How to Write the Discussion and Conclusion of a Seminar Paper: Structure, Phrases and an Example
The discussion chapter explains what your findings mean. It answers the research question, compares the findings with what earlier studies found, offers explanations, states the paper's limitations and ends with implications and recommendations. The findings chapter says what was found; the discussion says what it means. In a seminar paper it is usually the part your lecturer reads most closely, because it shows whether you understood what you found.
Findings, discussion and conclusion: the difference
| Chapter | Answers | Contains |
|---|---|---|
| Findings | What was found? | Results, tables and charts, no interpretation |
| Discussion | What does it mean? | Interpretation, comparison with literature, explanations, limitations |
| Conclusion | So what? | A short answer to the question, implications and recommendations |
Some institutions combine the discussion and conclusion into one chapter; others keep them separate. The structure below works for both: if they are separate, the last step moves into the conclusion chapter.
The structure of a discussion chapter, step by step
- Open with the answer. The first paragraph restates the research question and answers it in two or three sentences. The reader should not have to hunt for the bottom line.
- Interpret each key finding. One finding at a time, by importance or in the order of your hypotheses. For each: what it means, and whether it agrees with earlier studies or contradicts them.
- Explain. Why the finding came out the way it did, especially an unexpected one. A good explanation draws on the literature and on what actually happened in your study, and is phrased with care ("this may be because...", "one possible explanation is...").
- State the limitations. What in your study limits the conclusions: a small sample, one institution, self-report. A well-written limitation also says how it affects the interpretation.
- End with implications and recommendations. What it means for the field and for the people the topic affects, and what future research should examine.
A sample discussion
The continuation of the paper from the sample introduction, about changing shifts and grade average. The findings here are made up for the example, and the places that need a source are marked (Author, Year).
Answer This paper examined whether working changing shifts is related to undergraduate students' grade average. In the example study, students whose shifts changed every week had a lower average than students who worked similar hours on fixed shifts.
Interpretation This finding extends earlier work on weekly working hours (Author, Year): it is not only how much students work that matters, but how predictable their remaining study time is.
Explanation One possible explanation is that changing shifts make it hard to keep regular study times, so studying gets pushed to the days before exams. This fits the finding that students who planned their study week in advance did not show the same gap.
Limitations The sample came from a single institution, and working hours were self-reported. The findings should therefore be read with caution, and they do not show cause and effect.
Implications The findings suggest that planning study time may close part of the gap. Future research could test this in a larger sample across several semesters.
Phrases that help you write a discussion
| When you want to | You can write |
|---|---|
| Compare with the literature | "This finding is consistent with..." / "In contrast to..." |
| Extend an earlier finding | "This finding extends..." / "Beyond what was found earlier..." |
| Offer an explanation | "One possible explanation is..." / "This may be because..." |
| Explain an unexpected result | "Contrary to the hypothesis, ..." / "This is surprising given..." |
| State a limitation | "This finding should be interpreted with caution because..." |
| Recommend | "Future research could examine..." / "In light of these findings, ..." |
How to write limitations without weakening the paper
Limitations are not an admission of failure. Every seminar paper is limited in time, sample and tools, and your lecturer knows it. What weakens a paper is a limitation left unsaid, or a long list with no explanation. The right way: two or three real limitations, each with a sentence on how it affects the conclusions and what future research could do differently.
The conclusion chapter
The conclusion is shorter than the discussion, usually one to one and a half pages in a seminar paper. It returns to the research question from the introduction, answers it in plain words, and says what the paper contributes and what it recommends. It has no new findings and no new sources. A good check: read the introduction and the conclusion one after the other. They should sound like a question and its answer.
What about a theoretical paper with no findings?
In a theoretical paper, built on the literature rather than on data you collected, the discussion connects what the earlier chapters presented. It compares the approaches, shows where they agree and where they don't, and reaches a reasoned position on the question posed in the introduction. The structure is similar: answer, interpretation, explanation, limitations, implications. Only instead of "findings" there are "arguments from the literature".
Five common discussion mistakes
- Repeating the findings. A discussion that copies the findings chapter in other words interprets nothing.
- Ignoring unexpected results. Those are exactly the ones to explain, and they show you understood your data.
- Concluding more than the data allows. A relationship between two variables is not cause and effect, and a sample from one institution does not represent all students.
- Bringing in new sources never mentioned before. The discussion rests mainly on the literature presented in the review.
- Never returning to the research question. The reader should finish the chapter knowing the answer.
The discussion takes the most thinking, so it deserves several separate sessions rather than the last night. In Focusity you add the paper with its due date, and the app splits it into writing sessions in your free hours.
Split my paper into sessionsFrequently asked questions
What goes in the discussion chapter?
An answer to the research question, an interpretation of each key finding compared with earlier studies, possible explanations, especially for unexpected results, the paper's limitations, and finally implications and recommendations for future research.
What is the difference between the findings and the discussion?
The findings chapter presents what was found, without interpretation. The discussion explains what the findings mean, how they fit the literature and why they came out that way.
What is the difference between the discussion and the conclusion?
The discussion interprets the findings in depth and compares them with the literature. The conclusion is shorter: it answers the research question in plain words and states the implications and recommendations.
How long should the discussion be?
In a 20 to 25 page seminar paper the discussion is usually 3 to 5 pages and the conclusion one to one and a half pages. Your lecturer's guidelines come first.
Can I add new sources in the discussion?
You can add a source to explain an unexpected finding, but most of the discussion rests on the literature presented in the review. Many new sources in the discussion usually mean the review is missing something.
How do you write a discussion in a theoretical paper?
In a theoretical paper the discussion compares the approaches presented in the earlier chapters, shows where they agree and where they don't, and reaches a reasoned position on the question posed in the introduction.
A big paper, split into hours
Focusity builds a weekly study plan inside your free time, by each course's deadlines and difficulty. Free, on iPhone, Android and the web.
Build my plan — free