Research proposal: [Working title]
Replace the blue placeholders with your own words and delete the grey notes as you go. If your program names its own headings or word limit, use theirs, in their order.
Researcher | [your name] |
Program and degree | [e.g. MA in Journalism and Media Studies] |
Supervisor or committee | [names] |
Planned dates | [start month – end month] |
Word limit | [limit, and what it excludes] |
Citation style | [APA 7, MLA, Chicago or your program's style] |
Approval needed from | [supervisor, committee, ethics board] |
Questions first. Write the research questions before anything else. Every later section either helps answer them or goes.
Applying for a PhD? Use the short version
Some PhD applications ask for a short proposal instead of a full plan. The University of Sheffield, for example, suggests about 500–1,000 words for arts, humanities and social sciences. Check your department's guidance for its length and headings.
The idea: your question and a working title
The aim: what you hope to find out, and why it is worth doing
Why it matters now: how it fits current research, and what it adds
The plan: methods and a timetable that fits the time available
Resources: materials, equipment, training, travel, access
Fit: the supervisor whose work yours builds on
Title
A phrase that names what you will study, with whom and where. A colon can separate a hook from the description.
[Working title: what, with whom, where]
Abstract
Write it last. 150–250 words, or your program's limit.
[The problem]. This study will [what it will do] by [method] with [participants or sources] in [setting]. The findings will [what they will let someone do].
See a filled-in abstract
Small-town weeklies that stop printing keep their names, but their newsrooms change: no pages to fill, no press deadline, readers who arrive one story at a time. This study asks how editors and reporters at three weeklies in one Midwestern state decided what to cover in the year after their last print edition, and how their coverage changed. It combines interviews with all nine current newsroom staff and a content analysis of every local story published in the twelve months before and after each paper's last print issue, about 3,000 stories. The findings will give newsrooms planning the same change a record of what three papers kept, dropped and added, and why.
An invented example: the newspapers, people and figures are made up.
Introduction and background
The topic: [what it is, in plain words]
Why it matters now: [what has changed, for whom]
What research has covered: [two or three sentences, with citations]
Problem statement
One paragraph: what is not known, or not working, and for whom.
[The problem, the evidence for it and who it affects]
Purpose and research questions
The purpose of this [design] study is to [explore / describe / compare / test] [what] among [participants or sources] at [site].
RQ1. [question]
RQ2. [question]
RQ3. [question, if you need one]
Hypotheses: [H1, H2] (only if the study tests predictions)
See a filled-in purpose and questions
The purpose of this multiple-case study is to understand how editors and reporters at three small-town weeklies decided what to cover in the first year after their last print edition, and to describe how their local coverage changed.
RQ1. How do newsroom staff describe their decisions about what to publish, how often and at what length after print ended?
RQ2. How did the topics, sources and length of local stories change between the year before and the year after the last print edition?
RQ3. Which kinds of coverage did each newsroom keep, add or drop, and how do staff explain those choices?
One to three questions. Each one needs a data source in the methods and a row in the timeline.
Literature review
Short, and organized by theme or debate, not source by source. End on the gap.
Theme 1: [what is known, with citations]
Theme 2: [what is known, with citations]
Theme 3: [where the evidence is thin or disputed]
The gap: [what the research doesn't answer, which your questions do]
Methods
Future tense: what you will do. Give a reason for each choice in a clause.
Design | [type of study, and why it fits the questions] |
Participants or sources | [who or what, how many, how you will reach them] |
Sampling | [how you will choose them, and why that number] |
Data collection | [interviews, survey, archive, experiment: when and how] |
Instruments | [interview guide, questionnaire or codebook, in the appendices] |
Analysis | [named approach or tests, and who checks the coding] |
Researcher position | [for qualitative work: your background and how you will manage its influence] |
Question | Data | Analysis |
RQ1 | [data source] | [approach] |
RQ2 | [data source] | [approach] |
RQ3 | [data source] | [approach] |
Ethical considerations
Approval: [which board, and when you will apply]
Consent: [how participants agree, and how they can withdraw]
Privacy: [names, identifying details, how data are stored and for how long]
Risks: [what could go wrong for participants, and how you reduce it]
Timeline
When | Task | Output |
[months 1–2] | [ethics approval, final instruments, pilot] | [approval] |
[months 3–4] | [recruit and collect data] | [first data] |
[months 5–6] | [finish collection, transcribe, check coding] | [full data set] |
[months 7–9] | [analysis] | [findings] |
[months 10–12] | [write, revise, submit] | [thesis or report] |
Put the slow parts in. Ethics approval, recruitment, transcription and your supervisor's reading time all take longer than they look.
Budget and resources
Only if the study costs money or needs equipment, access or training. Every line traces back to a step in the methods.
Item | Calculation | Amount |
[travel] | [trips × miles × rate] | [$0] |
[transcription] | [interviews × minutes × rate] | [$0] |
[materials or access] | [what, for how long] | [$0] |
[participant thanks] | [people × amount] | [$0] |
Total | sum of the lines above | [$0] |
Funding source: [department fund, grant, or none needed]
Significance
Who will use the answer: [people, organizations, practitioners]
What it adds to research: [the gap it fills]
Limitations
What the design can't tell you: [limits of the sample, setting or method]
What you will do about it: [how the design reduces each one]
References
In the style your program requires. List only the sources you cite.
[Author, A. A. (Year). Title of the work. Source.]
Appendices
[Appendix A: interview guide or questionnaire]
[Appendix B: consent form and information sheet]
[Appendix C: letters of access or support]
Before you submit
Headings and order follow your program's guidelines
It is within the word limit, counted the way your program counts
Each research question has a data source, an analysis and a slot in the timeline
The methods are in the future tense and give a reason for each choice
Ethics approval comes before data collection in the timeline
The literature review ends on the gap your questions fill
Every source cited is in the references, and every reference is cited
Your supervisor has seen the questions and the method