Key Takeaways:
- The Discussion section interprets results in depth, compares them with existing literature, and explains what they mean, while the Conclusion offers a short, forward-looking summary.
- Discussion sections usually run several paragraphs or pages; Conclusions are typically 1 to 2 paragraphs and sometimes shorter.
- Unwanted repetition between the 2 sections is one of the most common reviewer complaints, so each section needs a distinct job.
- Using targeted phrases and section-specific checklists helps authors keep the boundaries clear before submission.
Contents
- Glossary of Key Terms
- Introduction
- Why Do Discussion and Conclusion Get Confused?
- Key Differences Between Discussion and Conclusion
- Discussion vs Conclusion: A Side-by-Side Example
- Discussion and Conclusion Across Different Paper Types
- Discussion vs Conclusion in a Literature Review
- Common Phrases Used in Discussion and Conclusion Sections
- How Can You Avoid Repetition Between the Discussion and Conclusion?
- Checklists for the Discussion and Conclusion Sections
- Final Thoughts
- Frequently Asked Questions
Glossary of Key Terms
Before comparing the 2 sections in detail, it helps to agree on what a few common terms mean. The table below defines the words used most often when authors and editors talk about the Discussion and Conclusion sections of a research paper.
| Term | Definition |
| Discussion section | The part of a research paper that interprets results, compares them with prior studies, and explains their meaning and significance. |
| Conclusion section | A short, standalone section that summarizes the paper’s main findings and their broader significance in a few sentences. |
| Findings | The specific outcomes or data points generated by a study, reported factually in the Results section. |
| Implications | The practical, theoretical, or policy consequences that follow from a study’s findings. |
| Limitations | The constraints, weaknesses, or boundary conditions of a study that may affect how its findings should be interpreted. |
| Recommendations | Suggested next steps for practice, policy, or future research based on the study’s findings. |
| IMRaD structure | The common research paper format consisting of Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion, often followed by a Conclusion. |
| Hypothesis | A testable statement predicting the relationship between variables, formed before data collection. |
| Peer review | The process by which other experts in the field evaluate a manuscript before publication. |
Introduction
Many early-career researchers spend weeks perfecting their data analysis, then struggle to explain what it all means in writing. Knowing how to write a good research paper starts with understanding its structure, and 2 sections in particular cause the most confusion: the Discussion and the Conclusion.
This confusion is understandable. Both sections sit at the end of the paper, both look back at the same data, and journal author guidelines are not always explicit about where the line between them falls, particularly for authors submitting to an international journal for the first time.
Most journal articles in the sciences and social sciences follow the IMRaD structure, which stands for Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. A complete manuscript typically opens with a title and an abstract, followed by the introduction, methods, and results sections, and closes with the Discussion and, often, a separate Conclusion.
Even though the Discussion and Conclusion sit next to each other and both reflect on the study’s findings, they serve different purposes. Blurring the 2 is a frequent source of reviewer comments, wordiness, and lost impact. This guide breaks down the differences, gives example phrases for each section, and offers checklists you can use before submission.
Why Do Discussion and Conclusion Get Confused?
Authors confuse the 2 sections mainly because both sections look back at the same results and both appear near the end of the paper, so it feels natural to repeat the same sentences in slightly different words.
A few specific habits make the overlap worse. Recognizing them is the first step toward drafting 2 sections that each carry their own weight.
- Writing the Conclusion immediately after the Discussion, while the same sentences are still fresh in mind.
- Treating the Conclusion as a shorter copy of the Discussion instead of a separate, forward-looking section.
- Not knowing the target journal’s specific requirements for each section, since formatting guidelines vary widely.
- Running out of time during revision, so the Conclusion gets copied and lightly trimmed rather than rewritten.
This confusion is not unique to first-time authors. Even experienced researchers sometimes submit manuscripts where a journal editor sends back a request to shorten an overlapping Conclusion. Building the habit of treating the 2 sections as separate writing tasks, with separate goals, is the most reliable long-term fix.
What Is the Discussion Section of a Research Paper?
The discussion section interprets your results, compares them with prior studies, and explains their significance within the wider field. It is where authors argue for the meaning of their data rather than simply reporting it.
A strong Discussion section typically restates the main findings briefly, explains how they answer the research question, compares them with previous work, addresses unexpected or contradictory results, acknowledges limitations, and points toward implications and future research. It often references figures and tables from the Results section to support the interpretation.
Because the Discussion draws heavily on visual data, it is worth reviewing how to present figures and tables clearly, since the Discussion section is where you explain what those visuals mean rather than simply repeating their contents.
What Is the Conclusion Section of a Research Paper?
The Conclusion is a short, standalone section that summarizes the paper’s main findings and their broader significance in a few sentences. It closes the paper by telling readers why the study mattered, without re-arguing every point made in the Discussion.
A well-written conclusion typically restates the research question, summarizes the key finding in 1 or 2 sentences, states the study’s contribution, and ends with a concise recommendation or direction for future work. It should read as a natural endpoint, not a second Discussion.
Key Differences Between Discussion and Conclusion
The table below compares the Discussion and Conclusion sections across 8 common dimensions. Use it as a quick reference while drafting or revising your manuscript.
| Aspect | Discussion Section | Conclusion Section |
| Main purpose | Interprets and explains what the results mean. | Summarizes findings and their broader significance. |
| Typical length | Several paragraphs to a few pages. | 1 to 2 paragraphs, sometimes shorter. |
| Content focus | Comparison with prior studies, unexpected results, mechanisms. | Overall takeaway, contribution, and forward look. |
| Use of citations | Frequent, to support or contrast interpretations. | Rare, since the section restates rather than argues. |
| Limitations | Discussed in detail, often with reasons and impact. | Mentioned briefly, if at all. |
| Future work | Suggested as part of the wider interpretation. | Stated concisely as a closing recommendation. |
| Tone | Analytical and exploratory. | Confident and conclusive. |
| Position in paper | Follows the Results section. | Follows the Discussion, often the final numbered section. |
These differences matter to reviewers as much as to readers. A reviewer who sees pages of new comparative analysis in a Conclusion often flags it as poor structure, since it suggests the author has not distinguished interpretation from summary. Conversely, a Discussion that only restates results without interpreting them tends to draw comments about missing analysis, since reviewers expect genuine engagement with what the data mean, not just a repeat of the numbers already shown in the Results section.
If you are unsure whether a sentence belongs in the Discussion or the Conclusion, ask whether it interprets data (Discussion) or restates a takeaway (Conclusion). If you would rather have a specialist make that call, Editage’s Premium Editing service pairs your manuscript with a subject-matter editor who checks structure, logic, and language across every section, including the boundary between these 2.
Discussion vs Conclusion: A Side-by-Side Example
Seeing the same finding written for each section makes the difference concrete. Imagine a study that found a new teaching method improved test scores by 12 percent compared with a traditional method.
| Element | Discussion Version | Conclusion Version |
| Interpretation | Scores improved by 12 percent, a difference consistent with prior work showing active learning benefits retention more than lecture-based formats. | The new method improved test scores by 12 percent over the traditional approach. |
| Context | This gain is smaller than the 20 percent reported in a similar study, possibly due to differences in class size and student prior knowledge. | Not included; comparative detail stays in the Discussion. |
| Closing note | Future studies should test this method across larger, more diverse student populations to confirm the effect. | These findings support wider adoption of the method, and further research across diverse classrooms is recommended. |
Notice that the Conclusion version is shorter, avoids the comparative statistic from the other study, and ends with a clear, confident statement rather than an open-ended research question. This pattern holds across most fields: the Discussion carries the supporting evidence and nuance, while the Conclusion carries only the headline message a busy reader would remember.
Discussion and Conclusion Across Different Paper Types
The balance between the 2 sections also shifts depending on the type of paper you are writing. The table below summarizes typical approaches across 4 common formats.
| Paper Type | Discussion Approach | Conclusion Approach |
| Original research article | Detailed interpretation, comparison with 3 or more prior studies, and explicit limitations. | Brief, 1 to 2 paragraphs, restating contribution and next steps. |
| Review article | Synthesizes patterns and gaps across many studies rather than a single data set. | Summarizes the overall state of the field and priority questions for future research. |
| Case study or case report | Interprets the specific case against known clinical or theoretical patterns. | States the case’s takeaway for practice, often in 3 to 5 sentences. |
| Thesis or dissertation | Often spans multiple chapters, with deep engagement with theory and prior literature. | A dedicated closing chapter summarizing contributions across all studies or chapters. |
Whatever the format, the same principle holds: the Discussion carries the analytical weight, while the Conclusion delivers the closing message in as few words as possible.
Discussion vs Conclusion in a Literature Review
Discussion in a literature review
- Synthesizes patterns, agreements, and contradictions across the studies reviewed, rather than interpreting a single data set.
- Identifies gaps, unanswered questions, or methodological weaknesses across the body of literature.
- Groups sources thematically or chronologically and explains how they relate to one another.
- Often several pages long, especially in a standalone review article or a dissertation literature review chapter.
Conclusion in a literature review
- Summarizes the overall state of knowledge on the topic in a few sentences or a short paragraph.
- States the most important gap or unresolved question the field should address next.
- May briefly justify the current study, if the review is part of a larger thesis or research paper introduction.
- Avoids re-listing every source or theme covered in the Discussion.
Key difference from a research paper
| Aspect | Research Paper | Literature Review |
| Discussion focus | Interprets the author’s own results | Synthesizes findings across many existing studies |
| Conclusion focus | Summarizes 1 study’s contribution | Summarizes the field’s overall state and gaps |
The same rule for avoiding repetition still applies: let the Discussion do the detailed synthesis, and keep the Conclusion to a short, forward-looking summary of where the field stands and what is missing.
Common Phrases Used in Discussion and Conclusion Sections
Word choice signals purpose. The Discussion tends to use exploratory, comparative language, while the Conclusion uses confident, summarizing language. The examples below can serve as starting points; adapt them to your field and findings.
Phrases for the Discussion Section
Interpreting results:
- These findings suggest that…
- This result is consistent with…
- A possible explanation for this finding is…
Comparing with prior literature:
- These results are in line with those reported by…
- In contrast to previous studies, we found…
- This finding extends earlier work by…
Addressing unexpected results and study boundaries:
- An unexpected finding was…
- A key limitation of this study is that…
- These results should be interpreted with caution because…
Pointing to significance and next steps:
- The implications of these findings for practice include…
- Future research could explore…
- Taken together, these results indicate…
Phrases for the Conclusion Section
Summarizing the study:
- This study set out to examine… and found that…
- In summary, our findings show…
- Overall, this research demonstrates…
Stating significance and contribution:
- These findings contribute to the understanding of…
- This work adds to the growing body of evidence on…
- The present study offers new insight into…
Closing with recommendations:
- Based on these findings, we recommend…
- Further research is needed to confirm…
- In conclusion, these results support the need for…
Transition Phrases Between Discussion and Conclusion
A short transition phrase at the start of the Conclusion signals to the reader that the paper is moving from analysis to closing summary. These phrases work well because they announce a shift without repeating content.
- In conclusion, this study demonstrates…
- Taken as a whole, this research shows…
- To summarize the key contribution of this work…
- This paper set out to investigate X and has shown that…
How Can You Avoid Repetition Between the Discussion and Conclusion?
You can avoid repetition by giving each section a distinct job: let the Discussion argue and interpret, and let the Conclusion summarize and close. The tips below help you keep that boundary clear during revision.
- Draft the Conclusion after finalizing the Discussion, not alongside it, so you know exactly what has already been said.
- Write the Conclusion from memory first, without looking at the Discussion, then check it against the paper for accuracy.
- Avoid repeating citations in the Conclusion; save detailed comparisons with other studies for the Discussion.
- Use different sentence structures and vocabulary in each section, even when referring to the same finding.
- Keep the Conclusion forward-looking, emphasizing contribution and next steps rather than re-explaining mechanisms.
- Read both sections aloud, back to back, and cut any sentence in the Conclusion that only restates a Discussion sentence.
- Ask a colleague or editor to read the 2 sections separately and flag anything that feels duplicated.
Spotting this kind of overlap is often easier for a second reader than for the author. A professional editor from Editage’s Premium Editing service reviews the entire manuscript for redundancy, logical flow, and language quality, which is particularly useful for catching repetition between sections that sit so close together.
Checklists for the Discussion and Conclusion Sections
Use these checklists during self-review, before sending your manuscript for peer review or professional editing.
Before working through the full checklists below, ask yourself 3 quick questions about your draft.
- Does the Discussion interpret the results, rather than simply repeating the numbers from the Results section?
- Does the Conclusion read clearly on its own, without requiring the reader to flip back to the Discussion?
- Could you delete any sentence from the Conclusion without losing information the reader needs?
What Should You Include in a Discussion Section?
A complete Discussion section briefly restates the main findings and then interprets them; the checklist below covers the elements reviewers expect to see.
- Opens with a brief restatement of the main findings, without repeating the full Results section.
- Explains how each key finding answers the original research question or hypothesis.
- Compares findings with at least 2 to 3 relevant prior studies.
- Offers plausible explanations for unexpected or contradictory results.
- References specific figures or tables where relevant, rather than describing data from memory.
- Acknowledges study limitations honestly, including sample size, design, or measurement constraints.
- Discusses theoretical, practical, or policy implications of the findings.
- Suggests specific directions for future research.
- Avoids introducing new results that were not reported in the Results section.
What Should You Include in a Conclusion Section?
The Conclusion should feel complete in itself; a reader skimming only this section should understand what the study found and why it matters.
- Restates the research question or objective in 1 sentence.
- Summarizes the main finding in 1 to 2 sentences, without new data or citations.
- States the study’s overall contribution to the field.
- Avoids repeating detailed comparisons with other studies.
- Mentions limitations only briefly, if at all
- Ends with a clear, specific recommendation or direction for future work.
- Stays within 1 to 2 paragraphs for most journal formats.
- Reads clearly on its own, without requiring the reader to refer back to the Discussion.
Final Thoughts
The Discussion and Conclusion sections work together, but they are not interchangeable. The Discussion argues for the meaning of your results; the Conclusion delivers the takeaway. Keeping these jobs separate makes your paper easier to read, easier to review, and more likely to be accepted.
As you revise, keep coming back to the glossary, the comparison table, and the checklists in this guide. Over time, drafting a clean, non-repetitive Discussion and Conclusion becomes a habit rather than a struggle, and reviewers will notice the improved clarity in your next submission.
If you would like expert support before submission, Editage’s Premium Editing service combines subject-matter language editing with structural feedback, helping you sharpen both your Discussion and your Conclusion so each section does its job clearly and concisely.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between discussion and conclusion in a research paper?
The Discussion interprets results in detail and compares them with prior work, while the Conclusion is a short, final summary of the study’s main finding and its significance. The Discussion argues; the Conclusion closes.
Can the discussion and conclusion be combined into one section?
Yes, some journals, especially in the humanities or for short-format papers, use a combined “Discussion and Conclusion” section. When combined, the section should still move from detailed interpretation to a brief closing summary, rather than mixing the 2 throughout. Many STEM journals don’t even ask for a separate Conclusion section or call it optional (e.g., PLOS ONE). You need only a concluding paragraph at the end of your Discussion.
How long should the conclusion of a research paper be?
Most journal conclusions run 1 to 2 paragraphs, roughly 150 to 250 words, though this varies by field and journal guidelines. JAMA, for example, asks for a conclusion of just 2-3 sentences for systematic reviews. A conclusion that runs several pages is likely duplicating the Discussion and should be trimmed.
Should the conclusion section include new information?
No, the Conclusion should not introduce new data, citations, or arguments that were not already presented in the Results or Discussion. Its role is to summarize and close, not to add new evidence.
Does the discussion section need citations?
Yes, the Discussion typically includes multiple citations, since it compares your findings with previous studies and situates your work within the existing literature. The Conclusion, by contrast, uses citations sparingly, if at all.
What comes first, the discussion or the conclusion, in a research paper?
The Discussion comes first, immediately after the Results section, followed by the Conclusion as the final section of the paper, sometimes preceding only the acknowledgments and references.
How do I stop repeating myself in the discussion and conclusion?
Draft the Conclusion after the Discussion is finished, write it from memory rather than by copying sentences, and keep it focused on the overall takeaway rather than detailed comparisons, mechanisms, or citations that belong in the Discussion.
Where do study limitations belong, in the discussion or the conclusion?
Limitations belong primarily in the Discussion, where they can be explained in detail alongside their likely impact on the results. The Conclusion should mention limitations only briefly, if at all, and should not introduce a limitation that was not already discussed. However, some journals ask for limitations to be explained in the Conclusions section; follow your journal guidelines regarding this.
Is the conclusion the same as the abstract in a research paper?
No, the Abstract summarizes the entire paper, including the objective, methods, results, and conclusion, in 150 to 300 words near the start of the paper. The Conclusion appears at the end and focuses only on the study’s overall finding and significance, without describing the methods in detail.
How do you start a discussion section in a research paper?
Most Discussion sections open with a brief, 1 to 2 sentence restatement of the main finding, connecting it directly to the research question or hypothesis stated in the Introduction, before moving into detailed interpretation and comparison with prior studies.
Comment