The conclusion is the paper’s final opportunity to demonstrate the significance of its argument. It is not a summary — or rather, it is not merely a summary. While the conclusion does revisit the paper’s main points, its primary purpose is to show the reader what the argument amounts to: what the accumulated evidence and analysis mean, why the findings matter, and how they connect to larger questions in the field. A conclusion that simply restates each body paragraph’s topic sentence in order (the “summary conclusion”) fulfills the minimum requirement but misses the opportunity to elevate the paper from a competent analysis to a compelling one. This guide, part of iResearchNet’s How to Write a Research Paper series, covers the structure, strategies, and common errors of research paper conclusions.
The Conclusion’s Functions
A strong conclusion accomplishes three tasks, each of which corresponds to a structural element.
Restating the thesis in light of the evidence. The conclusion’s opening sentences should return to the thesis, but not by repeating it verbatim. Instead, the thesis should be restated in a way that reflects the authority the body has earned. The introduction presents the thesis as a claim to be proven; the conclusion presents it as a claim that has been proven — or at least substantially supported — by the preceding analysis. The shift in tone from proposal to established finding signals to the reader that the argument has done its work.
Synthesizing the findings. Rather than summarizing each section individually, the conclusion should synthesize — drawing the paper’s separate threads together to show how they collectively support the thesis. Synthesis identifies the connections, patterns, and cumulative force of the evidence that individual body sections, focused on their own claims, could not address. A paper that analyzed three different juvenile diversion programs in three separate sections might synthesize in the conclusion by identifying the common features of successful programs and the conditions under which they fail.
Addressing implications. The final portion of the conclusion should look beyond the paper itself to the broader significance of its findings. Implications may be scholarly (how the findings extend, challenge, or refine existing theory or research), practical (how the findings might inform policy, practice, or decision-making), or methodological (how future research might address the limitations of the present study). The implications section connects the paper’s specific argument to the larger conversation that the introduction identified, completing the frame that the funnel structure opened.
Structural Strategies
The Reverse Funnel
If the introduction moves from general to specific (funnel), the conclusion moves from specific to general (reverse funnel). The conclusion opens with the most specific element — the thesis, restated in its now-supported form — and broadens outward to implications, connections to broader debates, and suggestions for further inquiry. This structure mirrors the introduction’s movement in reverse, creating a satisfying sense of structural closure.
Connecting to the Introduction
One effective technique is to return to the specific image, question, or problem that opened the introduction, showing how the paper’s argument has advanced the reader’s understanding. If the introduction opened with a statistic on rising overdose deaths, the conclusion might return to that statistic and explain what the paper’s analysis of pharmaceutical marketing practices reveals about it. This circular structure — returning to the beginning with new understanding — gives the paper a sense of completeness that a purely forward-moving conclusion does not achieve.
The “So What?” Test
Every conclusion should pass the “so what?” test: if a reader who has followed the argument asks “Why does this matter?”, the conclusion should provide a clear, specific answer. A conclusion that ends with “More research is needed on this topic” fails the test because it substitutes a generic statement for a substantive claim about significance. A conclusion that ends with “These findings suggest that federal sentencing reform should prioritize the elimination of mandatory minimums for nonviolent drug offenses, a policy change that would reduce racial disparities in incarceration while producing no measurable increase in drug-related crime” passes the test because it identifies a specific, actionable implication of the paper’s argument.
What Not to Do in a Conclusion
Several errors weaken conclusions more than any others.
Introducing new evidence. The conclusion is not the place to present data, quotations, or arguments that were not developed in the body. If a point is significant enough to appear in the paper, it requires the full treatment — evidence, analysis, integration — that only a body section can provide. New evidence in the conclusion signals that the body is incomplete.
Undermining the argument. Phrases like “Of course, this topic is very complex and there are many perspectives” or “This is just one possible interpretation” hedge the argument in ways that undo the body’s work. Academic writing values precision and appropriate qualification, but the conclusion is not the place to retreat from the paper’s claims. If the evidence supports the thesis, the conclusion should say so with confidence. Limitations should be noted specifically (identifying what the study could not address) rather than vaguely (suggesting the entire argument might be wrong).
Repeating the introduction. Copying or closely paraphrasing the introduction’s language in the conclusion is a missed opportunity. The reader has now encountered the body’s evidence and analysis; the conclusion should reflect that encounter by expressing the thesis with greater nuance, depth, and authority than the introduction could provide. If the conclusion sounds identical to the introduction, the body has not accomplished anything.
Ending with a cliché. Closing with a sweeping, inspirational statement (“If we all work together, we can make the world a better place”) replaces substance with sentiment. The final sentence of a research paper should be the paper’s most precise and grounded claim, not its most vague and aspirational one.
Apologizing for the paper’s limitations. Noting specific limitations — acknowledging that the study examined only three states, for instance, or that the dataset did not include the most recent year — is appropriate and expected. Apologizing for the paper’s existence (“This paper could not possibly address all aspects of this complex topic”) is not. Every paper has a defined scope; the conclusion should affirm what was accomplished within that scope rather than lamenting what was left out.
Writing Conclusions for Different Paper Types
The conclusion’s content and emphasis vary depending on the type of research paper.
Argumentative papers should conclude by restating the thesis with the authority the evidence has earned, briefly synthesizing the strongest evidence, and identifying the practical or policy implications of the argument. The conclusion of an argumentative paper should leave the reader convinced — or at least seriously engaged with — the paper’s position. If the paper argued for a specific policy change, the conclusion should articulate what that change would look like and why the evidence supports it. If the paper argued for a particular interpretation of a text, event, or phenomenon, the conclusion should explain what that interpretation reveals that competing interpretations do not.
Analytical papers should conclude by drawing together the threads of the analysis and identifying the patterns, relationships, or insights that the analysis as a whole reveals. Because analytical papers interpret rather than advocate, their conclusions tend to emphasize understanding over action — what the analysis shows, what it means, and how it changes the way the reader should think about the subject. A literary analysis might conclude by explaining how the close reading of specific passages reveals a thematic pattern that transforms the reader’s understanding of the entire work. A data analysis might conclude by explaining what the patterns in the data suggest about the underlying phenomenon being studied.
Expository papers should conclude by synthesizing the information presented and identifying its significance. Because expository papers explain rather than argue, their conclusions are less about persuading the reader of a contested claim and more about crystallizing the key takeaways from the explanation. The conclusion should answer the question “What should the reader understand now that they have read this paper?” and should articulate the answer in the most concise and precise terms the student can produce.
Literature review papers should conclude by synthesizing the state of knowledge on the topic — what has been established, what remains contested, and what gaps the existing literature has not addressed. The conclusion of a literature review is often the most important section, because it is where the student demonstrates the ability to see the literature as a whole rather than as a collection of individual studies. Identifying directions for future research is particularly appropriate in literature review conclusions, because the purpose of a literature review is often to prepare the ground for subsequent original research.
The Relationship Between Introduction and Conclusion
The introduction and conclusion are mirror structures: the introduction moves from general context to specific thesis (the funnel), and the conclusion moves from specific thesis to general implications (the reverse funnel). Together, they form a frame around the body — the introduction sets up the question, the body answers it, and the conclusion explains why the answer matters.
This framing relationship means that the introduction and conclusion should be revised together during the revision process. Changes to the thesis during drafting or revision require corresponding changes in both the introduction (which presents the thesis) and the conclusion (which restates and extends it). A conclusion that restates a thesis the introduction no longer contains — because the thesis was revised during drafting but the conclusion was not updated — produces a structural incoherence that undermines the entire paper.
One practical technique for ensuring alignment is to read the introduction and conclusion back-to-back, skipping the body, after the revision process is complete. If the two sections tell a consistent story — the introduction poses a question, and the conclusion provides an answer that is clearly responsive to that question — the frame is intact. If the conclusion seems to answer a different question than the introduction posed, one of the two sections needs revision. For extended guidance on the revision process, see iResearchNet’s guide to revising and editing.
Suggestions for Future Research
Many conclusions include a sentence or two suggesting directions for future research — identifying questions that the paper raises but does not answer, populations or contexts that the paper’s findings should be tested against, or methodological approaches that could extend the analysis. These suggestions are appropriate when they are specific and grounded in the paper’s findings; they are inappropriate when they are vague and formulaic.
A specific suggestion identifies a concrete research direction: “Future studies should investigate whether the staffing ratio effects documented in this analysis hold in rural hospitals, where recruitment challenges and patient demographics differ substantially from the urban settings examined here.” This suggestion names a specific variable (hospital setting), identifies why it matters (recruitment and demographics differ), and connects to the paper’s findings (staffing ratio effects).
A vague suggestion offers nothing actionable: “More research is needed on this important topic.” This sentence could appear at the end of any paper on any topic and adds no value. If the student cannot identify a specific direction for future research that follows from the paper’s findings, the suggestion should be omitted rather than replaced with a generic placeholder.
Conclusion Length
The conclusion’s length should be proportional to the paper’s total length. A five-page paper typically needs a conclusion of one paragraph (150 to 250 words). A fifteen-page paper may need two or three paragraphs (300 to 500 words). A conclusion that extends beyond 10 percent of the paper’s total length is usually repeating body content rather than synthesizing it.
The conclusion should feel substantial but concise — it should leave the reader with a clear understanding of what the paper accomplished and why it matters, delivered in the most efficient prose the student can produce. Every sentence should contribute to the conclusion’s purpose; sentences that merely restate what has already been said should be cut.
Frequently Asked Questions
Should I restate my thesis word for word?
No. The conclusion should return to the thesis, but the restatement should reflect the argument’s development. The language should be different, and the claim should carry more weight because the reader has now seen the evidence that supports it. A verbatim repetition of the introduction’s thesis suggests that the body did not deepen the writer’s understanding — which is exactly the wrong signal to send at the paper’s close.
Can I end with a question?
Ending with a question can work if the question emerges naturally from the paper’s findings and invites the reader to consider the argument’s implications. A question like “If diversion programs produce better outcomes at lower cost than incarceration, what justification remains for the current sentencing regime?” is rhetorical and pointed — it reinforces the paper’s argument by framing it as a challenge. A question like “What will happen next?” is vague and unsatisfying. The quality of the closing question depends on its specificity and its connection to the paper’s argument.
How do I suggest future research without being vague?
Specific research suggestions are more valuable than generic ones. “Future research should investigate whether the diversion programs that proved effective in urban jurisdictions produce comparable results in rural contexts, where access to social services is more limited” identifies a specific gap, a specific population, and a specific reason the question matters. “More research is needed on this topic” provides no information and no direction. If the student cannot identify a specific direction for future research, the suggestion should be omitted rather than replaced with a generic placeholder.
Is the conclusion the same as the abstract?
No. The abstract is a compressed summary of the entire paper — purpose, methods, findings, and conclusions — written for readers who may not read the full paper. The conclusion is the final section of the paper’s argument, written for readers who have read everything that precedes it. The abstract summarizes; the conclusion synthesizes, interprets, and projects forward. For guidance on writing abstracts, see iResearchNet’s guide to writing an abstract.
Related Pages
- How to Write a Research Paper — Complete step-by-step guide
- How to Write an Introduction for a Research Paper — Framing the argument and presenting the thesis
- How to Write a Body of a Research Paper — Building the argument paragraph by paragraph
- How to Write an Abstract for a Research Paper — Summarizing the completed paper
- How to Revise and Edit a Research Paper — Strengthening the argument through revision