne. “Mass Murder.” Feminist Studies , vol. 21, no. 1, 1995, pp. 165–166. JSTOR , www.jstor.org/stable/3178324

Langhamer, Claire. “Love and Courtship in Mid-Twentieth-Century England .” Historical Journal , vol. 50, no. 1, 2007, pp. 173-96. ProQuest , doi:10.1017/S0018246X06005966 .

In-text citation:

(Author Surname page number)

(Gordon 182)

JOURNAL  ARTICLE from a Print Journal

​Works Cited  Li st :

Author, First Name. "Title of Article." Title of Journal , vol. issue no., year, pp. page range.

Bagchi, Alaknanda. "Conflicting Nationalisms: The Voice of the Subaltern in Mahasweta Devi's Bashai Tudu." Tulsa Studies in Women's Literature , vol. 15, no. 1, 1996, pp. 41-50.

(Bagchi 42)

MORE EXAMPLES

Academic Journals:

Tip: Include volume and issue number (example:  vol. 23, no. 1 ) when both are available.

-Daily or Weekly Magazines

-monthly magazines.

Tip: When an issue of a magazine covers several months, the name of the first and last month in the range should be given in the citation, separated by a dash, for example:  Apr.-May 2003 .
Tip: When an article appears on nonconsecutive pages (for example A1 and A6) give only the first page number followed by a "+" as shown above. Give the page number on which the material you've used appears in your in-text citation, for example:  (Brown A6) .

Encyclopedia Articles

Book, film and product reviews.

Tip: The name of the work being reviewed should be preceded by "Rev.", and italics or other formatting done as appropriate for items reviewed and the source of the review itself.
  • << Previous: Articles
  • Next: Journal Article with 2 Authors >>
  • Last Updated: Sep 18, 2023 4:37 PM
  • URL: https://utica.libguides.com/mla

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

  • Knowledge Base
  • Research paper
  • Research Paper Format | APA, MLA, & Chicago Templates

Research Paper Format | APA, MLA, & Chicago Templates

Published on November 19, 2022 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on January 20, 2023.

The formatting of a research paper is different depending on which style guide you’re following. In addition to citations , APA, MLA, and Chicago provide format guidelines for things like font choices, page layout, format of headings and the format of the reference page.

Scribbr offers free Microsoft Word templates for the most common formats. Simply download and get started on your paper.

APA |  MLA | Chicago author-date | Chicago notes & bibliography

  • Generate an automatic table of contents
  • Generate a list of tables and figures
  • Ensure consistent paragraph formatting
  • Insert page numbering

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

upload-your-document-ai-proofreader

Table of contents

Formatting an apa paper, formatting an mla paper, formatting a chicago paper, frequently asked questions about research paper formatting.

The main guidelines for formatting a paper in APA Style are as follows:

  • Use a standard font like 12 pt Times New Roman or 11 pt Arial.
  • Set 1 inch page margins.
  • Apply double line spacing.
  • If submitting for publication, insert a APA running head on every page.
  • Indent every new paragraph ½ inch.

Watch the video below for a quick guide to setting up the format in Google Docs.

The image below shows how to format an APA Style title page for a student paper.

APA title page - student version (7th edition)

Running head

If you are submitting a paper for publication, APA requires you to include a running head on each page. The image below shows you how this should be formatted.

APA running head (7th edition)

For student papers, no running head is required unless you have been instructed to include one.

APA provides guidelines for formatting up to five levels of heading within your paper. Level 1 headings are the most general, level 5 the most specific.

APA headings (7th edition)

Reference page

APA Style citation requires (author-date) APA in-text citations throughout the text and an APA Style reference page at the end. The image below shows how the reference page should be formatted.

APA reference page (7th edition)

Note that the format of reference entries is different depending on the source type. You can easily create your citations and reference list using the free APA Citation Generator.

Generate APA citations for free

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

The main guidelines for writing an MLA style paper are as follows:

  • Use an easily readable font like 12 pt Times New Roman.
  • Use title case capitalization for headings .

Check out the video below to see how to set up the format in Google Docs.

On the first page of an MLA paper, a heading appears above your title, featuring some key information:

  • Your full name
  • Your instructor’s or supervisor’s name
  • The course name or number
  • The due date of the assignment

MLA heading

Page header

A header appears at the top of each page in your paper, including your surname and the page number.

MLA page header

Works Cited page

MLA in-text citations appear wherever you refer to a source in your text. The MLA Works Cited page appears at the end of your text, listing all the sources used. It is formatted as shown below.

The format of the MLA Works Cited page

You can easily create your MLA citations and save your Works Cited list with the free MLA Citation Generator.

Generate MLA citations for free

The main guidelines for writing a paper in Chicago style (also known as Turabian style) are:

  • Use a standard font like 12 pt Times New Roman.
  • Use 1 inch margins or larger.
  • Place page numbers in the top right or bottom center.

Format of a Chicago Style paper

Chicago doesn’t require a title page , but if you want to include one, Turabian (based on Chicago) presents some guidelines. Lay out the title page as shown below.

Example of a Chicago Style title page

Bibliography or reference list

Chicago offers two citation styles : author-date citations plus a reference list, or footnote citations plus a bibliography. Choose one style or the other and use it consistently.

The reference list or bibliography appears at the end of the paper. Both styles present this page similarly in terms of formatting, as shown below.

Chicago bibliography

To format a paper in APA Style , follow these guidelines:

  • Use a standard font like 12 pt Times New Roman or 11 pt Arial
  • Set 1 inch page margins
  • Apply double line spacing
  • Include a title page
  • If submitting for publication, insert a running head on every page
  • Indent every new paragraph ½ inch
  • Apply APA heading styles
  • Cite your sources with APA in-text citations
  • List all sources cited on a reference page at the end

The main guidelines for formatting a paper in MLA style are as follows:

  • Use an easily readable font like 12 pt Times New Roman
  • Include a four-line MLA heading on the first page
  • Center the paper’s title
  • Use title case capitalization for headings
  • Cite your sources with MLA in-text citations
  • List all sources cited on a Works Cited page at the end

The main guidelines for formatting a paper in Chicago style are to:

  • Use a standard font like 12 pt Times New Roman
  • Use 1 inch margins or larger
  • Place page numbers in the top right or bottom center
  • Cite your sources with author-date citations or Chicago footnotes
  • Include a bibliography or reference list

To automatically generate accurate Chicago references, you can use Scribbr’s free Chicago reference generator .

Cite this Scribbr article

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.

Caulfield, J. (2023, January 20). Research Paper Format | APA, MLA, & Chicago Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved February 15, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-format/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, apa format for academic papers and essays, mla format for academic papers and essays, chicago style format for papers | requirements & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

Copy URL to Clipboard

Is it better to have single-author papers.

  • Clear ownership and accountability: A single-author paper clearly identifies the person responsible for the entire project, from conceptualization to execution to publication. This can make it easier to assess the impact of the research and evaluate the researcher's contributions.
  • Independence: Single-author papers can reflect the individual's research vision, goals, and ideas without external interference or input.
  • Efficiency: Single-author papers can be completed more quickly and with fewer communication difficulties, as there is only one person involved in the decision-making process.
  • Diverse expertise and skills: Collaborative research can bring together researchers with different skills and expertise to tackle complex research questions.
  • More resources: Collaborative research can provide access to more funding, data, and equipment than a single researcher might have access to.
  • More perspectives: Collaborative research can incorporate different perspectives and approaches, leading to a more comprehensive and insightful study.

Ali Tafazoli

Machado, s., rajat sandhir, andres trostchansky, ian m. davis, zaheer afzal, dr j francis borgio, dr amarachi nkwoada, chandrika murugaiah, reham eltarabili, akhilesh kumar, dr harsh shah, niaz muhammad, giovanni s,, dr. saeed akhtar, yasir javed, muammar qadafi, naveed ahmad, mohamed hassaan, dr ritika sharma, anton dolzhenko, dr endale mulugeta, dr. arehalli manjappa, ahmed alengebawy, azevedo,luís peres, saira siddique, md. habibullah-al-mamun, tontonbrico, dr. sharada mallubhotla, rafia azmat, adam zwickle, dr parvaiz koul, nihed ben halima.

  • The vast majority of published research papers don't advance research or only very marginally, whether from single or multiple authors.
  • The only recognized way to evaluate the quality of a research paper, i.e. to evaluate its potential for advancing research in general, is the peer-review process. Since the peer-review process does not care at all about the number of authors, one can only assume that the number of authors is not an indicator of quality in any way.
  • research topic: some topics require a diversity of skills or an amount of work which cannot be carried out by a single person. On the other hand some topics require a deep thought process which is more likely to happen in a single brain.
  • personal preferences and finding the right collaborators: in research like in many other things, things often happen in this way or that way just because of circumstances.

Rolf Teschke

Nouhoum bouare, anju manuja, dr jelena ćirić, post an answer, answer count.

Ecology is not a dirty word

On the conservation of single-author papers.

The number of authors included on research papers in many disciplines has increased over time. This editorial in Journal of Applied Ecology is the latest analysis of this trend, finding that published single-author research papers in that journal have declined since 1966 (two years after the journal started publishing). N.B. the authors only quantify research papers (i.e. data papers, but they don’t specify if they include reviews/meta-analyses…see below), and applied ecology should be a multidisciplinary field, so this is a good thing.

The editorial is excellent, and you should read it – the discussion of underlying causes of this trend is mostly reasons why we should encourage more multi-author papers.

But…there will always be a place for single-author papers in research, especially for early career researchers.

Research is collaborative. Nothing is original; building knowledge relies on community and interdisciplinary collaboration. But this fact alone does not negate the role of single-author papers in contributing to knowledge.

Few papers have looked at single vs. multi author papers across disciplines. So, as an example, I searched for papers on ‘ecosystem services’ in Web of Science , and then refined the results by random disciplinary subjects. I only looked at the first 50 records of each subject, and some had fewer than 50 records, so the graph shows proportions. I used ‘ecosystem services’ because it’s one of my areas of expertise, and it’s also a recent research term ( established in the 1970s-90s ); so most disciplines will have comparable decades of bulk research. Apparently, single-author papers are more common in some disciplines than others.

single author

So what is the role of single-author papers in research?

Expert opinions. Well-argued expert views from a particular area of research (including reviews and syntheses) are more common from a single author, compared to papers involving data collection. And researchers can, and should, have their own ideas; formulating and justifying these ideas is part of their job description.

Observations. For ecology & biology related disciplines, observational natural history notes are extremely important data papers – they identify knowledge gaps and provide citable foundations for research projects. The majority of these papers should be single-authored, mostly because if you saw something really cool while out communing with nature, you should write about it! Unfortunately, because so few ecology journals accept natural history notes , this valuable type of single-author paper is often overlooked.

Early career researchers (ECRs). One of the most common skills highlighted in job advertisements, both academic and non-academic, is the ‘ability to work both independently and in a team’. This is a key reason ECRs should be encouraged to include a single-author paper in their publication record – a mix of both single & multi author papers demonstrates a researcher’s ability to conceptualise, analyse, and justify their research, as both an individual and a collaborator.

Independence and reputation. Single-author papers give ECRs space to grow. Many postdoc ECRs are employed on short-term contracts associated with someone else’s project. So any papers they produce from that project will naturally include other authors. This is totally normal, and important for building professional networks. But having a single-author project to tinker away at on the side has many benefits: it provides ECRs with an independent project to work on when waiting for feedback from co-authors, or feeling frustrated with their ‘proper’ job; and it gives them the opportunity to learn and build their own disciplinary niche (see previous point).

Community ecology. Communities are made up of interactions between individuals and their environment. Research disciplines are communities. And individuals, e.g. sole authors, are a component of those communities. Single-author papers inspire multi-author debate, new research, and new collaborations that advance the field. We shouldn’t want them to go extinct.

P1090701

© Manu Saunders 2017

Share this:

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)

One thought on “ On the conservation of single-author papers ”

  • Pingback: The Great Academic Resignation – Ecology is not a dirty word

Comments are closed.

' src=

  • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
  • Subscribe Subscribed
  • Copy shortlink
  • Report this content
  • View post in Reader
  • Manage subscriptions
  • Collapse this bar

U.S. flag

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.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • PLoS Comput Biol
  • v.9(7); 2013 Jul

Logo of ploscomp

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

Marco pautasso.

1 Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology (CEFE), CNRS, Montpellier, France

2 Centre for Biodiversity Synthesis and Analysis (CESAB), FRB, Aix-en-Provence, France

Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications [1] . For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively [2] . Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests [3] . Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read [4] . For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way [5] .

When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature. Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students start their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their research issue [6] . However, it is likely that most scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.

Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking to paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills [7] . In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student. Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.

Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience

How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review. On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review [8] . The topic must at least be:

  • interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary),
  • an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and
  • a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).

Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered [9] , but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions. In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience. In many cases, the topic (e.g., web services in computational biology) will automatically define an audience (e.g., computational biologists), but that same topic may also be of interest to neighbouring fields (e.g., computer science, biology, etc.).

Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature

After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers. Five pieces of advice here:

  • keep track of the search items you use (so that your search can be replicated [10] ),
  • keep a list of papers whose pdfs you cannot access immediately (so as to retrieve them later with alternative strategies),
  • use a paper management system (e.g., Mendeley, Papers, Qiqqa, Sente),
  • define early in the process some criteria for exclusion of irrelevant papers (these criteria can then be described in the review to help define its scope), and
  • do not just look for research papers in the area you wish to review, but also seek previous reviews.

The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review ( Figure 1 ), if not exactly on the issue you are planning to tackle, at least on a related topic. If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review,

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is pcbi.1003149.g001.jpg

The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, for example, to the study of the impacts of climate change on plant diseases, where there appear to be more literature reviews than research studies [33] .

  • discussing in your review the approaches, limitations, and conclusions of past reviews,
  • trying to find a new angle that has not been covered adequately in the previous reviews, and
  • incorporating new material that has inevitably accumulated since their appearance.

When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply:

  • be thorough,
  • use different keywords and database sources (e.g., DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), and
  • look at who has cited past relevant papers and book chapters.

Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading

If you read the papers first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper. My advice is, while reading, to start writing down interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write. This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.

Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument [11] , but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature. It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft. It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions. Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time.

Rule 4: Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write

After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for the review. This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review. Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations. A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: it may well attract more attention from busy readers, although it will inevitably simplify some issues and leave out some relevant material due to space limitations. A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major monographs.

There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews. The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs. integrative reviews. While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material [12] . A similar distinction exists between narrative and systematic reviews: while narrative reviews are qualitative, systematic reviews attempt to test a hypothesis based on the published evidence, which is gathered using a predefined protocol to reduce bias [13] , [14] . When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses. The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal(s), but also on the time available to write the review and the number of coauthors [15] .

Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest

Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16 , 17 . Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead to reviews that are trying to do too many things at once. The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields [18] . If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion. This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas.

While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.

Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent

Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps [19] . After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of:

  • the major achievements in the reviewed field,
  • the main areas of debate, and
  • the outstanding research questions.

It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts. A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: some people are excellent at mapping what has been achieved, some others are very good at identifying dark clouds on the horizon, and some have instead a knack at predicting where solutions are going to come from. If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature! In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs. active voice and present vs. past tense.

Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure

Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time, timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical. It also needs a good structure. With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews. For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched (database, keywords, time limits) [20] .

How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.g., with mind-mapping techniques. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review [21] . This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure. A careful selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too [22] .

Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback

Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so [23] . As a rule, incorporating feedback from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft. Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times. It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.

Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback. A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue [24] .

Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective

In many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing. This could create a conflict of interest: how can reviewers report objectively on their own work [25] ? Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too much importance to their own findings in the review. However, bias could also occur in the other direction: some scientists may be unduly dismissive of their own achievements, so that they will tend to downplay their contribution (if any) to a field when reviewing it.

In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial. If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings. In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.

Rule 10: Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies

Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published. Ideally, a literature review should not identify as a major research gap an issue that has just been addressed in a series of papers in press (the same applies, of course, to older, overlooked studies (“sleeping beauties” [26] )). This implies that literature reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases. Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up to a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision stage may be worthwhile. Assessing the contribution of papers that have just appeared is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their significance and impact on further research and society.

Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic (including independently written literature reviews) will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. But this is the nature of science [27] – [32] . I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to M. Barbosa, K. Dehnen-Schmutz, T. Döring, D. Fontaneto, M. Garbelotto, O. Holdenrieder, M. Jeger, D. Lonsdale, A. MacLeod, P. Mills, M. Moslonka-Lefebvre, G. Stancanelli, P. Weisberg, and X. Xu for insights and discussions, and to P. Bourne, T. Matoni, and D. Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft.

Funding Statement

This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB) through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data (CESAB), as part of the NETSEED research project. The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript.

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

APA Sample Paper

OWL logo

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

Note:  This page reflects the latest version of the APA Publication Manual (i.e., APA 7), which released in October 2019. The equivalent resource for the older APA 6 style  can be found here .

Media Files: APA Sample Student Paper  ,  APA Sample Professional Paper

This resource is enhanced by Acrobat PDF files. Download the free Acrobat Reader

Note: The APA Publication Manual, 7 th Edition specifies different formatting conventions for student  and  professional  papers (i.e., papers written for credit in a course and papers intended for scholarly publication). These differences mostly extend to the title page and running head. Crucially, citation practices do not differ between the two styles of paper.

However, for your convenience, we have provided two versions of our APA 7 sample paper below: one in  student style and one in  professional  style.

Note: For accessibility purposes, we have used "Track Changes" to make comments along the margins of these samples. Those authored by [AF] denote explanations of formatting and [AWC] denote directions for writing and citing in APA 7. 

APA 7 Student Paper:

Apa 7 professional paper:.

Banner

APA Style: Book with a single author

  • Getting Started

Reference List

  • Book with a single author
  • Book with two authors
  • Book with three or more authors
  • Edited book
  • Chapter in an edited book
  • Edition of a book other than the first
  • Journal article with one author
  • Journal article with two authors
  • Journal article with three or more authors
  • Journal article (print)
  • Basic webpage
  • Official publication online
  • Video sharing websites (YouTube)
  • Cochrane Review
  • Conference papers and poster sessions
  • Newspaper article
  • Tests and measurement instruments
  • Theses/Dissertations
  • Multiple works by the same author
  • Secondary sources
  • Online Library Tutorials

About Citing Books

In-Text Citation (Paraphrase) - entry that appears in the body of your paper when you express the ideas of a researcher or author using your own words.  For more tips on paraphrasing check out The OWL at Purdue .

In-Text Citation (Quotation) - entry that appears in the body of your paper after a direct quote.

References - entry that appears at the end of your paper.

Book With A Single Author

In-text citation (Paraphrase)

(Cottrell, 2013)

In-text citation (Quotation)

(Cottrell, 2013, p. 156)

Cottrell, S. (2013). The study skills handbook (5 th ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.

Author surname, Initial. (Year). Title of book (edition). Publisher.

Email Us SETU Waterford Libraries are operating library services on campus and our dedicated staff are committed to supporting you with your academic studies. If you have a question please contact us via email at [email protected] or for more detailed queries contact Library Learning Support at  [email protected]   and we will get back to you as soon as possible.

One to One Help

  • << Previous: Books
  • Next: Book with two authors >>
  • Last Updated: Dec 19, 2023 12:22 PM
  • URL: https://wit-ie.libguides.com/c.php?g=655085
  • Open access
  • Published: 08 February 2024

Evaluating the impact of the supporting the advancement of research skills (STARS) programme on research knowledge, engagement and capacity-building in a health and social care organisation in England

  • Gulshan Tajuria   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5559-0333 1 , 2 ,
  • David Dobel-Ober   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8457-4148 1 ,
  • Eleanor Bradley   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5877-2298 3 ,
  • Claire Charnley 1 ,
  • Ruth Lambley-Burke   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0416-6908 1 ,
  • Christian Mallen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2677-1028 1 , 2 ,
  • Kate Honeyford 1 &
  • Tom Kingstone   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9179-2303 1 , 2  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  126 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

302 Accesses

Metrics details

To evaluate the impact a novel education programme - to improve research engagement, awareness, understanding and confidence - had on a diverse health and social care workforce. Barriers and facilitators to engagement were explored together with research capacity-building opportunities and ways to embed a research culture. The programme is entitled ‘Supporting The Advancement of Research Skills’ (STARS programme); the paper reports findings from a health and social care setting in England, UK.

A four-level outcome framework guided the approach to evaluation and was further informed by key principles of research capacity development and relevant theory. Quantitative data were collected from learners before and after engagement; these were analysed descriptively. Semi-structured online interviews were conducted with learners and analysed thematically. A purposive sample was achieved to include a diversity in age, gender, health and social care profession, and level of attendance (regular attendees, moderate attendees and non-attenders).

The evaluation spanned 18 half-day workshops and 11 seminars delivered by expert educators. 165 (2% of total staff at Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust (MPFT)) staffs booked one or more education sessions; 128 (77%) including Allied Health Professionals (AHPs), psychologists, nursing and midwifery, and social workers attended one or more session. Key themes of engagement with teaching sessions, relevance and impact of training and promoting a research active environment were identified with relevant sub-themes. Positive impacts of training were described in terms of research confidence, intentions, career planning and application of research skills as a direct result of training. Lack of dedicated time for research engagement, work pressures and time commitments required for the programme were key barriers. Facilitators that facilitated engagement are also described.

Conclusions

Findings demonstrate the impact that a free, virtual and high-quality research education programme had at individual and organisational levels. The programme is the product of a successful collaboration between health and social care and academic organisations; this provides a useful framework for others to adapt and adopt. Key barriers to attendance and engagement spoke to system-wide challenges that an education programme could not address in the short-term. Potential solutions are discussed in relation to protecting staff time, achieving management buy-in, recognising research champions, and having a clear communication strategy.

Peer Review reports

Research has played a pivotal role in the advancement of health and social care by, for example, informing early diagnosis, the development and testing of new treatments for prevention, cure, recovery and palliative care [ 1 ]. The importance of research is heralded by key health and social care bodies in the UK, the context for this paper. The UK Government policy paper on clinical research delivery identifies the need to: ‘support healthcare professionals to develop research skills relevant to their clinical role and to design studies in ways which ensure delivering research is a rewarding experience, rather than an additional burden’ [ 2 ]. The Chief Nursing Officer for England’s strategic plan for research also emphasises the importance of developing a culture where research is relevant to all nurses, either through direct involvement or the use of research evidence as a key element in professional decision-making [ 3 ]. Similarly, the Royal College of Physicians [ 4 ] states that healthcare providers should see research as an integral element in care delivery, and to emphasise its ongoing commitment to social care research, the NIHR became the ‘National Institute for Health and Care Research’ in April 2022. The response from the research community to the Covid-19 pandemic has further boosted the impetus and appetite for health and social care to embed global and multi-disciplinary research strategies for the future [ 5 ].

Having sufficient research capacity and capability is important to enabling health and social care services and workers to translate research into practice [ 6 ]. However, inequalities exist in so far as research is not perceived as accessible and inclusive by all. Several studies describe workplace barriers including time [ 4 , 7 , 8 ] resources, such as access to published research [ 8 , 9 ] and lack of research knowledge, experience and expertise, both in terms of carrying out their own research and putting the findings of published research into practice [ 9 ]. Some professional groups describe lack of access to relevant training as a barrier to developing research knowledge and skills, (e.g. nurses [ 8 , 9 , 10 ]). Fry and Attawet [ 8 ] also identified a lack of organisational and management support for research linked to the absence of a culture that promotes research as an integral part of clinical practice. Thus, to nurture research engagement an individual (bottom-up) and service-level (top-down) approach to research capacity development (RCD) is necessary [ 11 ].

A recent evaluation of National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) funding awards suggested that whilst funding could be transformative and contribute to a healthy research culture in health and care organisations, issues of inequality were identified by professionals working in specialisms with less research experience or expertise. These were in organisations without connections to more research-intensive universities and by those working in non-medical professional groups (e.g. Allied Health Professionals (AHPs), nurses) [ 12 ]. This was further highlighted by a study with social care staff, which found they valued research but showed low levels of engagement and skill [ 13 ]. Authors would like to highlight here that they recognise that social care staff and social workers provide different functions. Social workers aim, “to provide support for people to help them to deal with the personal and social issues which affect their lives”… whereas “Social care is one of the terms which is used to refer to the strategies which are used to help to care for people who are in need” [ 14 ]. Even though these terms may be used sometimes interchangeably they are different in terms of qualification required to attain the title and the duties they perform. A growing evidence base identifies the key mechanisms to support Research Capacity Development (RCD) in health and social care. A rapid evidence review [ 15 ] highlighted intrinsic factors (e.g. attitudes and beliefs) and extrinsic factors (such as recognition of research skills acquisition within career progression and professional development via professional bodies, creation of personal awards); and observation of impacts on practice as helpful to encourage NHS staff to engage with researcher development.

Context to the STARS programme

MPFT is a health and social care NHS trust with a track record in research delivery and is in the process of developing research leadership. At the time of writing, the NHS Trust had not achieved university hospital status, although it works closely with two universities which developed the STARS programme in partnership (see Fig.  1 and Supplementary File 1 for a full overview of the structure of the programme). The STARS programme provides a useful resource to address disparities in research engagement between different professional groups in health and social care. Despite more opportunities for research having been generated for nurses and AHPs by organizations such as the NIHR Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs) and Clinical Research Networks (CRNs), disparities persist between non-academic clinicians and the opportunities available to certain clinical specialities [ 16 , 17 , 18 ]. Challenges and barriers to research training engagement highlighted in this paper are likely to have global relevance [ 19 ]. Thus, more broadly, offering programmes such as STARS may also help address global disparities in research engagement given the UK has the highest percentage of doctors (28.6%) and nurses (15%) who are trained in foreign countries [ 20 ]. STARS was designed in consultation with staff to identify existing barriers to engagement in research training, provide all staff with improved access to high-quality research training to enhance their confidence in research and enable the best use of empirical evidence in practice. The STARS programme was launched in January 2021.

figure 1

Supporting the advancement of research skills (STARS) programme

This paper reports findings from the evaluation which aimed to evaluate the delivery of the STARS programme to assess delivery outcomes, understand learner experiences, facilitators and barriers to engagement, and future opportunities

The approach to evaluation of this training programme was informed by Kirkpatrick’s four-level outcome framework: reaction (was training enjoyed?), learning (did learning occur?), behaviour (did behaviour change?) and results (was performance effected?) [ 21 ]. As this is a new programme, data was gathered against the first three levels of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model. Contemporary criticisms and revisions of the model were incorporated to better understand the chains of evidence and wider contextual factors that may influence the delivery of a new programme [ 22 ], such as the STARS programme.

Data collection

Quantitative data.

Data including information such as highest educational qualification, job role, the reason for attending and the line manager’s approval to attend the training was collected at the point learners registered for a teaching session. Data indicating service areas, rate of dropouts, staff backgrounds, highest and lowest rate of attendance was collected from the attendance record. Data was also collected using a brief post-session feedback (see Supplementary material - Learner Evaluation Form) form, which included a likert scale question inviting learners to rate the quality of the training.

Statistical analysis

Quantitative analysis was performed at a descriptive level, using Microsoft Excel (2016).

Qualitative methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with programme participants to explore learner experiences (aligned with Kirkpatrick’s reaction level), outcomes (learning) and intentions to apply research knowledge ( intended behaviours). Flexible interview formats were offered to encourage participation, such as online interviews and providing responses via email. Interviews were facilitated using a topic guide (see Supplementary material - STARS Interview Guide) that was iteratively revised.

Recruitment and sampling

A purposive sample of participants was identified using data from the programme booking form and attendance records:

Regular attenders: Those who attended a minimum of five teaching sessions across the whole programme or a single pathway.

Occasional attenders: Those who attended very few (1–2) sessions across the whole programme.

Non-attenders: Those who registered to attend, but eventually didn’t attend, to explore barriers to engagement.

Participants were invited by email for a maximum 30-minute interview. All potential participants were emailed a participant information sheet. They were given time to read the information and a contact name for any questions related to their participation, before being asked to confirm their participation in the study.

Description of sample

Thirty-six staff members were categorised as regular attenders; all were invited to take part in an interview. Two individuals declined to participate citing a lack of relevance, as they left their learning events halfway; two individuals declined due to work pressure following illness; three were ‘out of office’ according to email replies, and no response was received from 14 individuals. The remaining 15 agreed to participate in an interview with 10 choosing to use Microsoft Teams and five to provide written responses- ‘email interviews’. This method is becoming increasingly used to help supplement other forms of data and support involvement of healthcare professionals, who may have limited time/capacity for research but valuable knowledge to share [ 23 , 24 ]. Participants represented a diverse range of professional backgrounds, including: AHPs, psychologists, nursing and midwifery, and social workers; this reflected the broad range of learners on the programme. A semi-structured interview guide was used. The interviews were audio recorded and later transcribed in full by the lead author (GT).

Occasional ( n  = 17) and non-attenders ( n  = 13) were invited to participate in an interview. These were staff members who had booked several teaching sessions (1–12) but either did not attend any with/without apologies ( n  = 30) or attended only one or two. Seven email addresses were not valid as the staff had either left the service or changed role; four had an automated ‘out of office’ response set; four staff declined to participate and there was no response from 11 email addresses. Five staff agreed to be interviewed. A brief topic guide was used with questions aiming to find out just the reason/s behind non-attendance in the training. As these interviews were brief, non-verbatim notes were taken by the interviewer and included in analysis. At the end of each of these interviews, the notes were validated with the interviewee.

Qualitative analysis

The data analysis followed a thematic approach [ 22 ] to identify key themes. Data-driven coding was conducted to establish meaning from the words of participants; coding was also informed, a-priori, by the levels of the evaluation framework [ 25 ]. Initial coding was done by GT and TK who read all transcripts to support familiarisation before generating an initial set of codes. Right from initial codes to final themes, other than the authors, the wider STARS team gave input in various Team meetings. Similar codes were then compared and grouped to identify initial themes; these were reviewed to shape a preliminary set of main themes. Preliminary themes were shared and discussed with the team before finalising.

Quantitative findings

Over the 12-month evaluation period, a total of 18 half-day workshops were delivered, six from the research in clinical practice pathway; four from the research delivery pathway; eight from the research leader pathway (refer to Fig.  1 ); and 11 seminars to support the development of key skills. In total, 165 (2% of total staff at MPFT) staff members booked one or more teaching session. 128 (77%) attended one or more teaching session. On average, sessions in the research in practice pathway were attended by 25 staff; 12 in research delivery pathway; 21 in the research leader pathway; and 17 in seminars.

Qualifications, backgrounds and expectations

According to the booking form, attenders represented a range of professional groups.

Nursing registered − 29 (23%).

AHPs − 23 (17%).

Additional clinical services (all healthcare services) − 21 (16%).

Additional professional scientific and technical (such as pharmacist, qualified psychological therapist, social worker etc.) -15 (12%).

Medical profession − 14 (11%).

Other (e.g. research staff) − 26 (20%).

Approximately 85% of staff had reported prior educational qualifications, the majority included: 20% ( n  = 33) bachelor’s, 19% ( n  = 31) master’s, 3% ( n  = 5) doctoral degrees, 6% ( n  = 10) diplomas and nearly 2% ( n  = 3) MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery); remaining attenders did not provide information on their educational background.

Explanations for booking the training and number of staff

At the time of booking the course, staff were asked to provide reasons and expectations from STARS sessions using an open text box. Descriptive analysis of responses is presented in Table  1 :

A better understanding of research in practice, additional support for academic work and the development of research in trust were the most common reasons provided (Table  1 ).

Post session evaluation feedback

Learners demonstrated their learning from the sessions in a variety of ways and more often using the session specific feedback. In total, 195 feedback forms were completed and covered 24 sessions. The number of ratings completed per session ranged from 1 to 25. 136 (70%) learners rated the session they attended as ‘very good’, 52 (27%) rated as ‘good’, 4 (2%) rated ‘adequate’ and 2 (1%) rated ‘poor’. Qualitative findings, presented below, help us to make sense of the session ratings.

Qualitative findings

The main themes and sub-themes from the analysis of qualitative data from interviews are summarised in Table  2 and described with illustrative quotes in the following sections.

Engagement with teaching sessions

The reasons given by staff attending the training in booking forms (Table  1 ) and discussed in interviews were reflected to a large extent in the way participants chose the teaching sessions they attended. Eight interviewees had received research training as part of their degree-level qualifications; one was currently involved in conducting research at work.

Factors considered while selecting teaching sessions

Some staff were much focused on what they wanted to take from teaching sessions and booked selectively; however, some wanted to attend all, indiscriminately, due to unequal access in such training opportunities in the past and/or in their departments:

“I wanted to do them all because my concern is that they might not be offered again because we’ve never had them in social care… we’ve never had researchers come and talk to us in social care and social work unless you go to Uni.” P 4.

Some staff described their learning as focused on intrinsic factors such as:

“It’s always good to update because I think you find your own way in doing things like informed consent. P 11.

For other staff, learning on the programme was driven by extrinsic factors like:

“Social work and social care does have a huge gap in terms of research participation. We are trying to develop that within the organization and regionally” P 13.

Relevance of a teaching session to the current role was considered before booking by staff who either had knowledge or were currently involved in doing research but the staff without previous opportunities like this booked relatively indiscriminately. Intrinsic factors such as personal interest and career progressions and extrinsic factors such as organisational development were additional reasons to attend the teaching sessions.

Barriers to attendance

Getting data from those who did not attend after booking proved difficult. Four staff declined to take part in evaluation interviews because of work pressure or illnesses; this may reflect some of the reasons for non-attendance. Another five agreed to take part in short interviews to discuss their lack of attendance with the programme. All interviewees pointed towards time pressure as the main issue.

Qualitative data from the interviews with the regular attenders about barriers to attending some of the training after booking revealed similarities in reasons as the non-attenders. A general lack of time due to staff shortages highlighted the role of the line manager’s approval in attending the training as discussed by two staff members:

“some sessions that I could not attend as my manager didn’t think I should attend so many sessions, because of the pressures of the service following the covid backlogs etc” P 5.

One staff member briefly raised the issues of empowerment where some staff might find it difficult to get the line manager’s approval to attend such training:

“And perhaps you need to get the buy in from the managers, because there’s an awful, awful lot of staff that aren’t really empowered to be able to go off and do this and then influence their work” P 7.

Communication and marketing of the new training was highlighted as a barrier to attendance by staff from one of the departments:

“I think one was probably in the promotion, I came across it by chance…that’s something to do with our organization because it kind of sits slightly outside of MPFT, so I think sometimes that messaging doesn’t always get through” P3 .

Prioritising paid training over STARS training was also a reason for one of the staff to miss some of the teaching sessions:

“I’ve missed some STARS trainings because of attending other trainings which are paid training or conferences that have cost money. So obviously I’ve prioritized them over some of the STARS training” P 9.

Barriers to engagement

Providing training across different professional groups highlighted difficulties in understanding respective languages. Two respondents reported that some content used clinical language that was difficult to understand:

“There’s also an element of understanding research and how it can be applied there’s probably an element of language as well, so it’s not just clinical…or health orientated, it’s also care. So it is just understanding that language barrier so that social work and social care staff know that it’s appropriate for everybody in the organization” P 13.

For one staff member the pace of delivering the graphic and statistical information teaching was very fast and difficult to understand:

“Sometimes it felt like the presenters for some statistical information went too fast when that was the area that most people are weaker on, so perhaps some courses tried to fit too much into one session” P 5.

A couple of staff discussed the workshops as disengaging due to long presentations and less interaction:

“the ones where you will just kind of like listening for three hours. They were really hard to stay engaged with” P 9.

For two staff the breakout rooms were not as helpful as explained by one:

“it can be awkward when you’re with people you don’t know and haven’t got a full grasp of the subject, and trying to think of contributions” P 5.

One staff also highlighted how attending the training from a shared office space can be problematic compared to a private space:

“As when doing it in the office, it’s harder to engage in group discussions due to fear of disrupting other colleagues” P 2.

Other ways of delivering the training were also suggested due to long commitments for the workshops. Two participants suggested that three-hour workshops were too long when delivered online; face-to-face learning was preferred:

“it would be nice to have it when we can to have some classroom based stuff because again, it just feels more natural to ask questions and you get to have those conversations in breaks” P 1.

And according to one participant, the training could be delivered using pre-recorded content:

“If there was a way to like the website on the Internet, all these links that you could click on to watch re-watch everything so you know where to go to one place to see all” P 6.

However, for two participants the recordings of teaching sessions were not as good as attending in real-time, as explained by one:

“You’re not the one engaging in it like because obviously you’re just watching it after the fact, so I don’t sit through the whole thing…If you’ve got questions, there’s nowhere to ask those questions” P 9.

Facilitators to engagement

Online synchronous delivery of the teaching sessions was valued by all interview participants, in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. Use of breakout rooms for small group discussion and interaction was considered useful by most of the interview participants, for example:

“that was quite nice that you’d catch up with people that you were in the breakout rooms and could get to know a bit more about what they were doing and so I found that quite helpful from like a networking perspective” P 10.

Most of the staff members discussed keeping the recorded videos for future reference as very helpful:

“I know I’m not going to have time to apply myself to do in any sort of research at the moment with how things are at work, but I’ve got all the recordings and so could go back to those” P 10.

To summarise, barriers to attend the training included a lack of time on the participants’ end and lack of promotion. Perceived value due to no direct cost associated with the training was also revealed as a reason to miss a session after booking. Pace, professional-specific language, length of teaching and shared office space were highlighted as some of the barriers to engagement. Regarding facilitators to attend and maintain engagement, all staff were happy with online delivery and the availability of recordings was useful. However, mixed opinions were shared about the usefulness of breakout rooms given the range of professional groups that the staff belonged to.

Relevance and impact of training

Staff described various benefits to their research practice since attending STARS sessions, such as, writing and publishing a short report; working on a literature review; signing on to a university course; successfully receiving regulatory research approvals; and completing preliminary work to attend a professional doctorate or equivalent.

Training content relevance and suitability

All interview participants commented on the programme content and described it as comprehensive and well-balanced in terms of topics and delivery:

“I think it was really well balanced. The presenters came from diverse backgrounds and research was treated holistically by all, so everything felt relevant” P 12.

Impact on knowledge, skills and attributes

One participant described how learning was helpful to understand key areas in greater depth:

“I have an understanding of some critical appraisal and things like that, but it was probably more surface level and the STARS programme helped me to develop that quite significantly” P 1.

For another staff it helped with attending and presenting at different teaching sessions:

“So I’ve attended the regional teaching partnership programs we’ve presented our [name] project across [organisation] who are now looking at setting up a regional program. We’ve presented at NIHR events so yeah, definitely useful” P 13 .

The teaching sessions had a prompt impact on the knowledge and skills of those staff who already had some knowledge of research and also those who had identified specific opportunities to put into practice.

Applying new learning

Some learning on the training had wider applications that went beyond research, topics such as informed consent:

“Things like the informed consent training because for all our new staff that’s a major part of research. So from that we’ve drafted kind of a memoirs and processes formally based on sort of training materials on how an informed consent should be conducted so that we know that everybody starting at the same level” P 11.

Learning on one particular workshop helped to build a participant’s confidence in reading, making sense, and talking about research followed by conducting their own literature review:

“I used the literature review knowledge that I gained to do a very comprehensive literature review. Very rapid, quite comprehensive and then presented it. So I was able to put it into practice straight away” P 3 .

Overall, most of the participants mentioned using the new learning in practice but only a few staff members were able to provide practical examples.

Promoting a research-active environment

Staff discussed how they were using more resources from the organisation such as websites, the local research department, and library services in creating a research identity for themselves and contributing towards a research-active environment within and across their respective departments.

Research career pathways

The STARS programme helped to awaken ambitions for research and staff showed how keen they were on getting involved in doing research. Participants described doing their own research as a better option when other routes for progression were limited in their department:

“where I’m at in my role, there isn’t really anywhere to go unless you want to be a team leader, which isn’t really what I want to do. I really enjoy the patient facing side of things, and so I’ve always kind of said I’d be more interested in more specialized role or doing some research” P 10.

STARS was also useful in the stages of career development and for some it was helpful in starting the new paths as discussed by one:

“It’s either doing a feasibility or that sort of level today as part of a master’s course or doing their pre doctoral the NIHR sort of work to get a project effectively ready” P 6.

However, there was also a sense of being unfulfilled among some of the participants:

“I’d like to progress in it, but it’s where do I take it because I don’t know what opportunities are out there and how to apply for anything really” P 4.
“I’m really interested in doing some research in the area that I work in because I feel like there’s lots of improvements and things that could be made with how we do things and for the clients to get the most out of the service…I think with the STARS stuff I’ve sort of parked it so I’ve got it all saved together in a folder like ready so I can go and access it” P 10.

STARS opened up different routes for career progression for some staff. On the other hand, staff without immediate opportunities to get involved in research reported experiencing frustration because of the fact that there were no obvious opportunities for them to put their improved skills into practice. Success stories (going on a pre-doctoral path; progression for those who were already doing their master’s/doctorate etc.) of those who had some research base highlights the initiation of research identities.

Workforce satisfaction

In addition to feeling motivated to complete their academic qualifications, two staff members discussed how much they valued the STARS training and one participant described staying in their job, in order to access the training:

“I’ve not come across any other type of research training that is like is what the STARS programme offered. I purposely stayed within my role to access this stars training” P 9.

Improving awareness about research support services

The staff interviewees appreciated the associations to other support and resources that they had found out about while attending the STARS training. This included the library services and the R&I team:

“And the fact that our library helps us is phenomenal…So it’s given me a lot of knowledge about the wide organization and just how invested we are in research and that there are people [R&I] to help” P 7.

The STARS programme has been developed with contributions from different departments in order to make it suitable for all staff members to access and understand. This was reflected in the discussion where the interviewees appreciated the other links and resources.

The current paper reports findings from a mixed-methods study, which aimed to evaluate the delivery of a novel research training programme to health and social care staff in a single organisation in England (MPFT). The mixed methods approach generated key data against three of Kirkpatrick’s framework (reaction, learning and behaviour). Quantitative findings demonstrated good engagement with the programme from a diverse range of professional groups; a broad range of reasons were given for engagement. All of which demonstrates the broad appeal and initial reaction to the programme offer, particularly among professional groups who may not ordinarily engage in research (e.g. social care, nursing and midwifery staff). Ratings of session quality were very positive with 97% of ratings either very good or good. Qualitative findings highlighted three key themes: engagement with training, relevance, and impact of training, and promoting a research-active environment. Within these themes, positive reactions to training (e.g. appreciation, satisfaction, collaboration with others, access to new resources), evidence of learning (e.g. understanding critical appraisal) and change in behaviour through practical application (e.g. conducting a literature review) and sharing learning (e.g. networking) were identified. However, barriers still exist for many, including research terminology, limited capacity and the need for wider promotional campaigns.

Comparisons with findings from previous research in other areas and with elements of Gee and Cooke [ 26 ] framework for Research Capacity Development in health care are made, particularly within the areas of Close to Practice (CTP), Infrastructure (INF) and Skills and Confidence Building, which closely align with our findings and help support transferability to other contexts whilst also realising that a training programme can only do so much.

Close to practice

Gee and Cooke’s [ 26 ] ‘Close to Practice’ principle covers themes such as keeping research relevant to health care and informing day-to-day practice The current programme tried to be inclusive of all professional types (i.e. being close to practice); however, as identified in the engaging with teaching sessions theme, some language barriers were highlighted by staff from social care backgrounds who felt excluded due to the clinical/academic language used to deliver the training session – which may have obscured the relevance of the content for this group of learners. Still, the way the STARS programme supports this principle is evident in the content, which addresses both the main strands of the UK and English health policy, driving increased health and care involved in research:

the routine use of research findings in day to day practice;

increased involvement in research activity within the health service.

(referred to by Wakefield et al. [ 13 ] as ‘using research’ and ‘doing research’). The findings of the current evaluation demonstrated that participants’ reasons for booking onto the programme usually included one or both elements. Participants’ motivations also mirrored those found by Dimova et al. [ 15 ], presenting expectations that the STARS content supported both individual career development and organisational objectives such as high-quality patient care. In line with Ariely et al. [ 27 ] and Abramovich and McBride [ 28 ] booking but not attending the current training sessions was an indication toward the perceived low value of the training considering it was completely free for the staff. As the training is free to attend for the staff & managers with no direct impact on teams’ budgets, the priority to attend was given to paid trainings over STARS, sometimes.

Support infrastructure

Gee and Cooke’s [ 26 ] ‘Developing a support infrastructure’ principle covers ‘building additional resources and/or processes into the Trust’s organizational system to enable the smooth and effective running of research projects and for research capacity building’. The findings from the current evaluation, particularly under the ‘Promoting a research-active environment’ them, also showed how a wide-ranging in-house research skills training programme open to all staff can help build resources and processes within a healthcare provider that can support greater research activity.

In terms of processes, distinctive features of this training programme were that it was delivered in-house and entirely online. While the move to online training was necessitated by the pandemic (COVID-19), the evaluation showed that online training has the potential to become the delivery method of choice, particularly for in-house training for organisations covering a wide geographical area. Evaluations comparing online synchronous learning to traditional face-to-face learning have generally shown that (though with certain limitations) online approaches can be effective (George et al. [ 29 ], found this was the case for post registration medical education). In line with previous research, the current evaluation has also shown that an online-only training programme has challenges but can have a positive impact on applying research skills and developing confidence among healthcare staff [ 29 , 30 ].

Participants’ feedback identified the importance yet challenge of incorporating interactivity into online training [ 31 , 32 , 33 ]. Feedback on the length of the teaching sessions demonstrated that long sessions (in this case two hours or longer) could reduce engagement [ 33 , 34 ].

The literature on barriers to health and social care staff carrying out either or both of these activities (research finding use or research activity) identified four main barriers:

lack of time and/or resources;

lack of organisational or management support in other ways;

lack of skills, knowledge, and confidence to undertake research or put evidence into practice and.

lack of opportunities to develop these skills.

The first two of these are linked to infrastructure, resources and processes. The findings of the STARS evaluation showed mixed evidence in this respect. On one hand, the evaluation echoed previous research [ 7 , 8 ] that lack of time or staffing pressures was a major barrier to healthcare staff gaining research skills. Lack of protected time for research activities remains an important barrier to embedding a research-active environment into an organisation. As suggested by King et al. [ 11 ] the current evaluation was also conducted keeping in mind the long-term impacts on the organisational level. The STARS evaluation found the issue of management support, also identified previously [ 8 ], and affected both attendance and opportunities to put skills learnt into practice. On the other hand, the evaluation produced at least one positive example of a manager supporting an attendee in putting skills learnt into practice, resulting in changes in practice.

Research skills and confidence in the workforce

Gee and Cooke’s [ 26 ] ‘skills’ principle covers the provision of training and development opportunities to enable the health and care workforce to develop the skills and confidence to both ‘use’ and ‘do’ research. This principle speaks to the second theme of ‘Relevance and impact of training’ and matches the third and fourth barriers to doing and using research from the research literature mentioned above. This evaluation focused on how the STARS training programme addressed this principle and these barriers.

In terms of the provision of opportunities, the analysis of benefits reported by participants suggest that taking part in the programme contributed to improved skills and confidence in both the ‘using’ and ‘doing’ areas. Comments from the interviews also showed how the STARS programme had addressed the barrier of a lack of opportunities to develop these skills, with two (social care) participants commenting that STARS represented an opportunity not traditionally available to staff from their sector. This helps address one of Wakefield et al’s [ 13 ] recommendations about access to research training opportunities.

Previous research [ 8 , 10 , 13 ] showed that a lack of research skills, confidence and opportunities to gain them were issues associated with non-medical staff groups, particularly nurses, AHPs and social workers. However, the opportunity to gain knowledge and new skills through STARS was valued and staff had plans of using them in the future, echoing the results reported by Bullock et al. [ 35 ] The analysis of demographic data for the STARS programme was based on broad nationally defined staff categories (United Kingdom Electronic Staff Record (ESR) categories – see ‘A Guide to the Staff Group, Job Role and Area of Work classifications used in ESR’); it was difficult to separate, for example, social workers from other staff categories who usually have higher degrees, a high level of research skills, confidence and knowledge. However, the high level of take-up from nursing and midwifery and AHPs suggest that the STARS programme had been of interest to staff groups that previous research had identified as lacking skills, confidence and training opportunities to make evidence-based practice and research activity part of their working culture.

Comments received in the STARS evaluation raised the dilemma of whether it was possible to make content available and relevant to groups of participants with very different professional backgrounds and levels of research knowledge and experience; or whether attempting to achieve this meant the course content did not meet any group’s needs well. The evaluation found both positives and negatives in this respect – gains from sharing the training with colleagues from very different areas and perspectives versus content failing to suit the needs of the participants, very different prior research and professional knowledge and so inhibiting learning in some cases. Previous research was found, evaluating multidisciplinary training provisions that either spanned a range of professional groups working in the same area or students at a similar stage of education studying in different subject areas [ 7 , 9 , 10 , 12 ]. However, no previous research was found evaluating training programmes that matched the STARS participants’ mix of both professional backgrounds and work areas (spanning a range of inpatient and community health and social care settings as well as support services).

Strengths and limitations

The current evaluation contains both quantitative and qualitative primary data from engagers and non-engagers in a novel research education and training programme for a broad range of health and social care professionals. Qualitative methods were designed to be flexible and pragmatic to capture views from busy health and social practitioners; however, emailed responses did not support in-depth exploration. As the interviewer was also a staff member of the same organisation there might have been some undisclosed responses. Findings report key the components of training that worked/did not work; this information could eventually be used to improve future training in this setting and others. As the participants of the STARS programme and current evaluation are located within a health and social care NHS trust in England, the conclusions are relevant to similar settings only. However, findings seem relevant to non-UK health and social care workers. For example, Withington et al. described how their targeted training and mentoring model enhanced research capacity among social workers [ 19 ] Also similar to finding in STARS collaborative approaches have also been discussed as essential by Nystrom et al., in in health and social care context in Sweden to ensure support, trust and understanding among those working in healthcare system [ 36 ]. Despite this limitation, the findings highlight how a research training programme can be tailored around the needs of staff and run virtually during a pandemic.

This evaluation covered a 12-month period in which the STARS programme was rolled out for the first time at MPFT. Findings demonstrate the positive impact that access to free, high-quality, online research education can have in terms of enhancing research awareness and confidence across a diverse range of professional types; some of whom reported unequal access to such training in the past (e.g., social care, nursing and midwifery). Service-level barriers remain that a novel training programme cannot address (e.g., competing burden of clinical roles). It is too early to assess longer-term outcomes relating to the fourth level of Kirkpatrick’s framework (performance) or research culture at an organisation-level; further follow-up research is needed. The STARS programme demonstrates what strong collaboration between NHS and academic institutions can produce and provides a training model that can be adopted and adapted elsewhere to nurture research-active environments and promote research capacity building within and beyond the UK.

Availability of data and materials

The anonymised quantitative raw data from evaluation registers and qualitative data from interviews is available on reasonable requests. The corresponding and first author, GT, should be contacted if someone wants to request the data from this study.

Austin A. What does the new clinical research vision mean for NHS patients and health professionals? England.nhs.uk/blog. 2021. Available at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/blog/what-does-the-new-clinical-research-vision-mean-for-nhs-patients-and-health-professionals/#:~:text=Research%20is%20beneficial%20to%20people,faster%20returns%20to%20everyday%20life . Accessed 18 Feb 2022.

Policy paper. UK Govt. Saving and improving lives: the future of UK Clinical Research Delivery, United Kingdom. 2021. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-future-of-uk-clinical-research-delivery/saving-and-improving-lives-the-future-of-uk-clinical-research-delivery . Accessed Jan 2022.

National Health Service Making research matter: Chief Nursing Officer for England’s strategic plan for research. Available online at https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/B0880-cno-for-englands-strategic-plan-fo-research.pdf . 2021. Accessed 22 Apr 2022.

Royal College of Physicians. Delivering research for all: expectations and aspirations for the NHS in England (policy statement). Available at Delivering research for all: expectations and aspirations for the NHS in England | RCP London. 2019. Accessed 22 Apr 2022.

Barouki R, Kogevinas M, Audouze K, et al. The COVID-19 pandemic and global environmental change: emerging research needs. Environ Int. 2021;146: 106272.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Cooke J, Gardois P, Booth A. Uncovering the mechanisms of research capacity development in health and social care: a realist synthesis. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018;16(1):93.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Mustafa K, Murray CC, Nicklin E, et al. Understanding barriers for research involvement among paediatric trainees: a mixed methods study. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18:165.

Fry M, Attawet J. Nursing and midwifery use, perceptions and barriers to evidence-based practice: a cross-sectional survey. Int J Evid Based Healthcare. 2018;16(1):47–54. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000117 . (Accessed 14 Mar 2022).

Article   Google Scholar  

Barratt H, Fulop NJ. Building capacity to use and undertake research in health organisations: a survey of training needs and priorities among staff. BMJ Open. 2016;6: e012557.

Maben J, King A. Engaging NHS staff in research. BMJ. 2019;365:l4040. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4040 . (Accessed 22 Apr 2022).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

King O, West E, Lee S, Glenister K, Quilliam C, Wong Shee A, Beks H. Research education and training for nurses and allied health professionals: a systematic scoping review. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):1–55.

Burkinshaw P, Bryant LD, Magee C, et al. Ten years of NIHR research training: perceptions of the programmes: a qualitative interview study. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e046410. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046410 . (Accessed 22 Apr 2022).

Wakefield J, Lavender S, Nixon K, et al. Social work and social care: mapping workforce engagement, relevance, experience and interest in research. Br J Social Work. 2021;00:1–21.

Google Scholar  

What is social work/ social care? TCSW. Available: http://www.tcsw.org.uk/what-is-social-work-social-care/ . Sited on: 2 Jan 2024.

Dimova S, Prideaux R, Ball S, et al. Enabling NHS staff to contribute to research. Cambridge: RAND Europe; 2018.

Gilbert A, Steel J, Rachel D, Jaggi A. Identifying barriers and facilitators to engaging in clinical research within an NHS Therapies Department: results of a listening exercise. Physiotherapy. 2016;102:e179.

Jowett SM, Macleod J, Wilson S, Hobbs FD. Research in primary care: extent of involvement and perceived determinants among practitioners from one English region. Br J Gen Pract. 2000;50(454):387–9.

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Rahman S, Majumder MA, Shaban SF, Rahman N, Ahmed M, Abdulrahman KB, D’souza UJ. Physician participation in clinical research and trials: issues and approaches. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2011;7:85–93.

Withington T, Alcorn N, Maybery D, Goodyear M. Building research capacity in clinical practice for social workers: a training and mentorship approach. Adv Mental Health. 2020;18(1):73–90.

Papanicolas I, Mossialos E, Gundersen A, Woskie L, Jha AK. Performance of UK National Health Service compared with other high-income countries: observational study. BMJ. 2019;367:6326.

Kirkpatrick DL. Evaluating training programs. Mumbai: Tata McGraw-Hill Education; 1998.

Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol Taylor Francis Online. 2006;3(2):77–101.

Hawkins JE. The practical utility and suitability of email interviews in qualitative research. Qualitative Rep. 2018;23(2):493.

Amri M, Angelakis C, Logan D. Utilizing asynchronous email interviews for health research: overview of benefits and drawbacks. BMC Res Notes. 2021;14(1):1–5.

Kirkpatrick JD, Kirkpatrick WK. Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation. Association for Talent Development; 2016.

Gee M, Cooke J. How do NHS organisations plan research capacity development? Strategies, strengths, and opportunities for improvement. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):1–1.

Ariely D, Loewenstein G, Prelec D. Tom Sawyer and the construction of value. J Econ Behav Organ. 2006;60(1):1–10.

Abramovich S, McBride M. Open education resources and perceptions of financial value. Internet Higher Educ. 2018;39:33–8.

George PP, Zhabenko O, Kyaw BM, et al. Online digital education for post registration training of medical doctors: systematic review by the Digital Health Education Collaboration. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(2): e13269.

Newport L, Roberts D. Developing online training in wound care. Br J Nurs. 2021;30(12):37–8.

Bączek M, Zagańczyk-Bączek M, Szpringer M, et al. Students’ perception of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey study of polish medical students. Medicine. 2021;100(7):e24821.

Clayton KE, Blumberg FC, Anthony JA. Linkages between course status, perceived course value, and students’ preference for traditional versus non-traditional learning environments. Comput Educ. 2018;125:175–81.

Gegenfurtner A, Schmidt-Hertha B, Lewis P. Digital technologies in training and adult education. Int J Train Dev. 2020;24(1):1–4.

Odayappan A, Venkatesh R, Tammineni R, et al. Perspectives of physicians regarding the role of webinars on medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2021;69(5):1251.

Bullock A, Morris ZS, Atwell C. Collaboration between health services managers and researchers: making a difference? J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012;17(2):2–10.

Nyström ME, Karltun J, Keller C, Andersson Gäre B. Collaborative and partnership research for improvement of health and social services: researcher’s experiences from 20 projects. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018;16(1):1–7.

Department of Health. UK policy framework for health and social care research. 2017. Available at: https://www.healthandcareresearch.gov.wales/uploads/Policy%20%26%20Strategy/Research%20Governance/uk-policy-framework-health-social-care-research.pdf . Accessed Feb 2023.

Holm S. Declaration of Helsinki. Int Encyclopedia Ethics. 2013;1:1–4.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge and sincerely thank the members of the STARS working group for their contributions in delivering the project.

The authors thank CRN I&I strategic funding programme for funding the STARS program.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Research and Innovation Department, Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, St George’s Hospital, Block 7, Corporation Street, Stafford, ST16 3AG, UK

Gulshan Tajuria, David Dobel-Ober, Claire Charnley, Ruth Lambley-Burke, Christian Mallen, Kate Honeyford & Tom Kingstone

School of Medicine, Keele University, David Weatherall Building, Newcastle, ST5 5BG, UK

Gulshan Tajuria, Christian Mallen & Tom Kingstone

College of Health and Science, University of Worcester, Henwick Road, Worcester, Worcestershire, WR2 6AJ, UK

Eleanor Bradley

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Author GT conducted data collection and analysis with support from authors DD-O, EB and TK, author CC supported with literature for background and discussion and all authors were involved in the original conception of the idea and read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gulshan Tajuria .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study was classified through the Health Research Authority (HRA) automated systems as not requiring ethical approval, as per the UK Policy Framework for Health and Social Care Research28 [ 37 ]. The study was reviewed by the Research and Innovation department form the authors’ organisation (MPFT) prior to being placed on the local evaluation register (ref: e2021-10) and it followed GDPR principles with regard to data management and was conducted in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki29 [ 38 ]. A written informed consent was obtained from all participants before participation in the study. All prospective participants received information about the study and were asked to return a signed copy of the consent form via email. Additionally, at the start of each interview, participants were asked to confirm verbally that they consented to take part; this was audio recorded, as were the interviews. The author is happy to share the consent forms if needed but those would need to redact to maintain anonymity.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1., additional file 2., additional file 3., rights and permissions.

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

About this article

Cite this article.

Tajuria, G., Dobel-Ober, D., Bradley, E. et al. Evaluating the impact of the supporting the advancement of research skills (STARS) programme on research knowledge, engagement and capacity-building in a health and social care organisation in England. BMC Med Educ 24 , 126 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05059-0

Download citation

Received : 04 January 2023

Accepted : 15 January 2024

Published : 08 February 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05059-0

Share this article

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

  • Research capacity development (RCD)
  • Continuing Professional Development (CPD)
  • Research skills development
  • Barriers to research engagement
  • Evidence-based practice

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

single author research paper example

Help | Advanced Search

Computer Science > Computation and Language

Title: model editing with canonical examples.

Abstract: We introduce model editing with canonical examples, a setting in which (1) a single learning example is provided per desired behavior, (2) evaluation is performed exclusively out-of-distribution, and (3) deviation from an initial model is strictly limited. A canonical example is a simple instance of good behavior, e.g., The capital of Mauritius is Port Louis) or bad behavior, e.g., An aspect of researchers is coldhearted). The evaluation set contains more complex examples of each behavior (like a paragraph in which the capital of Mauritius is called for.) We create three datasets and modify three more for model editing with canonical examples, covering knowledge-intensive improvements, social bias mitigation, and syntactic edge cases. In our experiments on Pythia language models, we find that LoRA outperforms full finetuning and MEMIT. We then turn to the Backpack language model architecture because it is intended to enable targeted improvement. The Backpack defines a large bank of sense vectors--a decomposition of the different uses of each word--which are weighted and summed to form the output logits of the model. We propose sense finetuning, which selects and finetunes a few ($\approx$ 10) sense vectors for each canonical example, and find that it outperforms other finetuning methods, e.g., 4.8% improvement vs 0.3%. Finally, we improve GPT-J-6B by an inference-time ensemble with just the changes from sense finetuning of a 35x smaller Backpack, in one setting outperforming editing GPT-J itself (4.1% vs 1.0%).

Submission history

Access paper:.

  • Download PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • Other Formats

References & Citations

  • Google Scholar
  • Semantic Scholar

BibTeX formatted citation

BibSonomy logo

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.

  • Institution

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .

IMAGES

  1. Download Single column Paper Format Template

    single author research paper example

  2. Write Esse: Academic research paper sample

    single author research paper example

  3. 43+ Research Paper Examples

    single author research paper example

  4. Sample MLA Research Paper

    single author research paper example

  5. Guidelines For Writing A Research Paper For Publication

    single author research paper example

  6. Writing a Research Paper

    single author research paper example

VIDEO

  1. How Technology Has Affected Education?

  2. Writing A Research Paper: Discussion

  3. Secret To Writing A Research Paper

  4. A letter from the frustrated author of a journal paper 😁😄😆

  5. SECRET Tip To Publishing Research Papers In HIGH-IMPACT Journals

  6. Research Methodology: How To Write Research Paper in Hindi Manuscript Writing Skill

COMMENTS

  1. Single author papers vs multiple ones: which ones have more value

    For example, when citing 2 author papers, (White and Einstein, 1951), if its a 3 author paper, (White et Al, 1952) no mention of Einstein. Naturally single author papers have more value than the ...

  2. Research Guides: APA 6th Edition: Journal Article with One Author

    APA Citations. The reference list entry - information about the article that appears at the end of your paper in the list of references. The in-text citation - brief information that appears in the body of your paper to indicate a direct quote or paraphrase. Several of the examples in this guide were drawn from the APA Manual (6th ed.).

  3. One Author or Editor

    For each type of source in this guide, both the general form and an example will be provided. The following format will be used: In-Text Citation (Paraphrase) - entry that appears in the body of your paper when you express the ideas of a researcher or author using your own words.For more tips on paraphrasing check out The OWL at Purdue.. In-Text Citation (Quotation) - entry that appears in the ...

  4. Single Author

    Single Author. 7th Edition 6th Edition. When listing the source of information you are using in your paper, list the last name of the author (without their initials), followed by a comma, and then the year of publication. When referring to the author (s) directly in the text (also called a narrative citation), then list only the year (and page ...

  5. publications

    In your case, the way you have described it, it seems silly to put your research into another paper if it can stand alone. If the joint paper is likely to become a benchmark paper and get lots of attention, then being part of it may not be a bad idea. ... In math at least there are a lot of single author papers of very high quality. There are ...

  6. Reference Single and Multiple Authors in APA Format

    More Than 20 Authors. When a work is credited to more than 20 authors, the reference is listed by providing the names of the first 19 authors followed by . . . and then the final author. The remainder of the reference follows the same format as that for 20 or fewer authors. Authors' last names and initials are followed by the date of ...

  7. APA Citation Style, 7th edition: Journal Article with 1 Author

    Helpful Tips: DOI: If a journal article has a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) listed, you will always include this identifier in your reference as a URL. Online Database: For works from databases that publish works of limited circulation (such as the ERIC database) or original, proprietary material available only in that database (such as UpToDate), include the name of the database or archive ...

  8. How to Write a Research Paper in APA Format

    The sections in APA-style paper are as follows: 1. Title Page. As per the APA research paper format, the title should be between 10-12 words and should reflect the essence of the paper. After writing the title, write your name followed by name of the college.

  9. How to Write a Research Paper

    Develop a thesis statement. Create a research paper outline. Write a first draft of the research paper. Write the introduction. Write a compelling body of text. Write the conclusion. The second draft. The revision process. Research paper checklist.

  10. Journal Article with One Author

    Tip: When an article appears on nonconsecutive pages (for example A1 and A6) give only the first page number followed by a "+" as shown above. Give the page number on which the material you've used appears in your in-text citation, for example: (Brown A6).

  11. Single vs. Co-Authored and Multi-Authored Research Articles: Evaluating

    work should be first author (Manton & English, 2007). In science, as early as 1984-87 there were 2.7 authors per scientific paper and the number of single-authored papers had dropped to 31.4% (Peters & Raan, 1991). In advertising 51% of the scholarly articles were single-authored in 1990, 35% were co-authored and the remaining

  12. Research Paper Format

    Formatting an APA paper. The main guidelines for formatting a paper in APA Style are as follows: Use a standard font like 12 pt Times New Roman or 11 pt Arial. Set 1 inch page margins. Apply double line spacing. If submitting for publication, insert a APA running head on every page. Indent every new paragraph ½ inch.

  13. how useful are solo papers?

    Where single author articles are still relatively common are in the form of review articles where a single author can collate and critically assess the state of affairs in for example a subfield. Going back about 20-30 years, again in the afore mentioned for me familiar fields, single authorship was almost demanded from PhD students and older ...

  14. Is it better to have single-author papers?

    Independence: Single-author papers can reflect the individual's research vision, goals, and ideas without external interference or input. Efficiency: Single-author papers can be completed more quickly and with fewer communication difficulties, as there is only one person involved in the decision-making process.

  15. On the conservation of single-author papers

    The number of authors included on research papers in many disciplines has increased over time. This editorial in Journal of Applied Ecology is the latest analysis of this trend, finding that published single-author research papers in that journal have declined since 1966 (two years after the journal started publishing). N.B. the authors only quantify research…

  16. Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

    Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications .For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively .Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every ...

  17. Author Affiliations in Research Papers: Answering Your Top 3 Queries

    Author affiliation in research papers tells readers where the research was conducted. However, many authors move to a different institution or location after submission and are unsure how to mention changed affiliations for journal publication. ... Figure: Multiple author affiliations example for a single author 2. What should my author ...

  18. Single author self-reference: Identity construction and pragmatic

    The present study takes as a point of departure Chen and Yang's (in submission) work on single author self-reference by AWC writers. In that study, we find that AWE writers in the area of language studies typically use the 1st-person singular, to refer to themselves as single authors. AWC writers do the opposite: they avoided the 1st-person ...

  19. APA Sample Paper

    Note: This page reflects the latest version of the APA Publication Manual (i.e., APA 7), which released in October 2019. The equivalent resource for the older APA 6 style can be found here. Media Files: APA Sample Student Paper , APA Sample Professional Paper This resource is enhanced by Acrobat PDF files. Download the free Acrobat Reader

  20. Library Guides: APA Style: Book with a single author

    In-Text Citation (Paraphrase) - entry that appears in the body of your paper when you express the ideas of a researcher or author using your own words. For more tips on paraphrasing check out The OWL at Purdue. In-Text Citation (Quotation) - entry that appears in the body of your paper after a direct quote. References - entry that appears at ...

  21. PDF Author Contribution Statement

    The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study conception and ... : Y. Author. Z. Author. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript. An author name can appear multiple times, and each author name must appear at least once. For single authors, use the following wording: The author confirms ...

  22. Research Paper Format

    Research paper format is an essential aspect of academic writing that plays a crucial role in the communication of research findings.The format of a research paper depends on various factors such as the discipline, style guide, and purpose of the research. It includes guidelines for the structure, citation style, referencing, and other elements of the paper that contribute to its overall ...

  23. Evaluating the impact of the supporting the advancement of research

    Research has played a pivotal role in the advancement of health and social care by, for example, informing early diagnosis, the development and testing of new treatments for prevention, cure, recovery and palliative care [].The importance of research is heralded by key health and social care bodies in the UK, the context for this paper.

  24. [2402.06155] Model Editing with Canonical Examples

    We introduce model editing with canonical examples, a setting in which (1) a single learning example is provided per desired behavior, (2) evaluation is performed exclusively out-of-distribution, and (3) deviation from an initial model is strictly limited. A canonical example is a simple instance of good behavior, e.g., The capital of Mauritius is Port Louis) or bad behavior, e.g., An aspect ...