Free and Informative Example of an Introduction in a Research Paper

Free and Informative Example of an Introduction in a Research Paper

Writing the introduction for a research paper is often one of the most difficult tasks an academic writer faces. The introduction serves as the reader’s first impression of your research — it sets the tone, defines the scope, and establishes the credibility of your work. A strong introduction does far more than simply begin a paper: it identifies the research problem, presents background information, outlines the existing scholarship, states the purpose of the study, explains its significance, and briefly indicates how the paper is structured.

In this article, you will find a free and informative example of an introduction in a research paper. Before examining the example, we will explore what makes an introduction effective and why it plays such a crucial role in academic and scientific writing. This detailed explanation and the extended sample will help students and researchers in any field to better understand how to construct a clear, engaging, and persuasive opening section.

Why the Introduction Matters

An introduction is more than a summary; it is a carefully constructed roadmap that guides your reader into the world of your research. In both the humanities and the sciences, an introduction should accomplish several goals:

• Define the research problem or question – What specific issue, gap, or debate does your paper address?
• Provide relevant context and background – What has already been said or discovered about this topic?
• Explain why the topic is significant – Why does this matter to your field, society, or future research?
• Present your main aim or hypothesis – What will your study demonstrate or test?
• Outline the approach or methodology – How did you go about investigating your question?
• Preview the structure of your paper – How will your argument unfold across the sections?

Although these elements appear straightforward, weaving them together into a compelling narrative requires both clarity and creativity. Many researchers struggle with striking the right balance between depth and concision. The introduction must be informative without overwhelming the reader, and formal without becoming dry or inaccessible.

Common Challenges When Writing Introductions

Writers frequently face several obstacles when attempting to compose an effective introduction:

1. Over-generalisation: Starting too broadly or using vague statements that fail to capture the specific focus of the study.
2. Insufficient context: Not providing enough background to help readers unfamiliar with the topic understand its importance.
3. Lack of focus: Presenting too many ideas at once without a clear link between the problem, aim, and method.
4. Failure to engage: Writing in a purely descriptive way that does not spark interest or curiosity.
5. Missing structural cues: Forgetting to indicate what comes next in the paper, leaving readers uncertain of its direction.

Keeping these pitfalls in mind, the following example of an introduction in a research paper demonstrates how each element can be integrated effectively. The text has been written in a formal yet readable style and designed to apply to any discipline.

Example of an Introduction in a Research Paper

As a student of medieval literature, I have often attended lectures and read scholarly articles that assert — sometimes with striking certainty — that no writer or thinker influenced the later Middle Ages more profoundly than Maximus Auctor. The nature of Auctor’s supposed influence varies widely: some scholars emphasise his theological authority, others his contributions to philosophy, law, or education. Were all these claims entirely true, nearly every aspect of medieval culture — from religion and literature to architecture and even trade — could be traced back to the authoritative voice of Auctor.

While I do not doubt Auctor’s significance to the intellectual climate of his time, I argue that a closer critical examination of primary evidence from the late eleventh to the fifteenth centuries reveals a more complex and nuanced picture. My research therefore investigates English manuscripts of Auctor’s writings, focusing on the marginal annotations and ownership marks left by medieval readers. These traces provide invaluable insights into how Auctor’s works were actually received, read, and interpreted in the centuries that followed his life.

Maximus Auctor’s writings emerged during the decline of the Roman Empire, yet it was not until the Norman church reforms of the late eleventh century that they began to circulate widely in England. Monastic scribes carefully copied selected texts, including his Biblical Commentaries, Philosophical Dialogues, and Personal Letters. By the twelfth century, these works were appearing in private collections as well. The enduring fascination with Auctor’s ideas generated over 350 manuscripts that either survive today or have been identified through medieval catalogues and records. This abundance of primary material offers a rich foundation for re-evaluating how his influence spread through medieval England.

Initial findings indicate that the reality of Auctor’s reception diverges sharply from the sweeping generalisations found in modern scholarship. Some readers annotated his texts in ways that reveal deep theological engagement, while others appear to have used his works as rhetorical models or sources of moral authority. In some cases, the same passage was used to support opposing arguments in theological debates, underscoring the diversity of interpretation among medieval readers.

It is important to note that my aim is not to dismiss earlier scholarship on Auctor’s influence. Rather, I seek to build upon and refine it. Scholars such as Mirachi and Frederik (2007) and Ramsey and Morton (2011) have already moved beyond general claims by analysing manuscript evidence in specific contexts. Mirachi and Frederik’s examination of Earl Rockface’s extensive fourteenth-century collection, and Ramsey and Morton’s detailed analysis of northern English monastic libraries, both reveal surprising discrepancies between assumption and evidence. Similarly, Underhill (2013) returned to Auctor’s original Latin texts, comparing them with later medieval writings to demonstrate how meaning evolved across time and translation.

My own research has benefited greatly from these studies as well as the foundational work of Oleson (1934), whose focus on reader reception was ahead of its time. Oleson’s insight that marginal annotations offer a direct window into medieval thought remains essential. Combining Oleson’s methods with Ramsey and Morton’s (2011) palaeographic techniques and Mirachi and Frederik’s (2007) contextual analysis, my study employs a cross-disciplinary approach to understanding medieval readership. These combined strategies are explained in detail in the Methods and Manuscripts section of my paper.

The findings presented in the next section, The Responses of Auctor’s Medieval Readers, reveal an array of unexpected interpretations and creative adaptations. The individuality of these responses serves as a reminder that no text exerts a single, uniform influence. Instead, each reader brings unique experiences, expectations, and intellectual frameworks to their engagement with a work. Consequently, sweeping claims about Auctor’s universal influence must be re-examined in light of this diversity. The goal of my study is to recover the personal, often idiosyncratic, voices of medieval readers and to situate their interpretations within their historical and cultural contexts.

Ultimately, this research demonstrates how reader reception — the ways individuals interpret and use texts — can reshape our understanding of intellectual history. By returning to primary sources, we can move beyond inherited assumptions and rediscover how ideas were genuinely understood and transmitted across generations. Such an approach not only enriches our knowledge of Auctor but also illustrates the broader value of examining the life of texts through their readers.

What Makes This Introduction Effective?

Several structural and stylistic features contribute to the strength of the above example. Let us explore what makes it effective and how you can apply similar techniques when writing your own introduction.

1. From General to Specific

The introduction begins with a general statement familiar to anyone studying medieval literature before gradually narrowing down to the author’s specific research focus. This movement from broad context to detailed investigation creates a logical flow and helps readers understand both the relevance and novelty of the study.

2. Clarity and Precision of Language

Although the vocabulary is formal, it avoids excessive jargon. For example, terms such as “biblical commentaries” and “surviving manuscripts” are used instead of more specialised alternatives like “exegetical writings” or “extant materials.” Choosing precise yet widely understood words ensures clarity for an interdisciplinary audience.

3. Balanced Engagement with Scholarship

The introduction briefly summarises previous research but focuses only on the most relevant studies. Each reference serves a purpose: to establish a gap, demonstrate continuity, or provide methodological grounding. In research writing, quality of engagement always outweighs quantity of citations.

4. Indication of Structure

In the humanities, introductions often signal the organisation of the paper in a flexible manner. This example references subsequent sections — such as Literature Review, Methods, and Findings — without rigidly listing them. In contrast, scientific papers often dedicate a short concluding paragraph of the introduction to summarising the structure more formally.

5. Reconnection at the End

A strong introduction circles back to its central question or argument. The example concludes by restating the importance of examining medieval readers’ responses, thus reinforcing the study’s contribution and encouraging readers to continue to the next section.

Tips for Writing Your Own Research Paper Introduction

• Start with context, not conclusions. Avoid declaring your main finding too early. Instead, guide readers toward understanding why your research question matters.
• Be concise but substantial. Most introductions should make up about 10–15% of your total paper length, depending on the discipline.
• Define key terms early. If your paper uses specialised vocabulary, clarify it in the introduction to prevent confusion later.
• Show awareness of existing debates. Situate your research within broader scholarly conversations to demonstrate familiarity and relevance.
• End with direction. Signal how your study will proceed and what readers can expect from the following sections.

Final Thoughts

Writing an engaging and informative research paper introduction takes practice, patience, and precision. The introduction is your opportunity to convince readers that your research is worth their time and attention. By providing a clear rationale, demonstrating awareness of relevant literature, and outlining the significance of your work, you establish the credibility and importance of your study from the very beginning.

The example of an introduction in a research paper provided above illustrates how even a fictional scenario can demonstrate the balance of clarity, depth, and scholarly tone required for academic writing. Whether you are working on a humanities essay or a scientific paper, the same principles apply: introduce your problem clearly, explain why it matters, and show how your research offers a valuable contribution.

By following these strategies, you can transform the introduction from a routine requirement into a persuasive gateway that invites readers to explore your research in full.

For more detailed guidance on academic writing, editing, and proofreading, explore our resources on Proof-Reading-Service.com. Our professional editors specialise in helping researchers produce clear, polished, and publication-ready manuscripts.