XzhLoongSkills/skills/academic/research-skills/research-proposal/references/DOMAIN_TEMPLATES.md

Domain-Specific Templates

Guidance for adapting research proposals to different academic domains.

---

Overview: Domain Differences

Dimension	STEM	Humanities	Social Sciences
Length	Shorter (2,000-3,000)	Longer (3,000-10,000)	Medium (2,500-4,000)
Focus	Methodology, experiments	Theory, interpretation	Methods + theory
Hypothesis	Explicit, testable	Research questions	Both used
Literature	Recent (5 years)	Broader historical	Mix
Citations	APA	MLA/Chicago	APA/Chicago
Voice	Passive preferred	Active acceptable	Mixed

---

STEM Domain (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics)

Structural Emphasis

STEM Proposal Structure (~2,500 words)

Abstract                    150-200 words   (6%)
Introduction               400-500 words   (18%)
  - Background/Motivation  150 words
  - Problem Statement      150 words
  - Objectives/Hypotheses  100 words
Literature Review          400-500 words   (18%)
  - State of the Art       300 words
  - Research Gap           200 words
Methodology                600-800 words   (28%)    ← HEAVY EMPHASIS
  - Research Design        150 words
  - Materials/Equipment    150 words
  - Experimental Protocol  200 words
  - Data Analysis          200 words
  - Validation             100 words
Timeline                   200 words       (8%)
Expected Outcomes          300 words       (12%)
  - Scientific Contribution 150 words
  - Publications Plan       100 words
  - Potential Applications  50 words
References                 30-50 citations

Key Characteristics

Hypothesis-Driven

• State clear, testable hypotheses
• Define variables (independent, dependent, controlled)

• Specify expected outcomes

  **Hypothesis 1:** [Independent variable] will [effect] [dependent variable]
  when [conditions].
  
  **Hypothesis 2:** The proposed [method] will achieve [metric] performance
  compared to [baseline].
  

Technical Precision

• Exact specifications for equipment/software
• Detailed protocols with parameters
• Quantifiable success metrics

Preliminary Results

• If available, include pilot study data
• Demonstrate feasibility
• Show you have necessary skills

Methodology Section Template (STEM)

## 3. Methodology

### 3.1 Research Design

This research employs a [quantitative/experimental/computational] approach
to investigate [research questions]. The study comprises [N] phases:
[Phase 1], [Phase 2], and [Phase 3].

### 3.2 Materials and Equipment

The following resources are required:
- **Hardware**: [specific equipment, models, specifications]
- **Software**: [programs, versions, licenses]
- **Materials**: [reagents, samples, datasets]
- **Facilities**: [lab access, computing resources]

### 3.3 Experimental Protocol

**Phase 1: [Name]**
1. [Step 1 with parameters]
2. [Step 2 with parameters]
3. [Expected output]

**Phase 2: [Name]**
[Similar detailed steps]

### 3.4 Data Analysis

Data will be analyzed using [software/method]. Specifically:
- [Analysis 1]: [technique] to measure [metric]
- [Analysis 2]: [statistical test] to evaluate [hypothesis]

Statistical significance will be set at p < 0.05.

### 3.5 Validation

To ensure validity:
- [Validation method 1]
- [Validation method 2]
- Comparison with [benchmark/baseline]

STEM-Specific Language

Technical verbs:

• analyze, characterize, synthesize, optimize
• validate, calibrate, quantify, measure
• implement, develop, deploy, integrate

Precision phrases:

• "with a precision of ±X%"
• "under controlled conditions of [parameters]"
• "achieving [metric] > [threshold]"
• "statistically significant at p < 0.05"

---

Humanities Domain (History, Philosophy, Literature, Languages, Arts)

Structural Emphasis

Humanities Proposal Structure (~4,000 words)

Abstract                    250-300 words   (7%)
Introduction               600-800 words   (18%)
  - Context/Significance   300 words
  - Central Argument       200 words
  - Research Questions     200 words
Literature Review          1000-1500 words (30%)    ← HEAVY EMPHASIS
  - Theoretical Framework  400 words
  - Historiography/Field   600 words
  - Positioning            300 words
Methodology                400-600 words   (12%)
  - Sources/Archives       200 words
  - Analytical Approach    200 words
  - Interpretive Framework 200 words
Chapter Outline            400-500 words   (12%)    ← UNIQUE TO HUMANITIES
Timeline                   200-300 words   (6%)
Significance               400-500 words   (12%)
References                 50-100 citations

Key Characteristics

Argument-Driven

• Central thesis or argument
• Research questions, not hypotheses

• Interpretive rather than predictive

  **Central Argument:**
  This dissertation argues that [thesis statement]. By examining [sources/texts],
  this research demonstrates how [phenomenon] reveals [insight] about [broader
  significance].
  
  **Research Questions:**
  1. How did [historical actors/texts] [action/represent] [phenomenon]?
  2. What [factors/discourses] shaped [development/interpretation]?
  3. In what ways does [case study] illuminate [broader theoretical issue]?
  

Theoretical Sophistication

• Engage with major theorists
• Position within intellectual traditions
• Critical analysis of theory itself

Source-Based

• Primary sources (archives, texts, artifacts)
• Language requirements
• Access and travel considerations

Literature Review Template (Humanities)

## 2. Literature Review

### 2.1 Theoretical Framework

This research draws on [theoretical tradition] as articulated by [key
theorists]. [Theorist A]'s concept of [concept] provides a framework for
understanding [aspect of research]. However, [Theorist B] offers a
complementary perspective, arguing that [alternative view].

Building on these foundations, this study employs [specific theoretical
lens] to analyze [research focus]. This approach is particularly suited
to [justification] because [reasons].

### 2.2 Historiography / State of the Field

Scholarly attention to [topic] has evolved considerably over the past
[timeframe]. Early studies, such as [Author (Year)], focused primarily
on [aspect], establishing [finding/interpretation].

The field underwent significant transformation with [Author (Year)]'s
influential work, which challenged [previous assumption] by demonstrating
[new insight]. Subsequent scholars have built on this foundation,
exploring [development 1], [development 2], and [development 3].

More recently, scholars have turned to [new approach/topic]. [Author
(Year)] examines [specific focus], while [Author (Year)] investigates
[related area]. These studies reveal [emerging themes/debates].

### 2.3 Research Gap and Positioning

Despite this rich body of scholarship, significant questions remain
unexplored. First, [gap 1]. Second, [gap 2]. Third, [gap 3].

This dissertation addresses these gaps by [approach]. Unlike previous
studies that [limitation], this research [differentiation]. By [method],
this study offers new insights into [contribution].

Chapter Outline (Unique to Humanities)

## Provisional Chapter Outline

**Chapter 1: Introduction**
Introduces the central argument, contextualizes the study, and outlines
the dissertation structure.

**Chapter 2: [Thematic Title]**
Examines [topic/period/text] to establish [foundational argument].
Primary sources: [list key sources]

**Chapter 3: [Thematic Title]**
Analyzes [topic/period/text] to demonstrate [developing argument].
Primary sources: [list key sources]

**Chapter 4: [Thematic Title]**
Investigates [topic/period/text] to explore [complicating factors].
Primary sources: [list key sources]

**Chapter 5: Conclusion**
Synthesizes findings, articulates contributions, and suggests directions
for future research.

Humanities-Specific Language

Interpretive verbs:

• argue, contend, posit, suggest
• examine, analyze, interrogate, explore
• illuminate, reveal, demonstrate, trace

Analytical phrases:

• "close reading of [text] reveals..."
• "situating [phenomenon] within [context] allows us to see..."
• "this analysis complicates the prevailing narrative by..."
• "reading [source] against [context] demonstrates..."

---

Social Sciences Domain (Sociology, Psychology, Economics, Political Science)

Structural Emphasis

Social Sciences Proposal Structure (~3,000 words)

Abstract                    200-250 words   (7%)
Introduction               500-600 words   (18%)
  - Background             200 words
  - Problem Statement      200 words
  - Research Questions     150 words
Literature Review          600-800 words   (22%)
  - Theoretical Framework  250 words
  - Empirical Review       350 words
  - Research Gap           200 words
Methodology                600-800 words   (25%)    ← BALANCED EMPHASIS
  - Research Design        150 words
  - Sampling/Participants  150 words
  - Data Collection        200 words
  - Data Analysis          200 words
  - Ethics                 100 words
Timeline                   200-250 words   (7%)
Significance               300-400 words   (12%)
References                 40-60 citations

Key Characteristics

Question-Driven with Theoretical Grounding

• Clear research questions
• Hypotheses when appropriate (quantitative)

• Theory guides but doesn't dominate

  **Research Questions:**
  1. What is the relationship between [variable A] and [variable B] among
  [population]?
  2. How do [participants] experience/perceive [phenomenon]?
  3. To what extent does [factor] mediate/moderate the relationship between
  [X] and [Y]?
  
  **Hypotheses (if quantitative):**
  H1: [Variable A] is positively/negatively associated with [Variable B].
  H2: The relationship between [X] and [Y] is moderated by [Z].
  

Mixed Methods Common

• Often combines quantitative and qualitative
• Sequential or concurrent designs
• Triangulation valued

Ethical Emphasis

• Human subjects considerations
• IRB/ethics approval process
• Informed consent, confidentiality

Methodology Template (Social Sciences)

## 3. Methodology

### 3.1 Research Design

This study employs a [quantitative/qualitative/mixed methods] design.
[If mixed: The study follows a [sequential/concurrent] [explanatory/
exploratory] design, beginning with [phase 1] followed by [phase 2].]

The [design type] approach is appropriate because [justification based
on research questions].

### 3.2 Participants and Sampling

**Population:** [Define target population]

**Sample:** [N] participants will be recruited using [sampling strategy].
Inclusion criteria: [list]. Exclusion criteria: [list].

**Sample size justification:** Based on [power analysis/saturation
principle/similar studies], [N] participants are required to [detect
effect/achieve saturation].

### 3.3 Data Collection

**Quantitative:** [Surveys/experiments/secondary data]
- Instrument: [name/description]
- Variables measured: [list with operationalization]
- Procedure: [step-by-step process]

**Qualitative:** [Interviews/focus groups/observation]
- Protocol: [semi-structured/structured, duration]
- Topics covered: [list]
- Recording: [audio/video, transcription process]

### 3.4 Data Analysis

**Quantitative analysis:**
- Descriptive statistics for [variables]
- [Statistical test] to examine [hypothesis 1]
- [Statistical test] to examine [hypothesis 2]
- Software: [SPSS/R/Stata]

**Qualitative analysis:**
- [Thematic/content/discourse] analysis
- Coding approach: [inductive/deductive/hybrid]
- Software: [NVivo/Atlas.ti/manual]

### 3.5 Ethical Considerations

This research will be conducted in accordance with [ethical guidelines].
IRB/Ethics approval will be obtained from [institution].

Key considerations:
- **Informed consent:** [process]
- **Confidentiality:** [data storage, anonymization]
- **Potential risks:** [identified risks and mitigation]
- **Vulnerable populations:** [if applicable, special protections]

Social Sciences-Specific Language

Research verbs:

• investigate, examine, explore, assess
• compare, evaluate, measure, test
• understand, interpret, explain, predict

Methodological phrases:

• "using a [design] approach"
• "drawing on a [sampling] sample of [N] participants"
• "employing [analysis method] to identify..."
• "controlling for [confounding variables]"

---

Citation Style Quick Reference

APA (7th Edition) - STEM, Social Sciences

Journal article:

Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Year). Title of article. Journal Name,
Volume(Issue), pages. https://doi.org/xxxxx

Book:

Author, A. A. (Year). Title of work: Subtitle. Publisher.

In-text:

• (Author, Year) or Author (Year)
• (Author et al., Year) for 3+ authors

MLA (9th Edition) - Humanities (Literature, Languages)

Journal article:

Author Last, First. "Article Title." Journal Name, vol. #, no. #, Year,
pp. #-#.

Book:

Author Last, First. Title of Book. Publisher, Year.

In-text:

• (Author page) or Author argues "quote" (page)

Chicago (17th Edition) - History, some Humanities

Notes-Bibliography (Humanities):

Footnote: Author First Last, Title of Book (Place: Publisher, Year), page.
Bibliography: Author Last, First. Title of Book. Place: Publisher, Year.

Author-Date (Sciences):

(Author Year, page)
Author, First. Year. Title. Place: Publisher.

---

Language Output Considerations

English Proposals

• Maintain consistent British or American English
• Formal academic register
• Active voice acceptable, passive common in methods
• "We" for multi-author, "This study" for distance

Chinese Proposals (中文)

学术语体特征:

• 使用书面语，避免口语化表达
• 适当使用四字成语和学术术语
• 保持客观语气，避免主观判断词
• 使用"本研究"而非"我"

常用学术表达:

功能	中文表达
引出背景	随着...的发展，...日益受到关注
指出问题	然而，...仍存在以下问题
陈述目标	本研究旨在...；本文拟探讨...
方法说明	采用...方法，对...进行分析
预期贡献	研究结果将有助于...；有望为...提供参考

参考文献格式 (GB/T 7714-2015):

期刊: 作者. 题名[J]. 刊名, 年, 卷(期): 起止页码.
专著: 作者. 书名[M]. 出版地: 出版者, 出版年.

---

Domain-Specific Checklist

STEM Checklist

• Hypotheses are specific and testable
• Variables clearly defined and operationalized
• Methods section includes specific parameters
• Equipment/software versions specified
• Validation approach described
• Preliminary data included (if available)
• Realistic within lab capabilities

Humanities Checklist

• Central argument clearly stated
• Theoretical framework articulated
• Engagement with key scholars demonstrated
• Primary sources identified and accessible
• Chapter outline provided
• Language requirements addressed
• Archive/field access confirmed

Social Sciences Checklist

• Research questions linked to theory
• Sampling strategy justified
• Instruments described or referenced
• Analysis appropriate for question type
• Ethics considerations addressed
• Limitations acknowledged
• Practical significance articulated