personal reflection on research paper

Guide on How to Write a Reflection Paper with Free Tips and Example

A reflection paper is a very common type of paper among college students. Almost any subject you enroll in requires you to express your opinion on certain matters. In this article, we will explain how to write a reflection paper and provide examples and useful tips to make the essay writing process easier.

Reflection papers should have an academic tone yet be personal and subjective. In this paper, you should analyze and reflect upon how an experience, academic task, article, or lecture shaped your perception and thoughts on a subject.

Here is what you need to know about writing an effective critical reflection paper. Stick around until the end of our guide to get some useful writing tips from the writing team at EssayPro — a research paper writing service

What Is a Reflection Paper

A reflection paper is a type of paper that requires you to write your opinion on a topic, supporting it with your observations and personal experiences. As opposed to presenting your reader with the views of other academics and writers, in this essay, you get an opportunity to write your point of view—and the best part is that there is no wrong answer. It is YOUR opinion, and it is your job to express your thoughts in a manner that will be understandable and clear for all readers that will read your paper. The topic range is endless. Here are some examples: whether or not you think aliens exist, your favorite TV show, or your opinion on the outcome of WWII. You can write about pretty much anything.

There are three types of reflection paper; depending on which one you end up with, the tone you write with can be slightly different. The first type is the educational reflective paper. Here your job is to write feedback about a book, movie, or seminar you attended—in a manner that teaches the reader about it. The second is the professional paper. Usually, it is written by people who study or work in education or psychology. For example, it can be a reflection of someone’s behavior. And the last is the personal type, which explores your thoughts and feelings about an individual subject.

However, reflection paper writing will stop eventually with one very important final paper to write - your resume. This is where you will need to reflect on your entire life leading up to that moment. To learn how to list education on resume perfectly, follow the link on our dissertation writing services .

Unlock the potential of your thoughts with EssayPro . Order a reflection paper and explore a range of other academic services tailored to your needs. Dive deep into your experiences, analyze them with expert guidance, and turn your insights into an impactful reflection paper.

Free Reflection Paper Example

Now that we went over all of the essentials about a reflection paper and how to approach it, we would like to show you some examples that will definitely help you with getting started on your paper.

Reflection Paper Format

Reflection papers typically do not follow any specific format. Since it is your opinion, professors usually let you handle them in any comfortable way. It is best to write your thoughts freely, without guideline constraints. If a personal reflection paper was assigned to you, the format of your paper might depend on the criteria set by your professor. College reflection papers (also known as reflection essays) can typically range from about 400-800 words in length.

Here’s how we can suggest you format your reflection paper:

How to Start a Reflection Paper

The first thing to do when beginning to work on a reflection essay is to read your article thoroughly while taking notes. Whether you are reflecting on, for example, an activity, book/newspaper, or academic essay, you want to highlight key ideas and concepts.

You can start writing your reflection paper by summarizing the main concept of your notes to see if your essay includes all the information needed for your readers. It is helpful to add charts, diagrams, and lists to deliver your ideas to the audience in a better fashion.

After you have finished reading your article, it’s time to brainstorm. We’ve got a simple brainstorming technique for writing reflection papers. Just answer some of the basic questions below:

• How did the article affect you?
• How does this article catch the reader’s attention (or does it all)?
• Has the article changed your mind about something? If so, explain how.
• Has the article left you with any questions?
• Were there any unaddressed critical issues that didn’t appear in the article?
• Does the article relate to anything from your past reading experiences?
• Does the article agree with any of your past reading experiences?

Here are some reflection paper topic examples for you to keep in mind before preparing to write your own:

• How my views on rap music have changed over time
• My reflection and interpretation of Moby Dick by Herman Melville
• Why my theory about the size of the universe has changed over time
• How my observations for clinical psychological studies have developed in the last year

The result of your brainstorming should be a written outline of the contents of your future paper. Do not skip this step, as it will ensure that your essay will have a proper flow and appropriate organization.

Another good way to organize your ideas is to write them down in a 3-column chart or table.

Do you want your task look awesome?

If you would like your reflection paper to look professional, feel free to check out one of our articles on how to format MLA, APA or Chicago style

Writing a Reflection Paper Outline

Reflection paper should contain few key elements:

Introduction

Your introduction should specify what you’re reflecting upon. Make sure that your thesis informs your reader about your general position, or opinion, toward your subject.

• State what you are analyzing: a passage, a lecture, an academic article, an experience, etc...)
• Briefly summarize the work.
• Write a thesis statement stating how your subject has affected you.

One way you can start your thesis is to write:

Example: “After reading/experiencing (your chosen topic), I gained the knowledge of…”

Body Paragraphs

The body paragraphs should examine your ideas and experiences in context to your topic. Make sure each new body paragraph starts with a topic sentence.

Your reflection may include quotes and passages if you are writing about a book or an academic paper. They give your reader a point of reference to fully understand your feedback. Feel free to describe what you saw, what you heard, and how you felt.

Example: “I saw many people participating in our weight experiment. The atmosphere felt nervous yet inspiring. I was amazed by the excitement of the event.”

As with any conclusion, you should summarize what you’ve learned from the experience. Next, tell the reader how your newfound knowledge has affected your understanding of the subject in general. Finally, describe the feeling and overall lesson you had from the reading or experience.

There are a few good ways to conclude a reflection paper:

• Tie all the ideas from your body paragraphs together, and generalize the major insights you’ve experienced.
• Restate your thesis and summarize the content of your paper.

We have a separate blog post dedicated to writing a great conclusion. Be sure to check it out for an in-depth look at how to make a good final impression on your reader.

Need a hand? Get help from our writers. Edit, proofread or buy essay .

How to Write a Reflection Paper: Step-by-Step Guide

Step 1: create a main theme.

After you choose your topic, write a short summary about what you have learned about your experience with that topic. Then, let readers know how you feel about your case — and be honest. Chances are that your readers will likely be able to relate to your opinion or at least the way you form your perspective, which will help them better understand your reflection.

For example: After watching a TEDx episode on Wim Hof, I was able to reevaluate my preconceived notions about the negative effects of cold exposure.

Step 2: Brainstorm Ideas and Experiences You’ve Had Related to Your Topic

You can write down specific quotes, predispositions you have, things that influenced you, or anything memorable. Be personal and explain, in simple words, how you felt.

For example: • A lot of people think that even a small amount of carbohydrates will make people gain weight • A specific moment when I struggled with an excess weight where I avoided carbohydrates entirely • The consequences of my actions that gave rise to my research • The evidence and studies of nutritional science that claim carbohydrates alone are to blame for making people obese • My new experience with having a healthy diet with a well-balanced intake of nutrients • The influence of other people’s perceptions on the harm of carbohydrates, and the role their influence has had on me • New ideas I’ve created as a result of my shift in perspective

Step 3: Analyze How and Why These Ideas and Experiences Have Affected Your Interpretation of Your Theme

Pick an idea or experience you had from the last step, and analyze it further. Then, write your reasoning for agreeing or disagreeing with it.

For example, Idea: I was raised to think that carbohydrates make people gain weight.

Analysis: Most people think that if they eat any carbohydrates, such as bread, cereal, and sugar, they will gain weight. I believe in this misconception to such a great extent that I avoided carbohydrates entirely. As a result, my blood glucose levels were very low. I needed to do a lot of research to overcome my beliefs finally. Afterward, I adopted the philosophy of “everything in moderation” as a key to a healthy lifestyle.

For example: Idea: I was brought up to think that carbohydrates make people gain weight. Analysis: Most people think that if they eat any carbohydrates, such as bread, cereal, and sugar, they will gain weight. I believe in this misconception to such a great extent that I avoided carbohydrates entirely. As a result, my blood glucose levels were very low. I needed to do a lot of my own research to finally overcome my beliefs. After, I adopted the philosophy of “everything in moderation” as a key for having a healthy lifestyle.

Step 4: Make Connections Between Your Observations, Experiences, and Opinions

Try to connect your ideas and insights to form a cohesive picture for your theme. You can also try to recognize and break down your assumptions, which you may challenge in the future.

There are some subjects for reflection papers that are most commonly written about. They include:

• Book – Start by writing some information about the author’s biography and summarize the plot—without revealing the ending to keep your readers interested. Make sure to include the names of the characters, the main themes, and any issues mentioned in the book. Finally, express your thoughts and reflect on the book itself.
• Course – Including the course name and description is a good place to start. Then, you can write about the course flow, explain why you took this course, and tell readers what you learned from it. Since it is a reflection paper, express your opinion, supporting it with examples from the course.
• Project – The structure for a reflection paper about a project has identical guidelines to that of a course. One of the things you might want to add would be the pros and cons of the course. Also, mention some changes you might want to see, and evaluate how relevant the skills you acquired are to real life.
• Interview – First, introduce the person and briefly mention the discussion. Touch on the main points, controversies, and your opinion of that person.

Writing Tips

Everyone has their style of writing a reflective essay – and that's the beauty of it; you have plenty of leeway with this type of paper – but there are still a few tips everyone should incorporate.

Before you start your piece, read some examples of other papers; they will likely help you better understand what they are and how to approach yours. When picking your subject, try to write about something unusual and memorable — it is more likely to capture your readers' attention. Never write the whole essay at once. Space out the time slots when you work on your reflection paper to at least a day apart. This will allow your brain to generate new thoughts and reflections.

• Short and Sweet – Most reflection papers are between 250 and 750 words. Don't go off on tangents. Only include relevant information.
• Clear and Concise – Make your paper as clear and concise as possible. Use a strong thesis statement so your essay can follow it with the same strength.
• Maintain the Right Tone – Use a professional and academic tone—even though the writing is personal.
• Cite Your Sources – Try to cite authoritative sources and experts to back up your personal opinions.
• Proofreading – Not only should you proofread for spelling and grammatical errors, but you should proofread to focus on your organization as well. Answer the question presented in the introduction.

'If only someone could write my essay !' you may think. Ask for help our professional writers in case you need it.

Do You Need a Well-Written Reflection Paper?

Then send us your assignment requirements and we'll get it done in no time.

How To Write A Reflection Paper?

How to start a reflection paper, how long should a reflection paper be, related articles.

Personal Reflection Sample: preparing a Research Report for ACCA

The skill and learning statement includes the implications of interactions with mentor, an analysis of the extent to which research questions have been answered, a brief analysis of interpersonal and communication skills and their relevance to the research, as well as the contribution of the research experience to my professional and personal development.

1.      Experiences of interactions with mentor

I had chances of meeting my project mentor three times and obtained practical support regarding various aspects of the work during these meetings. Our first meeting was mainly dedicated to clarifying our expectations from the research experience and the discussions took place related to the issues of selection of the research approach and formulation of research questions and objectives.

By the time I had a meeting with my mentor for the second time Introduction and Information gathering chapters of the work have been completed and I received detailed feedback for these chapters of the research. Also, discussions were held about data analysis and presentation associated with the project.

During the final meeting with my mentor the overall work has been scrutinised and a set of specific points have been mentioned by my mentor. Specifically, my mentor raised a point that my discussions of research findings lacked depth and scale. Then, these points have been addressed and the final draft of the Research Report was completed.

I found advices given by my mentor very helpful in terms of increasing the quality of my Research Report and equipping me with knowledge of effectively conducting similar studies in the future in general. Moreover, my Project Mentor was not only highlighting the shortages that were associated with my project, but also was giving detailed explanations why these changes were desirable in a passionate manner.

Furthermore, I found these three sessions with my mentor to be highly motivational and informative experience because they have increased the level of my personal interest in conducting businesses studies. Prior to conducting the Research Report and having discussions with my mentor I was assuming conducting analytical business studies to be a rather boring experience.

However, thanks to my mentor I learned to appreciate the importance of analysing a business case in terms of identifying a current strategic and financial position of a business, and formulating the ways of identifying further strategic options available to the business.

2.      The extent to which research questions have been answered

Answering the research questions in my Research Report were directly related to the quality of secondary data, and the choice of methodology. Therefore, these issues were approached effectively by critically assessing the validity of the sources of secondary data and assessing alternative choices of methodology. Moreover, my first meeting with my Project mentor was mainly devoted to the discussion of the same issues.

As a result of comprehensive analysis the most reliable sources of secondary data in order to be used in Research Report were found to include published financial statements and annual reports, textbooks on financial and business analysis, information published in official company website, information available from ACCA website, as well as, various business journals an newspapers.

The choice of methods for conducting the study, on the other hand, was guided by the reliability of the data analysis methods and their relevance to the research issues. After spending additional amount of time for the choice of appropriate methodology and taking into account advises of my mentor, financial ratios and analytic tools have been chosen to be employed in my Research Report.

Purposely, financial and accounting ratios that were used in the study include profitability, liquidity, financial position and investor ratios, whereas, the choice of analytic tools consist of SWOT, PESTLE, and Porter’s five forces analysis.

To summarise this part, it is fair to state that all of the research questions in my Research Report have been effectively addressed, because the secondary data have been obtained from reliable sources, relevant methodology has been used to conduct the study, and the research findings have been critically discussed.

3.      Interpersonal and communication skills and their relevance to the research

I have demonstrated my interpersonal and communication skills at various stages of doing Research Report and preparing for and making the presentation. Moreover, without my interpersonal and communication skills completing the Research Report and doing the presentation would have proved to be highly challenging.

For example, my listening skills have proved to be highly valuable in terms of understanding vital information given by my mentor about increasing the quality of my Research Report, because these advises were fully understood and implemented into the practice.

My interpersonal skills have also played a positive role when I asked some of my trusted colleagues to be an audience when I was rehearsing my presentation. I was making presentations in front of my colleagues and was asking for their opinions about the quality of my presentation. This practice took place many times in different settings and I believe that following this strategy has enhanced the quality of my presentation and my marks.

However, my communication skills have played a crucial role in terms of succeeding in making the presentation effectively. I have learned from my experiences within and outside of academic settings that communication skills play the most crucial role in terms of succeeding in personal and professional lives.

For instance, an individual may possess a deep knowledge about a certain area. However, if the individual lacks competency of communicating his or her ideas, knowledge and feelings in an effective manner, the overall competency of the individual and the level of his or her contribution to the organisation will always remain compromised.

Therefore, in my opinion, regardless of the field, industry or type of organisation, communication skills can be specified as a compulsory attribute for an employee in order to be considered an a competent. In my case in particular, my advanced level of communication skills have enabled me to do my Research Report presentation effectively which has resulted in positive acclaim from my peers and mentor.

4.      The potential contribution of Research Report to the level of professional development

Conducting the Research Report and doing the presentation has increased the level of my professional competency in several ways. First of all, I have to mention the fact that I have developed a critical mindset towards solving business issues as a result of conducting the Research Report.

My mentor made it clear that it was important to critically analyse related issues in Research Report rather than just offering description of the issues and supplying calculations. The mentor had stressed many times that critical analysis and discussions are the elements of the work that increase its value. For the same reason I had to revise my Research Report several times until my mentor was satisfied with the level of critical analysis the work had included.

Although, such an approach to work seemed to be very challenging and confusing during the research process, I appreciated the value of critical analysis once the final work was completed. The skills of critical analysis that I have developed and applied in Research Report can easily be applied when real business issues would need to be resolved by me in the future in my professional capacity.

Completing the Research Report was similar to project management in real businesses environment in terms of strict deadlines, scarcity of resources, organising and planning, scheduling meetings, doing presentations etc. Therefore, the skills I developed during the process of completing Research Report can be used in order to successfully manage business projects in the future.

Moreover, my writing skills have also been greatly improved as a result of engaging in Research Report. Despite the popular opinion that with the increasing importance of information technology the practice of writing letters and reports are being replaced by alternative means of business communications, the importance of writing will always remain significant for business managers.

From this point of view engaging in Research Report was a very beneficial experience for me on a personal level. Specifically, writing the paper of almost ten thousand words in total, including this personal reflection, has made me better prepared to join the full-time workforce once my studies are completed.

Lastly, as a result of preparing the Research Report my professional interest on the issues associated with corporate strategy has been enhanced. Moreover, I am planning to continue studying the issues of corporate strategy and that knowledge would benefit me in the future as a corporate leader.

5.      Gains derived from conducting Research Report experience on a personal level

On a personal level I benefited from conducting the Research Report and doing the presentation in a number of ways. The research experience with Oxford Brookes has increased the level of my motivation for studying, making bold plans for my future career and implements necessary measures and initiatives in order to accomplish these plans. My mentor deserves to be mentioned here specifically for all encouragements and practical tips that can be applied in various alternative settings apart from academic life.

The level of my self-confidence has also been increased because I could complete the Research Report in time. Moreover, the presentation experience has increased the level of my self-confidence dramatically, because I understood that if I could do a successful presentation in front of my mentor and colleagues, doing the presentations of multi-million projects in front of top executives was just a matter of time.

The paramount importance of self-confidence for an individual is an undisputable matter. Self-confidence allows us to set ambitious plans and utilise all the available resources efficiently in order to achieve these plans.

My time-management skills have also been improved by the end of the Research Report. This is because there was a specific deadline for both, the Research Report and presentation and I had to adopt some principles related to time management in order to be able to submit my work on time.

These principles included setting specific deadlines for each chapter of the work, and above all, dramatically cutting the amount of time I used to browse social networking sites on the internet. I can highlight this fact as one of the most substantial gains in a personal level. This is because prior to the research experience I used to spend several hours a day browsing a set of social networking sites with no real benefit whatsoever. However, once the priority was given to the Research Project, this bad habit was dealt with effectively and irreversibly.

6.      Conclusions

To summarise, completing the Research Report and making presentation with Oxford Brookes University following my ACCA course has increased the level of my preparedness to join the full-time workforce and successfully utilise my energy and knowledge. In my opinion the biggest benefit I received from enrolling to this course of study is that the course of study, the Research Report and doing the presentation have made me to believe in my skills and capabilities and they have also awoke my desire to approach studying as a lifelong process.

Moreover, I have obtained a set of professional and personal gains as a result of completing the Research Report and making presentation that include the development of a critical mindset, improvement my writing and time management skills and enhancement of the level of my self-confidence.

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

Reflective writing is a process of identifying, questioning, and critically evaluating course-based learning opportunities, integrated with your own observations, experiences, impressions, beliefs, assumptions, or biases, and which describes how this process stimulated new or creative understanding about the content of the course.

A reflective paper describes and explains in an introspective, first person narrative, your reactions and feelings about either a specific element of the class [e.g., a required reading; a film shown in class] or more generally how you experienced learning throughout the course. Reflective writing assignments can be in the form of a single paper, essays, portfolios, journals, diaries, or blogs. In some cases, your professor may include a reflective writing assignment as a way to obtain student feedback that helps improve the course, either in the moment or for when the class is taught again.

How to Write a Reflection Paper . Academic Skills, Trent University; Writing a Reflection Paper . Writing Center, Lewis University; Critical Reflection . Writing and Communication Centre, University of Waterloo; Tsingos-Lucas et al. "Using Reflective Writing as a Predictor of Academic Success in Different Assessment Formats." American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 81 (2017): Article 8.

Benefits of Reflective Writing Assignments

As the term implies, a reflective paper involves looking inward at oneself in contemplating and bringing meaning to the relationship between course content and the acquisition of new knowledge . Educational research [Bolton, 2010; Ryan, 2011; Tsingos-Lucas et al., 2017] demonstrates that assigning reflective writing tasks enhances learning because it challenges students to confront their own assumptions, biases, and belief systems around what is being taught in class and, in so doing, stimulate student’s decisions, actions, attitudes, and understanding about themselves as learners and in relation to having mastery over their learning. Reflection assignments are also an opportunity to write in a first person narrative about elements of the course, such as the required readings, separate from the exegetic and analytical prose of academic research papers.

Reflection writing often serves multiple purposes simultaneously. In no particular order, here are some of reasons why professors assign reflection papers:

• Enhances learning from previous knowledge and experience in order to improve future decision-making and reasoning in practice . Reflective writing in the applied social sciences enhances decision-making skills and academic performance in ways that can inform professional practice. The act of reflective writing creates self-awareness and understanding of others. This is particularly important in clinical and service-oriented professional settings.
• Allows students to make sense of classroom content and overall learning experiences in relation to oneself, others, and the conditions that shaped the content and classroom experiences . Reflective writing places you within the course content in ways that can deepen your understanding of the material. Because reflective thinking can help reveal hidden biases, it can help you critically interrogate moments when you do not like or agree with discussions, readings, or other aspects of the course.
• Increases awareness of one’s cognitive abilities and the evidence for these attributes . Reflective writing can break down personal doubts about yourself as a learner and highlight specific abilities that may have been hidden or suppressed due to prior assumptions about the strength of your academic abilities [e.g., reading comprehension; problem-solving skills]. Reflective writing, therefore, can have a positive affective [i.e., emotional] impact on your sense of self-worth.
• Applying theoretical knowledge and frameworks to real experiences . Reflective writing can help build a bridge of relevancy between theoretical knowledge and the real world. In so doing, this form of writing can lead to a better understanding of underlying theories and their analytical properties applied to professional practice.
• Reveals shortcomings that the reader will identify . Evidence suggests that reflective writing can uncover your own shortcomings as a learner, thereby, creating opportunities to anticipate the responses of your professor may have about the quality of your coursework. This can be particularly productive if the reflective paper is written before final submission of an assignment.
• Helps students identify their tacit [a.k.a., implicit] knowledge and possible gaps in that knowledge . Tacit knowledge refers to ways of knowing rooted in lived experience, insight, and intuition rather than formal, codified, categorical, or explicit knowledge. In so doing, reflective writing can stimulate students to question their beliefs about a research problem or an element of the course content beyond positivist modes of understanding and representation.
• Encourages students to actively monitor their learning processes over a period of time . On-going reflective writing in journals or blogs, for example, can help you maintain or adapt learning strategies in other contexts. The regular, purposeful act of reflection can facilitate continuous deep thinking about the course content as it evolves and changes throughout the term. This, in turn, can increase your overall confidence as a learner.
• Relates a student’s personal experience to a wider perspective . Reflection papers can help you see the big picture associated with the content of a course by forcing you to think about the connections between scholarly content and your lived experiences outside of school. It can provide a macro-level understanding of one’s own experiences in relation to the specifics of what is being taught.
• If reflective writing is shared, students can exchange stories about their learning experiences, thereby, creating an opportunity to reevaluate their original assumptions or perspectives . In most cases, reflective writing is only viewed by your professor in order to ensure candid feedback from students. However, occasionally, reflective writing is shared and openly discussed in class. During these discussions, new or different perspectives and alternative approaches to solving problems can be generated that would otherwise be hidden. Sharing student's reflections can also reveal collective patterns of thought and emotions about a particular element of the course.

Bolton, Gillie. Reflective Practice: Writing and Professional Development . London: Sage, 2010; Chang, Bo. "Reflection in Learning." Online Learning 23 (2019), 95-110; Cavilla, Derek. "The Effects of Student Reflection on Academic Performance and Motivation." Sage Open 7 (July-September 2017): 1–13; Culbert, Patrick. “Better Teaching? You Can Write On It “ Liberal Education (February 2022); McCabe, Gavin and Tobias Thejll-Madsen. The Reflection Toolkit . University of Edinburgh; The Purpose of Reflection . Introductory Composition at Purdue University; Practice-based and Reflective Learning . Study Advice Study Guides, University of Reading; Ryan, Mary. "Improving Reflective Writing in Higher Education: A Social Semiotic Perspective." Teaching in Higher Education 16 (2011): 99-111; Tsingos-Lucas et al. "Using Reflective Writing as a Predictor of Academic Success in Different Assessment Formats." American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 81 (2017): Article 8; What Benefits Might Reflective Writing Have for My Students? Writing Across the Curriculum Clearinghouse; Rykkje, Linda. "The Tacit Care Knowledge in Reflective Writing: A Practical Wisdom." International Practice Development Journal 7 (September 2017): Article 5; Using Reflective Writing to Deepen Student Learning . Center for Writing, University of Minnesota.

How to Approach Writing a Reflection Paper

Thinking About Reflective Thinking

Educational theorists have developed numerous models of reflective thinking that your professor may use to frame a reflective writing assignment. These models can help you systematically interpret your learning experiences, thereby ensuring that you ask the right questions and have a clear understanding of what should be covered. A model can also represent the overall structure of a reflective paper. Each model establishes a different approach to reflection and will require you to think about your writing differently. If you are unclear how to fit your writing within a particular reflective model, seek clarification from your professor. There are generally two types of reflective writing assignments, each approached in slightly different ways.

1.  Reflective Thinking about Course Readings

This type of reflective writing focuses on thoughtfully thinking about the course readings that underpin how most students acquire new knowledge and understanding about the subject of a course. Reflecting on course readings is often assigned in freshmen-level, interdisciplinary courses where the required readings examine topics viewed from multiple perspectives and, as such, provide different ways of analyzing a topic, issue, event, or phenomenon. The purpose of reflective thinking about course readings in the social and behavioral sciences is to elicit your opinions, beliefs, and feelings about the research and its significance. This type of writing can provide an opportunity to break down key assumptions you may have and, in so doing, reveal potential biases in how you interpret the scholarship.

If you are assigned to reflect on course readings, consider the following methods of analysis as prompts that can help you get started :

• Examine carefully the main introductory elements of the reading, including the purpose of the study, the theoretical framework being used to test assumptions, and the research questions being addressed. Think about what ideas stood out to you. Why did they? Were these ideas new to you or familiar in some way based on your own lived experiences or prior knowledge?
• Develop your ideas around the readings by asking yourself, what do I know about this topic? Where does my existing knowledge about this topic come from? What are the observations or experiences in my life that influence my understanding of the topic? Do I agree or disagree with the main arguments, recommended course of actions, or conclusions made by the author(s)? Why do I feel this way and what is the basis of these feelings?
• Make connections between the text and your own beliefs, opinions, or feelings by considering questions like, how do the readings reinforce my existing ideas or assumptions? How the readings challenge these ideas or assumptions? How does this text help me to better understand this topic or research in ways that motivate me to learn more about this area of study?

2.  Reflective Thinking about Course Experiences

This type of reflective writing asks you to critically reflect on locating yourself at the conceptual intersection of theory and practice. The purpose of experiential reflection is to evaluate theories or disciplinary-based analytical models based on your introspective assessment of the relationship between hypothetical thinking and practical reality; it offers a way to consider how your own knowledge and skills fit within professional practice. This type of writing also provides an opportunity to evaluate your decisions and actions, as well as how you managed your subsequent successes and failures, within a specific theoretical framework. As a result, abstract concepts can crystallize and become more relevant to you when considered within your own experiences. This can help you formulate plans for self-improvement as you learn.

If you are assigned to reflect on your experiences, consider the following questions as prompts to help you get started :

• Contextualize your reflection in relation to the overarching purpose of the course by asking yourself, what did you hope to learn from this course? What were the learning objectives for the course and how did I fit within each of them? How did these goals relate to the main themes or concepts of the course?
• Analyze how you experienced the course by asking yourself, what did I learn from this experience? What did I learn about myself? About working in this area of research and study? About how the course relates to my place in society? What assumptions about the course were supported or refuted?
• Think introspectively about the ways you experienced learning during the course by asking yourself, did your learning experiences align with the goals or concepts of the course? Why or why do you not feel this way? What was successful and why do you believe this? What would you do differently and why is this important? How will you prepare for a future experience in this area of study?

NOTE: If you are assigned to write a journal or other type of on-going reflection exercise, a helpful approach is to reflect on your reflections by re-reading what you have already written. In other words, review your previous entries as a way to contextualize your feelings, opinions, or beliefs regarding your overall learning experiences. Over time, this can also help reveal hidden patterns or themes related to how you processed your learning experiences. Consider concluding your reflective journal with a summary of how you felt about your learning experiences at critical junctures throughout the course, then use these to write about how you grew as a student learner and how the act of reflecting helped you gain new understanding about the subject of the course and its content.

ANOTHER NOTE: Regardless of whether you write a reflection paper or a journal, do not focus your writing on the past. The act of reflection is intended to think introspectively about previous learning experiences. However, reflective thinking should document the ways in which you progressed in obtaining new insights and understandings about your growth as a learner that can be carried forward in subsequent coursework or in future professional practice. Your writing should reflect a furtherance of increasing personal autonomy and confidence gained from understanding more about yourself as a learner.

Structure and Writing Style

There are no strict academic rules for writing a reflective paper. Reflective writing may be assigned in any class taught in the social and behavioral sciences and, therefore, requirements for the assignment can vary depending on disciplinary-based models of inquiry and learning. The organization of content can also depend on what your professor wants you to write about or based on the type of reflective model used to frame the writing assignment. Despite these possible variations, below is a basic approach to organizing and writing a good reflective paper, followed by a list of problems to avoid.

Pre-flection

In most cases, it's helpful to begin by thinking about your learning experiences and outline what you want to focus on before you begin to write the paper. This can help you organize your thoughts around what was most important to you and what experiences [good or bad] had the most impact on your learning. As described by the University of Waterloo Writing and Communication Centre, preparing to write a reflective paper involves a process of self-analysis that can help organize your thoughts around significant moments of in-class knowledge discovery.

• Using a thesis statement as a guide, note what experiences or course content stood out to you , then place these within the context of your observations, reactions, feelings, and opinions. This will help you develop a rough outline of key moments during the course that reflect your growth as a learner. To identify these moments, pose these questions to yourself: What happened? What was my reaction? What were my expectations and how were they different from what transpired? What did I learn?
• Critically think about your learning experiences and the course content . This will help you develop a deeper, more nuanced understanding about why these moments were significant or relevant to you. Use the ideas you formulated during the first stage of reflecting to help you think through these moments from both an academic and personal perspective. From an academic perspective, contemplate how the experience enhanced your understanding of a concept, theory, or skill. Ask yourself, did the experience confirm my previous understanding or challenge it in some way. As a result, did this highlight strengths or gaps in your current knowledge? From a personal perspective, think introspectively about why these experiences mattered, if previous expectations or assumptions were confirmed or refuted, and if this surprised, confused, or unnerved you in some way.
• Analyze how these experiences and your reactions to them will shape your future thinking and behavior . Reflection implies looking back, but the most important act of reflective writing is considering how beliefs, assumptions, opinions, and feelings were transformed in ways that better prepare you as a learner in the future. Note how this reflective analysis can lead to actions you will take as a result of your experiences, what you will do differently, and how you will apply what you learned in other courses or in professional practice.

Basic Structure and Writing Style

Reflective Background and Context

The first part of your reflection paper should briefly provide background and context in relation to the content or experiences that stood out to you. Highlight the settings, summarize the key readings, or narrate the experiences in relation to the course objectives. Provide background that sets the stage for your reflection. You do not need to go into great detail, but you should provide enough information for the reader to understand what sources of learning you are writing about [e.g., course readings, field experience, guest lecture, class discussions] and why they were important. This section should end with an explanatory thesis statement that expresses the central ideas of your paper and what you want the readers to know, believe, or understand after they finish reading your paper.

Reflective Interpretation

Drawing from your reflective analysis, this is where you can be personal, critical, and creative in expressing how you felt about the course content and learning experiences and how they influenced or altered your feelings, beliefs, assumptions, or biases about the subject of the course. This section is also where you explore the meaning of these experiences in the context of the course and how you gained an awareness of the connections between these moments and your own prior knowledge.

Guided by your thesis statement, a helpful approach is to interpret your learning throughout the course with a series of specific examples drawn from the course content and your learning experiences. These examples should be arranged in sequential order that illustrate your growth as a learner. Reflecting on each example can be done by: 1)  introducing a theme or moment that was meaningful to you, 2) describing your previous position about the learning moment and what you thought about it, 3) explaining how your perspective was challenged and/or changed and why, and 4) introspectively stating your current or new feelings, opinions, or beliefs about that experience in class.

It is important to include specific examples drawn from the course and placed within the context of your assumptions, thoughts, opinions, and feelings. A reflective narrative without specific examples does not provide an effective way for the reader to understand the relationship between the course content and how you grew as a learner.

Reflective Conclusions

The conclusion of your reflective paper should provide a summary of your thoughts, feelings, or opinions regarding what you learned about yourself as a result of taking the course. Here are several ways you can frame your conclusions based on the examples you interpreted and reflected on what they meant to you. Each example would need to be tied to the basic theme [thesis statement] of your reflective background section.

• Your reflective conclusions can be described in relation to any expectations you had before taking the class [e.g., “I expected the readings to not be relevant to my own experiences growing up in a rural community, but the research actually helped me see that the challenges of developing my identity as a child of immigrants was not that unusual...”].
• Your reflective conclusions can explain how what you learned about yourself will change your actions in the future [e.g., “During a discussion in class about the challenges of helping homeless people, I realized that many of these people hate living on the street but lack the ability to see a way out. This made me realize that I wanted to take more classes in psychology...”].
• Your reflective conclusions can describe major insights you experienced a critical junctures during the course and how these moments enhanced how you see yourself as a student learner [e.g., "The guest speaker from the Head Start program made me realize why I wanted to pursue a career in elementary education..."].
• Your reflective conclusions can reconfigure or reframe how you will approach professional practice and your understanding of your future career aspirations [e.g.,, "The course changed my perceptions about seeking a career in business finance because it made me realize I want to be more engaged in customer service..."]
• Your reflective conclusions can explore any learning you derived from the act of reflecting itself [e.g., “Reflecting on the course readings that described how minority students perceive campus activities helped me identify my own biases about the benefits of those activities in acclimating to campus life...”].

NOTE: The length of a reflective paper in the social sciences is usually less than a traditional research paper. However, don’t assume that writing a reflective paper is easier than writing a research paper. A well-conceived critical reflection paper often requires as much time and effort as a research paper because you must purposeful engage in thinking about your learning in ways that you may not be comfortable with or used to. This is particular true while preparing to write because reflective papers are not as structured as a traditional research paper and, therefore, you have to think deliberately about how you want to organize the paper and what elements of the course you want to reflect upon.

ANOTHER NOTE: Do not limit yourself to using only text in reflecting on your learning. If you believe it would be helpful, consider using creative modes of thought or expression such as, illustrations, photographs, or material objects that reflects an experience related to the subject of the course that was important to you [e.g., like a ticket stub to a renowned speaker on campus]. Whatever non-textual element you include, be sure to describe the object's relevance to your personal relationship to the course content.

Problems to Avoid

A reflective paper is not a “mind dump” . Reflective papers document your personal and emotional experiences and, therefore, they do not conform to rigid structures, or schema, to organize information. However, the paper should not be a disjointed, stream-of-consciousness narrative. Reflective papers are still academic pieces of writing that require organized thought, that use academic language and tone , and that apply intellectually-driven critical thinking to the course content and your learning experiences and their significance.

A reflective paper is not a research paper . If you are asked to reflect on a course reading, the reflection will obviously include some description of the research. However, the goal of reflective writing is not to present extraneous ideas to the reader or to "educate" them about the course. The goal is to share a story about your relationship with the learning objectives of the course. Therefore, unlike research papers, you are expected to write from a first person point of view which includes an introspective examination of your own opinions, feelings, and personal assumptions.

A reflection paper is not a book review . Descriptions of the course readings using your own words is not a reflective paper. Reflective writing should focus on how you understood the implications of and were challenged by the course in relation to your own lived experiences or personal assumptions, combined with explanations of how you grew as a student learner based on this internal dialogue. Remember that you are the central object of the paper, not the research materials.

A reflective paper is not an all-inclusive meditation. Do not try to cover everything. The scope of your paper should be well-defined and limited to your specific opinions, feelings, and beliefs about what you determine to be the most significant content of the course and in relation to the learning that took place. Reflections should be detailed enough to covey what you think is important, but your thoughts should be expressed concisely and coherently [as is true for any academic writing assignment].

Critical Reflection . Writing and Communication Centre, University of Waterloo; Critical Reflection: Journals, Opinions, & Reactions . University Writing Center, Texas A&M University; Connor-Greene, Patricia A. “Making Connections: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Journal Writing in Enhancing Student Learning.” Teaching of Psychology 27 (2000): 44-46; Good vs. Bad Reflection Papers , Franklin University; Dyment, Janet E. and Timothy S. O’Connell. "The Quality of Reflection in Student Journals: A Review of Limiting and Enabling Factors." Innovative Higher Education 35 (2010): 233-244: How to Write a Reflection Paper . Academic Skills, Trent University; Amelia TaraJane House. Reflection Paper . Cordia Harrington Center for Excellence, University of Arkansas; Ramlal, Alana, and Désirée S. Augustin. “Engaging Students in Reflective Writing: An Action Research Project.” Educational Action Research 28 (2020): 518-533; Writing a Reflection Paper . Writing Center, Lewis University; McGuire, Lisa, Kathy Lay, and Jon Peters. “Pedagogy of Reflective Writing in Professional Education.” Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (2009): 93-107; Critical Reflection . Writing and Communication Centre, University of Waterloo; How Do I Write Reflectively? Academic Skills Toolkit, University of New South Wales Sydney; Reflective Writing . Skills@Library. University of Leeds; Walling, Anne, Johanna Shapiro, and Terry Ast. “What Makes a Good Reflective Paper?” Family Medicine 45 (2013): 7-12; Williams, Kate, Mary Woolliams, and Jane Spiro. Reflective Writing . 2nd edition. London: Red Globe Press, 2020; Yeh, Hui-Chin, Shih-hsien Yang, Jo Shan Fu, and Yen-Chen Shih. “Developing College Students’ Critical Thinking through Reflective Writing.” Higher Education Research and Development (2022): 1-16.

Writing Tip

Focus on Reflecting, Not on Describing

Minimal time and effort should be spent describing the course content you are asked to reflect upon. The purpose of a reflection assignment is to introspectively contemplate your reactions to and feeling about an element of the course. D eflecting the focus away from your own feelings by concentrating on describing the course content can happen particularly if "talking about yourself" [i.e., reflecting] makes you uncomfortable or it is intimidating. However, the intent of reflective writing is to overcome these inhibitions so as to maximize the benefits of introspectively assessing your learning experiences. Keep in mind that, if it is relevant, your feelings of discomfort could be a part of how you critically reflect on any challenges you had during the course [e.g., you realize this discomfort inhibited your willingness to ask questions during class, it fed into your propensity to procrastinate, or it made it difficult participating in groups].

Writing a Reflection Paper . Writing Center, Lewis University; Reflection Paper . Cordia Harrington Center for Excellence, University of Arkansas.

Another Writing Tip

Helpful Videos about Reflective Writing

These two short videos succinctly describe how to approach a reflective writing assignment. They are produced by the Academic Skills department at the University of Melbourne and the Skills Team of the University of Hull, respectively.

• << Previous: Writing a Policy Memo
• Next: Writing a Research Proposal >>
• Last Updated: Mar 6, 2024 1:00 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game New
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• College University and Postgraduate
• Academic Writing

How to Write a Reflection Paper

Last Updated: March 27, 2024 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Alicia Cook . Alicia Cook is a Professional Writer based in Newark, New Jersey. With over 12 years of experience, Alicia specializes in poetry and uses her platform to advocate for families affected by addiction and to fight for breaking the stigma against addiction and mental illness. She holds a BA in English and Journalism from Georgian Court University and an MBA from Saint Peter’s University. Alicia is a bestselling poet with Andrews McMeel Publishing and her work has been featured in numerous media outlets including the NY Post, CNN, USA Today, the HuffPost, the LA Times, American Songwriter Magazine, and Bustle. She was named by Teen Vogue as one of the 10 social media poets to know and her poetry mixtape, “Stuff I’ve Been Feeling Lately” was a finalist in the 2016 Goodreads Choice Awards. There are 8 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 3,807,520 times.

Reflection papers allow you to communicate with your instructor about how a specific article, lesson, lecture, or experience shapes your understanding of class-related material. Reflection papers are personal and subjective [1] X Research source , but they must still maintain a somewhat academic tone and must still be thoroughly and cohesively organized. Here's what you need to know about writing an effective reflection.

Things You Should Know

• Write an introduction that outlines the expectations you had and provide a thesis statement in the last sentence.
• State your conclusions in the body paragraphs of the paper. Explain how you arrived at your conclusions using logic and concrete details.
• Conclude the paper with a concise summary of your overall experience.

Sample Outline and Paper

Brainstorming

• These sentences should be both descriptive yet straight to the point.

• For lectures or readings, you can write down specific quotations or summarize passages.
• For experiences, make a note of specific portions of your experience. You could even write a small summary or story of an event that happened during the experience that stands out. Images, sounds, or other sensory portions of your experience work, as well.

• In the first column, list the main points or key experiences. These points can include anything that the author or speaker treated with importance as well as any specific details you found to be important. Divide each point into its own separate row.
• In the second column, list your personal response to the points you brought up in the first column. Mention how your subjective values, experiences, and beliefs influence your response.
• In the third and last column, describe how much of your personal response to share in your reflection paper.

• Does the reading, lecture, or experience challenge you socially, culturally, emotionally, or theologically? If so, where and how? Why does it bother you or catch your attention?
• Has the reading, lecture, or experience changed your way of thinking? Did it conflict with beliefs you held previously, and what evidence did it provide you with in order to change your thought process on the topic?
• Does the reading, lecture, or experience leave you with any questions? Were these questions ones you had previously or ones you developed only after finishing?
• Did the author, speaker, or those involved in the experience fail to address any important issues? Could a certain fact or idea have dramatically changed the impact or conclusion of the reading, lecture, or experience?
• How do the issues or ideas brought up in this reading, lecture, or experience mesh with past experiences or readings? Do the ideas contradict or support each other?

Organizing a Reflection Paper

• Verify whether or not your instructor specified a word count for the paper instead of merely following this average.
• If your instructor demands a word count outside of this range, meet your instructor's requirements.

• For a reading or lecture, indicate what you expected based on the title, abstract, or introduction.
• For an experience, indicate what you expected based on prior knowledge provided by similar experiences or information from others.

• This is essentially a brief explanation of whether or not your expectations were met.
• A thesis provides focus and cohesion for your reflection paper.
• You could structure a reflection thesis along the following lines: “From this reading/experience, I learned...”

• Your conclusions must be explained. You should provide details on how you arrived at those conclusions using logic and concrete details.
• The focus of the paper is not a summary of the text, but you still need to draw concrete, specific details from the text or experience in order to provide context for your conclusions.
• Write a separate paragraph for each conclusion or idea you developed.
• Each paragraph should have its own topic sentence. This topic sentence should clearly identify your major points, conclusions, or understandings.

• The conclusions or understandings explained in your body paragraphs should support your overall conclusion. One or two may conflict, but the majority should support your final conclusion.

As You Write

• If you feel uncomfortable about a personal issue that affects the conclusions you reached, it is wisest not to include personal details about it.
• If a certain issue is unavoidable but you feel uncomfortable revealing your personal experiences or feelings regarding it, write about the issue in more general terms. Identify the issue itself and indicate concerns you have professionally or academically.

• Avoid dragging someone else down in your writing. If a particular person made the experience you are reflecting on difficult, unpleasant, or uncomfortable, you must still maintain a level of detachment as you describe that person's influence. Instead of stating something like, “Bob was such a rude jerk,” say something more along the lines of, “One man was abrupt and spoke harshly, making me feel as though I was not welcome there.” Describe the actions, not the person, and frame those actions within the context of how they influenced your conclusions.
• A reflection paper is one of the few pieces of academic writing in which you can get away with using the first person pronoun “I.” That said, you should still relate your subjective feelings and opinions using specific evidence to explain them. [8] X Research source
• Avoid slang and always use correct spelling and grammar. Internet abbreviations like “LOL” or “OMG” are fine to use personally among friends and family, but this is still an academic paper, so you need to treat it with the grammatical respect it deserves. Do not treat it as a personal journal entry.
• Check and double-check your spelling and grammar after you finish your paper.

• Keep your sentences focused. Avoid squeezing multiple ideas into one sentence.
• Avoid sentence fragments. Make sure that each sentence has a subject and a verb.
• Vary your sentence length. Include both simple sentences with a single subject and verb and complex sentences with multiple clauses. Doing so makes your paper sound more conversational and natural, and prevents the writing from becoming too wooden. [9] X Research source

• Common transitional phrases include "for example," "for instance," "as a result," "an opposite view is," and "a different perspective is."

• For instance, if reflecting on a piece of literary criticism, you could mention how your beliefs and ideas about the literary theory addressed in the article relate to what your instructor taught you about it or how it applies to prose and poetry read in class.
• As another example, if reflecting on a new social experience for a sociology class, you could relate that experience to specific ideas or social patterns discussed in class.

Expert Q&A

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://www.csuohio.edu/writing-center/reflection-papers
• ↑ https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments/reflectionpaper
• ↑ Alicia Cook. Professional Writer. Expert Interview. 11 December 2020.
• ↑ https://www.trentu.ca/academicskills/how-guides/how-write-university/how-approach-any-assignment/how-write-reflection-paper
• ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/thesis-statements/
• ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/conclusions/
• ↑ https://www.anu.edu.au/students/academic-skills/writing-assessment/reflective-writing/reflective-essays
• ↑ https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/scholarlyvoice/sentencestructure

About This Article

To write a reflection paper, start with an introduction where you state any expectations you had for the reading, lesson, or experience you're reflecting on. At the end of your intro, include a thesis statement that explains how your views have changed. In the body of your essay, explain the conclusions you reached after the reading, lesson, or experience and discuss how you arrived at them. Finally, finish your paper with a succinct conclusion that explains what you've learned. To learn how to brainstorm for your paper, keep reading! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Stella Cheboi

Jul 22, 2016

Did this article help you?

Luz Gisela Perez

Nov 19, 2017

Apr 27, 2016

Debra Cust Bramble

Mar 20, 2016

Courtney Fulmer

May 22, 2020

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Get all the best how-tos!

Sign up for wikiHow's weekly email newsletter

• Peterborough

How to Write a Reflection Paper

Why reflective writing, experiential reflection, reading reflection.

• A note on mechanics

Reflection offers you the opportunity to consider how your personal experiences and observations shape your thinking and your acceptance of new ideas.  Professors often ask students to write reading reflections.  They do this to encourage you to explore your own ideas about a text, to express your opinion rather than summarize the opinions of others.  Reflective writing can help you to improve your analytical skills because it requires you to express what you think, and more significantly, how and why you think that way.  In addition, reflective analysis asks you to acknowledge that your thoughts are shaped by your assumptions and preconceived ideas; in doing so, you can appreciate the ideas of others, notice how their assumptions and preconceived ideas may have shaped their thoughts, and perhaps recognize how your ideas support or oppose what you read.

Types of Reflective Writing

Popular in professional programs, like business, nursing, social work, forensics and education, reflection is an important part of making connections between theory and practice.  When you are asked to reflect upon experience in a placement, you do not only describe your experience, but you evaluate it based on ideas from class.  You can assess a theory or approach based on your observations and practice and evaluate your own knowledge and skills within your professional field.   This opportunity to take the time to think about your choices, your actions, your successes and your failures is best done within a specific framework, like course themes or work placement objectives.  Abstract concepts can become concrete and real to you when considered within your own experiences, and reflection on your experiences allows you to make plans for improvement.

To encourage thoughtful and balanced assessment of readings, many interdisciplinary courses may ask you to submit a reading reflection.  Often instructors will indicate to students what they expect of a reflection, but the general purpose is to elicit your informed opinions about ideas presented in the text and to consider how they affect your interpretation.   Reading reflections offer an opportunity to recognize – and perhaps break down – your assumptions which may be challenged by the text(s). 

Approaches to Reflective Inquiry

You may wonder how your professors assess your reflective writing.  What are they looking for? How can my experiences or ideas be right or wrong?  Your instructors expect you to critically engage with concepts from your course by making connections between your observations, experiences, and opinions.   They expect you to explain and analyse these concepts from your own point of view, eliciting original ideas and encouraging active interest in the course material.

It can be difficult to know where to begin when writing a critical reflection.  First, know that – like any other academic piece of writing – a reflection requires a narrow focus and strong analysis.  The best approach for identifying a focus and for reflective analysis is interrogation.   The following offers suggestions for your line of inquiry when developing a reflective response.

It is best to discuss your experiences in a work placement or practicum within the context of personal or organizational goals; doing so provides important insights and perspective for your own growth in the profession. For reflective writing, it is important to balance reporting or descriptive writing with critical reflection and analysis.

Consider these questions:

• Contextualize your reflection:  What are your learning goals? What are the objectives of the organization?  How do these goals fit with the themes or concepts from the course?
• Provide important information: What is the name of the host organization? What is their mission? Who do they serve? What was your role? What did you do?
• Analytical Reflection: What did you learn from this experience? About yourself? About working in the field? About society?
• Lessons from reflection: Did your experience fit with the goals or concepts of the course or organization?  Why or why not? What are your lessons for the future? What was successful? Why? What would you do differently? Why? How will you prepare for a future experience in the field?

Consider the purpose of reflection: to demonstrate your learning in the course.  It is important to actively and directly connect concepts from class to your personal or experiential reflection.  The following example shows how a student’s observations from a classroom can be analysed using a theoretical concept and how the experience can help a student to evaluate this concept.

For Example My observations from the classroom demonstrate that the hierarchical structure of Bloom’s Taxonomy is problematic, a concept also explored by Paul (1993).  The students often combined activities like application and synthesis or analysis and evaluation to build their knowledge and comprehension of unfamiliar concepts.  This challenges my understanding of traditional teaching methods where knowledge is the basis for inquiry.  Perhaps higher-order learning strategies like inquiry and evaluation can also be the basis for knowledge and comprehension, which are classified as lower-order skills in Bloom’s Taxonomy.

Critical reflection requires thoughtful and persistent inquiry.  Although basic questions like “what is the thesis?” and “what is the evidence?” are important to demonstrate your understanding, you need to interrogate your own assumptions and knowledge to deepen your analysis and focus your assessment of the text.

Assess the text(s):

• What is the main point? How is it developed? Identify the purpose, impact and/or theoretical framework of the text.
• What ideas stood out to me? Why? Were they new or in opposition to existing scholarship?

Develop your ideas:

• What do I know about this topic? Where does my existing knowledge come from? What are the observations or experiences that shape my understanding?
• Do I agree or disagree with this argument?  Why?

Make connections:

• How does this text reinforce my existing ideas or assumptions? How does this text challenge my existing ideas or assumptions?
• How does this text help me to better understand this topic or explore this field of study/discipline?

A Note on Mechanics

As with all written assignments or reports, it is important to have a clear focus for your writing.  You do not need to discuss every experience or element of your placement.  Pick a few that you can explore within the context of your learning.  For reflective responses, identify the main arguments or important elements of the text to develop a stronger analysis which integrates relevant ideas from course materials.

Furthermore, your writing must be organized.  Introduce your topic and the point you plan to make about your experience and learning.  Develop your point through body paragraph(s), and conclude your paper by exploring the meaning you derive from your reflection. You may find the questions listed above can help you to develop an outline before you write your paper.

You should maintain a formal tone, but it is acceptable to write in the first person and to use personal pronouns.  Note, however, that it is important that you maintain confidentiality and anonymity of clients, patients or students from work or volunteer placements by using pseudonyms and masking identifying factors. 

The value of reflection: Critical reflection is a meaningful exercise which can require as much time and work as traditional essays and reports because it asks students to be purposeful and engaged participants, readers, and thinkers.

• Schools & departments

General tips for academic reflections

An overview of key things to keep in mind for academic reflections.

Make sure you know what the assessor is asking for

Your main consideration when producing written or any kind of academic reflection is to know exactly what is expected of you. Therefore, you should ask your assessor what kind of language and structure they are expecting. With that in mind, the characteristics described here and in the sections on language and structure for academic reflections are what is often sought after.

Language of academic reflections

Structure of academic reflections

Using private reflections as foundations for academic reflections

Academic reflective writing is often used to evidence that you have done reflection. Therefore, it is often beneficial to first do a private reflection where you can be as informal and unstructured as you want, and then readapt that into a piece of academic writing.

By using a private reflection initially, you can ensure that you get the full learning opportunity without censoring yourself or being conscious of language, before deciding how best to present your reflections to your assessor. This is similar to figuring out what your argument is and taking notes before writing an essay, or to all the background work you do to solve a technical/mathematical problem that you do not include in your hand-in.

Just as developing your argument and working through each step of a problem can be essential for the final essay or hand-in, for some people doing a private reflection can be very helpful in writing an effective academic reflection. For others, writing their reflection in a formal and structured way from the outset helps them structure their thoughts.

The core elements of academic reflective writing

Academic reflective writing is a genre and just like an essay has characteristics, so does academic reflective writing.

Academic reflective writing requires critical and analytic thought, a clear line of argument, and the use of evidence through examples of personal experiences and thoughts and often also theoretical literature.

You should aim for a balance between personal experience, tone, and academic practice and rigor.

Academic reflective writing should:

• develop a perspective or line of reasoning
• develop a link between your experience or practice and existing knowledge (theoretical or personal)
• show understanding and appreciation of different perspectives to your own
• show recognition that your own understanding is likely incomplete and situations are rarely clear-cut and simplistic
• show learning resulting from the reflection (either by discovering something new or confirming existing knowledge) and how you plan to use it
• be written in an appropriate style with language relevant to your academic discipline
• sometimes, but not always, use theoretical literature to inform your understanding. 

People can have misconceptions about academic reflective writing – some of the common ones are described below.

Developed from:

Ryan, M., 2011. Improving reflective writing in higher education: a social semiotic perspective. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(1), 99-111.

University of Portsmouth, Department for Curriculum and Quality Enhancement (date unavailable). Reflective Writing: a basic introduction [online].  Portsmouth: University of Portsmouth.

Queen Margaret University, Effective Learning Service (date unavailable).  Reflection. [online].  Edinburgh: Queen Margaret University.

How to Write a Reflection Paper? Steps and Examples

Nowadays, one of the most frequently asked questions at the high school, college, and university levels is how to write a reflection paper. You might be thinking, ‘Is it similar to the fundamental essay writing that students learn at the elementary and junior high school level?’ Yes, it is. However, the senior reflection essay and semester reflection essay are specifically designed for high-level students.

According to the Gibbs reflective cycle, this type of academic writing lets students reflect on their experiences, growth, and learning as they progress through their academic journey.

However, many students often struggle with expressing their thoughts and opinions on a given subject. Therefore, in this particular topic, we will reflect upon the challenges that some of our previous students encountered while writing a reflection paper during their last semester of graduation. The aim is to address each challenge and provide solutions on how to overcome them while adhering to the standard format and structure.

Table :  Changes in Student Grades and Missing Assignments After Implementation of Self Reflection.

Source: Sage Journals

Table of Contents

What is a Final Reflection Essay?

Reflective writing is a form of  academic writing  that helps you learn and grow as a writer, thinker, and person. It explores the writer’s personal opinion or experience, thoughts, and emotions.

And involves introspection and critical analysis of one’s own experience.Reflective writing can be done in many different ways and purposes.

In an academic setting, this type of writing is used in essays, journals, or portfolios where individuals are asked to reflect on their learning experiences or professional development critically.

However, learning how to write a reflection paper is also valuable for personal growth, self-expression, and a deeper understanding of oneself and the world around them.

Challenges of Writing the Senior Reflection Essay

What’s the purpose of writing a essay reflection.

The purpose of writing final reflection essay is to help stimulate self-reflection, introspection, and the unfolding of one’s perceptions and beliefs.

Reflecting writing goes beyond just describing or writing the literature it goes into depth about how an experience influences someone’s thoughts and emotions.

Writing the paper of reflection is itself an opportunity to introspect and assess your experience to bring personal improvements. 

💡 Feel Free to Mold As Per Your Assignment of High School Reflection Essay

There are various types of reflective writing and which form you will adopt is entirely subject to the goals and objectives of your assignment. The professor or mentor can ask you to come up with a particular experience in your life or any special moments of the class while learning how to write a reflection paper.

In addition to this, there may be a case of asking you to  write a paper  on any topic or the ideas that you sometimes discussed with your teacher or fellow.

In a nutshell, whatever the topic and assignment you will work on, just remember these tips. 

• Be clear about what type of reflective writing you’re doing—you might need to explain what kind of reflection you’re doing at the start of your paper (e.g., personal reflection vs. academic reflection).
• Define terms—if there are words or concepts that are unfamiliar to readers (or yourself), define them before using them later in the paper so they have

Types of Senior Essay of Reflection and Writing

There are three major types senior reflection essay : personal reflective essays, educational reflections, and professional reflections.

Personal Reflective Writing

Explores the writer’s own experiences, thoughts, and emotions. Personal reflection is often used as a tool for self-improvement or self-exploration. 

Educators often use it to help students reflect on their learning experiences to improve them in the future.

💡 Example for Your Convenience

A student might use personal reflection after reading about the Civil War era to explore what they learned about that period. A teacher could use this type of writing to assess student understanding after reading a chapter in their textbook or participating in an activity during class time.

Educational Reflective Paper 

Educational reflection focuses on learning experiences like courses, assignments, or projects. These papers are typically written by high school or college students reflecting on what they’ve learned during an academic course or class project. 

Teachers can also use educational reflection as part of a course evaluation process by asking students specific questions related to each course component (i.e., classroom activities) and then having them answer those questions using.

Professional Reflective Writing

Professional reflection involves reflecting on work experiences, internships, or professional development activities. 

These papers are typically written by professionals who have been working in their field for some time and are sharing their thoughts about how they learned certain skills or techniques while doing their job. 

How to Write a Reflection Paper with Proper Outline?

When it comes to writing the semester reflection essay, most teachers tend to give “total freedom” to their students. But this sudden abundance of freedom can lead to massive confusion and late submissions. 

Most of the time, teachers leave it entirely to the students to write their reflective papers. But this abrupt abundance of freedom often confuses them. And instead of easing their way into writing, they are left wondering where to start and how to write a reflection paper. 

When engaging in reflective writing, we should adhere to a similar structure as other forms of academic writing, ensuring our content remains within the boundaries of academic discourse.

To combat this issue, the  expert essay writers  have developed an easy prompt that will help you with outlining your paper. So let’s get straight to it. 

Introduction of Final Reflective Essay

The introduction of a final reflection essay is quite similar to introductions in other academic writings. It includes important elements like providing background information, stating the main idea (thesis), and capturing the reader’s attention with a hook or interesting opening.

To make it easier to understand, think of the introduction as the beginning of your paper, where you introduce the topic and grab the reader’s interest. 

You also share some background information to set the stage for what you’ll be reflecting upon. Finally, you present your main idea or argument, which is a roadmap for the rest of your paper. 

So, remember, the introduction is like the opening chapter of your reflective paper. It sets the scene, captures attention, and tells the reader what you’ll discuss.

Body Paragraphs 

Body paragraphs are the muscle of any academic paper because they serve as the supporting framework for your ideas and experiences. You must keep in mind while you learn how to write a reflection paper that the body of a reflective paper provides the key points that contribute to your overall assessment.

• It helps in describing the experience or the article of writing
• Your emotional or cognitive response to it
• Your critical analysis
• The lesson you might have learned due to the phenomenon you’re writing about
• Your application and the relevance of your experience

How you tackle your body paragraph of a high school reflection essay can make or break your reflective writing. While writing the main section of your paper, ways to connect all the paragraphs.

You must use transitional words and a topic sentence for each paragraph. The number of paragraphs you’re to write depends on the required  length of the research paper  you are writing about. 

Conclusions are important for almost all academic writing pieces as they allow you to tie all loose ends and reinforce your ideas.

Now, most of you must be thinking, “Do we need to reinforce our opinions on our readers when we are going through how to write a reflection paper?” The answer is “No”; we don’t necessarily need to impose our opinion.

But writing an impacting conclusion of a semester reflection essay that makes your reader consider your opinion on a topic is crucial.

Do Reflective Papers Have Citations? 

There is a common misconception that reflective papers do not require citations, but this belief can be misleading. It is important to remember that while reflective writing allows for personal opinions, it still follows the framework and standards of academic writing.

In academic writing,  citing a paper  is not only appreciated but often required. Therefore, referencing your reflective paper adds to its credibility and reliability.

For example:

A prevalent form of reflective writing among students involves referencing the context of their experiences.

How to Format your Semester Reflection Essay?

When writing a final reflection essay, there is typically no strict format. What matters the most is your comfort and expression. 

It is best to write freely without feeling restricted. However, too much freedom can sometimes confuse people. If a reflection paper is assigned to you, the format will usually depend on the criteria set by your professor.

For college reflection papers, also known as high school reflection essay, the length typically ranges from 500 to 1000 words.

In terms of a common senior reflection essay Format, here are some guidelines to consider when we are discussing how to write a reflection paper:

• Double-space the entire paper or text,  leaving a blank line between each line  of writing.
• Indent the  first word of each paragraph , which means starting each new paragraph  slightly inward from the left margin .
• Use a  one-inch margin  on all sides of the paper.
• Choose  “Times New Roman” with a 12-point font , which means the letters are medium size.

💡  Remember, these formatting guidelines generated by  ai essay writer  provide a cohesive and organized structure for your reflection paper, making it easier for readers to follow. It ensures that your paper looks neat and professional.

How to Write a Reflection Paper? Tips Based Steps

Now, let’s jump into the final reflection essay part and learn 9 simple yet powerful steps for writing the reflection paper. So, without further ado, let’s get straight into it.

Analyze the Material

• Play the role of Examiner:  Examine the overall thesis statement and overall content structure.
• Establish Your Perspective:  After you have done your due diligence, now take a clear stance or position.
• Formulate Important Questions:  Look for the loopholes and limitations in the content and develop key questions surrounding the main theme.

Make Connections

• Develop connection:  Find out the ways how you can link your life experience and opinions to the entire content.
• Connect the Dots:  Organize your thoughts while identifying similar patterns and concepts.
• Extract Valuable Insights:  Go into the details to reveal the profound interpretation of the connections.

Understand and Summarize

• Revision and Synthesize:  Highlight the important points and ideas.
• Formulate the Outline:  Make a proper outline to follow for the entire writing.
• Differentiate the content:  Adopt the dynamic strategies depending upon the content. 

Select a Theme

• Define Your Approach:  Pinpoint the crux of your high school reflection essay that sees eye to eye with your experience.
• Divide the Theme:  Make sections and subsections of your main theme and then do an in-depth exploration of each part to illuminate your reflection.
• Visualize:  Craft a clear yet simple narrative by using your main theme. 

Brainstorm Ideas and Experiences

• Let the Ideas Come in:  Make use of the online thesis statement generator  in case you are stuck with some novel ideas concerning your thesis statement.
• Do Note Taking:  Write down the personal experiences that somehow relate to the content at hand.
• Evoke Your Motivation:  Take motivation from experience and thoughts to bring creativity and intrigue in your reflection. 

Craft an Introduction

• Hook the Reader:  Open the sentence with some catchy and attention-grabbing words.
• Make the Context:  Provide brief background data related to your topic that make a context.
• Define Your Thesis Statement:  Use simple and clear words to highlight your main points of reflection. 

Write the Body

• Analyze Key Ideas:  Formulate the crucial part of your reflection paper.
• Use Examples:  Link relevant examples and stories that are most specific.
• Navigate the Reader:  Create imagination and walk your readers through your thoughts and experiences.

Conclude Effectively

• Close with Powerful Thoughts:  Restate your main arguments and ideas to reinforce in the reader’s mind.
• Signify the Importance:  Use strong words and language to showcase how your experiences and reflections influence your personal development.
• Leave the Readers with a Strong Impression:  Leave the readers with thought-provoking questions, words, or any statements that mark a lasting impression on their minds.

Proofread and Edit

• Proofread, Edit, and Improve:  Seek feedback from fellows, proofread, and revise to rectify grammatical and technical mistakes.
• Remove Redundancy:  Declutter your paper by removing the irrelevant and unnecessary content.
• Bring Perfection:  After you are finished with proofreading and redundant data, have a bird’s eye view of your content once to bring it to the perfect.

In conclusion, we are sure that our detailed guide on how to write a reflection paper has covered all of your questions. We have discussed all the ins and outs of reflection paper writing such as meaning, types, mind-mapping steps, etc. If you are still finding yourself struggling to come up with your reflective research paper writing service, don’t hesitate to contact us now. We will take care of everything for you!

Order Original Papers & Essays

Your First Custom Paper Sample is on Us!

Timely Deliveries

No Plagiarism & AI

100% Refund

Try Our Free Paper Writing Service

Related blogs.

Connections with Writers and support

Privacy and Confidentiality Guarantee

Average Quality Score

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

The Effect of Trait Self-Awareness, Self-Reflection, and Perceptions of Choice Meaningfulness on Indicators of Social Identity within a Decision-Making Context

Noam dishon.

1 Department of Psychological Sciences, Faculty of Health, Arts and Design, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Julian A. Oldmeadow

Christine critchley.

2 Department of Statistics, Data Science and Epidemiology, Faculty of Health, Arts and Design, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Jordy Kaufman

Theorists operating from within a narrative identity framework have suggested that self-reflective reasoning plays a central role in the development of the self. Typically, however, narrative identity researchers have investigated this relationship using correlational rather than experimental methods. In the present study, leveraging on a classic research paradigm from within the social identity literature we developed an experiment to test the extent to which self-reflection might have a causal impact on the self-concept within a decision-making context. In a minimal group paradigm participants were prompted to reflect on their painting choices either before or after allocating points to in-group∖ out-group members. As anticipated, self-reflection augmented social identification, but only when participants felt their choices were personally meaningful. Participants who reasoned about their choices and felt they were subjectively meaningful showed stronger similarity and liking for in-group members compared to those who did not reflect on their choices or found them to be subjectively meaningless. Hence, reflecting on and finding meaning in one’s choices may be an important step in linking behavior with in-group identification and thus the self-concept in turn. The absence of any effects on in-group favoritism (a third indicator of social identification measured) as well as implications of the study’s findings for self-perception, cognitive dissonance and social identity processes are also discussed.

Introduction

Psychological scientists have approached the issue of self and identity from a range of different positions. For example, some social and cultural psychologists have investigated self and identity using a social identity theory framework whereas other personality and developmental psychologists have pursued an approach informed by narrative identity theory (see, Tajfel and Turner, 1986 ; McAdams, 2001 ; Pasupathi et al., 2007 ; Miramontez et al., 2008 ). In the present paper, we synthesize aspects of both identity projects by utilizing an experimental paradigm associated with social identity theory (i.e., the minimal group paradigm), to investigate whether self-reflective reasoning, a cognitive process theorized to be central to narrative identity development, can have a causal effect on the self and identity. We also explore if such an effect could be impacted by the level of meaningfulness one associates with their self-reflective reasoning and modulated by individual differences in trait self-awareness.

Identity from a Narrative Identity Framework

McAdams (1985 , 2001 ) model of narrative identity postulates that our sense of identity is inextricably linked with the creation of a life story. According to this model, self-narratives have two primary functions. They facilitate our sense of self-continuity across time and they help us give context and meaning to the events of our lives so that we can make sense of who we are ( McAdams and McLean, 2013 ). Self-narratives, as McAdams and McLean (2013) , state facilitate meaning making because they allow the narrator to draw “…a semantic conclusion about the self from the episodic information that the story conveys” (pp. 236). Within the narrative identity literature the process of self-reflection coupled with the extraction of self-relevant meaning is referred to as autobiographical reasoning and it is theorized to be an essential cognitive process in narrative identity development and construction ( Singer et al., 2013 ). However, as Adler et al. (2016) note, within the narrative identity literature investigators have typically employed correlational research designs thereby rendering it difficult to draw causal conclusions. Adler et al. (2016) develop this idea further stating that given this paucity of experimental work “increasing methodological sophistication and variety in the study of narrative identity with an eye toward drawing causal inferences is vital” (pp. 29).

Self-Reflection, Meaning and the Self

Although research from within the narrative identity literature demonstrating a causal link between self-reflection and identity development remains scarce, several other lines of converging research also suggest that self-reflection should play an important role in self-concept development. For example within the clinical psychology literature, reflective functioning has been used to describe a persons ability to reflect on experiences, draw inferences about behavior from these reflections, and then use those inferences to construct and develop representations of the self ( Katznelson, 2014 ). Research which has investigated reflective functioning has demonstrated that changes in reflective functioning are linked to self-concept change. For example, in research with persons affected by borderline personality disorder, (a condition which is characterized by an unstable sense of self) Levy et al. (2006) found that improvements in reflective functioning were associated with improvements in self-representations and a more integrated sense of self.

Another reason for thinking that self-reflection should represent an important mechanism in self-concept construction and development comes from research which has utilized the self-referential memory paradigm. In a typical self-referential memory paradigm study, different word categories (i.e., traits and adjectives verse semantically and orthographically related words) are presented to participants who are instructed to remember them at exposure and then asked to recall them at a later time ( Rogers et al., 1977 ). The self-reference effect describes the tendency for participants to retrieve traits and adjectives that are self-related more successfully than words that are semantically or orthographically related ( Symons and Johnson, 1997 ). Schizophrenia is another condition of which an unstable sense of self represents a core feature (see Sass and Parnas, 2003 ), and research has demonstrated that persons affected by schizophrenia tend to display weaker self-reference effects compared to healthy controls which researchers have interpreted as an indication of reduced self-reflective capacity ( Harvey et al., 2011 ).

There are also several reasons for thinking that meaning-making tendencies should play an important role in self-concept construction and development in addition to the emphasis placed upon this process by narrative identity theorists as noted previously. Firstly, in a theoretical sense, influential thinkers such as Erikson (1963) , Frankl (1969) , and Bruner (1990) , have all argued strongly for the idea that meaning is likely to play an important role in self and identity development. At the same time, research from within the organizational psychology literature has demonstrated empirically that perceptions of meaningfulness are associated with a range of self-related outcomes. Psychological empowerment captures an employees cognitive-motivational stance toward their work and is comprised of four dimensions, impact , competence , autonomy , and of particular pertinence given the current investigation, meaning which reflects the degree to which one perceives their work as being personally meaningful ( Spreitzer, 1995 ; Holdsworth and Cartwright, 2003 ). The importance of perceptions of meaningfulness within the context of psychological empowerment is further highlighted by Spreitzer et al. ( 1997 , pp. 681) who argue that the dimension of meaning “serves as the ‘engine’ of empowerment.” Research exploring psychological empowerment at an individual factor level has noted that differences in meaning are positively associated with several self-related outcomes such as self-esteem and self-efficacy ( McAllister, 2016 ).

In our own research we have found that individual differences in trait self-awareness are associated with perceptions of choice meaningfulness within a decision-making context (Dishon et al., under review). Based on pre-existing literature which has explored self-awareness more generally (e.g., Morin, 2011 ) we defined trait self-awareness as individual differences in the capacity to access knowledge, insight and understanding of internal self-related experiences. We found that participants with higher levels of trait self-awareness perceived significantly more meaning in a series of minor experimentally induced choices compared to those with lower levels of trait self-awareness. Moreover, this difference remained irrespective of whether or not participants were told that their choices were diagnostic of important personal characteristics. We concluded from this research that individuals high in trait self-awareness are more likely to reflect on their choices and more likely to find them meaningful than individuals low in trait self-awareness. Extending on this work and drawing upon the literature previously presented, in the present paper we propose and explore a theoretical model (see Figure ​ Figure1 1 ) that articulates how self-reflection and perceptions of meaningfulness might affect the self within a choice context.

Self-reflection model.

Overview of the Self-Reflection Model

The assumptions underpinning this model are that when one is presented with a potential trigger event such as (but not limited to) a choice or behavior, the self will be affected (i.e., the choice/behavior will inform the self) as a consequence of (a) whether or not self-reflection takes place, and (b) the degree to which the choice is perceived to be personally meaningful. Moreover, (c) whether or not reflection takes place may be determined by individual or situational factors. For example, individuals with higher levels of trait self-awareness may be more predisposed to engage in self-reflective reasoning, whereas for others, situational cues such as an unexpected occurrence or a prompt from a third party might act as the catalyst for self-reflective reasoning. Several predictions arise from the model.

Prediction 1: If self-reflective reasoning does occur and the choice or behavior is perceived to be highly meaningful, then self-perception will occur (by which we mean the self-concept will be modified or changed as result of the behavior or action).

Prediction 2: If self-reflective reasoning does occur and the level of personal meaning associated with the choice or behavior is perceived to be low, its affect on the self will be weak or absent.

Prediction 3: If no self-reflective reasoning occurs there will be a weak effect on the self through an automatic self-perception process. Rather than predict no effect on the self in the absence of self-reflection, we allow for the possibility of an automatic or implicit self-perception process to occur because research has demonstrated that the self-concept can be impacted even in the absence of explicit reasoning. For example, in one demonstration of this type of effect, Klimmt et al. (2010) observed that exposing participants to different types of characters in video games led to automatic shifts in self-perception as measured in a follow up Implicit Association Test.

Prediction 4: Individuals high in trait self-awareness will be more likely to engage in self-reflective reasoning than individuals low in trait self-awareness 1 .

Prediction 5: Individuals low in trait self-awareness will engage in self-reflective reasoning only if prompted, or if some other situational cue triggers self-reflection.

Although narrative identity researchers have primarily looked at self-reflective reasoning in the context of autobiographical memories (see, Pasupathi, 2015 ), in the present study we sought to initially test the veracity of our self-reflection model on a smaller scale in a relatively minimal decision-making context. We did so for several reasons. First, decision-making lends itself well to experimental testing ( Carroll and Johnson, 1990 ). This is important because as noted earlier, to date, research investigating the relationship between self-reflective reasoning and the self has largely been correlational by design and attempts to test this possibility experimentally have been insufficient ( Adler et al., 2016 ). Second, consumer decision-making research has suggested that self-narratives often arise in every day decision-making contexts ( Phillips et al., 1995 ) and some narrative identity scholars have argued that day-to-day narratives which might not be overtly autobiographical nevertheless remain tightly linked to self and identity ( Bamberg, 2011 ; Pasupathi, 2015 ). Third, behaviorist and cognitive theories (i.e., self-perception theory and cognitive dissonance theory) suggest that the self is often informed by after-the-fact explanations for behaviors or post hoc reasoning for choices ( Brehm, 1956 ; Festinger, 1957 ; Bem, 1972 ). Another reason for thinking that self-reflection could impact self-perception stems from research by Wilson et al. (1993) which demonstrated that self-reflection can impact attitudes and post-choice satisfaction within a decision-making context.

Identity from a Social Identity Framework

From the view of social identity theory, our sense of identity is heavily influenced by the social groups that we belong to ( Tajfel and Turner, 1986 ). Social identity as originally conceptualized by Tajfel (1981) refers to “…that part of an individual’s self-concept which derives from his knowledge of his membership of a social group” (p. 255). According to the theory, we come to identify with certain social groups based upon the extent to which we think we share similarities with other group members. Then, in order to maintain a positive sense of our social identity we try to ensure that our group (the in-group) is favored over other out-groups. One way of doing this is by favoring one’s in-group and discriminating against the out-group. Within the social identity literature, the extent to which we feel similar to, like, or favor other in-group members is indicative of the extent to which our identification with that group has been incorporated into our self-concept ( Hogg, 1992 , 1993 ; Ellemers et al., 1999 ; Leach et al., 2008 ). The minimal group paradigm which facilitates the measurement of in-group favoritism and out-group discrimination is one way of measuring the extent to which group membership has been incorporated into the self-concept and therefore had an effect on social identity ( Otten, 2016 ).

In a typical minimal group paradigm experiment, participants are randomly allocated to a group and then asked to concurrently distribute resources to in-group and out-group members on allocation matrices specifically designed to measure allocation strategies that favor the in-group and∖or discriminate against an out-group ( Tajfel et al., 1971 ). Research in the field has consistently demonstrated that even when people are led to believe that their assignment to a group is for a trivial reason, such as their preferences for abstract artwork, they still tend to allocate resources more favorably to in-group members ( Otten, 2016 ). Whilst researchers have often been interested in using this methodology to investigate topics such as prejudice and discrimination, the allocation of resources within a minimal group paradigm environment need not be used exclusively for this end ( Bourhis et al., 1994 ). The allocation of resources within a minimal group paradigm context can also serve as a subtle and discreet measure of the degree to which group membership has been incorporated into the self-concept and one’s sense of social identity more generally ( Otten, 2016 ). Another way that social identity researchers have measured the extent to which commitment to a group can impact one’s self-concept and sense of identity is by measuring self-reported liking of, and similarity with, other anonymous in-group members (e.g., Hogg, 1992 , 1993 ; Ellemers et al., 1999 ; Leach et al., 2008 ). Ellemers et al. (1999) research is also important in the context of the current study because it demonstrates that social identification is more strongly affected when people are able to self-select into a group (as opposed to being assigned a group) and it would seem reasonable to think that self-reflective reasoning is a process that could be quite important for self-selection decisions.

The Current Study

In recent research in our lab we investigated the connection between self-reflective reasoning within a decision-making context and the self. We found that the degree of personal meaning that was given to a trivial choice was associated with individual differences in trait self-awareness (Dishon et al., under review). In the present study we sought to extend this research by investigating further if the cognitive process of engaging in self-reflective reasoning could affect one’s sense of identity. We also sought to explore whether an effect of this kind might be impacted by the extent to which one felt as though their reasoning had been personally meaningful and also moderated by individual differences in trait self-awareness. To test this model we developed an experiment that utilized and extended upon traditional minimal group paradigm work. Participants were randomly assigned to either an experimental or control condition. In the experimental condition participants were prompted to engage in self-reflective reasoning immediately after making painting choices whereas in the control condition participants went on to allocate resources immediately after selecting paintings. We used in-group∖out-group allocation strategies as one dependent measure of identity and we also used similarity and liking ratings with in-group∖out-group members as additional dependent measures of identity.

Based on the proposed model we hypothesized that participants who are relatively high in trait self-awareness would be more likely to spontaneously self-reflect on their choices and therefore be relatively unaffected by the self-reflection prompt manipulation. As such it was expected that for these participants, self-perception would be related to the perceived meaningfulness of their painting choices more so than condition. We also expected that participants who are relatively low in trait self-awareness would be less likely to spontaneously self-reflect on their choices and therefore more greatly affected by the self-reflection prompt manipulation. As such it was expected that for these participants, self-perception would be related to the perceived meaningfulness of their painting choices only in the experimental condition (i.e., when they have been prompted to self-reflect.)

Materials and Methods

Participants.

Two hundred and six undergraduate psychology students voluntarily participated in the study in exchange for course credit. During the procedure, a manipulation check was administered to ensure that participants had attended to feedback regarding group allocation (the details of which are explained further in the Procedure section below). The responses of 32 participants who failed the manipulation check were discarded leaving a remaining pool of 174 participants (139 female, 35 male) with a mean age of 33.06 years ( SD = 11.78). The difference in failure rates between conditions was not significant ( p = 0.518). Ethical approval for the study was provided by Swinburne University’s Human Research Ethics Committee (SUHREC).

Effects of the experimental manipulation on identity were inferred by, (a) the extent to which participants incorporated their in-group identification into their self-concept and measured by participant’s in-group favoritism when distributing resources to in-group∖out-group members on Tajfel matrices and, (b) participant’s self-identification with in-group∖out-group members which was assessed by measuring their liking of, and perceived similarity with, in-group∖out-group members.

Tajfel matrices

Tajfel matrices consist of six matrices in which participants are asked to allocate resources concurrently to an in-group member and out-group member along a spectrum of pre-determined in-group to out-group ratios. The six matrices comprise three pairs (one of each pair is a reversed version of the original).

There are four main allocation strategies that can be measured with Tajfel matrices. Parity is an allocation strategy whereby the participant distributes an equal amount of resources to both in-group and out-group recipients. Maximum In-Group Profit is an allocation strategy that sees the greatest possible amount of resources awarded to the in-group recipient irrespective of what is awarded to the out-group recipient. Maximum Difference reflects a strategy that optimizes the differential allocation of resources between recipients in favor of the in-group recipient at the expense, however, of absolute in-group profit. Maximum Joint Profit reflects a strategy in which overall allocation of resources is maximized across both in-group and out-group.

The matrices facilitated the calculation of pull scores which reflected participants’ gravitation toward particular allocation strategies. Matrix pair A compared the pull of Maximum In-Group Profit and Maximum Difference (i.e., in-group favoritism) against Maximum Joint Profit. Matrix pair B compared the pull of Maximum Difference against Maximum In-Group Profit and Maximum Joint Profit. Matrix C compared the pull of Parity against Maximum In-Group Profit and Maximum Difference [See Bourhis et al. ( 1994 ) for a comprehensive and in-depth account of the procedure involved in Tajfel matrix preparation, administration, and calculation].

Following a similar procedure to Grieve and Hogg (1999) we then conducted a factor analysis of the pull scores using principal axis factoring with promax rotation to examine the possibility of computing an overall in-group favoritism score. This revealed a single in-group favoritism factor which explained 48.9% of the variance (all loadings ≥ 0.63). The items were then summed and averaged to produced an overall measure of in-group favoritism with higher scores representing greater in-group favoritism (Cronbach’s α = 0.74).

In-group self-identification

As other researchers have done previously (e.g., Hains et al., 1997 ; Grieve and Hogg, 1999 ), participants’ liking of, and perceived similarity with, in-group∖out-group members were recorded to measure their level of self-identification with their in-group. To do so, after being presented with pairs of de-identified paintings by Paul Klee and Wassily Kandinsky and receiving feedback that their choices indicated a preference for the work of Klee irrespective of their actual choices, (see the Procedure section below for a more detailed account of the process involved,) participants were asked to imagine themselves meeting two people, one who had a preference for Klee and the other who had a preference for Kandinsky. Participants then rated on a seven-point scale which of these two people they thought they were most similar to in general (Q1), in artistic preferences (Q2), in painting preferences (Q3), in academic ability (Q4), and in political opinions (Q5). Using the same scenario, participants were also asked to rate who they thought they would like more (Q6), who they thought they would get along with more (Q7), and who they would like to meet more (Q8). Responses on questions 1–5 were summed and averaged to calculate an overall similarity score with higher scores representing a greater level of similarity with an in-group member (Cronbach’s α = 0.75). Response for questions 6–8 were summed and averaged to calculate an overall liking score with higher scores representing a greater level of liking for an in-group member (Cronbach’s α = 0.82).

Meaningfulness

Meaningfulness associated with self-reflective reasoning was measured by providing participants with a five-item Subjective Meaningfulness Scale which included items such as “I feel as though my choices were genuine” and, “My choices were meaningless.” Participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with each statement on a 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Responses were coded so that higher scores indicated greater level of meaningfulness. A factor analysis using principal axis factoring and promax rotation revealed that all five items loaded on a single factor which explained 32.6% of the variance (all loadings ≥ 0.43). Scores were then summed and averaged and an overall meaningfulness score was calculated (Cronbach’s α = 0.69; Guttman’s Lambda 2 = 0.70).

Trait Self-Awareness

Trait Self-Awareness was operationalized as function of participants’ scores on the Sense of Self Scale (SOSS; Flury and Ickes, 2007 ) which is a single factor 12-item measure designed to assess sense of self and self-understanding (Cronbach’s α = 0.86) and the Self-Reflection and Insight Scale (SRIS; Grant et al., 2002 ) which is a two factor 20-item measure of self-reflection and insight (Cronbach’s α = 0.88). In the present sample, using principal axis factoring and promax rotation, both measures retained their original factor structures with the SOSS exhibiting a single factor which accounted for 36.3% of the variance and the SRIS exhibiting two factors which accounted for a combined 53.6% of the variance (Factor 1 = 34.3%, Factor 2 = 19.3%). Both measures were scored so that higher scores indicated stronger sense of self and greater levels of self-reflection and insight and both measures were significantly correlated ( r = 0.35, p < 0.001). Scores on these scales were then summed to create an overall trait self-awareness score with higher scores representing greater levels of trait self-awareness (Cronbach’s α across the total 32-items = 0.77; principal axis factoring with promax rotation revealed three factors accounting for 50.6% of the variance [Factor 1 = 24.6%, Factor 2 = 21.8%, Factor 3 = 3.9%]).

Six pairs of images of paintings by Paul Klee and Wassily Kandinsky were utilized as the painting stimuli.

The experiment was administered online. Once consent to participate was provided, participants were informed they would be required to choose their preferred painting from six pairs of paintings which were then presented sequentially. All paintings were presented without the artists’ names attached to any of the works. After making their painting selections participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions (a reasoning pre resource allocation, similarity and liking ratings condition or, a reasoning post resource allocation, similarity and liking ratings condition). Participants in both conditions were presented with all the same stimuli and experiences except the order of exposure was manipulated slightly between conditions as outlined below.

In the reasoning pre condition, after the initial painting selection phase, participants took part in the self-reflective reasoning phase. In the self-reflective reasoning phase participants were presented with and asked to reflect on a 15-item list of potential reasons for their painting selections and then presented with an open text box and asked to reflect further in their own words about their reasons for their painting choices. Following this participants were presented with and completed the subjective meaningfulness measure. Then although they remained unware to it at the time, irrespective of their actual choices participants were informed that their choices indicated that they preferred the works of Paul Klee 2 . Participants were then presented with instructions pertaining to the completion of the Tajfel matrices before moving on to complete them. Following this, participants were presented with the in-group∖out-group similarity and liking measure. Participants then completed the trait self-awareness measures before recording their gender (female, male, or other) and age. A manipulation check was then conducted whereby participants were asked to indicate who they had previously been informed that their painting choices indicated they preferred the works of (possible response were, Paul Klee, Wassily Kandinsky, or Don’t remember). Participants were then presented with a debriefing statement, informed the experiment was over and thanked for their participation.

In the reasoning post condition, the order of exposure was manipulated so that after making painting selections, participants were told their choices indicated a preference for Paul Klee 3 and were administered with the matrices and in-group∖out-group similarity and liking measures before the self-reflective reasoning phase. After completing the choice reasoning phase and the subjective meaningfulness measure, participants in this condition were also then presented with the same trait self-awareness 4 measures, demographic questions, manipulation check and debriefing as their counterparts in the alternate condition.

Outlier Analysis

Three multivariate outliers (1 in the control and 2 in the self-reflection condition) were detected and removed from the analysis thereby leaving a total sample of 171 (86 in the control condition and 85 in the self-reflection condition).

Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics for trait self-awareness, choice meaningfulness, in-group similarity, in-group liking, and in-group favoritism as a function of self-reflection condition are presented in Table ​ Table1 1 .

Means and standard deviations for trait self-awareness, choice meaningfulness, similarity, liking, and in-group favoritism by self-reflection condition.

Effect of Experimental Manipulation on IV’s

We conducted between groups analyses to investigate if the self-reflection and control groups differed on the IV’s of choice meaningfulness and trait self-awareness as a function of the self-reflection manipulation. Independent samples t -test’s revealed that there was no significant difference in choice meaningfulness ( p = 0.365) or trait self-awareness ( p = 0.218) between conditions thereby demonstrating the IV’s were robust to the self-reflection manipulation.

Multiple-Sample Path Analysis

We ran a multiple-sample path analysis using the structural equation modeling program MPLUS (v 7.4) to investigate if the main effects of meaningfulness and trait self-awareness as well as the interaction effects (i.e., choice meaningfulness × trait self-awareness) on the DV’s differed between the experimental self-reflection and control non-self-reflection conditions. The model tested three exogenous/independent variables all predicting the three endogenous/dependent variables, in-group favoritism, similarity and liking. The exogenous variables were the main effects of trait self-awareness and choice meaningfulness, and a trait self-awareness × choice meaningfulness interaction.

Because the parameter to case ratio was under the required minimum of 1 parameter to 5 cases (1:4.75 or 36:171) as suggested by Kline (2011) , we discreetly tested each section of the model. In other words, three independent models with each of the three endogenous dependant variables were examined separately thereby ensuring that the parameter to case ratio was sufficient (i.e., 1:17.1 or 10:171). In all models the Satorra–Bentler robust estimator was used to account for multivariate non-normality, and all parameters were free across the self-reflection and control conditions. Chi-square Wald tests were utilized on a fully unconstrained model to test significant differences in the effects across conditions given the expectation that there would be differences in regression weights across groups ( Muthén and Muthén, 1998–2017 ). There were no significant differences in the results of these separate models and the full model 5 . Given this, the parameters for the full model are presented in Table ​ Table2 2 . Because the model was saturated with zero degrees of freedom fit indices are not reported.

Unstandardized regression weights and Wald Tests for the multi-sample path analysis.

Main Effects of Choice Meaningfulness and Trait Self-Awareness

The results in Table ​ Table2 2 reveal that there was a significant main effect for choice meaningfulness in both the control and self-reflection conditions for similarity, however, Wald tests reveal that the difference in effects between conditions was not significant. This suggests that higher choice meaningfulness scores were associated with higher similarity scores in both the self-reflection and control conditions. The results in Table ​ Table2 2 also demonstrate that there was a significant main effect of choice meaningfulness for liking in the self-reflection condition whereas the main effect of choice meaningfulness for liking in the control condition was not significant. The Wald test demonstrates that this difference in effects between conditions was significant, suggesting that higher choice meaningfulness scores were associated with higher liking scores in the self-reflection condition only. Whilst there was also a significant main effect of trait self-awareness on liking in the self-reflection condition, the Wald test demonstrates that this was not significantly different from the non-significant main effect of trait self-awareness in the control condition.

Trait Self-Awareness × Choice Meaningfulness Interaction Effects

As seen in Table ​ Table2 2 , for liking, the interaction between trait self-awareness and choice meaningfulness was only significant in the self-reflection condition and as the significant Wald test demonstrates, the strength of this interaction effect was also significantly different between the control and self-reflection conditions (see Figure ​ Figure2 2 ).

Predicted liking scores by trait self-awareness and choice meaningfulness groups across conditions. Groups were defined as 1 standard deviation above (high) and below (low) the mean (moderate).

The results in Figure ​ Figure2 2 suggest that for the self-reflection group the relationship between choice meaningfulness and liking strengthens as trait self-awareness scores decrease. That is, higher choice meaningfulness scores appear to be strongly associated with higher liking scores for those with lower trait self-awareness scores. This demonstrates a stronger impact of the self-reflection manipulation on participants lower in trait self-awareness and a reduction in the impact of the manipulation as trait self-awareness levels increase. Parallel trends were observed for similarity though the Wald test was only marginally significant.

The present study explored whether engaging in self-reflective reasoning could affect in-group identification and thereby demonstrate an effect of self-reflection on indicators of social identity and the self-concept. The possibility that such an effect could be impacted by the perceived level of meaningfulness associated with reasoning, and modulated by individual differences in trait self-awareness was also explored. Based on previous research, we developed a model which predicted that participants with higher levels of trait self-awareness would be minimally affected by the self-reflection manipulation. It was therefore hypothesized that for these participants self-perception would be related to the perceived meaningfulness of their painting choices more so than condition. The model further predicted that the self-reflection manipulation would have a greater impact on participants lower in trait self-awareness. Consequently, it was further anticipated that for these participants, self-perception would be related to perceived meaningfulness of their painting choices only in the experimental condition (i.e., when they were prompted to self-reflect). Participants’ in-group similarity and liking ratings (but not in-group favoritism allocations) supported these predictions and provided general support for the theoretical model proposed earlier.

Considering first the main effects of meaningfulness across conditions, the data demonstrated that whilst greater levels of meaning were associated with greater in-group similarity scores in both conditions, greater levels of meaning were only associated with in-group liking scores in the self-reflection condition. Taken together these results suggest that compared to the control condition, in the self-reflection condition stronger perceptions of meaningfulness led to stronger in-group identification. This is in line with predictions 1 and 2 relating to the self-reflection pathway in the theoretical model. Additionally, in line with prediction 3 of the theoretical model relating to the no self-reflection pathway, the effect of meaning on in-group perceptions in the control condition was smaller relative to the self-reflection condition. Moreover, the fact that there was no interaction between trait self-awareness and choice meaningfulness in the control group is suggestive of the possibility that in this condition, the main effect of meaning on in-group liking was the product of automatic or implicit processing because it occurred in the absence of any situational prompting and was not also impacted by pre-existing individual dispositions toward spontaneous self-reflection.

At the same time, the interaction between trait self-awareness and choice meaningfulness in the experimental condition indicates that the relationship between perceptions of choice meaningfulness and in-group liking strengthens as trait self-awareness levels decrease. This result suggests that the situational self-reflection prompt exhibited a stronger impact on participants who were less inclined (in terms of individual disposition) to engage in spontaneous self-reflection, and had less of an impact on participants with greater levels of individual disposition toward spontaneous self-reflection. This provides support for the hypothesis presented earlier and is also in line with predictions 4 and 5 of the theoretical model. A similar trend was also noted for in-group similarity, however, the difference in the strength of the effect between conditions was only marginally significant.

Limitations and Future Directions

One aspect of the study that could be viewed as both a limitation and strength is the way in which identity was measured. In the present study utilizing an already established experimental paradigm we developed a subtle way of testing the effect of self-reflective reasoning on identity. However, the cognitive process we were investigating was a process theorized from a narrative identity theory perspective, and the methodology used was born out of the social identity theory literature. On the one hand this approach represented a strength of the design in that it facilitated a discreet measurement of the effect of self-reflective reasoning on identity. At the same time, however, there are differences in the way that identity is conceptualized across both projects. To provide a stronger test of the hypothesis that self-reflective reasoning can affect narrative identity, experimental work with a more traditional dependent measure of narrative identity would be useful.

Another limitation was the way in which trait self-awareness was operationalized. In the present study trait self-awareness was operationalized as a function of participants’ scores on the SOSS and the SRIS. Whilst we had good reason to combine and operationalize these measures as a means of measuring trait self-awareness, future research aimed at the development of a dedicated measure of trait self-awareness would be worthwhile.

Though we were able to ensure that the modeling we conducted was sufficiently powered the present study could have benefited from a larger sample size. In the present study the parameter to cases ratio for the overall model was less then recommended (e.g., Kline, 2011 ). Therefore as outlined in the results section, to ensure that our modeling was sufficiently powered we initially computed three discreet models, one for each dependent variable. Although there was no significant difference in the outcomes between the individual and the combined models, in future to avoid the necessity of running independent models for each dependent variable it would be beneficial to recruit a larger sample which meets the parameter to cases ratio for the entire model in the first instance.

It is also possible that the deception that we engaged in (i.e., providing all participants with feedback that they preferred the work of Klee, irrespective of their actual choices) could have raised suspicions amongst participants who may have actually had some pre-existing knowledge of Klee and∖or Kandinsky (i.e., the artists whose works were used as the choice stimuli). Whilst we did include a manipulation check to ensure that the deception had had its intended effect, in future research, to address this issue more comprehensively it would be beneficial if participants were also directly questioned about their pre-existing knowledge of the artists whose works are used as the choice stimuli. Another way that this issue could be controlled for in the future would be to use the works of unknown artists as the choice stimuli.

Implications

The results of the present study may be of value to researchers who are interested in the developmental trajectory of narrative identity and autobiographical reasoning. Previous research looking at the development of narrative identity has suggested that the ability to cultivate a life-story tends to arise on average by about 14 years of age and that this is preceded by autobiographical reasoning for memorable life events which tends to first arise between the ages of nine and ten ( Bohn and Berntsen, 2008 ). Little is known, however, about the antecedents to the onset of autobiographical reasoning processes. Whilst it could be the case that development of autobiographical reasoning processes occurs in a stepwise fashion with little preceding them, the results of this study which demonstrate that reasoning about a trivial choice can effect the self and identity, beg the question that perhaps autobiographical reasoning processes develop as a continuous extension of more basic self-reflective reasoning processes which develop earlier in childhood. Perhaps it is the practice of more basic self-reflective reasoning which lays the cognitive foundations for, and facilitates the development of, more advanced autobiographical reasoning. One piece of recent research which dovetails with this idea comes from Bryan et al. (2014) who found in their work that children between the ages of three and six are already engaging in everyday decision making behaviors that are motivated by their developing sense of self and identity.

The fact that we observed significant effects for in-group identification and no effects on in-group favoritism has implications for researchers interested in intergroup discrimination and self-categorization. Specifically, the effects that we observed for in-group liking and in-group similarity suggest that self-categorization is likely to be influenced by both self-reflection and the level of subjective meaningfulness associated with choices or behaviors on which self-categorization is based. The absence of any effect on in-group favoritism suggests that intergroup discrimination is unlikely to be substantially impacted by self-reflection or choice meaningfulness. Research which has investigated positive-negative asymmetry within a minimal group paradigm context may help explain the discrepancy in effects between the attitudinal and behavioral measures. Positive-negative asymmetry research (see, Buhl, 1999 ; Mummendey et al., 2000 ) has demonstrated that group members tend to display stronger in-group preferences on positive stimuli compared to negative stimuli (i.e., evaluations of well regarded attributes such as creativity or intelligence, verses allocations of aversive noise). Given this research, one possibility that exists then is that in the current study, the attitudinal in-group liking and similarity measures which required participants to evaluate group members along positive dimensions were perceived more favorably compared to the behavioral measure of in-group favoritism which required participants to make allocation choices that had the potential to disadvantage out-group members.

Another possible explanation, however, for the absence of an effect on in-group favoritism could be due to aspects of the wider cultural climate within which participants were located at the time. Specifically, when this experiment took place Australia remained in the midst of a nation-wide debate regarding the legalization of same-sex marriage. Within the context of this debate university students have had strong messages of social justice and fairness directed at them at a cultural level. For example, the National Union of Students, which is the nations peak student representative body strongly advocated for students to support marriage equality ( Barlow, 2017 ). Given the cultural climate and the strong messages of social justice and fairness directed at students during the period in which this experiment took place, it is possible that in the allocation matrix tasks participants felt more compelled to engage in resource allocations which emphasized parity rather than discrimination. At the same time, in-group similarity and in-group liking ratings may have remained relatively immune to the impact of these cultural messages because perceptions of in-group identification do not necessarily equate to out-group discrimination and therefore do not have the same kinds of implications for one’s sense of fairness or social justice.

The present study may also have some implications for researchers whose work is informed by self-perception and cognitive dissonance theories. The results of the present study suggest that the application of self-reflection theory could be useful in some contexts in which cognitive dissonance and self-perception theories are not well positioned to explain the effect of choice or behavior on the self. According to self-perception theory ( Bem, 1972 ), after-the-fact explanations for behavior are generally limited to attributions about the internal (dispositional) or external (situational) cause of a behavior and are also only likely to occur in circumstances in which there is a weak or non-existent pre-existing explanation for the behavior. From the view of cognitive dissonance theory ( Festinger, 1957 ), post hoc reasoning about choices is limited to choices that induce dissonance and are motivated by a desire to reduce dissonance. Our model, however, suggests that choice or behavior is likely to effect the self as a consequence of whether it was actually perceived to be personally meaningful and that this needn’t be exclusive to dissonance inducing choices, nor to behaviors for which one does not have a pre-existing explanation.

Within the narrative identity literature, reflecting on life events in a personally meaningful way has been conceptualized as one of the key psychological mechanisms underpinning our sense of identity. To date, however, research on this issue has been largely correlational with little causal evidence available to confirm or disconfirm this claim. In the present study we sought to test experimentally if this cognitive process theorized to be so vital for identity development, could have a causal effect on self and identity. We also sought to explore the possibility that such an effect could be impacted by the level of meaningfulness associated with self-reflective reasoning, and modulated by individual differences in trait self-awareness. The results of this study largely supported our hypothesis and the proposed model from which those predictions were derived. For participants who were high in trait self-awareness, being prompted to engage in self-reflective reasoning mattered little. For this group of participants, in-group liking and similarity was related to perceptions of subjective meaningfulness relatively equally across conditions. At the same time, however, for participants low in trait self-awareness, being prompted to engage in self-reflection mattered a great deal. For these participants, subjective meaningfulness moderated in-group liking and similarity only when they had been prompted to engage in self-reflection. Overall the results of this study provide evidence to suggest that engaging in self-reflective reasoning can affect the self and identity and that this effect is impacted by both choices meaningfulness and individual differences in trait self-awareness.

Author Contributions

ND, JAO, CC, and JK all contributed to the paper and approved it for publication.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Funding. ND was supported by an Australian Government funded Research Training Program Scholarship.

1 Even though we predict that those high in trait self-awareness will be more likely to engage in self-reflection, given the magnitude of the relationship between trait self-awareness and perceptions of choice meaningfulness noted in our previous study (Dishon et al., under review) there is still scope for those high in trait self-awareness to find their choices meaningless.

2 Participants remained unware of this deception until they were debriefed at the end of the study.

3 As was the case in the reasoning pre condition, participants in this condition also remained unaware to the fact that they had received this feedback irrespective of their actual choices up until they were debriefed at the end of the study.

4 Even though individual differences in trait self-awareness represent a starting point in the theoretical model, in both conditions the trait self-awareness measure was administered after the self-reflection manipulation and in-group∖out-group ratings had taken place because we wanted to avoid potentially priming self-reflection processes in participants prior to their exposure to the self-reflection manipulation.

5 We also unpacked the in-group favoritism factor and ran the model on each of the individual pull scores. There was no significant difference between these models and the models using the in-group favoritism factor.

• Adler J. M., Lodi-Smith J., Philippe F. L., Houle I. (2016). The incremental validity of narrative identity in predicting well-being a review of the field and recommendations for the future. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 20 142–175. 10.1177/1088868315585068 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bamberg M. (2011). Who am I? Big or small—shallow or deep? Theory Psychol. 21 122–129. 10.1177/0959354309357646 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barlow K. (2017). The Massive Drive to Get Students to Enroll for Same-Sex Marriage Vote. The Huffington Post Australia. Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au [accessed August 22 2017]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bem D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 6 1–62. 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60024-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bohn A., Berntsen D. (2008). Life story development in childhood: the development of life story abilities and the acquisition of cultural life scripts from late middle childhood to adolescence. Dev. Psychol. 44 1135–1147. 10.1037/0012-1649.44.4.1135 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bourhis R. Y., Sachdev I., Gagnon A. (1994). “Intergroup research with the Tajfel matrices: methodological notes,” in The Psychology of Prejudice: the Ontario Symposium on Personality and Social Psychology , eds Zanna M., Olson J. (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; ), 209–232. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brehm J. W. (1956). Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 52 384–389. 10.1037/h0041006 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bruner J. S. (1990). Acts of Meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bryan C. J., Master A., Walton G. M. (2014). “Helping” versus “being a helper”: invoking the self to increase helping in young children. Child Dev. 85 1836–1842. 10.1111/cdev.12244 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Buhl T. (1999). Positive-negative asymmetry in social discrimination: meta-analytical evidence. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 2 51–58. 10.1177/1368430299021004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carroll J. S., Johnson E. J. (1990). Decision Research: A Field Guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ellemers N., Kortekaas P., Ouwerkerk J. W. (1999). Self-categorisation, commitment to the group and group self-esteem as related but distinct aspects of social identity. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 29 371–389. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199903/05)29:2/3<371::AID-EJSP932>3.0.CO;2-U [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Erikson E. H. (1963). Childhood and Society. New York, NY: Norton. [ Google Scholar ]
• Festinger L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Standford, CA: Stanford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Flury J. M., Ickes W. (2007). Having a weak versus strong sense of self: the sense of self scale (SOSS). Self Identity 6 281–303. 10.1080/15298860601033208 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frankl V. E. (1969). The Will to Meaning: Principles and Application of Logotherapy. New York, NY: World Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Grant A. M., Franklin J., Langford P. (2002). The self-reflection and insight scale: a new measure of private self-consciousness. Soc. Behav. Pers. 30 821–835. 10.2224/sbp.2002.30.8.821 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grieve P. G., Hogg M. A. (1999). Subjective uncertainty and intergroup discrimination in the minimal group situation. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 25 926–940. 10.1177/01461672992511002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hains S. C., Hogg M. A., Duck J. M. (1997). Self-categorization and leadership: effects of group prototypicality and leader stereotypicality. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 23 1087–1100. 10.1177/01461672972310009 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harvey P. O., Lee J., Horan W. P., Ochsner K., Green M. F. (2011). Do patients with schizophrenia benefit from a self-referential memory bias? Schizophr. Res. 127 171–177. 10.1016/j.schres.2010.11.011 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hogg M. A. (1992). The Social Psychology of Group Cohesiveness: From Attraction to Social Identity. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hogg M. A. (1993). Group cohesiveness: a critical review and some new directions. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 4 85–111. 10.1080/14792779343000031 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Holdsworth L., Cartwright S. (2003). Empowerment, stress and satisfaction: an exploratory study of a call centre. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 24 131–140. 10.1108/01437730310469552 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Katznelson H. (2014). Reflective functioning: a review. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 34 107–117. 10.1016/j.cpr.2013.12.003 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Klimmt C., Hefner D., Vorderer P., Roth C., Blake C. (2010). Identification with video game characters as automatic shift of self-perceptions. Media Psychol. 13 323–338. 10.1080/15213269.2010.524911 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kline R. B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leach C. W., Van Zomeren M., Zebel S., Vliek M. L., Pennekamp S. F., Doosje B., et al. (2008). Group-level self-definition and self-investment: a hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 95 144–165. 10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.144 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Levy K. N., Clarkin J. F., Yeomans F. E., Scott L. N., Wasserman R. H., Kernberg O. F. (2006). The mechanisms of change in the treatment of borderline personality disorder with transference focused psychotherapy. J. Clin. Psychol. 62 481–501. 10.1002/jclp.20239 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McAdams D. P. (1985). Power, Intimacy, and the Life Story: Personological Inquiries into Identity. New York, NY: Guilford Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• McAdams D. P. (2001). The psychology of life stories. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 5 100–122. 10.1037/1089-2680.5.2.100 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McAdams D. P., McLean K. C. (2013). Narrative identity. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 22 233–238. 10.1177/0963721413475622 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McAllister I. (2016). The Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment on the Relationship between Job and Personal Resources and Employee Engagement. Master’s thesis, San Jose State University, San Jose, CA. [ Google Scholar ]
• Miramontez D. R., Benet-Martinez V., Nguyen A.-M. D. (2008). Bicultural identity and self/group personality perceptions. Self Identity 7 430–445. 10.1080/15298860701833119 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morin A. (2011). Self-awareness part 1: definition, measures, effects, functions, and antecedents. Soc. Pers. Psychol. Compass 5 807–823. 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00387.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mummendey A., Otten S., Berger U., Kessler T. (2000). Positive-negative asymmetry in social discrimination: valence of evaluation and salience of categorization. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 26 1258–1270. 10.1177/0146167200262007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Muthén L. K., Muthén B. O. (1998–2017). Mplus User’s Guide. 8th Edn Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. [ Google Scholar ]
• Otten S. (2016). The minimal group paradigm and its maximal impact in research on social categorization. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 11 85–89. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.06.010 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pasupathi M. (2015). “Autobiographical reasoning and my discontent: alternative paths from narrative to identity,” in The Oxford Handbook of Identity Development , eds McLean K. C., Syed M. (New York, NY: Oxford; ), 166–181. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pasupathi M., Mansour E., Brubaker J. R. (2007). Developing a life story: constructing relations between self and experience in autobiographical narratives. Hum. Dev. 50 85–110. 10.1159/000100939 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Phillips D. M., Olson J. C., Baumgartner H. (1995). Consumption visions in consumer decision making. Adv. Consum. Res. 22 280–284. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rogers T. B., Kuiper N. A., Kirker W. S. (1977). Self-reference and the encoding of personal information. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 35 677–688. 10.1037/0022-3514.35.9.677 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sass L. A., Parnas J. (2003). Schizophrenia, consciousness, and the self. Schizophr. Bull. 29 427–444. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.schbul.a007017 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Singer J. A., Blagov P., Berry M., Oost K. M. (2013). Self-defining memories, scripts, and the life story: narrative identity in personality and psychotherapy. J. Pers. 81 569–582. 10.1111/jopy.12005 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spreitzer G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: dimensions, measurement, and validation. Acad. Manage. J. 38 1442–1465. 10.2307/256865 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spreitzer G. M., Kizilos M. A., Nason S. W. (1997). A dimensional analysis of the relationship between psychological empowerment and effectiveness, satisfaction, and strain. J. Manag. 23 679–704. [ Google Scholar ]
• Symons C. S., Johnson B. T. (1997). The self-reference effect in memory: a meta- analysis. Psychol. Bull. 121 371–394. 10.1037/0033-2909.121.3.371 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tajfel H. (1981). Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tajfel H., Billig M. G., Bundy R. P., Flament C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 1 149–178. 10.1002/ejsp.2420010202 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tajfel H., Turner J. C. (1986). “The social identity theory of intergroup behavior,” in The Psychology of Intergroup Relations , eds Worchel S., Austin W. (Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall; ), 7–24. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson T. D., Lisle D. J., Schooler J. W., Hodges S. D., Klaaren K. J., LaFleur S. J. (1993). Introspecting about reasons can reduce post-choice satisfaction. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 19 331–339. 10.1177/0146167293193010 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Don’t Underestimate the Power of Self-Reflection

• James R. Bailey
• Scheherazade Rehman

Focus on moments of surprise, failure, and frustration.

Research shows the habit of reflection can separate extraordinary professionals from mediocre ones. But how do you sort which experiences are most significant for your development?

• To answer this questions, the authors asked 442 executives to reflect on which experiences most advanced their professional development and had the most impact on making them better leaders.
• Three distinct themes arose through their analysis: surprise, frustration, and failure. Reflections that involved one or more or of these sentiments proved to be the most valuable in helping the leaders grow.
• Surprise, frustration, and failure. Cognitive, emotional, and behavioral. These parts of you are constantly in motion and if you don’t give them time to rest and reflect upon what you learned from them, you will surely fatigue.

Where your work meets your life. See more from Ascend here .

Empathy, communication, adaptability, emotional intelligence, compassion. These are all skills you need to thrive in the workplace and become a great leader. Time and again, we even hear that these capabilities are the key to making yourself indispensable — not just now but far into the future. Soft skills, after all, are what make us human, and as far as we know, can’t be performed well by technologies like artificial intelligence.

• James R. Bailey is professor and Hochberg Fellow of Leadership at George Washington University. The author of five books and more than 50 academic papers, he is a frequent contributor to the Harvard Business Review, The Hill, Fortune, Forbes, and Fast Company and appears on many national television and radio programs.
• Scheherazade Rehman is professor and Dean’s Professorial Fellow of International Finance. She is director of the European Union Research Center and former Director of World ExecMBA with Cybersecurity, has appeared in front of the U.S. House and Senate, and been a guest numerous times onPBS Newshour, the Colbert Report, BBC World News, CNBC, Voice of America, and C-Span.

Partner Center

• Open access
• Published: 11 April 2024

Organizing the dissemination and implementation field: who are we, what are we doing, and how should we do it?

• Gretchen J. R. Buchanan   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5186-0145 1   na1 ,
• Lindsey M. Filiatreau 2   na1 &
• Julia E. Moore 3   na1  

Implementation Science Communications volume  5 , Article number:  38 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

253 Accesses

4 Altmetric

Metrics details

Two decades into its tenure as a field, dissemination and implementation (D&I) scientists have begun a process of self-reflection, illuminating a missed opportunity to bridge the gap between research and practice—one of the field’s foundational objectives. In this paper, we, the authors, assert the research-to-practice gap has persisted, in part due to an inadequate characterization of roles, functions, and processes within D&I. We aim to address this issue, and the rising tension between D&I researchers and practitioners, by proposing a community-centered path forward that is grounded in equity.

We identify key players within the field and characterize their unique roles using the translational science spectrum, a model originally developed in the biomedical sciences to help streamline the research-to-practice process, as a guide. We argue that the full translational science spectrum, from basic science research, or “T0,” to translation to community, or “T4,” readily applies within D&I and that in using this framework to clarify roles, functions, and processes within the field, we can facilitate greater collaboration and respect across the entire D&I research-to-practice continuum. We also highlight distinct opportunities (e.g., changes to D&I scientific conference structures) to increase regular communication and engagement between individuals whose work sits at different points along the D&I translational science spectrum that can accelerate our efforts to close the research-to-practice gap and achieve the field’s foundational objectives.

Peer Review reports

Contributions to the literature

Providing clarity regarding the distinct groups of individuals involved in D&I science and practice from researchers to the communities impacted by the change and outline key roles of these unique sets of actors.

Specifying the range of activities, from theoretical research to applied implementation, involved in D&I science and practice using a translational structure.

Identifying existing gaps (e.g., poor integration of research into existing implementation efforts) that impede attainment of the shared vision of D&I science and practice and propose solutions to these gaps.

Introduction

Though still in its infancy, the field of dissemination and implementation science (D&I) [ 1 , 2 ] is facing challenges related to the growing gap between the science and practice of implementation [ 1 , 3 , 4 ]. D&I is the scientific study of translating research findings and evidence-based interventions into everyday practice; in the current state of the D&I literature, this often means that a practice developed by one group of actors is being implemented into the everyday practice of others [ 5 ]. A premortem by Beidas and colleagues [ 4 ] highlighted several factors stagnating the field, including closure of the evidence-to-practice gap [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 ], insufficient impact, and inability to align timelines and priorities with partners [ 1 ]. This commentary aims to establish further clarity regarding who “we” are as a field, what we are doing, and how we can collectively work to achieve shared goals of improved population health in D&I. This refers to the collective “we” of those engaged in D&I work.

In clarifying key components of D&I, important lessons can be drawn from more established fields. For example, when reflecting on disciplines such as mathematics and physics, one notes the emergence of two broad areas of scholarship—theoretical and applied—within these fields. These scholarship areas fill distinct, but important roles within their fields. Here, the authors posit that D&I science could be similarly broken down into theoretical and applied scholarships. In this paper, we, the authors, elaborate on the functions of these differential scholarships, and the functions of professionals working in the large and ever-growing field of implementation practice.

While many have noted D&I aims “to promote the adoption and integration of evidence-based practices, interventions, and policies into routine health care and public health settings to improve the impact on population health,” [ 10 ] specificity in how to achieve this outcome has been elusive. In this article, we propose that the field must first define the actors and audiences across the implementation spectrum and how each group connects with others. Subsequently, the field can strengthen the infrastructures that facilitate these connections. In this article, we aim to address the rising tension between implementation scientists, implementation support practitioners, delivery systems [ 11 ], and communities by proposing a path forward that is community-oriented and grounded in equity, thereby upholding every actor’s place at the D&I table. We draw on principles well-established in the field of translational science to better align D&I towards both improved ideas and real-world impact. We note that our mental model as authors is that success for D&I would be defined as impact at the community or population levels. We recognize this is not the mental model held by all people working in D&I, but believe even for those whose focus is not on population impact, we can collectively work together to achieve these outcomes and impact practice [ 12 ].

Who are we?

To date, much of the discussion around the direction of D&I has been researcher-centric [ 13 ]. To promote greater equity within the discipline (i.e., to reduce disparities in whose voices are heard within the field of D&I), we would like to expand the existing discourse to include the entire spectrum of professionals who work in implementation, including communities, delivery systems, implementation support practitioners, intermediaries, non-implementation science researchers (e.g., interventionists), and applied and theoretical D&I researchers. Including the entire implementation workforce in a description of the field provides opportunities to see where practitioners have not been empowered to exert influence and to change these inequities. While D&I professionals are likely to fill more than one role at a time or during their careers and may hold perspectives that are therefore representative of a number of these D&I actors, we would like to re-center the current conversation within D&I around implementation support practitioners and delivery systems specifically to uphold our commitment to those most directly affected by D&I efforts.

Communities and individuals impacted by the change

Communities and the individuals who comprise them play a critical role in the success or failure of efforts to implement evidence-based or informed programs and practices (EBPs) within a particular setting [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. Aligned with this principle, there has been a shifting focus from using community-based to community-led research methods across academic disciplines [ 18 , 19 ]. Funding agencies have also begun to recognize the need for greater community involvement in research, with current directives to engage community partners across the research spectrum [ 20 ]. As suggested by others, strengthening relationships between communities and individuals working at all levels of implementation should remain a priority in closing the evidence-to-practice gap and upholding equity in D;I; indeed, it is essential [ 21 ].

Practitioners—implementation support practitioners and delivery systems

Implementation has been happening for the entirety of human history. While several scientific fields (e.g., political science, medicine) began formally investigating processes of D&I in the mid-to-late twentieth century—thereby laying the foundation for current research in this area— the distinct field of D&I only emerged in the past few decades, prompted by repeatedly observed barriers to the successful implementation of EBPs [ 5 , 22 ].

“Implementation practitioners” are professionals comprised of two distinct groups: implementation support practitioners [ 23 , 24 ] (e.g., administrators, policy-makers) are involved in planning, engagement, co-creation, strategy selection, capacity building, monitoring, and evaluation; delivery systems (e.g., front-line managers at organizations implementing an EBP) are responsible for implementing the actual practices with professionals, organizations, and the public [ 11 ]. Identifying professionals engaged in implementation practice can be difficult as there is inconsistency and terminology; for example, there are over 30 job titles associated with implementation support practitioner roles (see Fig.  1 ). “Delivery systems” are often unaware of the D&I field or their role as end-users. Implementation researchers appropriately identifying and connecting with delivery systems and implementation support practitioners is key to closing the evidence-to-practice gap and improving impact [ 4 ].

Professional job titles of individuals working directly in implementation or implementation support as identified through the Center for Implementation (In preparation for an event about the roles of implementation support practitioners, an open call was sent out to members of an online community of professionals supporting implementation. People were asked for their current or previous job titles that included an implementation component.)

Intermediaries

Globally, there are several intermediary organizations serving to translate findings from D&I to support the implementation of EBPs by delivery systems and implementation support practitioners (e.g., the Collaborative for Implementation Practice; Center for Evidence and Implementation in Australia; Impact Center at the University of North Carolina; Center for Effective Services in Ireland; the Nigerian Implementation Science Alliance). These organizations employ implementation support practitioners and bridge the implementation research-to-practice divide by providing training in implementation-related skills and creating tools to support the selection of appropriate implementation strategies. For example, one intermediary has a mini-course providing an introduction to implementation that has enrolled over 10,000 individuals. Millions of research, government, and philanthropic dollars are being invested in these organizations [ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ]. As implementation researchers and intermediaries, the authors regularly hear from organizations, communities, and individuals that they struggle to access supports in implementation science to address their needs in implementing evidence The demand for this type of work often outpaces the supply, and researchers and funders alike state a clear need for additional resources linking implementation science and practice [ 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 ].

Researchers

To better clarify the full spectrum of implementation researchers, researchers whose work is primarily centered on the advancement of implementation ideas (e.g., theory, methods, or framework (TMF) development) are referred to as theoretical implementation scientists and those whose work is primarily centered on the direct use of implementation concepts as a method to achieve better clinical or programmatic outcomes as applied implementation scientists . Scientists may work on both theoretical and applied projects but tend to focus their programs of research in one or the other and may even identify as one or the other.

Non-D&I researchers are also becoming increasingly interested in D&I, as evidenced by the growing number of D&I training institutes globally (e.g., HIV, Infectious Disease and Global Health Implementation Research Institute (HIGH IRI); University College Cork Implementation Science Training Institute; University of Nairobi Implementation Science Fellowship; Training Institute for Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health (TIDIRH)) [ 34 ]. Non-D&I researchers are individuals from distinct substantive areas (e.g., HIV, cancer prevention) who are interested in applying D&I to their work but have limited training in this area. These researchers often aim to draw from the TMFs and evidence from D&I to design, implement, and scale EBPs. They may benefit from increased collaboration with individuals who have worked more squarely in D&I.

What are we doing?

We, the paper’s authors, entered the field of D&I with the goal of bridging the research-to-practice gap to better improve the lives of people in our areas of scholarship (HIV, mental health). Yet, we have found that our substantively distinct bodies of applied D&I research have unfolded in such a way that we are all currently involved in a range of theoretical implementation research. This journey has not been without difficulty—the further we moved from our applied work and what grounded our science, the less impact we felt we were having. While we found theoretical research important, we felt as though our roles and functions within D&I were less clear. This lack of clarity in our professional self-concept ultimately helped us identify that D&I is not monolithic. Through conversation, we found that articulating the spectrum of theoretical to applied D&I helped us regain the clarity we needed to continue advancing our science. We believe these realizations could also be beneficial to other D&I professionals.

Leveraging translational science to find clarity

There is extensive literature on moving research findings into practice [ 35 ], but the translation of D&I knowledge into practice has received much less attention [ 1 ]. Moreover, there is insufficient understanding of which actors are involved at which stages along this spectrum, how each stage contributes to the field, and how these stages, and actors at each of these stages, can connect and achieve shared goals. In Fig.  2 , the authors draw on the translational spectrum to address these limitations. The traditional translational spectrum aims to streamline the “bench to bedside” approach and defines the continuum of basic science (stage T0) to public health science (stage T4) [ 36 ]. D&I science has long been placed in the T3–T4 segments of the traditional translational spectrum [ 36 ]. However, we argue that the full translational spectrum, from T0 through T4, is applicable to D&I. This distinction is often at the core of the tension observed within the field and where our personal struggles in our shifting identities and relationship with D&I research emerged.

The translational spectrum applied to implementation science

In the traditional translational spectrum, T0, “pre-clinical research,” includes bench science and aims to define mechanisms, targets, and strategies for intervention on a general level. In D&I, theoretical implementation scientists work on the development of TMFs, and elicitation, description, and modeling of mechanisms. Many of the foundational papers that guide implementation research to date stem from work at this stage [ 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 ]. T1, “translation to humans,” includes Stage 1 clinical trials and proof of concept science and aims to develop new methods of diagnosis, treatment, and prevention in highly controlled settings. In D&I, theoretical and applied implementation researchers focus on translating theoretical constructs (i.e., TMFs) to actual people and developing methods to test these constructs. Examples of this type of research include measurement of implementation domains such as context (e.g., the Organizational Readiness for Change measure) [ 44 ] and implementation outcomes (e.g., the NoMAD measure from Normalization Process Theory) [ 45 ]. T2, “translation to patients,” includes Stages 2–3 clinical trials and aims to develop clinical applications and evidence-based guidelines for a given disease. In D&I, applied implementation researchers focus on identifying implementation constructs relevant to a specific situation, intervention, context, or population where the researchers aim to understand how best to implement. Traditional randomized controlled trial designs are often used in this stage. Individuals working at this stage may test bundled strategies, interrogate the “active ingredients” in strategies [ 46 ], or test strategies in varied contexts.

An interesting phenomenon occurs in the T3–4 range. Acknowledging the contributions of researchers and practitioners, we see a split whereby researchers continue to serve as the primary actors in one branch of the translational spectrum, while practitioners become the primary actors in another branch of the spectrum. T3, “translation to practice,” includes comparative effectiveness trials and clinical outcome studies and aims to evaluate real-world effectiveness. In D&I, implementation support practitioners come into a principal role. Individuals working in this capacity use the results of T0–2 to plan implementation projects, sometimes in the form of quality improvement-type projects. In parallel, T3 applied implementation researchers are primarily monitoring or evaluating implementation projects’ real-world effectiveness; this could involve research using pragmatic or naturalistic methods whereby researchers partner with healthcare delivery systems or organizations to better understand real-world implementation or effectiveness outcomes. T4 involves population-level outcomes research and monitoring improvements in morbidity and mortality to impact policy or system change. In D&I, implementation support practitioners and delivery systems scale EBPs up and out. Implementation researchers working at stage T4 define the implementation workforce, develop surveillance systems, and evaluate the effects of evidence-informed implementation on project successes. Intermediaries are prime partners in this work. Additional work is needed to establish clear evidence about what is and is not working on a broad scale and in what contexts [ 42 , 47 ].

Defining the translational spectrum for D&I facilitates the process of identifying a “home base” for individuals involved in D&I science, thereby improving self-concept clarity and making clear how individuals can foray into upstream and downstream segments to better link their research with that of others. In keeping with findings from workplace self-concept clarity literature [ 48 , 49 ], when we claim our places in the spectrum, we can improve our effectiveness and avoid burnout [ 50 ]. Specifically, we can improve our capacity to clearly generate research questions, identify colleagues, and expand the impact of our work.

How should we do it?

As has been noted by others [ 21 , 51 , 52 ], there is a significant disconnect between individuals working in distinct roles within the field of D&I, particularly between those operating at the two ends of the D&I translational spectrum. By interacting more often and intentionally across the entirety of the D&I process, we as a field could develop significant synergy and produce actionable solutions more quickly to achieve shared goals.

Asking and answering the right question

Fundamental respect for the work of actors at every level of the implementation spectrum, fostered by regular communication, is essential in resolving our identity crises, achieving our shared goals, and upholding equity within the field [ 21 ]. One fundamental way for theoretical implementation scientists to demonstrate respect for implementation practitioners is to ask research questions that implementation practitioners want answered [ 52 ]. Implementation practitioners have critical theoretical questions that arise while implementing programs and policies in their specific contexts. For example, implementation practitioners regularly assess organizational readiness for change before altering or implementing a new program or policy (as recommended in the implementation science literature). Yet when the assessments suggest that sites are not ready to implement the intended change, there is little guidance from implementation science about how to best address this issue. A common suggestion is to prioritize “ready” sites [ 53 ]. This approach is likely to perpetuate existing inequities or disparities, as “ready” sites are often the sites that are least in need of additional resources and supports, and leaves “non-ready” sites with no plan for reaching a sufficient level of readiness. What strategies can increase readiness? Another example involves the need for a more concrete understanding of the effects of adaptation. While the field might agree adaptation is often important to the scale-up and scale-out of EBPs, many adaptation tools [ 54 , 55 ] are designed for researchers as opposed to practitioners looking for guidance in understanding if the adaptations they propose will influence the effectiveness of the original EBP. How can D&I measures be made more accessible for implementation practitioners? These are just two examples of many.

Working with existing implementation efforts

Evaluating existing processes and successes of implementation practitioners can also galvanize efforts, improve impact of D&I, and uphold equity in D&I. Delivery systems are continually implementing “the thing” and have been for years. Connecting with existing implementation efforts and studying the effectiveness of implementation strategies being actively used by delivery systems is critical to supporting the ongoing work of these individuals [ 2 , 21 , 56 ]. In many ways, this can shortcut science more quickly to a clearer understanding of what works when and for whom, and improve the likelihood of establishing sustainable practices and policies that are feasible, acceptable, and appropriate [ 23 , 24 ]. This approach is also consistent with the principles of community-based participatory research, including respect for lived experience and tailoring interventions to the needs of the community [ 57 , 58 ].

Fostering increased communication

Increased communication among actors across the D&I translational spectrum is critical, as previously noted [ 3 , 52 , 59 ]. To again draw from the successes of other fields, the International AIDS Society is a group of over 13,000 members worldwide that “unite(s) scientists, policymakers and activists to galvanize the scientific response, build global solidarity and enhance human dignity for all people living with and affected by HIV” [ 60 ]. The International AIDS Society hosts two conferences that rotate annually with a shifting focus between research and practice. Using this model, which has been repeatedly shown to be highly impactful, individuals working at all stages of the HIV implementation science spectrum can engage in, learn from, and contribute to dialogue with others with distinct perspectives and roles in the discipline, thereby improving equity concerning whose voices are centered and uplifted in global agenda-setting efforts. As such, the field of D&I could benefit from an organization akin to the International AIDS Society and agenda-setting practices and conference structures employed by this Society [ 61 , 62 , 63 ].

Developing tools to directly support real-world D&I

Tools that facilitate the translation of D&I into practice are also critical to achieving shared goals [ 1 ]. Again, the field of D&I can look to adjacent fields to learn how they have successfully scaled. For example, the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI), whose mission is to improve health and healthcare worldwide, has scaled the use of quality improvement methods. Over 30 years, they have worked in 42 countries and have had over 7 million online course enrollments [ 64 ]. Part of IHI’s model has been to develop practical and easy-to-use improvement tools. A critique of implementation science is that existing frameworks are complicated and difficult to use [ 3 , 4 ]. If the field of D&I learned from the success of IHI and developed tools that help professionals operationalize implementation science in practice, it would support the broader use of D&I to improve outcomes.

Aligning funding mechanisms and priorities

Funding agencies should increase requirements and supports for community inclusion and implementation throughout the research process. Researchers currently prioritize funding agency policies and expectations, which may not allow enough time for building sustainable community relationships and co-creation of work. A shift in funding agencies’ research calls and approach to awarding research dollars is necessary to build capacity for long-term academic-community partnerships [ 65 , 66 , 67 ]. Implementation science-related funding calls from the National Institutes of Health, UK Research and Innovation, the Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases, the South African Medical Research Council, and other funding agencies could more intentionally include requirements for this type of work.

Key actions are needed for the field of D&I to self-actualize: (1) Uphold everyone’s place at the implementation table while centering the wants and needs of those most directly affected by implementation efforts; (2) Clarify where on the translational spectrum work is being done by whom and where the gaps in both sufficient volume of work and translation of that work lie; and (3) Facilitate regular communication across the spectrum, from theoretical implementation scientists to implementation practitioners and vice versa. Ideally, this work should be done with researchers and practitioners around the globe. If these three tasks are accomplished, we as a field will be able to reverse the tides and bridge the implementation research-to-practice gap, instead of letting it continue to grow.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

• Dissemination and implementation

Human immunodeficiency virus

Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome

Westerlund A, Sundberg L, Nilsen P. Implementation of implementation science knowledge: the research-practice gap paradox. Worldviews Evidence-Based Nurs. 2019;16(5):332–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12403 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Metz A, Jensen T, Farley A, Boaz A. Is implementation research out of step with implementation practice? Pathways to effective implementation support over the last decade. Implement Res Pract. 2022;3:263348952211055. https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895221105585 .

Rapport F, Smith J, Hutchinson K, et al. Too much theory and not enough practice? The challenge of implementation science application in healthcare practice. J Eval Clin Pract. 2022;28(6):991–1002. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13600 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Beidas RS, Dorsey S, Lewis CC, et al. Promises and pitfalls in implementation science from the perspective of US-based researchers: learning from a pre-mortem. Implement Sci. 2022;17(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01226-3 .

Eccles MP, Mittman BS. Welcome to implementation science. Implement Sci. 2006;1(1):1–3. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-1-1 .

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Taylor SP, Kowalkowski MA, Beidas RS. Where is the implementation science? An opportunity to apply principles during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clin Infect Dis. 2020:6–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa622 .

Lyon AR, Comtois KA, Kerns SEU, Landes SJ, Lewis CC. Closing the science–practice gap in implementation before it widens. In: Albers B, Shlonsky A, Mildon R, eds. Implementation Science 3.0. Springer International Publishing; 2020:295–313. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03874-8_12 .

Ploeg J, Davies B, Edwards N, Gifford W, Miller PE. Factors influencing best-practice guideline implementation: Lessons learned from administrators, nursing staff, and project leaders. Worldviews Evidence-Based Nurs. 2007;4(4):210–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6787.2007.00106.x .

Bernhardt JM, Mays D, Kreuter MW. Dissemination 2.0: closing the gap between knowledge and practice with new media and marketing. J Health Commun. 2011;16(SUPPL. 1):32–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2011.593608 .

National Cancer Institute. Implementation Science. 2020. Accessed 12 Sept 2023. https://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/is/about .

Wandersman A, Duffy J, Flaspohler P, et al. Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: The interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation. Am J Community Psychol. 2008;41(3–4):171–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-008-9174-z .

Boulton R, Sandall J, Sevdalis N. The Cultural Politics of ‘Implementation Science.’ J Med Humanit. 2020;41(3):379–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10912-020-09607-9 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Jensen TM, Metz AJ, Farley AB, Disbennett ME. Developing a practice-driven research agenda in implementation science : Perspectives from experienced implementation support practitioners. Published online. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895231199063 .

Iwelunmor J, Blackstone S, Veira D, et al. Toward the sustainability of health interventions implemented in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and conceptual framework. Implement Sci. 2016;11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0392-8 .

Baptiste S, Manouan A, Garcia P, Etya’ale H, Swan T, Jallow W. Community-led monitoring: when community data drives implementation strategies. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2020;17(5):415–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11904-020-00521-2 .

Anderson KA, Dabelko-Schoeny H, Koeuth S, Marx K, Gitlin LN, Gaugler JE. The use of community advisory boards in pragmatic clinical trials: The case of the adult day services plus project. Home Health Care Serv Q. 2021;40(1):16–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621424.2020.1816522 .

Ramanadhan S, Davis M, Donaldson ST, Miller E, Minkler M. Participatory Approaches in Dissemination and Implementation Science. In: Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK, editors. Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health: Translating Science to Practice. New York: Oxford University Press; 2023. p. 212.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Ricalde MCA, Annoni J, Bonney R, et al. Understanding the Impact of Equitable Collaborations between Science Institutions and Community-Based Organizations: Improving Science through Community-Led Research. Bioscience. 2022;72(6):585–600. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biac001 .

Fernandez ME, Ten Hoor GA, van Lieshout S, et al. Implementation mapping: using intervention mapping to develop implementation strategies. Front Public Heal. 2019;7(JUN):1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2019.00158 .

National Institutes of Health. All of Us: Local Community and/or Participant Advisory Boards (C/PABs). 2023. Accessed 13 Sept 2023. https://allofus.nih.gov/about/who-we-are/all-us-community-and-participant-advisory-boards .

Brownson RC, Kumanyika SK, Kreuter MW, Haire-Joshu D. Implementation science should give higher priority to health equity. Implement Sci. 2021;16(1):28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01097-0 .

Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med. 2011;104(12):510–20. https://doi.org/10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180 .

Bührmann L, Driessen P, Metz A, et al. Knowledge and attitudes of implementation support practitioners—findings from a systematic integrative review. PLoS One. 2022;17(5 May):1–25. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267533 .

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Albers B, Metz A, Burke K. Implementation support practitioners- A proposal for consolidating a diverse evidence base. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05145-1 .

PCORI dissemination and implementation funding initiatives. Accessed 29 Feb 2024. https://www.pcori.org/impact/putting-evidence-work/pcori-dissemination-and-implementation-funding-initiatives .

United States Agency for International Development. USAID’s Implementation Science Investment. Accessed 29 Feb 2024. https://www.usaid.gov/fact-sheet/usaids-implementation-science-investment .

National Heart, Lung and BI. Implementation Science Branch. Accessed 29 Feb 2024. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/about/translation-research-and-implementation-science/implementation-science .

Zurynski Y, Smith CL, Knaggs G, Meulenbroeks I. Funding research translation: how we got here and what to do next. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2021;45(5):420–3. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.13131 .

Holmes B, Hamilton AB. Three opportunities to boost implementation science at a critical time of need. Heal Published online. 2021. https://doi.org/10.18865/ed.29.S1.77 .

Planning team for the Pathways to Prevention (P2P) Workshop on Achieving Health Equity in Preventive Services and the Office for Disease Prevention portfolio analysis team. We Need More Implementation Science To Improve Health Equity in Clinical Preventive Services. Director’s Messages. https://prevention.nih.gov/about-odp/directors-messages/2022/we-need-more-implementation-science-improve-health-equity-clinical-preventive-services . Published October 14, 2022. Accessed 29 Feb 2024.

Implementation Science Takes Off at Brown. 2023. Accessed 29 Feb 2024. https://psych.med.brown.edu/news/2023-10-02/bridge-growth .

Davis R, D’Lima D. Building capacity in dissemination and implementation science: a systematic review of the academic literature on teaching and training initiatives. Implement Sci. 2020;15(1):97. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-020-01051-6 .

Boyce CA, Barfield W, Curry J, et al. Building the next generation of implementation science careers to advance health equity. 2019;29:77–82. https://doi.org/10.18865/ed.29.S1.77 .

Osanjo GO, Oyugi JO, Kibwage IO, et al. Building capacity in implementation science research training at the University of Nairobi. Implement Sci. 2016;11(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/S13012-016-0395-5 .

Straus SE, Ma JT, Graham I. Defining knowledge translation. Review. 2009;181:165–8. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.081229 .

National Center for Advancing Translational Science. Transforming Translational Science. https://ncats.nih.gov/files/NCATS-factsheet.pdf . Accessed 24 Mar 2020. 2017;Fall.

Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: Conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Ment Heal Ment Heal Serv Res. 2011;38(2):65–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7 .

Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50 .

Aarons GA, Hurlburt M, Horwitz SMC. Advancing a conceptual model of evidence-based practice implementation in public service sectors. Adm Policy Ment Heal Ment Heal Serv Res. 2011;38(1):4–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-010-0327-7 .

Tabak RG, Khoong EC, Chambers DA, Brownson RC. Bridging research and practice: Models for dissemination and implementation research. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43(3):337–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2012.05.024 .

Walsh-Bailey C, Tsai E, Tabak RG, et al. A scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models. Implement Sci. 2021;16(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01173-5 .

Nilsen P, Bernhardsson S. Context matters in implementation science: A scoping review of determinant frameworks that describe contextual determinants for implementation outcomes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4015-3 .

Powell BJ, Waltz TJ, Chinman MJ, et al. A refined compilation of implementation strategies: Results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1 .

Shea CM, Jacobs SR, Esserman DA, Bruce K, Weiner BJ. Organizational readiness for implementing change: A psychometric assessment of a new measure. Implement Sci. 2014;9(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-7 .

Finch TL, Girling M, May CR, et al. Improving the normalization of complex interventions : part 2 - validation of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory ( NPT ). BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(135):1–13.

Google Scholar  

Desveaux L, Nguyen MD, Ivers NM, et al. Snakes and ladders: A qualitative study understanding the active ingredients of social interaction around the use of audit and feedback. Transl Behav Med. 2023;13(5):316–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibac114 .

Edwards N, Barker PM. The importance of context in implementation research. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2014;67:S157–62. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0000000000000322 .

Gray CE, Mcintyre KP, Mattingly BA, Jr GWL. Interpersonal Relationships and the Self-Concept. Springer International Publishing; 2020.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43747-3 .

Wu P, Liu T, Li Q, Yu X, Liu Z, Tian S. Maintaining the working state of firefighters by utilizing self-concept clarity as a resource. BMC Public Health. 2024;24(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-17896-1 .

Balundė A, Paradnikė K. Resources linked to work engagement: the role of high performance work practices, employees’ mindfulness, and self-concept clarity. Soc Inq into Well-Being. 2016;2(2):55–62. https://doi.org/10.13165/SIIW-16-2-2-06 .

Harvey G, Rycroft-Malone J, Seers K, et al. Connecting the science and practice of implementation – applying the lens of context to inform study design in implementation research. Front Heal Serv. 2023;3(July):1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2023.1162762 .

Tabak RG, Padek MM, Kerner JF, et al. Dissemination and Implementation Science Training Needs: Insights From Practitioners and Researchers. Am J Prev Med. 2017;52(3):S322–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2016.10.005 .

Atkins BR, Allred S, Hart D. Philanthropy’s Rural Blind Spot. Stanford Soc Innov Rev. Published online 2021. https://tableau.dsc.umich.edu/t/UM-Public/views/IndexofDeepDisadvantage/CountiesCitiesMap?:isGuestRedirectFromVizportal=y&:embed=y .

Stirman SW, Baumann AA, Miller CJ. The FRAME: An expanded framework for reporting adaptations and modifications to evidence-based interventions. Implement Sci. 2019;14(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-019-0898-y .

Miller CJ, Barnett ML, Baumann AA, Gutner CA, Wiltsey-Stirman S. The FRAME-IS: a framework for documenting modifications to implementation strategies in healthcare. Implement Sci. 2021;16(1):36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01105-3 .

Boaz A. Lost in co-production: To enable true collaboration we need to nurture different academic identities . LSE; 2021. p. 1–4. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2021/06/25/lost-in-co-production-to-enable-truecollaboration-we-need-to-%0Anurture-different-academic-identities/ .

Seifer S. Walking the Talk: Achieving the Promise of Authentic Partnerships. Partnersh Perspect. 2007;IV(I):1–12.

Ramanadhan S, Davis MM, Armstrong R, et al. Participatory implementation science to increase the impact of evidence-based cancer prevention and control. Cancer Causes Control. 2018;29(1):363–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-018-1008-1 .

Shelton RC, Brownson RC. Enhancing Impact: A Call to Action for Equitable Implementation Science. Prev Sci Published online. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-023-01589-z .

International AIDS Society. Home Page. Accessed 2 Oct 2023. https://www.iasociety.org .

Cahn P, McClure C. Beyond the first 25 years: The International AIDS Society and its role in the global response to AIDS. Retrovirology. 2006;3(1):2004–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-4690-3-85 .

Kort R. 5th International AIDS Society Conference on HIV Pathogenesis, treatment and prevention: summary of key research and implications for policy and practice - operations research. J Int AIDS Soc. 2010;13(SUPPL. 1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1758-2652-13-S1-S5 .

Gayle H, Wainberg MA. Impact of the 16th International Conference on AIDS: can these conferences lead to policy change? Retrovirology. 2007;4:2–3. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-4690-4-13 .

IHI Marks 30 Years of Quality Improvement in Health Care Worldwide. BusinessWire. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20211028005209/en/IHI-Marks-30-Years-of-Quality-Improvement-in-Health-Care-Worldwide . Published 28 Oct 2021.

Elwood WN, Corrigan JG, Morris KA. NIH-Funded CBPR: self-reported community partner and investigator perspectives. J Community Health. 2019;44(4):740–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-019-00661-6 .

Teufel-Shone NI, Schwartz AL, Hardy LJ, et al. Supporting new community-based participatory research partnerships. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16010044 .

Minkler M, Blackwell AG, Thompson M, Tamir HB. Community-based participatory research: implications for public health funding. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(8):1210–3. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.93.8.1210 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Drs. Cory Bradley and Donny Gerke for their contributions in early conceptualization of this paper and to colleagues who took the time to review and provide feedback prior to submission.

GB was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health grant T32MH019960 at Washington University (PI: Leopoldo J. Cabassa) during a portion of manuscript development. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of Mental Health.

Author information

Gretchen J. R. Buchanan, Lindsey M. Filiatreau and Julia Moore are co-first authors.

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute, Minneapolis, MN and University of Minnesota Medical School, MN, Minneapolis, USA

Gretchen J. R. Buchanan

Division of Infectious Diseases, School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, MO, St. Louis, USA

Lindsey M. Filiatreau

The Center for Implementation, ON, Toronto, Canada

Julia E. Moore

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

GB, LF, and JM equally participated in the conception, drafting, and revising of the manuscript, and they have approved the manuscript as submitted. GB, LF, and JM agree to be personally accountable for their own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gretchen J. R. Buchanan .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests.

Author JM is the Director of The Center for Implementation and previously led the implementation team at the Knowledge Translation Program, St. Michael’s Hospital. Several examples are drawn from direct experience in these roles. LF and GB declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Buchanan, G.J.R., Filiatreau, L.M. & Moore, J.E. Organizing the dissemination and implementation field: who are we, what are we doing, and how should we do it?. Implement Sci Commun 5 , 38 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-024-00572-1

Download citation

Received : 10 November 2023

Accepted : 20 March 2024

Published : 11 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-024-00572-1

Share this article

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

• Implementation science
• Translational science
• Translational science spectrum
• Translational research continuum
• Evidence to practice gap
• Implementation support practitioners

Implementation Science Communications

ISSN: 2662-2211

• Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
• General enquiries: [email protected]