Dissertation Outline Sample: An Undergraduate Empirical Psychology Study

Model Answer

This outline shows how to plan an undergraduate empirical psychology dissertation before you start writing. It is built around the standard structure used across UK psychology departments — Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion and Conclusion — for a report of around 8,000 words. Read through each chapter below, note the specific sub-sections your own study needs to cover, and use the indicative word counts as a starting guide rather than a strict rule; a heavily quantitative design may need a longer Results chapter than one shown here. Revisit this outline after your literature search, again once your ethics application is approved, and once more after data collection, so it always reflects the study you are actually running.

Chapter 1: Introduction (with Literature Review)

Introduces the topic, reviews the relevant theory and prior empirical findings, and builds a clear case for the present study, ending with your research question and hypotheses. Examiners read this chapter to judge how well you understand the field, so precision matters more than breadth.

What to cover:

• Broad introduction to the topic and why it matters, narrowing to your specific focus
• Theoretical framework(s) relevant to the topic, explained and compared
• Critical review of key prior studies, organised by theme rather than one by one
• Identification of gaps, inconsistencies or unanswered questions in existing research
• The present study’s aim, framed explicitly as addressing one of those gaps
• Formally stated hypotheses (H1, H2, and so on) or research questions
• A short paragraph explaining how sources were identified (databases, search terms, key authors)
• Operational definitions of each variable, stated clearly enough to be measured

Suggested flow: Move from broad context to theory, then to the specific studies most relevant to your design, and close with the gap, aim and hypotheses in that order.

Common pitfall: Describing studies one after another instead of grouping them by theme, which reads as a list rather than a critical argument.

Indicative length: ~2,600 words  |  Indicative references/sources: 20–28

Chapter 2: Method

Describes exactly what you did and who took part, in enough detail that another researcher could repeat your study. A well-written Method chapter should let a stranger replicate your study exactly, with no follow-up questions needed.

What to cover:

• Design (for example between-subjects, correlational, experimental) and variables measured
• Participants: sample size, recruitment method, and inclusion/exclusion criteria
• Materials and measures, including reliability or validity evidence for each questionnaire or task
• Procedure: a step-by-step account of what participants experienced, in order
• Ethical approval, consent procedures and debriefing
• Any pilot testing carried out beforehand
• A power analysis or clear justification for the chosen sample size
• Details of how anonymity and data storage were handled

Suggested flow: Present Design, then Participants, then Materials, then Procedure, then Ethics, in that fixed order, since this is the sequence most psychology markers expect.

Common pitfall: Omitting enough procedural detail for replication, or failing to justify the chosen sample size.

Indicative length: ~1,400 words  |  Indicative references/sources: 6–10

Chapter 3: Results

Reports what the data showed, using appropriate statistics and tables, without yet interpreting what it means. Every number reported here should be traceable back to a specific variable defined in your Method chapter.

What to cover:

• Data screening: missing data, outliers and assumption checks
• Descriptive statistics for all key variables (means, standard deviations or frequencies)
• Inferential test(s) matched to your design and hypotheses, reported in APA style
• Effect sizes reported alongside significance values
• A results table and/or figure summarising the key comparison
• A clear statement of whether each hypothesis was supported
• A brief statement confirming whether statistical assumptions were met, and what was done if they were not
• Exact APA-style statistics reported for every test, including degrees of freedom

Suggested flow: Report assumption checks first, then descriptive statistics, then each inferential test in the order your hypotheses were introduced.

Common pitfall: Interpreting findings in this chapter rather than saving interpretation for the Discussion.

Indicative length: ~1,200 words  |  Indicative references/sources: 3–6

Chapter 4: Discussion

Explains what the results mean, how they relate to the literature reviewed earlier, and what they contribute to the field. A strong Discussion returns to every hypothesis by name and explains, in plain language, what the result actually means.

What to cover:

• Restatement of the key findings in plain language, linked back to each hypothesis
• Comparison with the specific studies discussed in the Introduction
• Theoretical implications: what the findings add to or challenge in existing models
• Practical or applied implications, where relevant
• Limitations of the design, sample or measures used
• Directions for future research suggested by the findings
• A short paragraph reconciling your findings with any studies that found something different
• A distinction between statistical significance and practical or clinical significance

Suggested flow: Open with a plain-language summary of what was found, work hypothesis by hypothesis comparing your results to the literature, then close with implications, limitations and future research.

Common pitfall: Introducing brand-new literature here instead of returning to sources already reviewed in the Introduction.

Indicative length: ~2,200 words  |  Indicative references/sources: 10–15

Chapter 5: Conclusion

Closes the dissertation with a short, confident summary of what was found and why it matters. Because this chapter is short, every sentence should earn its place — cut anything that repeats the Discussion.

What to cover:

• A one-paragraph summary of the study’s aim and key finding
• A statement of the study’s contribution, however modest
• A final practical takeaway for the field or for practitioners
• A closing statement that reinforces the significance of the topic
• A one-sentence reminder of the study’s aim, for a reader who skips straight to the end
• No new limitations or literature introduced at this late stage

Suggested flow: State the aim, the key finding, the contribution and a closing thought, each in a single sentence.

Common pitfall: Ending on a limitation rather than a confident, clear statement of what the study contributes.

Indicative length: ~600 words  |  Indicative references/sources: 0–2

How the Chapters Fit Together

Each hypothesis stated at the end of your Introduction should map onto a specific analysis reported in Results, which is then interpreted, in turn, in Discussion. Examiners routinely check this chain — a hypothesis with no corresponding result, or a Discussion point with no basis in the data, is one of the most common reasons marks are lost in empirical dissertations, so check the links each time you redraft.

Chapter Word Count Summary

Milestones

• Weeks 1–2: agree your research question, hypotheses and this outline with your supervisor
• Weeks 3–5: complete the literature search and draft the Introduction
• Week 6: submit your ethics application
• Weeks 7–9: collect data once ethical approval is granted
• Weeks 10–11: analyse data and draft Results
• Weeks 12–13: draft Discussion and Conclusion
• Week 14: submit a full draft for supervisor feedback
• Week 15: revise, format and submit

Further reading: see our dissertation proposal writing guidance and our dissertation writing service for support with each chapter.