theoretical background master thesis

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation

Example Theoretical Framework of a Dissertation or Thesis

Published on 8 July 2022 by Sarah Vinz . Revised on 10 October 2022.

Your theoretical framework defines the key concepts in your research, suggests relationships between them, and discusses relevant theories based on your literature review .

A strong theoretical framework gives your research direction, allowing you to convincingly interpret, explain, and generalise from your findings.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Table of contents

Sample problem statement and research questions, sample theoretical framework, your theoretical framework, frequently asked questions about sample theoretical frameworks.

Your theoretical framework is based on:

• Your problem statement
• Your research questions
• Your literature review

To investigate this problem, you have zeroed in on the following problem statement, objective, and research questions:

• Problem : Many online customers do not return to make subsequent purchases.
• Objective : To increase the quantity of return customers.
• Research question : How can the satisfaction of the boutique’s online customers be improved in order to increase the quantity of return customers?

The concepts of ‘customer loyalty’ and ‘customer satisfaction’ are clearly central to this study, along with their relationship to the likelihood that a customer will return. Your theoretical framework should define these concepts and discuss theories about the relationship between these variables.

Some sub-questions could include:

• What is the relationship between customer loyalty and customer satisfaction?
• How satisfied and loyal are the boutique’s online customers currently?
• What factors affect the satisfaction and loyalty of the boutique’s online customers?

As the concepts of ‘loyalty’ and ‘customer satisfaction’ play a major role in the investigation and will later be measured, they are essential concepts to define within your theoretical framework .

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Below is a simplified example showing how you can describe and compare theories. In this example, we focus on the concept of customer satisfaction introduced above.

Customer satisfaction

Thomassen (2003, p. 69) defines customer satisfaction as ‘the perception of the customer as a result of consciously or unconsciously comparing their experiences with their expectations’. Kotler and Keller (2008, p. 80) build on this definition, stating that customer satisfaction is determined by ‘the degree to which someone is happy or disappointed with the observed performance of a product in relation to his or her expectations’.

Performance that is below expectations leads to a dissatisfied customer, while performance that satisfies expectations produces satisfied customers (Kotler & Keller, 2003, p. 80).

The definition of Zeithaml and Bitner (2003, p. 86) is slightly different from that of Thomassen. They posit that ‘satisfaction is the consumer fulfillment response. It is a judgement that a product or service feature, or the product of service itself, provides a pleasurable level of consumption-related fulfillment.’ Zeithaml and Bitner’s emphasis is thus on obtaining a certain satisfaction in relation to purchasing.

Thomassen’s definition is the most relevant to the aims of this study, given the emphasis it places on unconscious perception. Although Zeithaml and Bitner, like Thomassen, say that customer satisfaction is a reaction to the experience gained, there is no distinction between conscious and unconscious comparisons in their definition.

The boutique claims in its mission statement that it wants to sell not only a product, but also a feeling. As a result, unconscious comparison will play an important role in the satisfaction of its customers. Thomassen’s definition is therefore more relevant.

Thomassen’s Customer Satisfaction Model

According to Thomassen, both the so-called ‘value proposition’ and other influences have an impact on final customer satisfaction. In his satisfaction model (Fig. 1), Thomassen shows that word-of-mouth, personal needs, past experiences, and marketing and public relations determine customers’ needs and expectations.

These factors are compared to their experiences, with the interplay between expectations and experiences determining a customer’s satisfaction level. Thomassen’s model is important for this study as it allows us to determine both the extent to which the boutique’s customers are satisfied, as well as where improvements can be made.

Figure 1 Customer satisfaction creation 

Of course, you could analyse the concepts more thoroughly and compare additional definitions to each other. You could also discuss the theories and ideas of key authors in greater detail and provide several models to illustrate different concepts.

A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a  literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation . As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.

While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work based on existing research, a conceptual framework allows you to draw your own conclusions, mapping out the variables you may use in your study and the interplay between them.

A literature review and a theoretical framework are not the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably. While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work, a literature review critically evaluates existing research relating to your topic. You’ll likely need both in your dissertation .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

Vinz, S. (2022, October 10). Example Theoretical Framework of a Dissertation or Thesis. Scribbr. Retrieved 6 May 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/example-theoretical-framework/

Is this article helpful?

Sarah's academic background includes a Master of Arts in English, a Master of International Affairs degree, and a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science. She loves the challenge of finding the perfect formulation or wording and derives much satisfaction from helping students take their academic writing up a notch.

Other students also liked

What is a theoretical framework | a step-by-step guide, dissertation & thesis outline | example & free templates, what is a research methodology | steps & tips.

• Translators
• Graphic Designers

Please enter the email address you used for your account. Your sign in information will be sent to your email address after it has been verified.

6 Steps to Mastering the Theoretical Framework of a Dissertation

As the pivotal section of your dissertation, the theoretical framework will be the lens through which your readers should evaluate your research. It's also a necessary part of your writing and research processes from which every written section will be built.

In their journal article titled Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for your "house" , authors Cynthia Grant and Azadeh Osanloo write:

The theoretical framework is one of the most important aspects in the research process, yet is often misunderstood by doctoral candidates as they prepare their dissertation research study. The importance of theory-driven thinking and acting is emphasized in relation to the selection of a topic, the development of research questions, the conceptualization of the literature review, the design approach, and the analysis plan for the dissertation study. Using a metaphor of the "blueprint" of a house, this article explains the application of a theoretical framework in a dissertation. Administrative Issues Journal

They continue in their paper to discuss how architects and contractors understand that prior to building a house, there must be a blueprint created. This blueprint will then serve as a guide for everyone involved in the construction of the home, including those building the foundation, installing the plumbing and electrical systems, etc. They then state, We believe the blueprint is an appropriate analogy of the theoretical framework of the dissertation.

As with drawing and creating any blueprint, it is often the most difficult part of the building process. Many potential conflicts must be considered and mitigated, and much thought must be put into how the foundation will support the rest of the home. Without proper consideration on the front end, the entire structure could be at risk.

With this in mind, I'm going to discuss six steps to mastering the theoretical framework section—the "blueprint" for your dissertation. If you follow these steps and complete the checklist included, your blueprint is guaranteed to be a solid one.

Complete your review of literature first

In order to identify the scope of your theoretical framework, you'll need to address research that has already been completed by others, as well as gaps in the research. Understanding this, it's clear why you'll need to complete your review of literature before you can adequately write a theoretical framework for your dissertation or thesis.

Simply put, before conducting any extensive research on a topic or hypothesis, you need to understand where the gaps are and how they can be filled. As will be mentioned in a later step, it's important to note within your theoretical framework if you have closed any gaps in the literature through your research. It's also important to know the research that has laid a foundation for the current knowledge, including any theories, assumptions, or studies that have been done that you can draw on for your own. Without performing this necessary step, you're likely to produce research that is redundant, and therefore not likely to be published.

Understand the purpose of a theoretical framework

When you present a research problem, an important step in doing so is to provide context and background to that specific problem. This allows your reader to understand both the scope and the purpose of your research, while giving you a direction in your writing. Just as a blueprint for a home needs to provide needed context to all of the builders and professionals involved in the building process, so does the theoretical framework of your dissertation.

So, in building your theoretical framework, there are several details that need to be considered and explained, including:

• The definition of any concepts or theories you're building on or exploring (this is especially important if it is a theory that is taken from another discipline or is relatively new).
• The context in which this concept has been explored in the past.
• The important literature that has already been published on the concept or theory, including citations.
• The context in which you plan to explore the concept or theory. You can briefly mention your intended methods used, along with methods that have been used in the past—but keep in mind that there will be a separate section of your dissertation to present these in detail.
• Any gaps that you hope to fill in the research
• Any limitations encountered by past researchers and any that you encountered in your own exploration of the topic.
• Basically, your theoretical framework helps to give your reader a general understanding of the research problem, how it has already been explored, and where your research falls in the scope of it. In such, be sure to keep it written in present tense, since it is research that is presently being done. When you refer to past research by others, you can do so in past tense, but anything related to your own research should be written in the present.

Use your theoretical framework to justify your research

In your literature review, you'll focus on finding research that has been conducted that is pertinent to your own study. This could be literature that establishes theories connected with your research, or provides pertinent analytic models. You will then mention these theories or models in your own theoretical framework and justify why they are the basis of—or relevant to—your research.

Basically, think of your theoretical framework as a quick, powerful way to justify to your reader why this research is important. If you are expanding upon past research by other scholars, your theoretical framework should mention the foundation they've laid and why it is important to build on that, or how it needs to be applied to a more modern concept. If there are gaps in the research on certain topics or theories, and your research fills these gaps, mention that in your theoretical framework, as well. It is your opportunity to justify the work you've done in a scientific context—both to your dissertation committee and to any publications interested in publishing your work.

Keep it within three to five pages

While there are usually no hard and fast rules related to the length of your theoretical framework, it is most common to keep it within three to five pages. This length should be enough to provide all of the relevant information to your reader without going into depth about the theories or assumptions mentioned. If you find yourself needing many more pages to write your theoretical framework, it is likely that you've failed to provide a succinct explanation for a theory, concept, or past study. Remember—you'll have ample opportunity throughout the course of writing your dissertation to expand and expound on these concepts, past studies, methods, and hypotheses. Your theoretical framework is not the place for these details.

If you've written an abstract, consider your theoretical framework to be somewhat of an extended abstract. It should offer a glimpse of the entirety of your research without going into a detailed explanation of the methods or background of it. In many cases, chiseling the theoretical framework down to the three to five-page length is a process of determining whether detail is needed in establishing understanding for your reader.

Use models and other graphics

Since your theoretical framework should clarify complicated theories or assumptions related to your research, it's often a good idea to include models and other helpful graphics to achieve this aim. If space is an issue, most formats allow you to include these illustrations or models in the appendix of your paper and refer to them within the main text.

Use a checklist after completing your first draft

You should consider the following questions as you draft your theoretical framework and check them off as a checklist after completing your first draft:

• Have the main theories and models related to your research been presented and briefly explained? In other words, does it offer an explicit statement of assumptions and/or theories that allows the reader to make a critical evaluation of them?
• Have you correctly cited the main scientific articles on the subject?
• Does it tell the reader about current knowledge related to the assumptions/theories and any gaps in that knowledge?
• Does it offer information related to notable connections between concepts?
• Does it include a relevant theory that forms the basis of your hypotheses and methods?
• Does it answer the question of "why" your research is valid and important? In other words, does it provide scientific justification for your research?
• If your research fills a gap in the literature, does your theoretical framework state this explicitly?
• Does it include the constructs and variables (both independent and dependent) that are relevant to your study?
• Does it state assumptions and propositions that are relevant to your research (along with the guiding theories related to these)?
• Does it "frame" your entire research, giving it direction and a backbone to support your hypotheses?
• Are your research questions answered?
• Is it logical?
• Is it free of grammar, punctuation, spelling, and syntax errors?

A final note

In conclusion, I would like to leave you with a quote from Grant and Osanloo:

The importance of utilizing a theoretical framework in a dissertation study cannot be stressed enough. The theoretical framework is the foundation from which all knowledge is constructed (metaphorically and literally) for a research study. It serves as the structure and support for the rationale for the study, the problem statement, the purpose, the significance, and the research questions. The theoretical framework provides a grounding base, or an anchor, for the literature review, and most importantly, the methods and analysis. Administrative Issues Journal

Related Posts

What Is a Peer-Reviewed Journal?

17 Free Online Academic English Writing Courses

• Academic Writing Advice
• All Blog Posts
• Writing Advice
• Admissions Writing Advice
• Book Writing Advice
• Short Story Advice
• Employment Writing Advice
• Business Writing Advice
• Web Content Advice
• Article Writing Advice
• Magazine Writing Advice
• Grammar Advice
• Dialect Advice
• Editing Advice
• Freelance Advice
• Legal Writing Advice
• Poetry Advice
• Graphic Design Advice
• Logo Design Advice
• Translation Advice
• Blog Reviews
• Short Story Award Winners
• Scholarship Winners

Need an academic editor before submitting your work?

Organizing Academic Research Papers: Theoretical Framework

• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Executive Summary
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tertiary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Annotated Bibliography
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• How to Manage Group Projects
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Essays
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Acknowledgements

Theories are formulated to explain, predict, and understand phenomena and, in many cases, to challenge and extend existing knowledge, within the limits of the critical bounding assumptions. The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a theory of a research study. The theoretical framework introduces and describes the theory which explains why the research problem under study exists.

Importance of Theory

A theoretical framework consists of concepts, together with their definitions, and existing theory/theories that are used for your particular study. The theoretical framework must demonstrate an understanding of theories and concepts that are relevant to the topic of your  research paper and that will relate it to the broader fields of knowledge in the class you are taking.

The theoretical framework is not something that is found readily available in the literature . You must review course readings and pertinent research literature for theories and analytic models that are relevant to the research problem you are investigating. The selection of a theory should depend on its appropriateness, ease of application, and explanatory power.

The theoretical framework strengthens the study in the following ways .

• An explicit statement of  theoretical assumptions permits the reader to evaluate them critically.
• The theoretical framework connects the researcher to existing knowledge. Guided by a relevant theory, you are given a basis for your hypotheses and choice of research methods.
• Articulating the theoretical assumptions of a research study forces you to address questions of why and how. It permits you to move from simply describing a phenomenon observed to generalizing about various aspects of that phenomenon.
• Having a theory helps you to identify the limits to those generalizations. A theoretical framework specifies which key variables influence a phenomenon of interest. It alerts you to examine how those key variables might differ and under what circumstances.

By virtue of its application nature, good theory in the social sciences is of value precisely because it fulfills one primary purpose: to explain the meaning, nature, and challenges of a phenomenon, often experienced but unexplained in the world in which we live, so that we may use that knowledge and understanding to act in more informed and effective ways.

The Conceptual Framework. College of Education. Alabama State University; Drafting an Argument . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006.

Strategies for Developing the Theoretical Framework

I.  Developing the Framework

Here are some strategies to develop of an effective theoretical framework:

• Examine your thesis title and research problem . The research problem anchors your entire study and forms the basis from which you construct your theoretical framework.
• Brainstorm on what you consider to be the key variables in your research . Answer the question, what factors contribute to the presumed effect?
• Review related literature to find answers to your research question.
• List  the constructs and variables that might be relevant to your study. Group these variables into independent and dependent categories.
• Review the key social science theories that are introduced to you in your course readings and choose the theory or theories that can best explain the relationships between the key variables in your study [note the Writing Tip on this page].
• Discuss the assumptions or propositions of this theory and point out their relevance to your research.

A theoretical framework is used to limit the scope of the relevant data by focusing on specific variables and defining the specific viewpoint (framework) that the researcher will take in analyzing and interpreting the data to be gathered, understanding concepts and variables according to the given definitions, and building knowledge by validating or challenging theoretical assumptions.

II.  Purpose

Think of theories as the conceptual basis for understanding, analyzing, and designing ways to investigate relationships within social systems. To the end, the following roles served by a theory can help guide the development of your framework.*

• Means by which new research data can be interpreted and coded for future use,
• Response to new problems that have no previously identified solutions strategy,
• Means for identifying and defining research problems,
• Means for prescribing or evaluating solutions to research problems,
• Way of telling us that certain facts among the accumulated knowledge are important and which facts are not,
• Means of giving old data new interpretations and new meaning,
• Means by which to identify important new issues and prescribe the most critical research questions that need to be answered to maximize understanding of the issue,
• Means of providing members of a professional discipline with a common language and a frame of reference for defining boundaries of their profession, and
• Means to guide and inform research so that it can, in turn, guide research efforts and improve professional practice.

*Adapted from: Torraco, R. J. “Theory-Building Research Methods.” In Swanson R. A. and E. F. Holton III , editors. Human Resource Development Handbook: Linking Research and Practice . (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 1997): pp. 114-137; Sutton, Robert I. and Barry M. Staw. “What Theory is Not.” Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (September 1995): 371-384.

Structure and Writing Style

The theoretical framework may be rooted in a specific theory , in which case, you are expected to test the validity of an existing theory in relation to specific events, issues, or phenomena. Many social science research papers fit into this rubric. For example, Peripheral Realism theory, which categorizes perceived differences between nation-states as those that give orders, those that obey, and those that rebel, could be used as a means for understanding conflicted relationships among countries in Africa. A test of this theory could be the following: Does Peripheral Realism theory help explain intra-state actions, such as, the growing split between southern and northern Sudan that may likely lead to the creation of two nations?

However, you may not always be asked by your professor to test a specific theory in your paper, but to develop your own framework from which your analysis of the research problem is derived . Given this, it is perhaps easiest to understand the nature and function of a theoretical framework if it is viewed as the answer to two basic questions:

• What is the research problem/question? [e.g., "How should the individual and the state relate during periods of conflict?"]
• Why is your approach a feasible solution? [I could choose to test Instrumentalist or Circumstantialists models developed among Ethnic Conflict Theorists that rely upon socio-economic-political factors to explain individual-state relations and to apply this theoretical model to periods of war between nations].

The answers to these questions come from a thorough review of the literature and your course readings [summarized and analyzed in the next section of your paper] and the gaps in the research that emerge from the review process. With this in mind, a complete theoretical framework will likely not emerge until after you have completed a thorough review of the literature .

In writing this part of your research paper, keep in mind the following:

• Clearly describe the framework, concepts, models, or specific theories that underpin your study . This includes noting who the key theorists are in the field who have conducted research on the problem you are investigating and, when necessary, the historical context that supports the formulation of that theory. This latter element is particularly important if the theory is relatively unknown or it is borrowed from another discipline.
• Position your theoretical framework within a broader context of related frameworks , concepts, models, or theories . There will likely be several concepts, theories, or models that can be used to help develop a framework for understanding the research problem. Therefore, note why the framework you've chosen is the appropriate one.
• The present tense is used when writing about theory.
• You should make your theoretical assumptions as explicit as possible . Later, your discussion of methodology should be linked back to this theoretical framework.
• Don’t just take what the theory says as a given! Reality is never accurately represented in such a simplistic way; if you imply that it can be, you fundamentally distort a reader's ability to understand the findings that emerge. Given this, always note the limitiations of the theoretical framework you've chosen [i.e., what parts of the research problem require further investigation because the theory does not explain a certain phenomena].

The Conceptual Framework. College of Education. Alabama State University; Conceptual Framework: What Do You Think is Going On? College of Engineering. University of Michigan; Drafting an Argument . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Lynham, Susan A. “The General Method of Theory-Building Research in Applied Disciplines.” Advances in Developing Human Resources 4 (August 2002): 221-241; Tavallaei, Mehdi and Mansor Abu Talib. A General Perspective on the Role of Theory in Qualitative Research. Journal of International Social Research 3 (Spring 2010); Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006.

Writing Tip

Borrowing Theoretical Constructs from Elsewhere

A growing and increasingly important trend in the social sciences is to think about and attempt to understand specific research problems from an interdisciplinary perspective. One way to do this is to not rely exclusively on the theories you've read about in a particular class, but to think about how an issue might be informed by theories developed in other disciplines. For example, if you are a political science student studying the rhetorical strategies used by female incumbants in state legislature campaigns, theories about the use of language could be derived, not only from political science, but linguistics, communication studies, philosophy, psychology, and, in this particular case, feminist studies. Building theoretical frameworks based on the postulates and hypotheses developed in other disciplinary contexts can be both enlightening and an effective way to be fully engaged in the research topic.

Another Writing Tip

Don't Undertheorize!

Never leave the theory hanging out there in the Introduction never to be mentioned again. Undertheorizing weakens your paper. The theoretical framework you introduce should guide your study throughout the paper. Be sure to always connect theory to the analysis and to explain in the discussion part of your paper how the theoretical framework you chose fit the research problem, or if appropriate, was inadequate in explaining the phenomenon you were investigating. In that case, don't be afraid to propose your own theory based on your findings.

Still Another Writing Tip

What's a Theory? What's a Hypothesis?

The terms theory and hypothesis are often used interchangeably in everyday use. However, the difference between them in scholarly research is important, particularly when using an experimental design. A theory is a well-established principle that has been developed to explain some aspect of the natural world. Theories arise from repeated observation and testing and incorporates facts, laws, predictions, and tested hypotheses that are widely accepted [e.g., rational choice theory; grounded theory].

A hypothesis is a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in your study. For example, an experiment designed to look at the relationship between study habits and test anxiety might have a hypothesis that states, "We predict that students with better study habits will suffer less test anxiety." Unless your study is exploratory in nature, your hypothesis should always explain what you expect to happen during the course of your research.

The key distinctions are:

• A theory predicts events in a broad, general context;  a hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a specified set of circumstances.
• A theory has been extensively tested and is generally accepted among scholars; a hypothesis is a speculative guess that has yet to be tested.

Cherry, Kendra. Introduction to Research Methods: Theory and Hypothesis . About.com Psychology; Gezae, Michael et al. Welcome Presentation on Hypothesis . Slideshare presentation.

• << Previous: The Research Problem/Question
• Next: 5. The Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 18, 2023 11:58 AM
• URL: https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803
• QuickSearch
• Library Catalog
• Databases A-Z
• Publication Finder
• Course Reserves
• Citation Linker
• Digital Commons
• Our Website

Research Support

• Ask a Librarian
• Appointments
• Interlibrary Loan (ILL)
• Research Guides
• Databases by Subject
• Citation Help

Using the Library

• Reserve a Group Study Room
• Renew Books
• Honors Study Rooms
• Off-Campus Access
• Library Policies
• Library Technology

User Information

• Grad Students
• Online Students
• COVID-19 Updates
• Staff Directory
• News & Announcements
• Library Newsletter

My Accounts

• Interlibrary Loan
• Staff Site Login

FIND US ON  

Eureka! When I learnt how to write a theoretical framework

Feb 6, 2019

Have you checked out  the rest of  The PhD Knowledge Base ? It’s home to hundreds more free resources and guides, written especially for PhD students.  

Have you ever had a eureka moment? A moment where something that you’ve misunderstood for ages becomes crystal clear?

I did, about half way through my PhD.

Did I come up with a ground breaking discovery that would revolutionise my field? Did I develop a new theory that would change the way we think about the world?

I finally understood how to write a theoretical framework.

Sound silly? It isn’t. 

During the one-on-one PhD coaching sessions I run, the issue of how to write a theory framework comes up more frequently than any other. The theoretical framework is important, but many people find it difficult. I know I struggled with it. 

Then someone explained the theory framework to me in such a simple way. Here’s the eureka moment: The theoretical framework is like a toolbox.

Simple, right?

Let me explain. In the literature review you highlighted the problem that needs ‘fixing’. The theoretical framework – the ’toolbox’ – details the theories, propositions, hypotheses (if you’re using them) and concepts – the ’tools’ – that you will use to address or make sense of this problem.

So, your job in a theoretical framework chapter is to discuss in detail what the tools look like, how they behave, how they have been used before, how they relate to one another, how they are relevant to your aims and objectives and what the drawbacks are from using them. The methods chapter then discusses how you will use (operationalise) those tools.

Hello, Doctor…

Sounds good, doesn’t it?  Be able to call yourself Doctor sooner with our five-star rated How to Write A PhD email-course. Learn everything your supervisor should have taught you about planning and completing a PhD.

Now half price. Join hundreds of other students and become a better thesis writer, or your money back. 

What is a theoretical framework?

In the literature review you highlighted the problem that needs ‘fixing’. The theoretical framework – the ’toolbox’ – details the theories, propositions, hypotheses (if you’re using them) and concepts – the ’tools’ – that you will use to address or make sense of this problem.

The list of potential explanations for why responses differ is enormous.

You could approach this question with a focus on, say, psychology, power, gender, economics, and so on. The best we can typically hope for – and this is particularly true in much of the social sciences – is an interpretation of the truth.

So – and this is important – we use theory to focus our attention on a small sub-set of all potential explanations, on one particular viewpoint.

Now I know I’m getting into messy epistemological and ontological waters here. I am an interpretivist, so I see theory as a ‘lens’ that you apply to make sense of the world. That’s the shape of my toolbox.

But, even if you’re a positivist you still pick and choose theoretical concepts and hypotheses from a range of available options; you just use them in a different way (rather than a lens, they become testable propositions, or measurement tools).

Without a theoretical framework we are left with a potentially endless choice of potential viewpoints, which would make our data collection and analysis and our discussion hugely chaotic.

Master your lit review & theory framework.

Learn what goes where (and why), and how it all fit together with this free, interactive guide to the PhD literature review and theory framework.

In other words, if we don’t know how to focus our attention, how we can present a coherent explanation? 

The theoretical framework is a natural extension of the literature review. The purpose of the literature review, amongst other things, is to highlight gaps and shortcomings with the existing work in your field.

The theoretical framework details   the perspective you will take   to address that gap and shortcoming.

For example, in   my doctoral research,   my literature review focused on government responses to climate change and pointed out that there hadn’t been much discussion on local government.

The theoretical framework then made an informed decision to come at it from a particular theoretical perspective (institutional theory, if you’re interested) and then discussed what that theory looks like, highlighting the key concepts and ideas. 

In your own research you will also need to make an informed decision about the particular theory you will employ to guide you through the rest of the research.

The theoretical framework is a natural extension of the literature review. The purpose of the literature review, amongst other things, is to highlight gaps and shortcomings with the existing work in your field. The theoretical framework details the perspective you will take to address that gap and shortcoming.

So, the   job of the theoretical framework isn’t to repeat the literature review . Instead, think of it as a   separate, mini literature review , this time focusing on the theory you will employ. You don’t have to discuss every particular use and discussion of the theoretical position you employ. If you did, you’d quickly run out of space and time.

Remember, your examiners are likely to already be familiar with the theory, meaning that rather than discuss every possible thing that there is to discuss about it, you instead need to discuss how and why the theory has been adapted and adopted to the context of your research.

How to structure a theoretical framework

• You need to have a solid grasp of your aims and objectives. These define the space in which your research will sit and your goals when conducting it. You will need to briefly recap these when you start writing your theoretical framework, both to remind the reader and so that you can relate your theory to these overarching aims.
• What theory/theories are you using? Here you need to define and explain each theory you draw upon and, in doing so, discuss the leading proponents and applications. This shows that you understand the theory you are going to adopt.
• You then need to spend time critically arguing why you are adopting this particular theory. There are a lot of potential theories you could use. Why this one? Importantly, you should relate your choice to the discussions in the literature review and your aims and objectives.
• Can the theory/theories be broken down into different schools? Which one are you siding with and why?
• A theory contains a number of concepts. Which will you be drawing upon? Why these ones? Have you defined them properly? The way you approach this section will be influenced by your epistemological and ontological perspective and, thus, whether you use hypotheses or not. If you are using hypotheses, you need to state them as such.
• How do the concepts relate to your aims and objectives?
• Have you clearly stated your ontological and epistemological perspective?
• Are you the first to use this particular theory in this particular way? What benefits or drawbacks does that bring?
• Can you spot any drawbacks with applying this theory? Does it fail to account for a particular dimension of a phenomenon? Is it difficult to operationalize?
• How are your concepts related? Are you using them as hypotheses? Or as a model to make sense of the data? Somewhere in between? Be explicit about how they are all related and what you plan on doing with them.

The goal of writing up a theoretical framework is to tell the reader why you have chosen particular theories, how they relate to the gap in the literature, and how they relate to your aims and objectives.

A short (but necessary) note on ontology and epistemology 

How do i choose theories and create my framework.

Unless you are using an inductive methodological approach (where you generate theory from the data), you will likely approach your fieldwork with a theoretical framework in mind. Which theory or theories you choose is, in part, down to your aims and objectives and whether there is a relevant theory available ‘off-the-shelf’ that is appropriate for your needs.

There are generally three strategies that researchers use to develop their theoretical frameworks: 

• There may be theories in your field that have arisen on the basis of repeated observation and testing and which are widely accepted.
• Or, you might find that you need to select concepts from multiple theories and create a novel framework that is unique to your particular context.
• A growing and important trend in social research is to adopt an interdisciplinary perspective when trying to understand the social world. This can be achieved by looking beyond the dominant, well-established theories and thinking about how other theories, particularly those from other disciplines or sub-disciplines, can be used.

In any case, you must consider the following when selecting a theory:  

• Identify your ontological and epistemological beliefs.
• List several theories that align with your epistemological position and which can aid your understanding of the phenomenon under investigation.
• Engage in literature review around those theories, both to familiarise yourself with them but also to understand their relevance to your study.
• Ask yourself how each theory connects to your problem, aims & objectives.
• Select the theory or theories that provide more relevant tools for your thesis. 

I have more than one theory. What do I do?

  Often, you need to combine concepts, hypotheses or ideas from more than one theoretical school. Employing   more than one theory is entirely legitimate.   I did so in my PhD. 

  However, you need to  consider a few key questions : 

Are the theories you are bringing together epistemologically compatible? 

Have you discussed each theory in the same level of detail to adequately explain the theory, your justification for its inclusion, its relation to the literature and its potential drawbacks? 

What benefits does focusing on more than one theory bring? Perhaps one theory has shortcomings that the other addresses? 

What downsides are there to employing more than one theory? 

Has anyone else used this combination of theories before you? 

The theoretical framework is a tricky section to write, largely because the choice available to you is huge.

But   keep that toolbox metaphor in mind. 

  Each theory contains a number of tools. Your job in the theory framework is to take the tools you need for your project from the most relevant theory/theories and package them up into your own toolbox.

When you’re done, you should see that the theory framework offers:

• Structure, by detailing the key concepts, tools and, where relevant, hypotheses
• A way to connect to other research
• A coherent, joined up set of ideas that structure the writing and help to create an argumentative streak that can run throughout your thesis
• An approach that can be reused in additional contexts once you’re done

Along the way, you need to convince the reader that you’ve picked and applied the most appropriate tools possible, given your aims and objectives.

The theoretical framework frames the research. If you build that frame right, your research will shine. If you don’t then you’ll struggle.

If you need expert guidance to structure, plan or write your theory framework you can get in touch for a one-on-one coaching session . It’s like having a personal trainer, but for your PhD. 

Share this:

67 comments.

A great read. Quite some insight into my Phd journey. The conceptual framework?

Glad you found it useful. You having trouble with your conceptual framework?

This is enlightening. I was struggling with my Theoretical framework. I will apply the guidelines here and await feedback from my supervisor. Thanks

I’m glad you found the post useful. Thanks for your kind words.

I came across your posts while helping my wife with her work (I finished my PhD two years ago), and I keep thinking…hmmm the pain I went through to learn this… thank you for making it so easy for others…

Thanks for the kind words. I remember how difficult I found my own PhD, so my motivation is to make life easier for as many other PhD students as possible.

i need some more clear version to develop a theoretical framework. kindly contact me through email. thank you

Great insights. I have read through your thesis. You did a lot of quality work. I see the EM, Environmental Policy Capacity and the institutions theory all discussed. Really detailed and linked. Let me see how mine goes

I’ve sent you an email. I’d be glad to help.

This is very helpful because am really struggling to write my theoretical section. I have a question, I selected a framework but realised it has shortcomings, so I decided to include a model, but also I have another theory. All the three are confusing me how to structure them please I need your help. Thanks

Hi Carolyne,

Thanks for your email. Do you want to have a one-on-one coaching session with me? We’ll be able to get to the bottom of your confusion and clear up your theory problems once and for all. Click here for more details and to book yourself in.

Do you have a structured outline, similar to the overall diss outline, for the theoretical framework?

I sure do. You can find it here: https://www.thephdproofreaders.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Theoretical-Framework-Template_AW_20190208.pdf

What are the advantages of having a chapter on theoretical framework independent of the Literature Review chapter. Please assist.

Thanks for your comment. Whether or not you need a separate literature review and theory framework chapter depends on how distinct they are from one another and on how complex each chapter is. It may be the case that you need two chapters because to discuss both in one would make the chapter very large, complex and hard to follow. Also, it is often the case that the theory framework builds on and addresses gaps you’ve highlighted in your literature review, so for that reason it makes sense to keep them as two separate chapters.

But which one comes first? I thought theoretical framework comes earlier than literature review or is it in a proposal where it is structured that way?

Typically the lit review comes first, then the theory. The lit review makes the case for the research and the theory framework shows the approach you will take to conduct the research.

Thanks for the kind words 🙂

Dear Max, I am using multiple related concepts to frame my research. I am confused whether to dedicate a complete chapter to explain only these five concepts, or just operationalise them in one of the chapters. Again, is introducing these concepts early in my introductory chapter a good idea as it forms one of my research questions. This means I have answered the question in the introductory chapter

Thanks for your comment. Whether or not such concepts end up in your introduction/context discussion will depend in part on whether they are framing your research (as in, providing the background or context) or whether you’re using them to answer your research questions (in which case they’ll form part of your theory framework and will therefore come at a later stage).

Dear Max, I was searching how to structure Theoretical framework and came across your writing. Thank you for this, it is really helpful. I’m one of those phd students who struggles with Theoretical framework :/ I would appreciate your help if possible. Could you please outline, how can I reach you?

Thanks for your kind words. I’m glad you’re finding the phD Knowledge Base useful. You can reach me at max[at]thephdproofreaders.com

Speaks soon!

I’m so confused about my theoretical framework. Could you possibly help please?

Sure. Have you checked out the one-on-one PhD coaching service we offer? It sounds just that’s just what you need.

I couldn’t express how grateful I am. MAY YOU BE SHOWERED WITH BLESSINGS

Thanks! I’m glad you found the advice useful.

wow!!! thank you very much , I have been struggling to write my theoretical framework . thank you.

You’re welcome!

Dr. Max I am expecting to learn more on how to pick the right literatures, related to my theme. all of them seem very nice and informative. I am having hard time to select them. and also I have difficulties in starting the sentence of my Introduction. I am researching on “the impact of Prosperity gospel in Tanzanian mainline churches”. my topic is very popular and many has been said … I feel like I am saying what has been said .

Thanks for your comment. I wish you the best of luck.

Hi Max, Great read. Doing my MA Thesis after years away from academia has been a challenge to say the least. Your article provided clarity that I have been asking for/seeking elsewhere (supervision/consultant) for months. Wish I had of found it earlier but glad I came across it.

Thank you and all the best in these uncertain times.

Great! Glad you’re finding the resources useful. Good luck with the rest of the thesis.

Dear Max, thank you very much, many things got clear after reading this. I have a question, I am using political capability approach as my theoretical foundation which is part of RBW theory. So technically it is not a theory but just an approach, so does this indirectly mean that I am USING RBW Theory? Many Thanks

Hi – glad you found it useful. Without knowing more about your project I’m afraid I can’t advise about your choice of theory framework. Have you approached your supervisor with this question?

This is a very helpful article.

Glad you enjoyed it!

This has been one of the best articles that has clearly outlined the Theoretical framework. Kindly do a Youtibe video for auditory learners with real examples. It will greatly assist me especiall. I am glad I found this article.

Thanks for the kind words and for your feedback. I’ll take it on board for future guides.

Thanks so much for this which has helped me with a sticky bit as I move forward to discover new theoretical concepts from slightly outside my field that fit better than those I started out with. A part-time PhD has such a long life that it leaves too much room for changes and adaptations! A big thank you to Rebecca Baker on a Shut Up and Write Session who referred me to this!

I’m glad you found the guide useful. Thanks to you and to Rebecca Baker!

I found this post very helpful, thanks for sharing

Thanks for reading!

Thank you for this crisp advice on Theoretical framework. personally i have been experiencing difficulties selecting appropriate theory related to the study. However your advice was really beneficial. God bless you for your kindness towards us researchers.

Thanks for the kind words Roshni.

Thank you so much for sharing this information regarding the theoretical framework. I revisited my chapter and strengthened it based on the pointers you outlined here. This is a must read before drafting the chapter. Very helpful ?

Thanks for the kind words. I’m glad you found it useful.

This came just in time! I’m taking a research philosophy course and this week’s discussion is “Theory and Theoretical Frameworks”. I found this very helpful.

Great. I hope it helped deepen your understanding.

Thank you Dr Lempriere for this insightful article. I have just started my PhD journey and I found this article to be very useful and eye-opening.

Interesting and excellent read.

Thank you so very much for sharing your intellectual insights on this.

Hi this is really useful thank you. I have a question regarding one of my tools. I realise (quite late) that I am using one tool in a *generalised* way. I could put this another way – the context in which I found this tool constituted a more particular use of this more general tool, and I am seeking to retrieve it for a more general use. This opens the question – on what grounds am I employing a generalised form of this tool? What constraints govern this process of generalisation? Etc. I wish I’d dealt with this earlier… Do you have any thoughts on how I navigate this?

Hi – I’d love to give you advice, but without knowing more about your research and thesis any advice I would give wouldn’t be qualified. Sorry I can’t be of more help.

I loved your explanation, but what if you ARE doing an inductive project?

I found your article very useful, thank you! I am currently building a Foucauldian theoretical framework through which to discuss a phenomena (“Karens”).

Do you any academic articles which I can use to justify using the interpretavist approach (using theory as a lens)? I cant find anything through my searches.

Hi – sorry, we don’t I’m afraid.

Surely, this is a great lesson offered. How I pray I had your email, I would love to learn more from you. Thank you

Been struggling with my Phd and literature review . This has been very helpful. Is it possible for you to share your email so i can engage more with you and get some insights and help

Really really helpful guide, I am so grateful to you for providing this! It is helping me immensely in developing my own framework, a task which previously seemed scary, confusing and impossible!

Thanks for this. It is very useful. So should I first write my Lit review and then only the theoretical framework? TIA

Thanks! It’s hard to say without knowing more about your project, I’m afraid!

Thank you for the wonderful work. I want to know if theoretical frame work can presented in a diagram form

You’re welcome! Yes, your theory framework can be presented visually. It’s a great way of showing the framework in a clean, simplified way. It also serves as a useful reference guide for people to easily refer back to if they want to remind themselves of what your theory framework looks like.

I found your article highly informative. I recently enrolled for my PhD and my supervisor asked me to submit my Research outline. Does the outline have to have that detailed Theoretical framework. Again how best can I choose the theoretical framework suitable for my topic. If I may have a list of Theoretical frameworks I will be happy. I will also be grateful to have a direct contact with you.

A great insight into how to write a theoretical framework, simple and jargon free, the article makes the purpose and the method of writing the chapter explicit. Thank you.

That’s so kind of you Sethu. I’m glad you found it useful.

i WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IS THE IDEAL PLACE TO SITUATE THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK WITHIN THE LITERATURE REVIEW? Peter Nemaenzhe

The theory/conceptual framework is often its own chapter between the lit review and methods. Sometimes though you can include it in the literature review, but I would suggest including it towards the end. I.e. do the lit review first, then introduce the theory framework.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search The PhD Knowledge Base

Most popular articles from the phd knowlege base.

The PhD Knowledge Base Categories

• Your PhD and Covid
• Mastering your theory and literature review chapters
• How to structure and write every chapter of the PhD
• How to stay motivated and productive
• Techniques to improve your writing and fluency
• Advice on maintaining good mental health
• Resources designed for non-native English speakers
• PhD Writing Template
• Explore our back-catalogue of motivational advice

• my research
• contributions and comments

writing the thesis – the theoretical framework

Please note that I write my blog on weekends. It is not part of my workload or job description. I support the #USSstrike and “teach out” online. 

Not every thesis has a section or chapter devoted to a theoretical framework. But a lot do. (It’s the Ph in PhD after all.) And these ‘theory chapters’ can be very tricky to write – and are often tricky for the examiner to read.

Before starting to write your theory section/chapter it can be good to think about what the examiner wants to see.

The examiners have likely been appointed because they know, and possibly use, the same theoretical framing as you. And this means that you have to assume that they don’t need a basic introduction or a run-through of every possible thing there is to say about the theory. The examiner doesn’t want a general essay, the kind of here’s-the-lot that you wrote for doctoral course-work (or even your masters’ degree).

The purpose of the theory section/chapter in the doctoral thesis is to set the examiner up to make sense of what you’ve done and what you claim to have ‘found’. The examiner therefore expects – and needs – to see something particular to your work. Something that isn’t so general it could apply to any project anywhere, anytime. Something that is bespoke to what they are about to encounter.

The examiner wants to know:

• How you understand your chosen theory – there are usually multiple ways that theories are interpreted. Which have you opted for and why? What are the advantages of the approach you have taken?
• Why you’ve chosen this approach – what is it about this particular framing that gives you a way to conceive and design your project, and/or that gives your results real explanatory heft?
• That you know the ways in which the theory is already used in the field. Who else has used this approach in ways similar to you? What can you build on from their work? Or perhaps, how does your use of this theory differ from the way it is usually put to work?
• How you have used the theory – how and where have you brought the theory into conversation with your research? Are some aspects of the theory more important than others to your research? Which and why?
• What are the potential down-sides to using this theory and approach – what doesn’t it do? What have you done about these potential problems?

And if you have brought two or more theoretical approaches together in your research, then you need to provide the answers to these questions for them both/all. But you also need to say why and how it is possible to use more than one approach. Does one theoretical framing fill in a gap left by the other? Are these theories (epistemologically) compatible? What tensions are there between them? Has anyone else done this? What potential issues are there that you need to draw the examiner’s attention to?

Once you’re clear on the audience and purpose for your theory chapter/section then it’s also important to consider the way you’re going to write it.

The examiner wants to know you are on top of the theory. That you know your stuff. That you have expertise. That you can speak with authority about it. So they don’t expect to read quote after quote after quote after quote. Assume that the examiners have read the original, so what they want is something other than a cut and paste of the stuff they’ve already encountered.

The examiner wants your theoretical explication – your approach to the theory and how it’s used – largely in your own words. Of course, the judicious juicy quote can be used for a few key points, those occasions where the theorist makes a point, just so. But it’s best if you can explain the key points about the theory in your own way.

And the examiner really doesn’t want to see you quoting large slabs of “introductions to”, that is, other people’s interpretations of key ideas, unless you are actually discussing how the theory has been interpreted in the field. They want to see that you have read the texts for yourself.

The examiner gets pretty worried if they can’t see you and your research in the theoretical chapter. They want to see you summarising, evaluating, managing a discussion, stating your take on the theory, explaining your use of it. If they can’t find you, then they’ll approach the viva wondering whether you really do grasp the framework you claim as the basis of your work. They’ll have a set of viva questions in mind to try to find this out. You don’t want that!

So in sum –  you need to have a deep and meaningful relationship with your chosen theory long before you put hand to mouse to write the relevant chapter. You need to know how to explain it. And you need to be very clear about how and why and where you’ve used it.

But there is no doubt that writing the theoretical section/chapter will also enhance your understanding and your subsequent use of the theory throughout the rest of the thesis text.

Share this:

About pat thomson

11 responses to writing the thesis – the theoretical framework.

Reblogged this on Digital learning PD Dr Ann Lawless and commented: for my doctoral stduents

This is SO helpful: thank you. For my writing, and my teaching. Very best wishes, ever Colin M

Reblogged this on Parts That Make Me Whole and commented: Here is a blog post worth referring to, while sorting out theory matters

. Thanks for the elegant description of what’s needed for a theoretical framework. I needed that.

Pat thank you once again for your insight. Again I find myself printing this blog off and using your guidance above almost as a check list whilst in the discovery phase of my theory. I am at the Literature Review stage and had a supervisory meeting whereby all we talked about was theory and themes. As always food for thought and development.. My gratitude and thanks Eileen

This piece is very resourceful; it hits the nail on the head on what is expected of a thesis on theoretical framework!

This is so useful! I am working on my first year transfer report and this post was so very helpful. Thank you Pat!

Thank you very much. It is excellent advice!

Thank you for such a simple, clear and precise explanation regarding writing a theory.

Thank you for a simple yet detailed explanation of the theoretical framework. The highlighted ideas will surely sharpen my concepts

Many thanks. You are a star. Thanks for your unqualified support. Take care.

Leave a comment Cancel reply

• Search for:

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Email Address:

patter on facebook

Recent Posts

• creativity and giving up on knowing it all
• white ants and research education
• Anticipation
• research as creative practice – possibility thinking
• research as – is – creative practice
• On MAL-attribution
• a brief word on academic mobility
• Key word – claim
• key words – contribution
• research key words – significance
• a thesis is not just a display
• should you do a “side project”?

SEE MY CURATED POSTS ON WAKELET

Top posts & pages.

• aims and objectives - what's the difference?
• writing a bio-note
• avoiding the laundry list literature review
• I can't find anything written on my topic... really?
• headings and subheadings – it helps to be specific
• creativity and giving up on knowing it all
• five ways to structure a literature review
• connecting chapters/chapter conclusions
• 20 reading journal prompts
• connecting chapters/chapter introductions
• Entries feed
• Comments feed
• WordPress.com

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Conceptual and Theoretical Frameworks for Thesis Studies: What you must know

A theoretical framework is a conceptual model that provides a systematic and structured way of thinking about a research problem or question. It helps to identify key variables and the relationships between them and to guide the selection and interpretation of data. Theoretical frameworks draw on existing theories and research and can be used to develop new hypotheses or test existing ones. They provide a foundation for research design, data collection, and analysis and can help to ensure that research is relevant, rigorous, and coherent. Theoretical frameworks are common in many disciplines, including social sciences, natural sciences, and humanities, and are essential for building knowledge and advancing understanding in a field.

This article explains the importance of frameworks in a thesis study and the differences between conceptual frameworks and theoretical frameworks. It provides guidelines on how to write a thesis framework, definitions of variable types, and examples of framework types.

What is a research framework and why do I need one?

When planning your thesis study, you need to justify your research and explain its design to your readers. This is called the research framework.

When planning your thesis study, you need to justify your research and explain its design to your readers. This is called the research framework. Think of it as the foundation of a building. A good building needs a strong foundation. Similarly, your research needs to be supported by reviewing and explaining the existing knowledge in the field, describing how your research study will fit within or contribute to the existing literature (e.g., it could challenge or test an existing theory or address a knowledge gap), and informing the reader how your study design aligns with your thesis question or hypothesis.

Important components of the framework are a literature review of recent studies associated with your thesis topic as well as theories/models used in your field of research. The literature review acts as a filtering tool to select appropriate thesis questions and guide data collection, analysis, and interpretation of your findings. Think broadly! Apart from reviewing relevant published papers in your field of research, also explore theories that you have come across in your undergraduate courses, other published thesis studies, encyclopedias, and handbooks.

There are two types of research frameworks: theoretical and conceptual .

What is a conceptual framework?

A conceptual framework is a written or visual representation that explains the study variables and their relationships with each other. The starting point is a literature review of existing studies and theories about your topic.

Steps to develop a conceptual framework

• Clarify your study topic by identifying and defining key concepts in your thesis problem statement and thesis question. Essentially, your thesis should address a knowledge gap.
• Perform a literature review to provide a background to interpret and explain the study findings. Also, draw on empirical knowledge that you have gained from personal experience.
• Identify crucial variables from the literature review and your empirical knowledge, classify them as dependent or independent variables, and define them.
• Brainstorm all the possible factors that could affect each dependent variable.
• Propose relationships among the variables and determine any associations that exist between all variables.
• Use a flowchart or tree diagram to present your conceptual framework.

Types of variables

When developing a conceptual framework, you will need to identify the following:

• Independent variables
• Dependent variables
• Moderating variables
• Mediating variables
• Control variables

First, identify the independent (cause) and dependent (effect) variables in your study. Then, identify variables that influence this relationship, such as moderating variables, mediating variables, and control variables. A moderating variable changes the relationship between independent and dependent variables when its value increases or decreases. A mediating variable links independent and dependent variables to better explain the relationship between them. A control variable could potentially impact the cause-and-effect relationship but is kept constant throughout the study so that its effects on the findings/outcomes can be ruled out.

Example of a conceptual framework

You want to investigate the hours spent exercising (cause) on childhood obesity (effect).

Now, you need to consider moderating variables that affect the cause-and-effect relationship. In our example, the amount of junk food eaten would affect the level of obesity.

Next, you need to consider mediating variables. In our example, the maximum heart rate during exercise would affect the child’s weight.

Finally, you need to consider control variables. In this example, because we do not want to investigate the role of age in obesity, we can use this as a control variable. Thus, the study subjects would be children of a specific age (e.g., aged 6–10 years).

What is a theoretical framework?

A theoretical framework provides a general framework for data analysis. It defines the concepts used and explains existing theories and models in your field of research.

A theoretical framework provides a general framework for data analysis. It defines the concepts used and explains existing theories and models in your field of research. It also explains any assumptions that were used to inform your approach and your choice of specific rationales. Theoretical frameworks are often used in the fields of social sciences.

Purpose of a theoretical framework

• Test and challenge existing theories
• Establish orderly connections between observations and facts
• Predict and control situations
• Develop hypotheses

Steps to develop a theoretical framework

• Identify and define key concepts in your thesis problem statement and thesis question.
• Explain and evaluate existing theories by writing a literature review that describes the concepts, models, and theories that support your study.
• Choose the theory that best explains the relationships between the key variables in your study.
• Explain how your research study fills a knowledge gap or fits into existing studies (e.g., testing if an established theory applies to your thesis context).
• Discuss the relevance of any theoretical assumptions and limitations.

A thesis topic can be approached from a variety of angles, depending on the theories used.

• In psychology, a behavioral approach would use different methods and assumptions compared with a cognitive approach when treating anxiety.
• In literature, a book could be analyzed using different literary theories, such as Marxism or poststructuralism.

Structuring a theoretical framework

The structure of a theoretical framework is fluid, and there are no specific rules that need to be followed, as long as it is clearly and logically presented.

The theoretical framework is a natural extension of your literature review. The literature review should identify gaps in the field of your research, and reviewing existing theories will help to determine how these can be addressed. The structure of a theoretical framework is fluid, and there are no specific rules that need to be followed, as long as it is clearly and logically presented. The theoretical framework is sometimes integrated into the literature review chapter of a thesis, but it can also be included as a separate chapter, depending on the complexity of the theories.

Example of a theoretical framework

The sales staff at Company X are unmotivated and struggling to meet their monthly targets. Some members of the management team believe that this could be achieved by implementing a comprehensive product-training program, but others believe that introducing a sales commission structure will help.

Company X is not achieving their monthly sales targets

To increase monthly sales.

Research question:

How can Company X motivate their sales team to achieve its monthly sales targets?

Sub-questions:

• Why do the sales staff feel unmotivated?
• What is the relationship between motivation and monetary rewards?
• Do the sales staff feel that they have sufficient product knowledge?

Theoretical framework:

A literature search will need to be performed to understand the background of the many different theories of motivation in psychology. For example, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (basic human needs—physiological, safety, love/belonging, esteem, and self-actualization—have to be fulfilled before one can live up to their true potential), Vroom’s Theory of Expectancy (people decide upon their actions based on the outcomes they expect), and Locke’s Goal-Setting Theory (goals are a key driver of one’s behavior). These theories would need to be investigated to determine which would be the best approach to increase the motivation of the sales staff in Company X so that the monthly sales targets are met.

A robust conceptual or theoretical framework is crucial when writing a thesis/dissertation. It defines your research gap, identifies your approach, and guides the interpretation of your results.

A thesis is the most important document you will write during your academic studies. For professional thesis editing and thesis proofreading services, check out Enago's Thesis Editing service s for more information.

Editor’s pick

Get free updates.

Subscribe to our newsletter for regular insights from the research and publishing industry!

What type of framework is used in the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) domain? +

Theoretical frameworks are typically used in the HSS domain, while conceptual frameworks are used in the Sciences domain.

What is the difference between mediating versus moderating variables? +

The difference between mediators and moderators can be confusing. A moderating variable is unaffected by the independent variable and can increase or decrease the strength of the relationship between the independent and dependent variables. A mediating variable is affected by the independent variable and can explain the relationship between the independent and dependent variables. T he statistical correlation between the independent and dependent variables is higher when the mediating variable is excluded.

What software should I use to present my conceptual framework? +

The software program Creately provides some useful templates that can help you get started. Other recommended programs are SmartDraw , Inkscape , and diagrams.net .

Theoretical Background

• First Online: 26 June 2020

Cite this chapter

• Javier Galego Pascual 2  

Part of the book series: Springer Theses ((Springer Theses))

387 Accesses

This chapter presents the essential theoretical background necessary to explain some of the most important concepts discussed throughout this thesis. The aim is to provide the reader with the basic tools to understand the many fundamental equations and approximations used in the contexts of cavity quantum electrodynamics (CQED) and quantum chemistry. We start by addressing the question of what is the quantum Hamiltonian for the light–matter interaction and illustrating what approximations play an important role in its definition. We then focus on the matter part of the light–matter Hamiltonian in order to provide the best possible description of a complex molecule. In this section we address the Born–Oppenheimer approximation, widely used in molecular and solid-state physics and in quantum chemistry. Additionally, we present the description of different characteristic phenomena of organic molecules such as chemical structure and reactions, and their response to the electromagnetic field. Then, we focus on this last part, discussing the important features of CQED and the different theoretical descriptions that study them. Finally we present the fundamentals of the two different regimes of light–matter interaction: weak and strong coupling.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

This expression is valid both in the presence and absence of sources. It is worth mentioning that in the case of the free field it is possible to write each term as \(A_{\mathbf {k},\lambda }(\mathbf {r},t) = A_{\mathbf {k},\lambda }(\mathbf {r})e^{-i\omega (\mathbf {k})t}\) , where the \(A_{\mathbf {k},\lambda }(\mathbf {r})\) satisfy the homogeneous Helmholtz equation \((\varvec{\nabla }^2 + k^2)A_{\mathbf {k},\lambda }(\mathbf {r})=0\) . In this case the explicit time dependence of \(\mathcal {H}_\mathrm {EM}\) disappears, as the energy is conserved.

We see that in the vacuum state of the system the energy is \(E_\mathrm {0} = \frac{1}{2}\sum _{\mathbf {k},\lambda } \hbar \omega (\mathbf {k})\) . The frequencies \(\omega (\mathbf {k})\) have no upper bound, so \(E_\mathrm {0}\) diverges. However, this is not a problem since expectation values only depend on energy differences and not absolute energies, so the divergence of the vacuum state does not appear in any physical observable.

The more fundamental definition for the polarization field is \(\hat{\mathbf {P}}(\mathbf {r}) = \sum _{i,j} q_i^{(j)}(\mathbf {r}_i-\mathbf {r}_j) \int _0^1 ds \delta ^3 \left[ \mathbf {r} - \mathbf {r}_j -s(\mathbf {r}_i-\mathbf {r}_j) \right] \) . This is more cumbersome and less intuitive, so we instead present \(\hat{\mathbf {P}}(\mathbf {r})\) directly as a multipole expansion. The connection between each expression can be found in [ 2 ].

This approximation is completely equivalent to the long-wavelength approximation , in which the charges conforming each dipole are very close compared to the EM wavelength and thus experience the same fields, i.e. for \(\varvec{\mu } = q_i\mathbf {r}_i + q_j\mathbf {r}_j\) the fields satisfy \(\mathbf {A}(\mathbf {r}_i) \approx \mathbf {A}(\mathbf {r}_j)\) . This is analogous to neglect the effects of higher electric multipoles, as they are more significant as the spatial structure of the collection of charges becomes important.

Note that, depending on the context, we use the indices i and j to represent either individual charged particles or molecules.

This effect emerges because the speed of light is finite. When the information of a particular charge configuration reaches an emitter situated far away, these charges have already rearranged, so that the emitter response is no longer in phase. This arises for distances much larger than the wavelength corresponding to the characteristic absorption frequency of the emitters [ 20 ]. In the systems that we are concerned with in this thesis, these wavelengths are of the order of hundreds of nanometers, so we can completely disregard retardation effects when dealing with dipole–dipole interactions.

Note that while in one dimension the transition state is a local maximum, in general multi-dimensional scenarios this is a saddle point.

In Sect.  2.3 we analyze the relevance of this term when not all EM modes are explicitly considered.

In this thesis we are mainly interested in molecules, but this occurs for any set of charges such as atoms, quantum dots, nanoparticles, etc.

The Franck–Condon principle states that the intensity of a vibronic transition (i.e., a change of electronic and vibrational states) is directly proportional to the overlap between the corresponding nuclear wavefunctions. This is based on the assumption of a vertical transition, i.e., that there is some adiabatic separation between nuclear and electronic timescales, similarly as in the Born–Oppenheimer approximation.

We note that theoretical efforts in this regard have been made for small plasmonic nanoparticles using time-dependent density functional theory [ 38 ].

This also includes the emitter–emitter interactions in the multiple-emitter case.

The exact diagonalization of Eq. ( 2.63 ) can be done without invoking the RWA. However, for the sake of brevity we present the diagonalization within the single-excitation subspace.

Note that this also depends on the choice of quantum emitter, as very large Q factors are not useful if the emitter has a broader linewidth than the cavity.

This is equivalent to treating the many-particle TC Hamiltonian with collective operators, thus representing the coupling between the bright state and the cavity mode.

This is equivalent to consider a Lindblad master equation approach and neglecting the excitation refilling terms, making the ground state a population reservoir [ 93 , 94 ].

Cohen-Tannoudji C, Dupont-Roc J, Grynberg G (1997) Photons and atoms

Google Scholar  

Steck DA (2007) Quantum and atom optics, vol 47

Dirac PAM (1927) The quantum theory of the emission and absorption of radiation. Proc R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 114:243

ADS   MATH   Google Scholar  

Dirac PAM (1981) The principles of quantum mechanics, vol 27. Oxford University Press

Majety VP, Zielinski A, Scrinzi A (2014) Mixed gauge in strong laser-matter interaction. J Phys B At Mol Opt Phys 48:025601

Göppert-Mayer M (1931) Über Elementarakte mit zwei Quantensprüngen. Annalen der Physik 401:273

Power EA, Zienau S (1959) Coulomb gauge in non-relativistic quantum electro-dynamics and the shape of spectral lines. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser A Math Phys Sci 251:427

Woolley RG (1971) Molecular quantum electrodynamics. Proc R Soc Lond A 321:557

ADS   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Power E, Thirunamachandran T (1982) Quantum electrodynamics in a cavity. Phys Rev A 25:2473

Power EA, Thirunamachandran T (1980) The multipolar Hamiltonian in radiation theory. Proc R Soc Lond A Math Phys Sci 372:265

Born M, Oppenheimer R (1927) Zur Quantentheorie der Molekeln. Annalen der Physik 389:457

Tully JC (2000) Perspective on “Zur Quantentheorie der Molekeln”. Theor Chem Acc Theory Comput Model (Theoretica Chimica Acta) 103:173

Born M, Huang K (1954) Dynamical theory of crystal lattices. Clarendon Press

Worth GA, Cederbaum LS (2004) Beyond Born-Oppenheimer: molecular dynamics through a conical intersection. Annu Rev Phys Chem 55:127

Levine BG, Martínez TJ (2007) Isomerization through conical intersections. Annu Rev Phys Chem 58:613

Mead CA, Truhlar DG (1982) Conditions for the definition of a strictly diabatic electronic basis for molecular systems. J Chem Phys 77:6090

Novotny L, Hecht B (2009) Principles of nano-optics. ISBN: 9781107005464

Leonas V et al (2000) Photosynthetic excitons. World Scientific

Weiss U (2012) Quantum dissipative systems, vol 10. World Scientific

Stone A (2013) The theory of intermolecular forces, 2nd edn. OUP Oxford

Sheppard D, Terrell R, Henkelman G (2008) Optimization methods for finding minimum energy paths. J Chem Phys 128:134106

ADS   Google Scholar  

Truhlar DG, Gordon MS (1990) From force fields to dynamics: classical and quantal paths. Science 249:491

Prezhdo OV, Rossky PJ (1997) Mean-field molecular dynamics with surface hopping. J Chem Phys 107:825

Barbatti M (2011) Nonadiabatic dynamics with trajectory surface hopping method. Wiley Interdisc Rev Comput Mol Sci 1:620

Eyring H (1935) The activated complex in chemical reactions. J Chem Phys 3:107

Arrhenius S (1889) Über die dissociationswärme und den einfluss der temperatur auf den dissociationsgrad der elektrolyte. Zeitschrift für physikalische Chemie 4:96

Miller WH (1993) Beyond transition-state theory: a rigorous quantum theory of chemical reaction rates. Acc Chem Res 26:174

Yamamoto T (1960) Quantum statistical mechanical theory of the rate of exchange chemical reactions in the gas phase. J Chem Phys 33:281

Miller WH (1974) Quantum mechanical transition state theory and a new semiclassical model for reaction rate constants. J Chem Phys 61:1823

Miller WH, Schwartz SD, Tromp JW (1983) Quantum mechanical rate constants for bimolecular reactions. J Chem Phys 79:4889

Jackson JD (2007) Classical electrodynamics. Wiley

Bonin KD, Kresin VV (1997) Electric-dipole polarizabilities of atoms, molecules, and clusters. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd

Rescigno TN, McKoy V (1975) Rigorous method for computing photoabsorption cross sections from a basis-set expansion. Phys Rev A 12:522

Kasha M (1950) Characterization of electronic transitions in complex molecules. Discuss Faraday Soc 9:14

Nitzan A, Jortner J, Rentzepis PM (1971) Internal conversion in large molecules. Mol Phys 22:585

May V, Kühn O (2011) Charge and energy transfer dynamics in molecular systems. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim, Germany

Nitzan A (2006) Chemical dynamics in condensed phases: relaxation, transfer and reactions in condensed molecular systems. Oxford University Press

Barbry M, Koval P, Marchesin F, Esteban R, Borisov AG, Aizpurua J, Sánchez-Portal D (2015) Atomistic near-field nanoplasmonics: reaching atomic-scale resolution in nanooptics. Nano Lett 15:3410

Huttner B, Barnett SM (1992) Quantization of the electromagnetic field in dielectrics. Phys Rev A 46:4306

Scheel S, Buhmann SY (2008) Macroscopic quantum electrodynamics—concepts and applications. Acta Physica Slovaca 58:675

Buhmann SY (2007) Casimir-polder forces on atoms in the presence of magnetoelectric bodies. Thesis (PhD), Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena

Kavokin A, Baumberg J, Malpuech G, Laussy F (2008) Microcavities

Tame MS, McEnery K, Özdemir Ş, Lee J, Maier S, Kim M (2013) Quantum plasmonics. Nat Phys 9:329

Hopfield J (1958) Theory of the contribution of excitons to the complex dielectric constant of crystals. Phys Rev 112:1555

Dung HT, Knöll L, Welsch D-G (1998) Three-dimensional quantization of the electromagnetic field in dispersive and absorbing inhomogeneous dielectrics. Phys Rev A 57:3931

Van Vlack C, Kristensen PT, Hughes S (2012) Spontaneous emission spectra and quantum light-matter interactions from a strongly coupled quantum dot metal-nanoparticle system. Phys Rev B 85:075303

Alpeggiani F, Andreani LC (2014) Quantum theory of surface plasmon polaritons: planar and spherical geometries. Plasmonics 9:965

Li R-Q, Hernángomez-Pérez D, García-Vidal FJ, Fernández-Domínguez AI (2016) Transformation optics approach to plasmon-exciton strong coupling in nanocavities. Phys Rev Lett 117:107401

Savage KJ, Hawkeye MM, Esteban R, Borisov AG, Aizpurua J, Baumberg JJ (2012) Revealing the quantum regime in tunnelling plasmonics. Nature 491:574

Zhang P, Feist J, Rubio A, García-González P, García-Vidal FJ (2014) Ab initio nanoplasmonics: the impact of atomic structure. Phys Rev B 90:161407(R)

Varas A, García-González P, Feist J, García-Vidal FJ, Rubio A (2016) Quantum plasmonics: from jellium models to ab initio calculations. Nanophotonics 5:409

Vukics A, Grießer T, Domokos P (2014) Elimination of the \({{A}}\) -square problem from cavity QED. Phys Rev Lett 112:073601

Keeling J (2007) Coulomb interactions, gauge invariance, and phase transitions of the Dicke model. J Phys Condens Matter 19:295213

Kirton P, Roses MM, Keeling J, Dalla Torre EG (2018) Introduction to the Dicke model: from equilibrium to nonequilibrium, and vice versa. Adv Quantum Technol 1800043

De Bernardis D, Jaako T, Rabl P (2018) Cavity quantum electrodynamics in the nonperturbative regime. Phys Rev A 97:043820

Rokaj V, Welakuh DM, Ruggenthaler M, Rubio A (2018) Light-matter interaction in the long-wavelength limit: no ground-state without dipole self-energy. J Phys B 51:034005

Todorov Y, Sirtori C (2014) Few-electron ultrastrong light-matter coupling in a quantum LC circuit. Phys Rev X 4:041031

De Bernardis D, Pilar P, Jaako T, De Liberato S, Rabl P (2018) Breakdown of gauge invariance in ultrastrong-coupling cavity QED. Phys Rev A 98:053819

Andrews DL, Jones GA, Salam A, Woolley RG (2018) Perspective: quantum Hamiltonians for optical interactions. J Chem Phys 148:040901

Stokes A, Nazir A (2019) Gauge ambiguities imply Jaynes-Cummings physics remains valid in ultrastrong coupling QED. Nat Commun 10:499

Kónya G, Vukics A, Domokos P. The equivalence of the Power-Zineau-Woolley picture and the Poincaré gauge from the very first principles

George J, Chervy T, Shalabney A, Devaux E, Hiura H, Genet C, Ebbesen TW (2016) Multiple Rabi splittings under ultrastrong vibrational coupling. Phys Rev Lett 117:153601

Chikkaraddy R, de Nijs B, Benz F, Barrow SJ, Scherman OA, Rosta E, Demetriadou A, Fox P, Hess O, Baumberg JJ (2016) Single-molecule strong coupling at room temperature in plasmonic nanocavities. Nature 535:127

Chikkaraddy R, Turek VA, Kongsuwan N, Benz F, Carnegie C, van de Goor T, de Nijs B, Demetriadou A, Hess O, Keyser UF, Baumberg JJ (2018) Mapping nanoscale hotspots with single-molecule emitters assembled into plasmonic nanocavities using DNA origami. Nano Lett 18:405

Autore M, Li P, Dolado I, Alfaro-Mozaz FJ, Esteban R, Atxabal A, Casanova F, Hueso LE, Alonso-González P, Aizpurua J, Nikitin AY, Vélez S, Hillenbrand R (2018) Boron nitride nanoresonators for phonon-enhanced molecular vibrational spectroscopy at the strong coupling limit. Light Sci Appl 7:17172

Zengin G, Wersäll M, Nilsson S, Antosiewicz TJ, Käll M, Shegai T (2015) Realizing strong light-matter interactions between single-nanoparticle plasmons and molecular excitons at ambient conditions. Phys Rev Lett 114:157401

Gubbin CR, Maier SA, De Liberato S (2017) Theoretical investigation of phonon polaritons in SiC micropillar resonators. Phys Rev B 95:035313

Jaynes ET, Cummings FW (1963) Comparison of quantum and semiclassical radiation theories with application to the beam maser. Proc IEEE 51:89

Tavis M, Cummings FW (1968) Exact solution for an N-molecule-radiation-field Hamiltonian. Phys Rev 170:379

Garraway BM (2011) The Dicke model in quantum optics: Dicke model revisited. Philos Trans R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 369:1137

Michetti P, Mazza L, La Rocca GC (2015) Strongly coupled organic microcavities. In: Zhao YS (ed) Organic nanophotonics, nano-optics and nanophotonics, vol 39. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

Agranovich V, Gartstein YN, Litinskaya M (2011) Hybrid resonant organic-inorganic nanostructures for optoelectronic applications. Chem Rev 111:5179

Spano FC (2015) Optical microcavities enhance the exciton coherence length and eliminate vibronic coupling in J-aggregates. J Chem Phys 142

Herrera F, Spano FC (2016) Cavity-controlled chemistry in molecular ensembles. Phys Rev Lett 116:238301

Ćwik JA, Kirton P, De Liberato S, Keeling J (2016) Excitonic spectral features in strongly coupled organic polaritons. Phys Rev A 93:33840

Zeb MA, Kirton PG, Keeling J (2018) Exact states and spectra of vibrationally dressed polaritons. ACS Photonics 5:249

Wu N, Feist J, Garcia-Vidal FJ (2016) When polarons meet polaritons: exciton-vibration interactions in organic molecules strongly coupled to confined light fields. Phys Rev B 94:195409

Herrera F, Spano FC (2017) Dark vibronic polaritons and the spectroscopy of organic microcavities. Phys Rev Lett 118

Herrera F, Spano FC (2018) Theory of nanoscale organic cavities: the essential role of vibration-photon dressed states. ACS Photonics 5:65

del Pino J (2018) Vibrational and electronic strong light–matter coupling with molecular excitations. Thesis (PhD), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

Flick J, Ruggenthaler M, Appel H, Rubio A (2015) Kohn-Sham approach to quantum electrodynamical density-functional theory: exact time-dependent effective potentials in real space. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112:15285

Flick J, Ruggenthaler M, Appel H, Rubio A (2017) Atoms and molecules in cavities, from weak to strong coupling in quantum-electrodynamics (QED) chemistry. Proc Natl Acad Sci 114:3026

Tokatly IV (2013) Time-dependent density functional theory for many-electron systems interacting with cavity photons. Phys Rev Lett 110:233001

Ruggenthaler M, Flick J, Pellegrini C, Appel H, Tokatly IV, Rubio A (2014) Quantum-electrodynamical density-functional theory: bridging quantum optics and electronic-structure theory. Phys Rev A 90:012508

Feist J, Galego J, Garcia-Vidal FJ (2018) Polaritonic chemistry with organic molecules. ACS Photonics 5:205

Flick J, Appel H, Ruggenthaler M, Rubio A (2017) Cavity Born-Oppenheimer approximation for correlated electron-nuclear-photon systems. J Chem Theory Comput 13:1616

Somaschi N, Giesz V, De Santis L, Loredo J, Almeida MP, Hornecker G, Portalupi SL, Grange T, Antón C, Demory J et al (2016) Near-optimal single-photon sources in the solid state. Nat Photonics 10:340

Purcell EM (1946) Spontaneous emission probabilities at radio frquencies. Phys Rev 69:674

Louisell WH, Louisell WH (1973) Quantum statistical properties of radiation, vol 7. Wiley, New York

Koenderink AF (2010) On the use of purcell factors for plasmon antennas. Opt Lett 35:4208

Kristensen PT, Van Vlack C, Hughes S (2012) Generalized effective mode volume for leaky optical cavities. Opt Lett 37:1649

Sauvan C, Hugonin JP, Maksymov IS, Lalanne P (2013) Theory of the spontaneous optical emission of nanosize photonic and plasmon resonators. Phys Rev Lett 110:237401

Brecha R, Rice P, Xiao M (1999) N two-level atoms in a driven optical cavity: quantum dynamics of forward photon scattering for weak incident fields. Phys Rev A 59:2392

Sáez-Blázquez R, Feist J, Fernández-Domínguez A, García-Vidal F (2017) Enhancing photon correlations through plasmonic strong coupling. Optica 4:1363

Bozhevolnyi SI, Khurgin JB (2016) Fundamental limitations in spontaneous emission rate of single-photon sources. Optica 3:1418

Törmä P, Barnes WL (2015) Strong coupling between surface plasmon polaritons and emitters: a review. Rep Prog Phys 78:13901

Henkelman G, Uberuaga BP, Jónsson H (2000) A climbing image nudged elastic band method for finding saddle points and minimum energy paths. J Chem Phys 113:9901

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Física teórica de la materia condensada, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

Dr. Javier Galego Pascual

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Javier Galego Pascual .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Galego Pascual, J. (2020). Theoretical Background. In: Polaritonic Chemistry. Springer Theses. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48698-3_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48698-3_2

Published : 26 June 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-48697-6

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-48698-3

eBook Packages : Physics and Astronomy Physics and Astronomy (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Manuscript Preparation

What is the Background of a Study and How Should it be Written?

• 3 minute read
• 898.9K views

Table of Contents

The background of a study is one of the most important components of a research paper. The quality of the background determines whether the reader will be interested in the rest of the study. Thus, to ensure that the audience is invested in reading the entire research paper, it is important to write an appealing and effective background. So, what constitutes the background of a study, and how must it be written?

What is the background of a study?

The background of a study is the first section of the paper and establishes the context underlying the research. It contains the rationale, the key problem statement, and a brief overview of research questions that are addressed in the rest of the paper. The background forms the crux of the study because it introduces an unaware audience to the research and its importance in a clear and logical manner. At times, the background may even explore whether the study builds on or refutes findings from previous studies. Any relevant information that the readers need to know before delving into the paper should be made available to them in the background.

How is a background different from the introduction?

The introduction of your research paper is presented before the background. Let’s find out what factors differentiate the background from the introduction.

• The introduction only contains preliminary data about the research topic and does not state the purpose of the study. On the contrary, the background clarifies the importance of the study in detail.
• The introduction provides an overview of the research topic from a broader perspective, while the background provides a detailed understanding of the topic.
• The introduction should end with the mention of the research questions, aims, and objectives of the study. In contrast, the background follows no such format and only provides essential context to the study.

How should one write the background of a research paper?

The length and detail presented in the background varies for different research papers, depending on the complexity and novelty of the research topic. At times, a simple background suffices, even if the study is complex. Before writing and adding details in the background, take a note of these additional points:

• Start with a strong beginning: Begin the background by defining the research topic and then identify the target audience.
• Cover key components: Explain all theories, concepts, terms, and ideas that may feel unfamiliar to the target audience thoroughly.
• Take note of important prerequisites: Go through the relevant literature in detail. Take notes while reading and cite the sources.
• Maintain a balance: Make sure that the background is focused on important details, but also appeals to a broader audience.
• Include historical data: Current issues largely originate from historical events or findings. If the research borrows information from a historical context, add relevant data in the background.
• Explain novelty: If the research study or methodology is unique or novel, provide an explanation that helps to understand the research better.
• Increase engagement: To make the background engaging, build a story around the central theme of the research

Avoid these mistakes while writing the background:

• Ambiguity: Don’t be ambiguous. While writing, assume that the reader does not understand any intricate detail about your research.
• Unrelated themes: Steer clear from topics that are not related to the key aspects of your research topic.
• Poor organization: Do not place information without a structure. Make sure that the background reads in a chronological manner and organize the sub-sections so that it flows well.

Writing the background for a research paper should not be a daunting task. But directions to go about it can always help. At Elsevier Author Services we provide essential insights on how to write a high quality, appealing, and logically structured paper for publication, beginning with a robust background. For further queries, contact our experts now!

How to Use Tables and Figures effectively in Research Papers

• Research Process

The Top 5 Qualities of Every Good Researcher

You may also like.

Make Hook, Line, and Sinker: The Art of Crafting Engaging Introductions

Can Describing Study Limitations Improve the Quality of Your Paper?

A Guide to Crafting Shorter, Impactful Sentences in Academic Writing

6 Steps to Write an Excellent Discussion in Your Manuscript

How to Write Clear and Crisp Civil Engineering Papers? Here are 5 Key Tips to Consider

The Clear Path to An Impactful Paper: ②

The Essentials of Writing to Communicate Research in Medicine

Changing Lines: Sentence Patterns in Academic Writing

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

•    
• List of international prohects 2015/2016
• List of International Projects 2012-2014

 Recommended Links

 context links.

• Master Academic Studies

Engineering Animation

• General information
•  News Archive
• Basic informations
• Educational goal
• Educational outcomes
• Course content
• Teaching methods
• Knowledge evaluation

Course is active from 01.10.2010..