The Research Process: The Ten-Step Thesis Model
The topic-development material states the process twice — once as a running list, once as a set of numbered section headings — and the two statements do not agree. This page prints both, shows exactly where they part company, and leaves the disagreement standing.
Two enumerations of the same process
The compact statement of the research process in this library is the seven-stage model. The ten-step model is the longer, thesis-oriented version from the topic-development material, and it is the one to work to if you are producing an examined piece of research.
The complication is that the material states it twice. A running list appears in the prose, spread across three paragraphs. A set of numbered headings then organises every detailed section that follows. Both are reproduced below, unaltered.
As a running list in the prose (eleven items)
- Begin with an idea — refine your idea
- Do a literature review to find out what has been done in this field
- State the research question in one sentence
- State your specific aim or objective
- Select the most appropriate methodology to answer your question
- Decide how you will collect data
- Obtain ethics clearance to proceed
- Gather your data
- Analyse your data
- Draw conclusions
- Write your report
As numbered section headings (ten)
- Begin with an idea
- Review the Research Topic
- Check the literature
- Decide your research question
- Design your research
- Seek Ethics clearance
- Conduct Research
- Draw Conclusions
- Write your report
- Store data
Where the two lists part company
The table below is an alignment attempt, not a reconciliation. Read the third column as the interesting one: it records what happens at each join, including the joins that do not hold.
THE RUNNING LIST SET AGAINST THE NUMBERED HEADINGS
| Running-list item | Numbered heading | What happens at the join |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Begin with an idea — refine your idea | 1. Begin with an idea | Aligns, except that refine your idea has no home of its own; refinement is arguably what heading 2 is for |
| Nothing corresponds | 2. Review the Research Topic | A full step, with its own detailed section, that the running list does not contain |
| 2. Do a literature review to find out what has been done in this field | 3. Check the literature | Same activity, different position — second in the list, third in the headings |
| 3. State the research question in one sentence | 4. Decide your research question | Aligns cleanly |
| 4. State your specific aim or objective | Nothing corresponds | Absorbed into the question step, or into design; the source does not say which |
| 5. Select the most appropriate methodology to answer your question | 5. Design your research | Two list items collapse into one heading — this is the first of them |
| 6. Decide how you will collect data | 5. Design your research | The second of the two |
| 7. Obtain ethics clearance to proceed | 6. Seek Ethics clearance | Aligns cleanly, and in both versions it sits before any data is gathered |
| 8. Gather your data | 7. Conduct Research | Aligns in substance; the heading is the broader of the two |
| 9. Analyse your data | 8. Draw Conclusions | The list names the activity, the heading names the output |
| 10. Draw conclusions | 8. Draw Conclusions | Two list items collapse into one heading again |
| 11. Write your report | 9. Write your report | Aligns cleanly |
| Nothing corresponds | 10. Store data | Appears only in the headings — the process in the running list ends at the report |
The alignment in this table is our reading. The supplied teaching source prints both enumerations and never maps one onto the other.
Which enumeration should govern
Treat the numbered headings as the controlling structure. They are what the material's detailed guidance is written under: each has a section behind it, each is elaborated, and the substantive content of the topic-development material follows their order rather than the running list's.
The running list is best read as a summary written for a different purpose — a quick statement of the arc, of the kind you would give in a briefing. It happens to be finer-grained in two places, which is why it produces more items.
The ten steps against the seven stages
The two models in this library describe the same work at different resolutions. Mapping them shows what the longer version adds — and, less obviously, what it drops.
TEN-STEP HEADINGS MAPPED TO SEVEN-STAGE STAGES
| Ten-step heading | Seven-stage equivalent | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Begin with an idea | 1. Identification of research problem | The seven-stage model opens with a problem; the ten-step model opens with an idea, which is a looser thing |
| 2. Review the Research Topic | 1. Identification of research problem (continued) | Testing the topic gets no stage of its own in the shorter model |
| 3. Check the literature | 2. Literature review | Direct match |
| 4. Decide your research question | 4. Determine specific research questions or hypotheses | Direct match, though the ten-step version drops the word hypotheses |
| 5. Design your research | No equivalent stage | The seven-stage list goes from questions straight to collection |
| 6. Seek Ethics clearance | No equivalent stage | Absent from the seven-stage model entirely |
| 7. Conduct Research | 5. Data collection | The heading is broader — the source calls this the action stage |
| 8. Draw Conclusions | 6. Analysing and interpreting the data | Match; the longer material describes this as theorising your data |
| 9. Write your report | 7. Reporting and evaluating research | Match on reporting. Neither model explains what evaluating adds |
| 10. Store data | No equivalent stage | Present only in the ten-step model |
| No equivalent heading | 3. Specifying the purpose and establishing the conceptual framework | No numbered step of its own, although the material handles the framework inside Check the literature |
Both models come from the supplied teaching source. The mapping between them is ours; the source never sets the two side by side.
The net effect is that the ten-step model is safer to run a thesis against. It forces a design decision, forces a clearance decision, and does not let you stop at the report. What it loses is the seven-stage model's explicit prompt to establish a conceptual framework, which becomes something you have to remember to do inside the literature step.
What each of the ten steps commits you to
The controlling sequence
Begin with an idea
Produce a candidate topic and screen it before you fall in love with it. Covered on generating and refining a research idea.
Review the Research Topic
Test the candidate against two sets of questions — five about the research and five about you — then brainstorm, cluster and title it. Covered on reviewing and testing your research topic.
Check the literature
Source and scan, save, read and annotate, write daily, date and back up, then build the theoretical framework. Covered on checking the literature.
Decide your research question
State it in one sentence, having first settled the context. Covered on deciding your research question.
Design your research
Choose methodology and collection methods together, and split your time roughly half to research and half to writing. Covered on designing your research.
Seek Ethics clearance
Three screening questions on confidentiality, cultural appropriateness and bias, plus approvals before you commence. Covered on seeking ethics clearance, including what the source defers.
Conduct Research
The action stage, where you apply the methods you designed. The source's entire treatment is two sentences, one of which says effective project management is required here.
Draw Conclusions
Analyse, then theorise: establish where your data supports and where it contradicts the theory in your literature review.
Write your report
Collate, interpret, reach conclusions — then summarise and communicate to your specific audience.
Store data
Store the report and the data so they add to the body of knowledge. Covered with the writing step on writing the report and storing the data.
Working with a model that does not close
A mismatch like this is not unusual in teaching material, and it is not fatal. What matters is that you handle it deliberately rather than pretending it is not there — particularly if you are quoting the process in a methodology chapter.
How to proceed when the two versions disagree
Before you commit to a process statement
- You have decided which enumeration governs your project, and you can say why
- Design, ethics clearance and data storage all appear on your plan as named activities
- Your aim or objective is written down somewhere, whether or not it has a numbered step
- You have noted that the process is described in the same material as ever-changing rather than fixed
- Any diagram you draw of the process is labelled as your synthesis, not as a reproduction of the source
- You know where your institutional data storage requirements are written down, because the source does not reproduce them
What to carry forward
- The material states the thesis process twice — eleven running items and ten numbered headings — and never reconciles them.
- Work to the ten numbered headings. They carry the detailed guidance and they cover design, ethics and storage.
- Three steps live in only one enumeration: Review the Research Topic and Store data in the headings, State your specific aim or objective in the list. Keep all three.
- Against the seven-stage model, the ten-step version adds design, ethics and storage, and loses the explicit conceptual framework stage.
- If you quote the process, quote one version and name the other. Smoothing the mismatch over is the one move that will not survive scrutiny.
Frequently asked questions
Is it ten steps or eleven?
Both numbers are in the supplied teaching source. The running list in the prose yields eleven items; the numbered section headings that organise the detailed guidance give ten. The headings are the better structure to work to, because they are what the material's substantive content is written under.
Why does 'Store data' only appear in one version?
The source does not explain it. Storage has a numbered heading and a short section of its own, but no counterpart in the running list, which finishes at writing the report. Plan for it regardless — it is a genuine step, and the material notes that institutional requirements apply to it.
Which model should I use, the seven-stage or the ten-step?
For a thesis or an examined project, use the ten-step model: it names design, ethics clearance and storage, none of which appear in the seven-stage list. The seven-stage model remains useful as a compact diagnostic for locating yourself in the overall process.
Can I just merge the two lists into one clean sequence?
You can produce a working sequence for your own plan, but label it as your synthesis rather than presenting it as the source's model. The mismatch is in the material itself, and an examiner familiar with it will expect you to have noticed rather than tidied it away.
Where does the conceptual framework fit in the ten-step model?
It has no numbered step. The seven-stage model names establishing the conceptual framework explicitly at stage three; in the ten-step version the framework material sits inside the literature step. If you are working to the ten steps, make sure the framework is an explicit deliverable of step three.
Does the ten-step model allow iteration?
The same body of teaching material describes the research process as an ever-changing process rather than a fixed set of steps, and says your questions will evolve as evidence accumulates. That qualification is attached to the seven-stage statement, but nothing suggests the longer version is meant to be more rigid.
References and source attribution
- O'Leary, Z. 2017, The Essential Guide to Doing Your Research Project, 3rd ed., Sage Publications, London (the topic-development material also cites the 2010 edition, Doing your research project).
- Naoum, S. G. 2013, Dissertation Research & Writing for Construction Students, 3rd ed., Routledge (set as reading on topic selection, pp. 9–11).
- Bryman, A. 2016, Social Research Methods, 5th ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford (the topic-development references also list the 2012 4th ed.).
- The supplied teaching source: master's-level teaching material on developing a research topic, supplied as study notes and accompanying slides. Both enumerations of the process are reproduced from that material.
Suggested questions for Ask KEVOS
- What are the ten steps of the research process in this library's source material?
- Why do the ten-step and eleven-item versions of the process disagree?
- How does the ten-step thesis model compare with the seven-stage model?
- Which steps appear in only one of the two enumerations?
- How should I describe the research process in my methodology chapter given the mismatch?