Writing Strategies for Rationalize Study Specifics

This book is running in a long beta. Revisions are currently underway. Check back in January 2025 for updated content.

Seen throughout each Goal of the Methods section is language for rationalizing choices, so it’s no surprise that we have a Strategy devoted to this in the Results. This Strategy we call Rationalize Study Specifics. As we learned in the Methods section, it is important to have sound reasoning for specific study choices made throughout the study. Sometimes those choices are explicitly reflected in writing. When those choices are divergent from the field or unique to your study, you may decide to reiterate your sound reasoning in the Results. This reasoning could help to ward off criticism of your choices and/or build credibility. Here is an example of Restate Study Specifics:

a. “As suggested by [Authors, YEAR], it was not necessary to correct for multicollinearity for correlations less than .70.”

Here, the researcher rationalizes what was performed or not performed as suggested by previous research. The citation here is important for adding some weight to the decision. If the decision is a point of contention, there may need to be a second sentence to explain why such a process is not necessary. In other words, in some cases when the argument is not yet convincing, a deeper explanation may be needed.

Take a look at some Language Use patterns for Rationalize Study Specifics, and don’t forget to critically read for these often subtle statements in Results sections of your field.