The answer to the question depends on what say you have in the process. for example, if you are asking about publishing in a journal, the answer will depend on the journal format, whether they have a separate result and discussion section or if its clubbed. However, if you are talking about compiling a thesis, most universities give the applicant a free hand as to how they want to format their thesis.

I think in Germany at universities there is always a separation between results and discussions of theses.

I think that don't exist the better. Depend of the nature, objectives and extension of the research. For example, If your scientific research has a number of hypotheses and the results are consistent with the hypotheses I do not see why separate the two sections because each hypothesis requires convincing explanations and they shall be presented after the presentation of them. Now If the number of hypotheses is large and your discussion is large too I think that can to separate for better discussion and understanding. This my opinion take into account the nature of research. However, my personal opinion is not separate this sections. I prefer to write in the following form: (1) Presentation of the hypotheses; (2) Presentation of the results in the research; (3) Discussion of the results with based in the National or International Literature of the Scientific Area / My opinion as researcher.

Dear sir,

Hope you are doing fine.I think to have separate results and discussion or combined one depends on the work you carried out and how important is it for discussion. In many cases we may have number of further conclusions depending upon on the results we obtained in this case we require a separate discussion section and in this you can elaborate the your discussions in a separate section.on the other hand if you have very clear conclusions from results there u can combine both results and discussion. This is my personal view.

If the results section is restrained to the factual results then their position within the existing literature and their implications for practice require their own chapter. The first is purely factual, while the second gives space to make a case / set out a line of an arguement. Mixing up the two would weaken both. Based on the individual case the strength of the results might be considered in either.

I mostly club them (Results and Discussion) together. Whether to club them together or keep as separate sections depend on the type of results and extent of discussion. If the results need extended discussion with lot of explanations, then it is needed to have a separate Discussion section.

Depends on the type of research. I prefer a combined Results and Discussion for qualitative research, particular that which discusses the content of text and speech, but I prefer separate sections for quantitative analyses.

Dear Gajanan -

It purely depends on your research structure and approach.

Quantitative research usually has Findings and Discussions under one section. Finally conclusion and recommendations as another section.

Qualitative research typically has findings as one section, followed by analysis and discussion, and then conclusion.

Good Luck.

Shabbir

In my view, it is great to separate them. This allows the reader to clearly identify what was found against the literature and author's contributions. However, as Juan Francisco Garcia Martin pointed out, some studies require discussion to go together with the results.

I went through the similar dilemma and took different approaches to different types of documents. In my thesis, I am separating findings from the discussion in order to make congruent to the thesis structure. However, when presenting a Journal paper for the first and exploratory study, I recognised that separating them was leading to a hard reading. This was primarily because the exploratory study had an evaluative purpose based on quality indicators taken from the literature review. It was difficult then to present findings that were directly related to the literature without referring and discussing it. I do believe it depends on each piece of work and it worth trying (or drafting) both approaches to see which leads to better reading and understanding of the content.

The goal of every researcher is to communicate his/her findings and discuss them in a way that readers will understand with some ease. To do this is imperative to make sure every section stands out clearly and written to convey some information. While I do think it depends on your writing and communication skills, separating the results and discussion may be a better option. Ideally you want people to go through your study without having to struggle. I have done a quantitative survey research paper and realized that it would have been messy if I combined the results with discussion because I had to match my findings with specific research questions/hypotheses. I found this hard to understand myself. I guess readers would have found it hard too if I didn't separate them. Again I do believe if you have very good writing skills, you can combine them.

The common practice is to have result section separate from the discussion. However, I have seen in some case both sections merged. This depend on the journal or the writing guideline for place where the paper will be published.

I prefer to have Results and Discussion as one section.

Conclusions is another section on its own

It depends on the journal requirement. In my opinion, I prefer results and discussion in one section.

It depends on the kind of your work and also on the journal where your paper will be published . But in my view It should be separate as the reader may understand that easily.

It is much better that these be separate sections.

I peer-review several papers a year for multiple journals. In my experience, the papers that combine "findings and discussion" usually leave the discussion section as superficial.

Instead, the discussion should be the most important part of your study in which you show why your findings are important and how professionals can use them.

Here is a research study outline I recommend:

Conference Paper Research Study Manuscript Outline

Most of the papers I've seen, results and discussion are combined as one section for thesis and dissertation even in publishable format of journals. I believe, it would be easy for some researchers to present the findings of the study if they will provide immediately the interpretation regarding the reasons behind the results and comparing it with the previous findings of the studies as supporting literature. For the continuity of thoughts and ideas, readers would be guided about the subject or the problem being discussed. The statistical analysis, interpretation and discussion of results and supporting literature are joined together to make coherence.

It is better to separate the results and the discussion to allow the researcher to discuss holistically the results rather than having a segmented discussion per result. Combining them might limit strong and significant points of the article.

I belief that for short communivction papers (those that are 12 or less pages) should have the 2 sections combined as a rule. However, for full research papers, the rule is normally separation of the 2 sections, unless it focus on just one long issue.

Check this link, it may be beneficial;

https://www.enago.com/academy/discussion-conclusion-know-difference-drafting-manuscript/