What the Results Chapter Is For
Every dissertation chapter has one job, and the results chapter’s job is the simplest to state and the easiest to get wrong: report what you found. Not what you think it means, not why it matters, not what should happen next. Just the findings, presented clearly enough that an examiner can see exactly what your data showed before you start arguing about it in the discussion.
That distinction is the whole chapter. Students lose marks here not because their results are weak, but because they blur the line between reporting and interpreting. A sentence like “This shows that peer mentoring clearly works” belongs in the discussion. In the results chapter, the equivalent is: “Students who attended peer mentoring scored a mean of 18.7 (SD = 2.9) on the confidence scale, compared with 12.4 (SD = 2.1) for the control group.” The number is the finding. The judgement about what it proves comes later.
What Belongs in the Chapter (and What Does Not)
Before you write a word, sort your material into two piles. In the results chapter: the findings that answer your research questions, in a logical order, with the tables and figures that support them. Out of it: interpretation (“this suggests that…”), comparisons with other studies, explanations of why a result surprised you, and any new literature. Those all belong in the discussion chapter, which our dissertation discussion chapter guide covers in detail.
Also out: your methods. A brief reminder of the test you ran is fine, but the justification for choosing it belongs in the methodology. If you find yourself re-explaining your sampling strategy here, you have drifted. Our dissertation methodology chapter guide explains where that material lives.
A Structure That Works
There is no single mandatory order, but the structure below works for almost every quantitative and mixed-methods dissertation, and it scales to qualitative work with one adjustment noted at the end.
1. Open with a short orientation paragraph
Two or three sentences: what data you collected, from whom, and how the chapter is organised. “This chapter presents the findings of a survey of 214 first-year nursing students, organised by research question. Descriptive results are reported first, followed by the tests of each hypothesis.” That is all. The examiner now knows what to expect, and you have a roadmap to follow.
2. Report descriptive results first
Before any test, give the reader the lay of the land: sample characteristics, means, frequencies, ranges. A reader who knows that 68% of your sample were aged 18–20 and that confidence scores ranged from 6 to 24 can make sense of everything that follows. Tables are ideal here — a participant characteristics table early in the chapter is standard practice, not decoration.
3. Work through your research questions in order
Take each research question or hypothesis in turn, in the same order you stated them in your introduction. For each one, state the analysis used, report the result, and state plainly whether the hypothesis was supported.
4. Close with a brief summary of the key findings
Half a page at most: the headline results, restated without new numbers and without interpretation. This is the bridge into the discussion, and it also protects you — if an examiner reads nothing else in the chapter, they will still know what you found.
Tables and Figures: The Rules That Matter
Tables and figures are not illustrations. They are evidence, and they follow rules. Every table and figure needs a number and a clear, descriptive title (“Table 1: Participant characteristics by group”), placed above a table and below a figure in most styles — check your department’s guide, because conventions vary. Every one must be referred to in the text (“As Table 2 shows…”), not left to float. And every one must be readable on its own: a reader who looks only at the table should understand what it shows, which means labelled columns, units, and notes explaining any abbreviations.
Choose the right tool for the job. Tables communicate exact values; charts communicate patterns and trends. If the precise mean matters, use a table. If the shape of a trend matters — scores rising across three time points, for example — a chart says it in a glance. Never present the same data in both a table and a figure unless your department requires it; duplication looks like padding, and examiners notice padding.
Keep figures honest. Axes should start at zero for bar charts, and scales should not be stretched to exaggerate a small difference — a chart that makes a 2-point gap look like a chasm will damage your credibility far more than a modest result honestly shown. Scribbr’s guide to writing a results section gives worked examples of tables and figures done well, and it is worth checking your own against them.
Reporting Statistics Without Embarrassing Yourself
Quantitative students most often lose marks on small reporting errors, not on wrong tests. Get these right and the chapter reads as competent even when the results are mixed.
Report descriptive statistics with every test. A p-value alone means nothing. Always give the means, standard deviations, and sample sizes alongside it, so the reader can judge the size of the effect, not just its statistical significance.
Report effect sizes and confidence intervals. “p < .05” tells the reader a difference is unlikely to be chance. It does not tell them whether the difference matters. An effect size (Cohen’s d, r, eta-squared) and a confidence interval do that work, and examiners increasingly expect them. A significant result with a tiny effect size is a finding to report honestly, not a triumph to oversell.
Use the right tense and precision. Results are reported in the past tense — you found these things; they are done. Report p-values to two or three decimal places, and write p < .001 rather than p = .000, which is never literally true. Keep decimal places consistent throughout the chapter.
Report non-significant results too. A hypothesis that was not supported is still a finding. Hiding it — or worse, quietly dropping the analysis — is a serious error, and examiners who spot a missing hypothesis will assume the worst. State it plainly: “No significant difference was found between the groups, t(98) = 1.12, p = .27.” Then move on. The discussion is where you explain what that might mean.
Qualitative Results: The Same Discipline, Different Shape
If your study is qualitative, the chapter is usually organised by theme rather than by research question, with each theme introduced, evidenced with two or three well-chosen quotes, and briefly described — not yet interpreted at length. The discipline is identical: present the evidence first, and let the reader see the data before you tell them what to think about it.
Weak vs Strong: The Same Finding, Written Two Ways
Weak: “The results were really good and showed that the workshops obviously helped students a lot, which proves our idea was right.”
Strong: “Students who attended the workshops scored significantly higher on academic confidence (M = 18.7, SD = 2.9) than those who did not (M = 12.4, SD = 2.1), t(98) = 12.19, p < .001, d = 1.02 (see Table 2). The hypothesis that workshop attendance would be associated with higher confidence was supported.”
The strong version contains no adjectives about how good the result was, no claim about what it proves, and no interpretation. It contains the numbers, the test, and the verdict on the hypothesis — which is everything the results chapter owes the reader, and nothing it does not.
Common Mistakes That Cost Marks
Interpreting in the results chapter. The single most common error. Every time you catch yourself writing “this suggests,” “this means,” or “this proves,” move that sentence to the discussion.
Repeating the methodology. A reminder of the test is enough. The justification lives in the methodology chapter, not here.
Unlabelled or unreferred tables. A table nobody mentions in the text looks forgotten, and a table without a title looks unfinished. Both are easy to fix and costly to leave.
Cherry-picking. Reporting only the significant results and burying the rest. Examiners read appendices and spot gaps; a complete, honest chapter scores better than a flattering, partial one.
Raw output dumps. Copying software output tables verbatim into the chapter. Rewrite every result in your own sentences, in your department’s format, and keep the raw output for the appendix.
A Checklist Before You Submit
- Every research question or hypothesis is addressed, in order, with a clear verdict.
- Descriptive statistics accompany every inferential test.
- Every table and figure is numbered, titled, labelled, and referred to in the text.
- No interpretation, no new literature, and no methods justification have crept in.
- Non-significant results are reported as plainly as significant ones.
- Past tense throughout, consistent decimal places.
- The chapter ends with a brief summary of key findings, ready for the discussion.
The results chapter rewards restraint. Report fully, interpret nowhere, and let the numbers speak before you do. Our dissertation conclusion guide shows how those findings eventually become the final answer to your research questions.
If your analysis is done but the chapter will not come together — tables everywhere, findings in the wrong order, interpretation leaking into every paragraph — you do not have to sort it alone. The Pen Master pairs you with subject-matched writers who turn raw output into clean, examiner-ready results chapters every week. Message us on WhatsApp at +49 1521 3962850 or send your brief through the contact form on thepenmaster.com, and we will take it from there.