The results chapter has one job: report what the data showed, clearly and without bias. Mixing in interpretation, speculation, or comparison to prior literature too early is the most common structural mistake — that work belongs in your discussion chapter.
| Results Chapter | Discussion Chapter |
|---|---|
| "The regression model explained 34% of variance (R² = .34, p < .001)" | "This level of explained variance suggests other unmeasured factors may play a substantial role, consistent with Smith's (2020) argument that..." |
| Reports the finding | Interprets what the finding means |
| No comparison to prior literature | Connects findings back to the literature review |
| Organized by research question | Organized by implication or theme |
A quick self-check: if a sentence in your results chapter starts with "this suggests," "this indicates," or references a citation explaining the finding, it likely belongs in discussion instead. Results chapters report; discussion chapters explain.
Findings organized by research question, reported without premature interpretation.
Yes, typically — quotes serve as the evidence supporting each theme. We select quotes that clearly illustrate the theme without overloading the chapter, and report them alongside frequency or prevalence where relevant.
As many as needed to present the findings clearly, and no more — a results chapter padded with redundant tables showing the same data multiple ways reads as filler rather than rigor.
Yes, this is common — send your output (SPSS, R, NVivo, or coded transcripts) and we structure the narrative around your research questions.