To begin with, it is good to say what importance the discussion has at all. The main purpose of the discussion is to put the results of the implemented research activity into the context of the given issue for a simple reason. In all likelihood, you are not the first author to deal with the issue, as well as the last one who will ever deal with it. However, each researcher achieves some other results during their work, so it is good to compare and evaluate each other because two researches can never achieve exactly the same results.
Among the content of the discussion of your text, the benefits of your research activity and the overall text submitted should be clearly described. It is good to evaluate the results achieved with other researches on the same or similar topic, and further analyze them. To look at them from different angles, try to focus on their practical benefits or uses, and so on. If you have a topic for which this is not possible, try to formulate some recommendations for good practice, or describe the expected effects of a given phenomenon in terms of the near term. You can take a critical look at the results of your research activity in two ways, either in the context of the author’s reflection or in relation to the environment.
During the development, you have certainly come across a number of researches and authors who promote completely opposite propositions or have achieved diametrically opposed results than your research. So try to think about where the differences are. As mentioned above, no two researches can achieve exactly the same results, and differences in science are desirable, so do not be afraid to compare the results of each research with each other. Did the author use other methodological approaches? Another research or statistical method? Include it, but never put yourself in the position of an assessor who attacks or despises. Be collegial, as there can always be a few unique ways of dealing with the issue, and you can’t be sure that yours is the only one right.
The last part of the discussion is the controversy over the results achieved and the procedures used. This may take the form of thinking about what the research results would be if other methods or procedures were used. If you were to do all the research again, would you do the same, or would you, by the lessons learned from the previous mistakes, go a different way? Describe it. Would this change affect your research results? What do you think it would be? These seemingly simple questions are rather difficult to answer, and not every author is capable of doing so, but the effort is appreciated, and in the eyes of the opponent and the supervisor, a well and efficiently elaborated controversy can certainly improve the final assessment of the work.
Can’t you create a discussion after reading this article? Do not hesitate to send us a non-binding inquiry through our ordering system, and we will be happy to assist you.