research report in nederlands

Development of the scientific research profile of the Netherlands

• In 2020, the Netherlands are in the top 5 of reference countries with the highest citation impact score in all scientific fields.
• Over the period 2004-2020, the number of Dutch publications increases in all scientific fields.
• The share of publications relative to other countries has fallen, mainly due to the strong rise of Chinese science.

The citation impact indicates the extent to which reference is made to scientific publications. The more an article is cited, the higher its scientific impact.

This fact sheet discusses differences in citation impact and publication volume between different scientific fields. The fields of Humanities and Law have not been included because no reliable conclusions can be drawn on the basis of the data for those fields. We compare the Netherlands with 20 reference countries, over the period from 2001‑2004 (indicated by “2004”) to 2017-2020 (indicated by “2020”).

This fact sheet is based on publication and citation data from the citation index system drawn up by the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), which is based on raw data from Web of Science. The data provides an indication of developments, but does not give a complete picture of all aspects relevant to the quality and extent of Dutch science.

Research profile of the Netherlands

The figure below compares the citation impact score with an indicator of volume: the percentage of Dutch articles in the total number of articles in a given scientific field. The arrows indicate the profile for each field in 2004 and in 2020. To give a clear indication of the trend in development over that period, a straight line has been drawn between 2004 and 2020.

Development of citation impact score

The above graph shows a number of trends:

• The Netherlands is doing very well. The citation impact score for all fields in 2020 is well above the global average (1.0).
• The citation impact was increasing for almost all fields. The exception is Nature, where the citation impact decreases.
• The greatest development was in the fields of Agriculture and Social Sciences.

A similar picture is apparent from the proportion of publications that are among the top 10% most cited publications worldwide: all the fields score (well) above average and show an increase over the entire period or a stabilization. The exception is once again Nature, which decreases over time.

In short, the Netherlands has developed in such a way that all the scientific fields now score well above the global average.

Development in volume

As regards the relative proportion of publications, the Netherlands shows an increase in the scientific fields of Social Sciences and Health sciences and a decrease in Agricultural sciences, Natural sciences, and Engineering. The rise of China plays a major role in this decline. The proportion of Chinese publications in the fields of Agricultural sciences, Natural sciences, and Engineering increased more sharply between 2004 and 2020 than in the reference countries. As a result, the proportion of Agricultural sciences, Natural sciences, and Engineering publications is declining in a large majority of the reference countries.

When China is excluded from the reference countries, the proportion of Dutch Agricultural sciences, Natural sciences, and Engineering publications  remains roughly the same: Agricultural sciences goes from 2.7% to 2.6%; Natural sciences from 2.4% to 2.7%; Engineering from 2.2% to 2.2%. In the field of Health and Social Science, the proportion of Dutch publications without China in fact rises more sharply; Health from 3.1% to 3.8%; Social Sciences from 3.2% to 4.2% of the production of the reference countries.

In the following sections, we discuss the citation impact score and the proportion of Dutch publications in greater detail by making explicit comparisons with the reference countries.

Citation impact score: comparison with reference countries

In 2020, the Netherlands was in the top 5 of reference countries with the highest citation impact score for all scientific fields. There is no other country that is in the top 5 for all scientific fields. The United Kingdom, Switzerland and Singapore are in the top-5 for four scientific fields.   In the table below, the position of the Netherlands in each field is underlined. Striking points are:

• In 2020, the Netherlands had the highest citation impact score for Social Sciences of all countries.
• For Agriculture, the Netherlands ranked third, after Singapore and Ireland.
• In Health, the Netherlands ranked second in 2020, after the United Kingdom.
• In Engineering, the Netherlands ranked fifth and in Nature fourth.

Development of the position of the Netherlands

If we look at the development of the citation impact score since 2004 as compared to the reference countries, then the following trends are apparent:

• The Netherlands has developed strongly in the field of Social Sciences: in 2004 it was in 5th place and in 2020 in 1st place.
• For Agricultural sciences, the Netherlands in 4th place in 2004 and after that in 2th or 3th place.
• For Health, the Netherlands was in the top 3 over the entire period.
• For Natural sciences, the Netherlands varies between 2th and 4th place.
• For Engineering, the Netherlands varies between 3th and 5th place.  

Citation impact at discipline level 

As regards scientific disciplines, the Netherlands scored (well) above the global average in 2020 in almost all disciplines. There are four disciplines for which the citation impact score fell by more than 10%, all within the “STEM” fields (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics):

• Chemistry and chemical technology
• Electrical engineering
• Physics and material science
• Mathematics
• Instruments and instrumentation

The appendix contains the data at discipline level.

Publication output: comparison with reference countries

The graph below shows the percentage distribution of publications by country across the scientific fields in 2020, ranked by the proportion for Natural sciences and Engineering. It is immediately apparent that the Netherlands has the smallest proportion of Natural sciences and Engineering publications. It is also apparent that the Netherlands has the largest proportion of Health publications. The Netherlands also has a high proportion of publications in Social Sciences.

Over the period from 2004 to 2020, the number of publications for the Netherlands increased in all scientific fields. Growth in the number of publications for Social Sciences and Health sciences was also faster in the Netherlands than the average for the reference countries.

On average, however, publications for Engineering, Agricultural sciences, and Natural sciences increased more strongly in the reference countries than in the Netherlands. The data shows the powerful influence of China. Over the period as a whole, the total number of Chinese publications increased by 900%, far more than in other countries.

If we exclude China, then the development of Dutch publications in the fields of Engineering, Agricultural sciences, and Natural sciences are close to the development of the reference countries.

Publication output at discipline level

A similar picture is apparent as regards volume growth for the disciplines. Dutch publications in all the social sciences are increasing more strongly than in the reference countries. For all “(natural) sciences and technical” disciplines, except astronomy, the increase is stronger in the reference countries. Even if we exclude China, the increase in the majority of “(natural) sciences and technical” disciplines is stronger in the reference countries.

The “life sciences and health” disciplines display a mixed picture. For example, whereas the Netherlands has increased more in Health Sciences than the reference countries, those countries have increased more in the field of Fundamental medical sciences.

More information about the disciplines is provided in the appendix .

In conclusion

We see that the citation impact score has risen most strongly since 2004 in the fields of Social Sciences and Agriculture. The proportion of publications in relation to the reference countries has increased most for Social Sciences and Health.

Compared to other countries, the Netherlands published the most in the field of Health in 2020 and also in the field of Social Sciences. For Natural sciences and Engineering, the citation impact score in 2004 was already well above the global average, and has decreased slightly for Nature. The proportion of publications as compared to other countries has decreased, mainly due to the strong rise of Chinese science. If we exclude China, the Netherlands’ proportion remains roughly the same. Compared to other countries, the Netherlands published the least in 2020 in the fields of Agriculture, Natural sciences and Engineering.

It is difficult to explain the observed differences between the fields in greater detail. This is partly because it is not possible to combine data on publications with (international) figures on FTEs or expenditure because different classifications are used and because the correlation can vary greatly between the different fields.  

About the data

• The data about publications and citations comes from the CWTS citation index system, which is based on raw data from Web of Science. The categories 'journal article' and 'review' were examined. It is customary for data on scientific publications to take periods of four years, in order to dampen large outliers. Each year in this fact sheet therefore covers a period of four years, for example 2020 refers to the period 2017-2020.
• The figures are normalized per area: corrected for differences in citation culture between the areas. The data is based on 'fractional counting': a publication that has multiple authors, the citations are distributed over the authors using 'fractional counting'. This is in contrast to the 'full-counting' method, in which a collaborative publication for each author is fully counted and therefore counts more heavily according to the number of authors. With fractional counting, a publication with several authors counts as much as a publication with one author (see Waltman and van Eck, 2015).
• The data is available at area level and at discipline level. The figures at the discipline level cannot be aggregated to the level of the areas. For information on numbers of publications, we compared the Netherlands with twenty reference countries: Australia, Belgium, Canada, China, Denmark, Germany, Finland, France, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Norway, Austria, Singapore, Spain, United Kingdom, United States, Sweden, South Korea and Switzerland. The Netherlands is often compared with these countries in the field of science. The citation impact score says something about the position of the Netherlands in relation to all countries in the world.

Definitions and abbreviations

For an explanation of the used definitions and abbreviations we refer to the webpage  Definitions for Science in Figures .

Sources The CWTS citation index-systeem, that is based on data of Web of Science  

Van Leeuwen, T.N. (2013). Bibliometric research evaluations, Web of Science and the social sciences and humanities: a problematic relationship?  Bibliometrie - Praxis und Forschung,  band 2 DOI:  http://dx.doi.org/10.5283/bpf.173

Waltman, L. en N.J. van Eck (2015). Field-normalized citation impact indicators and the choice of an appropriate counting method. In: Journal of Informetrics 9, blz. 872–894. Elsevier.

file type docx - file size 33.13 KB

Related publications

• Open access of research publications
• Publication output by scientific field, international benchmark (WoS)
• Scientific publications, international benchmark (WoS)
• Scientific publications in the Netherlands by institutional sector (WoS)
• Scientific publication output per university (WoS)
• Scientific publications by Dutch universities
• Citation impact score of Dutch universities (WoS)
• Citation impact of all scientific publications international benchmark (WoS)
• NWO and KNAW institutes: scientific publication output and citation impact (WoS)
• Top 1% and top 10% cited (WoS)
• Citation impact of scientific publications in the Netherlands (WoS)
• Performance profile of the Dutch research system

Dutch articles

Our Dutch articles are easy-to-read publications on diverse topics. This concerns reports of our own research or of research in collaboration with external parties. These articles are currently only available in Dutch.

Evaluation Activity Based Housing (AGH) Faculty of Social Sciences.

Faculty research report

Non-take-up of childcare allowance with a Wlz-indication

Dutch research report

De werking en effectiviteit van verzuimboetes

Potential Support for a More Sustainable Business Travel Policy Among Academic Staff at Leiden University

English research report

Reaching Young Adults with Debt More Effectively

Feasibility Assessment of the Childcare Financing System

Reducing Financial Stress Among Students

Advisory report

De belastingbetaler bedanken

Nederlands onderzoeksrapport

Op weg naar financiële zelfredzaamheid

Effectief communiceren over betaalde ranking

Effectiviteit van interventies gericht op het verhogen van belastingcompliance

Geldstress bij jongeren

Regie over volkshuisvesting

Spaarbonus Woningverduurzaming

Veilige toegang en verantwoord delen

This website uses cookies to track the usage of it.

• Filing a complaint
• Student advisory board
• Application Register
• Orange Knowledge Programme
• Art studies
• Education Executive Agency
• Decisions on complaints

Research reports

• Annual reports
• Brochure for international students on the Code of Conduct
• Information package language tests providers
• Frequently asked questions

Please see the Dutch page for our research reports. If you have questions about these reports, please contact us!

Did you know……

Newest post, recent posts, doorzoek de website.

The World Bank In The Netherlands

A founding member of the World Bank, the Netherlands supports international efforts to meet the Sustainable Development Goals, boost economic growth, promote peace, and end poverty.

75 years of Partnership

2022 marks the 75th anniversary of the first loan of the IBRD to the Netherlands for a $195 million Post-war project

World Bank Group Response

As the world tackles the COVID-19 crisis, our support focuses on helping countries address the crisis and transition to recovery

World Bank Group Action Plan 2021-25

The highlights of our forthcoming Climate Change Action Plan show how we will help countries fully integrate climate and

The Netherlands At-A-Glance

The Netherlands is a founding member of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development — the World Bank — and was one of the first countries to receive a World Bank loan after the Second World War.

Global Economic Prospects

COVID-19 has triggered the deepest global recession in decades. While the ultimate outcome is still uncertain, the pandemic will result in contractions across the vast majority of emerging market and developing economies. It will also do lasting damage to labor productivity and potential output.

Global Growth to Weaken to 2.6% in 2019, Substantial Risks Seen

Despite Gains, Women Face Setbacks in Legal Rights Affecting Work

Ending Poverty. Investing in Opportunity.

Working Papers & Documents: Netherlands

World bank group in action.

• The World Bank Group - Together We All Prosper

Stay Connected

News & events, latest events, stay connected, sign up for our:  .

I agree with the terms of the Privacy Notice and consent to my personal data being processed, to the extent necessary, to subscribe to the selected updates.

Work With Us In The Netherlands

Additional resources.

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here .

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Public Views About Science in the Netherlands

This roundup of findings shows public views about science-related issues and the role of science in Dutch society. The findings come from a Pew Research Center survey conducted across 20 publics in Europe, the Asia-Pacific, Russia, the U.S., Canada and Brazil from October 2019 to March 2020.

[chapter title=”Ratings of medical treatments, scientific achievements and STEM education in the Netherlands” icon_url=”https://www.pewresearch.org/science/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2020/09/STEM_icon.png”]

Majorities in most of the 20 publics surveyed saw their medical treatments in a favorable light on the eve of the global pandemic. Medical treatments were often seen more favorably than achievements in other areas.

Across the 20 publics, a median of 59% say their medical treatments are at least above average. In the Netherlands, 63% think their country’s medical treatments are the best in the world or above average. Only 6% of Dutch adults think their medical treatments are below average.

About six-in-ten Dutch adults (59%) say their technological achievements are the best in the world or above average; 54% say this about their scientific achievements. Overall, 56% view their country’s university STEM education as the best in the world or above average. By contrast, far fewer (36%) think Dutch primary and secondary STEM education is at least above average.

Majorities in all publics agree that being a world leader in scientific achievement is at least somewhat important, but the share who view this as very important varies by public. A 20-public median of 51% place the highest level of importance on being a science world leader. In the Netherlands, only 21% say being a world leader in scientific achievements is very important, the lowest share among 20 publics surveyed.

Overall, there is broad agreement among these 20 publics that government investment in scientific research is worthwhile. A median of 82% say government investments in scientific research aimed at advancing knowledge are usually worthwhile for society over time. In the Netherlands, 81% of people say this.

[chapter title=”Views on artificial intelligence, food science and childhood vaccines in the Netherlands” icon_url=”https://www.pewresearch.org/science/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2020/09/AI_icon.png”]

Majorities in most publics see their government’s space exploration program as a good thing for society. Across the 20 publics, a median of 72% say their government’s space exploration program has mostly been a good thing for society. In the Netherlands, 68% say the European Space Agency’s space exploration program has been good for society.

Public views on artificial intelligence (AI) and using robots to automate jobs are more varied from public to public. A median of 53% say the development of AI, or computer systems designed to imitate human behaviors, has mostly been a good thing for society, while 33% say it has been a bad thing. The Center survey also finds that publics offer mixed views about the use of robots to automate jobs. Across the 20 publics, a median of 48% say such automation has mostly been a good thing, while 42% say it has been a bad thing.

In the Netherlands, people tend to have mixed views of both developments. Roughly half say the effect of workplace automation has been good for society, while 44% say it has been bad for society. Opinions about the effect of artificial intelligence also are mixed: About as many say artificial intelligence has been good for society as say it has been bad for society (48% vs. 46%).

Across most of the publics surveyed, views about the safety of fruits and vegetables grown with pesticides, food and drinks with artificial preservatives and genetically modified foods tilt far more negative than positive. About half think produce grown with pesticides (median of 53%), foods made with artificial preservatives (53%) or genetically modified foods (48%) are unsafe. About three-in-ten (29%) in the Netherlands say fruits and vegetables grown with pesticides are safe, while 42% think they are unsafe, and 29% say they don’t know enough about this issue to say. When it comes to genetically modified foods, more think they are unsafe than safe to eat (29% vs. 20%), but half say they don’t know enough about genetically modified foods to say.

When it comes to childhood vaccines such as the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, a median of 61% say the preventive health benefits of such vaccines are high, and a median of 55% think there is no or only a low risk of side effects. Six-in-ten Dutch adults say the preventive health benefits from the MMR vaccine are high; 64% half rate the risk of side effects from the MMR vaccine as low or none.

[chapter title=”Views on climate and the environment in the Netherlands” icon_url=”https://www.pewresearch.org/science/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2020/09/Climate_icon.png”]

Majorities across all 20 survey publics would prioritize protecting the environment even if it causes slower economic growth. A median of 71% would prioritize environmental protection. In the Netherlands, 63% think protecting the environment should be given priority, even if it causes slower economic growth and some loss of jobs. A smaller share (34%) thinks creating jobs should be the top priority, even if the environment suffers to some extent.

Public concern about global climate change has gone up over the past few years in many publics surveyed by the Center.

Majorities in all 20 publics say they are seeing at least some effects of climate change where they live. A median of 70% say they are experiencing a great deal or some effects of climate change where they live. In the Netherlands, seven-in-ten say climate change is affecting where they live a great deal (28%) or some (41%).

A 20-public median of 58% say their national government is doing too little to reduce the effects of climate change. About half in the Netherlands (52%) say their government is doing too little to reduce the effects of climate change, while 29% say the government is doing about the right amount and 18% say it is doing too much.

Find out more

Read the full report online .

All surveys were conducted with nationally representative samples of adults ages 18 and older. Here is the survey methodology used in each public.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy

• Research areas

NSCR Research

Our research program is based on four leading questions: Who commits crime and why? Where, when and how is crime committed? What are the consequences for victims and society? How does society respond to crime? These four research questions form the basis for our research groups. In addition, we set up a fifth research group that conducts research into evidence-based policing.

Our researchers conduct joint research from various disciplines on various themes. For example, the criminal careers of terrorists and cyber criminals, the choice of locations where burglars and poachers commit their crimes, the consequences of e-justice (#MeToo), conflicts in public spaces and the bystander effect, the effectiveness of probation supervision, and the transfer of criminal behaviour within families. Frequently, our research is not about just one leading question, but several questions are combined. For example in research into (re)victimization in criminal or civil proceedings or in research whether prison sentences actually increase the risk of recidivism.

Research Groups

Crime events in context, victimization, reactions to crime and its effects, evicence-based policing, criminal events, empirical legal studies, extremism/terrorism, intergenerational transmission, life-course, nscr video group, police research, spatial and temporal crime patterns, victimology, wildlife crime and wilderness problems.

NSCR conducts fundamental scientific research into crime and law enforcement. Our research is substantively innovative, methodologically state-of-the-art and contributes to the solution of major societal issues in the field of security and justice.

NSCR is part of the Institutes Organisation of the Dutch Research Council (NWO).

Annual report

NSCR Annual Reports

Job openings and internships

Job vacancies

Postal address

PO Box 71304 1008 BH Amsterdam

Visiting address

De Boelelaan 1077 1081 HV Amsterdam Route Google Maps

+31(0)6 2161 8344 +31(0)6 1568 6575 +31(0)20 598 5239 [email protected]

Press & Communication

+31(0)6 1568 6575

© 2024 NSCR Privacy Statement DIGITAL ACCESSIBILITY STATEMENT

Inflation lower on Bonaire, higher on St. Eustatius and Saba

Recent news

Dutch gdp per capita in 2023 ranks fourth in the eu.

24/04/2024 15:00

Trade missions help firms to get ahead internationally

2021 Census provides an accurate picture of our population

24/04/2024 10:00

Netherlands is second-largest exporter and importer of goods in EU

23/04/2024 15:00

Volunteer work in 2023 back to pre-pandemic levels

Consumers marginally less negative in April

22/04/2024 15:00

House prices up by over 5 percent in March

Investment down by almost 3 percent in February

Area used to grow bulbs up by more than a fifth since 2013

19/04/2024 15:00

Fewer goods transported by inland vessels in 2023

18/04/2024 15:00

No further increase in labour force participation

Homeworkers live fifteen minutes further away from work

17/04/2024 15:00

Publishing Perspectives

• Submit Rights Deal

Amsterdam’s Elsevier: Research and Real-World Impact

In Feature Articles by Porter Anderson December 14, 2023 Leave a Comment

Near year’s end, Amsterdam’s Elsevier releases two reports looking at research and its impact beyond campuses and research hubs.

By Porter Anderson, Editor-in-Chief | @Porter_Anderson

Verses: ‘Research With an Impact on Society’

• Sixty-six percent of respondents say academia has a moral responsibility to incorporate real-world impact into standard research evaluation​
• Seventy percent say they are passionate about research that has a positive real-world impact
• Fifty-three percent say a more holistic approach to evaluation would improve research cost-effectiveness.\
• Fifty-one percent of respondents identified at least one serious problem with current methods of research evaluation

In this report, it’s interesting to note some of the differences, culture-to-culture in the question of how important it is for research “to aim for real-world impact.” Particularly in the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic , there could hardly have been a time when it was so obvious, the need that the world-at-large has for the most sophisticated, committed, and efficient research.

Nevertheless, this graphic indicates that surveyed personnel on this point came in on the affirmative side (yes, research should aim for real-world impact) at rates up to 93 percent in the United Kingdom and a low of 64 percent in the Elsevier report’s home, the Netherlands.

Another very interesting point in this report compares the view of funders and those of researchers.

While funders surveyed seem to agree with researchers that more holistic approaches are important, the funders did say that they were more in agreement with the researchers that the current system creates vested interests.

And it’s the researchers who said they were more passionate than the funders about having “real-world impact as researchers and academic leaders.”

Topping the list of barriers offered by respondents overall (researchers and funders) to a more holistic form of research assessment was lack of resources at 56 percent, and 48 percent citing a lack of consensus on what actually constitutes impact.

Also running heavily were the lack of a common framework or methodology in holistic method of assessing research’s impact, at 45 percent. But a tie came in next, with 40 percent saying that two more barriers are “achieving sufficient alignment between different actors” and “complexity.”

• How do you view the existing evaluation system?
• How would you like to see it change?
• What is needed to get there?

Among highlights of the outcomes covered here:

• Evaluation is a priority: The subject is of high importance to academic leaders
• A primary focus is institutional-level assessment, including societal impact: Leaders are interested in evaluation of the university and its teaching, research and societal mission
• There is a strong appetite for change: The current system, with its emphasis on articles and citations, does not align with desired outcomes. There is wide support for reform towards a system that also addresses education and societal impact
• Striking the right balance between research and education will be key: This involves acknowledging that research underpins education, especially at research-intensive universities
• Evaluation of universities shouldn’t be viewed as separate from evaluation of academics
• Evaluation of universities in a specific country cannot be out of sync with global trends
• Bringing about change won’t be easy: A comprehensive, objective evaluation of societal impact is far from straightforward
• A shift in culture is necessary: A move towards a more interdisciplinary approach, emphasizing aspects such as team science, and diversity and inclusion, is seen as an important ingredient for success
• Qualitative assessment and peer review are critical for evaluation of broader impact
• Quantitative measures of broader impact are needed: While these are complex and elusive, they would enable easy aggregation and comparison of elements such as societal impact
• Artificial intelligence has an important role to play: AI will change the way we teach and do research, and it has the potential to enhance future evaluation through addressing challenges around qualitative and quantitative assessment

• Improve how research is conceived, conducted and communicated: AI is already proving its value in a variety of areas, from sifting and analyzing data to providing personalized and predictive services
• Innovate teaching and learning: Generative AI is currently used in coursework and homework assignments, and has the potential to create personalized learning materials, as well as provide virtual mentoring and other support
• Aid peer review: Options identified included scanning manuscripts for ethical issues, such as plagiarism, and checking for alignment with journals’ aims & scopes
• Optimize institutions’ impact: Studies are already underway to explore the use of AI in predicting and evaluating contributions
• Convert qualitative comments into quantitative metrics: Many felt that AI is a promising route to turn qualitative comments into practical indicators
• Build evaluation tools: These include algorithms designed to analyze case studies

Clearly, the effort to assess research and its impact on society, an undercurrent in both reports, has been heightened among the world’s biggest publishers in the field.

In her introduction to the Back to Earth study, Judy Verses, president for academic and government affairs at Elsevier, writes, “Research with an impact on society has always been important. But with increasingly stretched budgets, it’s now equally important to assess, audit and communicate this impact. Funders know this and researchers know this.

“Indeed, academics are already being increasingly called on to show the economic and societal impact of their work, and funders have systems in place to evaluate this.”

The Call for Harmonization: Not Just in Academia

Needless to say, there are stark parallels here with some of the issues seen in the international trade publishing industry’s efforts to develop better practices and results in comparative evaluation, as well.

For example, there’s been a fine pilot exercise performed by AldusUp that looks at the different ways European book markets evaluate themselves. The apples-to-pears challenges of market-to-market publishing statistics can be dizzying.

Two of the most cogent points Reinke made after those 18 months of research she’d performed—relative to “ Data and Reading and Publishing Research ” with Christoph Blasi and Miha Kovač—were that in the trade data comparison she was examining, (1) the entity paying for data could heavily influence the results, leading to “quite heterogeneous ideas of which data is relevant,” and (2) the “general social conditions in each country could have a strong impact on what types of texts and media are considered beneficial.”

What’s more, Reinke noted, many nation’s research is published only in its own language, creating additional friction because of translation requirements and lack of clarity about the efficacy of side-by-side comparisons’ accuracy in parameters.

At the worldwide level beyond Aldus’ purview in Europe,  Karine Pansa president of the  International Publishers Association (IPA), has made data, its collection and coherence from market to market, a major center of her attention during her term in office .

More on academic publishing is here, more on Elsevier is here , more on industry statistics is here , more on Frankfurter Buchmesse is here , more on the Guest of Honor Slovenia program at Frankfurt this year is here , and more on questions of data, it’s use and place in many parts of publishing, is here .

Publishing Perspectives is the world media partner of the  International Publishers Association .

About the Author

Porter anderson.

Porter Anderson has been named International Trade Press Journalist of the Year in London Book Fair's International Excellence Awards. He is Editor-in-Chief of Publishing Perspectives. He formerly was Associate Editor for The FutureBook at London's The Bookseller. Anderson was for more than a decade a senior producer and anchor with CNN.com, CNN International, and CNN USA. As an arts critic (Fellow, National Critics Institute), he was with The Village Voice, the Dallas Times Herald, and the Tampa Tribune, now the Tampa Bay Times. He co-founded The Hot Sheet, a newsletter for authors, which now is owned and operated by Jane Friedman.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

• News and events
• What is open access?
• In the Netherlands

European Commission publishes scoping report on research assessment

The European Commission published a scoping report summarizing the outcomes of extensive consultations with European and international stakeholders, that took place from March to November 2021.  

  The consultation with stakeholders aimed at discussing how to facilitate and speed up a reform of the research assessment system, so that the quality, performance and impact of research and researchers are assessed on the basis of the most appropriate criteria and processes. The consultation identified objectives and outlines for such a reform, with principles and actions that could be agreed between the organisations that have the responsibility to define criteria and processes to assess research projects, researchers, research units and research institutions.   The report also proposes a way forward for the implementation of such principles and actions. This would consist in a European agreement that would be signed by individual research funding organisations, research performing organisations and national/regional assessment authorities and agencies, as well as by their associations, all willing to reform the current research assessment system.     Please click here to download the report  

You are here

Dutch National website providing information for academics about the advantages of open access to publicly financed research

About this website  

• Open publications
• Repositories
• Open education
• Open access publishers
• Pros and cons
• What does academia want?
• Current situation
• Publisher deals
• Taverne Amendment
• Researcher / author
• Publisher / editor
• Across the border
• Promotional materials
• Testimonials

Recent publications

• Summary Contemporary inequality
• Key figures on young carers in the Netherlands (aged 16 through 24)
• Life’s a Juggle: the All-Round Worker

The Netherlands Institute for Social Research ¦ SCP is a government agency which conducts research into the social aspects of all areas of government policy. The main fields studied are health, welfare, social security, the labour market and education, with a particular focus on the interfaces between these fields. The reports published by SCP are widely used by government, civil servants, local authorities and academics.

• Market Research Blog
• Custom Research

Search form

Netherlands, table of contents.

• PESTEL Analysis, SWOT Analysis and Risk Analysis of  Netherlands

The Netherlands , a country located in Northwest Europe, is bordered by the North Sea to the north and west, Belgium to the south, and Netherlands to the east. The Netherlands is divided into 12 provinces, with Amsterdam as the capital. The official language of the Netherlands is Dutch, and the currency is the euro (EUR).

Netherlands PESTLE Analysis & Macroeconomic Trends Market Research Report.

Browse Report

Netherlands, the Dutch United Provinces, declared their independence from Spain in 1579. During the 17th century, they became a leading seafaring and commercial power, with settlements and colonies around the world. After a 20-year French occupation, a Kingdom of the Netherlands was formed in 1815. In 1830, Belgium seceded and formed a separate kingdom.

1 . PESTEL Analysis, SWOT Analysis and Risk Analysis of  Netherlands

Netherlands  PESTEL Analysis

This report covers  Netherlands  PESTEL (political, economic, social, technological, environmental and legal) analysis.

Netherlands  SWOT Analysis

This market research report covers SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis for  Netherlands .

Netherlands  Risk Analysis

This market research report covers current and future business risk analysis for  Netherlands  along with macroeconomic factor analysis.

Clients Who Trust Us

Need tailor made market research solution we can help you with that too..

At Market Research Reports, Inc. we aim to make it easier for decision makers to find relevant information and locate right market research reports which can save their time and assist in what they do best, i.e. take time-critical decisions.

We work with our associate Global market research firms who are known leaders in their respective domains to obtain right market research solution for our customer’s needs, be it custom research or syndicated research reports.

Market Research Reports, Inc 16192 Coastal Hwy Lewes , DE 19958 , USA

USA: +1-302-703-9904

India: +91-8762746600

marketresearchreports

[email protected]

• Create new account
• Request new password

Latest Blog Posts

• SiC Power Semiconductors: The Next Big Wave in Advanced Electronics
• Global MEMS Devices Sector on the Rise: Expected to Surpass $1.8 Billion by 2030

Stay Connected

Research industries.

• Banking & Finance
• Business & Government
• Computing & Electronics
• Consumer & Retail
• Energy & Utilities
• Food & Beverages
• Industry & Manufacturing
• Marketing & Advertising
• Pharma & Healthcare
• Travel & Leisure

Our Company

• Become Publisher
• Publications By Country
• Research Subscription
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Trade Trends

Our Services

• Syndicated Market Research
• Custom Market Research
• Market Research Consulting
• Industry Market Research
• Market Research For Startups
• B2B Market Research
• Market Research Resources
• Market Research Learning

© Copyright 2010-24 Market Research Reports, Inc. . All Rights Reserved. M Market Research Reports and the M Market Research Reports Logo are registered trademarks of Market Research Reports, Inc.

Disclaimer: Market Research Reports, Inc. has no affiliation to, and is not associated with any other website(s) or organization(s). We offer syndicated research reports (like country analysis, SWOT analysis, competitive intelligence, industry reports, company reports and market analysis & trends reports) and custom market research from our website MarketResearchReports.com only.

If you are looking for a market research solution for your research requirements, please begin your search using the search box on top of this page or use our chat system to speak to our market research consultants or directly write to us .

The Netherlands is 24.5% circular.

The material footprint satisfying societal needs in the netherlands.

INTERVENTIONS

Jobs and skills in a dutch circular economy.

Methodology

Methodology review, download the report.

Request a country scan

316 51978796 [email protected]

Your plant research in clear, digital & objective reports.

Mission & vision

When it comes to plant research, NLresearch does things a little differently. Whether it’s product research concerning bio-simulants, herbicides, the testing of LED armatures or functional examinations such as spectrum determination and climate control research for crops – we guarantee insightful data that can be applied practically. Our objective systems ensure objective results, expressed in a wide range of parameters. Solve your complex challenges with our PSII, color and multispectral camera systems, and premium climate chambers.

Our focus is on the domestic as well as the international market, and we are poised to become a  global player. Our methods don’t just allow for independently applicable, practical research; they are also ideal for sharing knowledge, even across national borders. The NLresearch online portal can be used at any time by you or your project partners for access to real-time images and metadata. This way, complex projects remain comprehensible and controllable, regardless of where you and your team are based. Our web environment allows for the easy sharing of knowledge and results through clear reports.

Contact us to discuss tailor-made solutions that are perfect for your specific application!

Camera systems

NLRESEARCH has access to various multispectral camera systems that are used during the research. Whenever possible, we collect data through sensors rather than having people measure manually.

Climate control

NLRESEARCH has various types of high-quality climate chambers at its disposal that can simulate any climate in the world.

LED lamps can also be tested of course! Are you preparing to equip your greenhouse with LED lamps, but do you want to check the effect that temperature has on the lamps first? Consider what NLRESEARCH might do for you! 

Want to learn more? 

Contact us or fill in the contact sheet. we will be happy to help you, expert in the field of digital & objective research.

Agro Business Park 69-73

6708 PV Wageningen

The Netherlands

Tell us what your needs are, and we will send you a free quote.

+316 51978796

Please email us for general requests and questions

[email protected]

© 2022 NLResearch | All rights reserved | Privacy & Cookie Statement

Website made by: maxom.nl.

• Czech Republic
• Greater China
• Netherlands
• New Zealand
• North Macedonia
• Philippines
• South Africa
• South Korea
• Switzerland
• United Arab Emirates
• United Kingdom
• United States
• Open Search Menu Close Search Menu

The Netherlands MarketBeat

Jos hesselink • 23/04/2024.

Now 2024 is underway, the commercial real estate market finds itself in relatively uncharted territory. While the market is still seeking a new balance between liquidity and fundamentals, market sentiment is improving. Market rates have significantly decreased since the fourth quarter of 2023, as it is expected that the European Central Bank will lower the policy rate in June.

For the coming year, a certain degree of market recovery would certainly be possible. Anticipating declining market rates, investor sentiment is improving, creating appetite or traction to explore the market. Due to a moderately filled transaction pipeline, this improved sentiment will not immediately translate into higher investment volumes, but it may happen as early as the second half of 2024, resulting in total investment volumes ranging between EUR 10 and EUR 12 billion for the year. The next six months will be crucial determining whether there is indeed a newfound balance between supply and demand and between liquidity and fundamentals.

Get the full Netherlands property market picture with all the market data by downloading the reports.

Current Marketbeats

Netherlands Office Data

Netherlands Industrial Data

Netherlands Retail Data

Netherlands Living Data

Download previous quarterly office marketbeat reports.

• Netherlands Marketbeat Office Q4 2023
• Netherlands Marketbeat Office Q3 2023
• Netherlands Marketbeat Office Q2 2023
• Netherlands Marketbeat Office Q1 2023

Download Previous Quarterly Retail Marketbeat Reports

• Netherlands Marketbeat Retail Q4 2023
• Netherlands Marketbeat Retail Q3 2023
• Netherlands Marketbeat Retail Q2 2023
• Netherlands Marketbeat Retail Q1 2023

Download Previous Quarterly Industrial Marketbeat Reports

• Netherlands Marketbeat Industrial & Logistics Q4 2023
• Netherlands Marketbeat Industrial & Logistics Q3 2023
• Netherlands Marketbeat Industrial & Logistics Q2 2023
• Netherlands Marketbeat Industrial & Logistics Q1 2023

Insights in your inbox

• Jos Hesselink Associate - Research Lead (EMEA Grade - Associate)

LOOKING FOR DATA?

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and Types

Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and Types

Table of Contents

Research Report

Definition:

Research Report is a written document that presents the results of a research project or study, including the research question, methodology, results, and conclusions, in a clear and objective manner.

The purpose of a research report is to communicate the findings of the research to the intended audience, which could be other researchers, stakeholders, or the general public.

Components of Research Report

Components of Research Report are as follows:

Introduction

The introduction sets the stage for the research report and provides a brief overview of the research question or problem being investigated. It should include a clear statement of the purpose of the study and its significance or relevance to the field of research. It may also provide background information or a literature review to help contextualize the research.

Literature Review

The literature review provides a critical analysis and synthesis of the existing research and scholarship relevant to the research question or problem. It should identify the gaps, inconsistencies, and contradictions in the literature and show how the current study addresses these issues. The literature review also establishes the theoretical framework or conceptual model that guides the research.

Methodology

The methodology section describes the research design, methods, and procedures used to collect and analyze data. It should include information on the sample or participants, data collection instruments, data collection procedures, and data analysis techniques. The methodology should be clear and detailed enough to allow other researchers to replicate the study.

The results section presents the findings of the study in a clear and objective manner. It should provide a detailed description of the data and statistics used to answer the research question or test the hypothesis. Tables, graphs, and figures may be included to help visualize the data and illustrate the key findings.

The discussion section interprets the results of the study and explains their significance or relevance to the research question or problem. It should also compare the current findings with those of previous studies and identify the implications for future research or practice. The discussion should be based on the results presented in the previous section and should avoid speculation or unfounded conclusions.

The conclusion summarizes the key findings of the study and restates the main argument or thesis presented in the introduction. It should also provide a brief overview of the contributions of the study to the field of research and the implications for practice or policy.

The references section lists all the sources cited in the research report, following a specific citation style, such as APA or MLA.

The appendices section includes any additional material, such as data tables, figures, or instruments used in the study, that could not be included in the main text due to space limitations.

Types of Research Report

Types of Research Report are as follows:

Thesis is a type of research report. A thesis is a long-form research document that presents the findings and conclusions of an original research study conducted by a student as part of a graduate or postgraduate program. It is typically written by a student pursuing a higher degree, such as a Master’s or Doctoral degree, although it can also be written by researchers or scholars in other fields.

Research Paper

Research paper is a type of research report. A research paper is a document that presents the results of a research study or investigation. Research papers can be written in a variety of fields, including science, social science, humanities, and business. They typically follow a standard format that includes an introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion sections.

Technical Report

A technical report is a detailed report that provides information about a specific technical or scientific problem or project. Technical reports are often used in engineering, science, and other technical fields to document research and development work.

Progress Report

A progress report provides an update on the progress of a research project or program over a specific period of time. Progress reports are typically used to communicate the status of a project to stakeholders, funders, or project managers.

Feasibility Report

A feasibility report assesses the feasibility of a proposed project or plan, providing an analysis of the potential risks, benefits, and costs associated with the project. Feasibility reports are often used in business, engineering, and other fields to determine the viability of a project before it is undertaken.

Field Report

A field report documents observations and findings from fieldwork, which is research conducted in the natural environment or setting. Field reports are often used in anthropology, ecology, and other social and natural sciences.

Experimental Report

An experimental report documents the results of a scientific experiment, including the hypothesis, methods, results, and conclusions. Experimental reports are often used in biology, chemistry, and other sciences to communicate the results of laboratory experiments.

Case Study Report

A case study report provides an in-depth analysis of a specific case or situation, often used in psychology, social work, and other fields to document and understand complex cases or phenomena.

Literature Review Report

A literature review report synthesizes and summarizes existing research on a specific topic, providing an overview of the current state of knowledge on the subject. Literature review reports are often used in social sciences, education, and other fields to identify gaps in the literature and guide future research.

Research Report Example

Following is a Research Report Example sample for Students:

Title: The Impact of Social Media on Academic Performance among High School Students

This study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and academic performance among high school students. The study utilized a quantitative research design, which involved a survey questionnaire administered to a sample of 200 high school students. The findings indicate that there is a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance, suggesting that excessive social media use can lead to poor academic performance among high school students. The results of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers, as they highlight the need for strategies that can help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities.

Introduction:

Social media has become an integral part of the lives of high school students. With the widespread use of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat, students can connect with friends, share photos and videos, and engage in discussions on a range of topics. While social media offers many benefits, concerns have been raised about its impact on academic performance. Many studies have found a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance among high school students (Kirschner & Karpinski, 2010; Paul, Baker, & Cochran, 2012).

Given the growing importance of social media in the lives of high school students, it is important to investigate its impact on academic performance. This study aims to address this gap by examining the relationship between social media use and academic performance among high school students.

Methodology:

The study utilized a quantitative research design, which involved a survey questionnaire administered to a sample of 200 high school students. The questionnaire was developed based on previous studies and was designed to measure the frequency and duration of social media use, as well as academic performance.

The participants were selected using a convenience sampling technique, and the survey questionnaire was distributed in the classroom during regular school hours. The data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlation analysis.

The findings indicate that the majority of high school students use social media platforms on a daily basis, with Facebook being the most popular platform. The results also show a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance, suggesting that excessive social media use can lead to poor academic performance among high school students.

Discussion:

The results of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers. The negative correlation between social media use and academic performance suggests that strategies should be put in place to help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities. For example, educators could incorporate social media into their teaching strategies to engage students and enhance learning. Parents could limit their children’s social media use and encourage them to prioritize their academic responsibilities. Policymakers could develop guidelines and policies to regulate social media use among high school students.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, this study provides evidence of the negative impact of social media on academic performance among high school students. The findings highlight the need for strategies that can help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities. Further research is needed to explore the specific mechanisms by which social media use affects academic performance and to develop effective strategies for addressing this issue.

Limitations:

One limitation of this study is the use of convenience sampling, which limits the generalizability of the findings to other populations. Future studies should use random sampling techniques to increase the representativeness of the sample. Another limitation is the use of self-reported measures, which may be subject to social desirability bias. Future studies could use objective measures of social media use and academic performance, such as tracking software and school records.

Implications:

The findings of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers. Educators could incorporate social media into their teaching strategies to engage students and enhance learning. For example, teachers could use social media platforms to share relevant educational resources and facilitate online discussions. Parents could limit their children’s social media use and encourage them to prioritize their academic responsibilities. They could also engage in open communication with their children to understand their social media use and its impact on their academic performance. Policymakers could develop guidelines and policies to regulate social media use among high school students. For example, schools could implement social media policies that restrict access during class time and encourage responsible use.

References:

• Kirschner, P. A., & Karpinski, A. C. (2010). Facebook® and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1237-1245.
• Paul, J. A., Baker, H. M., & Cochran, J. D. (2012). Effect of online social networking on student academic performance. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, 8(1), 1-19.
• Pantic, I. (2014). Online social networking and mental health. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(10), 652-657.
• Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 948-958.

Note*: Above mention, Example is just a sample for the students’ guide. Do not directly copy and paste as your College or University assignment. Kindly do some research and Write your own.

Applications of Research Report

Research reports have many applications, including:

• Communicating research findings: The primary application of a research report is to communicate the results of a study to other researchers, stakeholders, or the general public. The report serves as a way to share new knowledge, insights, and discoveries with others in the field.
• Informing policy and practice : Research reports can inform policy and practice by providing evidence-based recommendations for decision-makers. For example, a research report on the effectiveness of a new drug could inform regulatory agencies in their decision-making process.
• Supporting further research: Research reports can provide a foundation for further research in a particular area. Other researchers may use the findings and methodology of a report to develop new research questions or to build on existing research.
• Evaluating programs and interventions : Research reports can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and interventions in achieving their intended outcomes. For example, a research report on a new educational program could provide evidence of its impact on student performance.
• Demonstrating impact : Research reports can be used to demonstrate the impact of research funding or to evaluate the success of research projects. By presenting the findings and outcomes of a study, research reports can show the value of research to funders and stakeholders.
• Enhancing professional development : Research reports can be used to enhance professional development by providing a source of information and learning for researchers and practitioners in a particular field. For example, a research report on a new teaching methodology could provide insights and ideas for educators to incorporate into their own practice.

How to write Research Report

Here are some steps you can follow to write a research report:

• Identify the research question: The first step in writing a research report is to identify your research question. This will help you focus your research and organize your findings.
• Conduct research : Once you have identified your research question, you will need to conduct research to gather relevant data and information. This can involve conducting experiments, reviewing literature, or analyzing data.
• Organize your findings: Once you have gathered all of your data, you will need to organize your findings in a way that is clear and understandable. This can involve creating tables, graphs, or charts to illustrate your results.
• Write the report: Once you have organized your findings, you can begin writing the report. Start with an introduction that provides background information and explains the purpose of your research. Next, provide a detailed description of your research methods and findings. Finally, summarize your results and draw conclusions based on your findings.
• Proofread and edit: After you have written your report, be sure to proofread and edit it carefully. Check for grammar and spelling errors, and make sure that your report is well-organized and easy to read.
• Include a reference list: Be sure to include a list of references that you used in your research. This will give credit to your sources and allow readers to further explore the topic if they choose.
• Format your report: Finally, format your report according to the guidelines provided by your instructor or organization. This may include formatting requirements for headings, margins, fonts, and spacing.

Purpose of Research Report

The purpose of a research report is to communicate the results of a research study to a specific audience, such as peers in the same field, stakeholders, or the general public. The report provides a detailed description of the research methods, findings, and conclusions.

Some common purposes of a research report include:

• Sharing knowledge: A research report allows researchers to share their findings and knowledge with others in their field. This helps to advance the field and improve the understanding of a particular topic.
• Identifying trends: A research report can identify trends and patterns in data, which can help guide future research and inform decision-making.
• Addressing problems: A research report can provide insights into problems or issues and suggest solutions or recommendations for addressing them.
• Evaluating programs or interventions : A research report can evaluate the effectiveness of programs or interventions, which can inform decision-making about whether to continue, modify, or discontinue them.
• Meeting regulatory requirements: In some fields, research reports are required to meet regulatory requirements, such as in the case of drug trials or environmental impact studies.

When to Write Research Report

A research report should be written after completing the research study. This includes collecting data, analyzing the results, and drawing conclusions based on the findings. Once the research is complete, the report should be written in a timely manner while the information is still fresh in the researcher’s mind.

In academic settings, research reports are often required as part of coursework or as part of a thesis or dissertation. In this case, the report should be written according to the guidelines provided by the instructor or institution.

In other settings, such as in industry or government, research reports may be required to inform decision-making or to comply with regulatory requirements. In these cases, the report should be written as soon as possible after the research is completed in order to inform decision-making in a timely manner.

Overall, the timing of when to write a research report depends on the purpose of the research, the expectations of the audience, and any regulatory requirements that need to be met. However, it is important to complete the report in a timely manner while the information is still fresh in the researcher’s mind.

Characteristics of Research Report

There are several characteristics of a research report that distinguish it from other types of writing. These characteristics include:

• Objective: A research report should be written in an objective and unbiased manner. It should present the facts and findings of the research study without any personal opinions or biases.
• Systematic: A research report should be written in a systematic manner. It should follow a clear and logical structure, and the information should be presented in a way that is easy to understand and follow.
• Detailed: A research report should be detailed and comprehensive. It should provide a thorough description of the research methods, results, and conclusions.
• Accurate : A research report should be accurate and based on sound research methods. The findings and conclusions should be supported by data and evidence.
• Organized: A research report should be well-organized. It should include headings and subheadings to help the reader navigate the report and understand the main points.
• Clear and concise: A research report should be written in clear and concise language. The information should be presented in a way that is easy to understand, and unnecessary jargon should be avoided.
• Citations and references: A research report should include citations and references to support the findings and conclusions. This helps to give credit to other researchers and to provide readers with the opportunity to further explore the topic.

Advantages of Research Report

Research reports have several advantages, including:

• Communicating research findings: Research reports allow researchers to communicate their findings to a wider audience, including other researchers, stakeholders, and the general public. This helps to disseminate knowledge and advance the understanding of a particular topic.
• Providing evidence for decision-making : Research reports can provide evidence to inform decision-making, such as in the case of policy-making, program planning, or product development. The findings and conclusions can help guide decisions and improve outcomes.
• Supporting further research: Research reports can provide a foundation for further research on a particular topic. Other researchers can build on the findings and conclusions of the report, which can lead to further discoveries and advancements in the field.
• Demonstrating expertise: Research reports can demonstrate the expertise of the researchers and their ability to conduct rigorous and high-quality research. This can be important for securing funding, promotions, and other professional opportunities.
• Meeting regulatory requirements: In some fields, research reports are required to meet regulatory requirements, such as in the case of drug trials or environmental impact studies. Producing a high-quality research report can help ensure compliance with these requirements.

Limitations of Research Report

Despite their advantages, research reports also have some limitations, including:

• Time-consuming: Conducting research and writing a report can be a time-consuming process, particularly for large-scale studies. This can limit the frequency and speed of producing research reports.
• Expensive: Conducting research and producing a report can be expensive, particularly for studies that require specialized equipment, personnel, or data. This can limit the scope and feasibility of some research studies.
• Limited generalizability: Research studies often focus on a specific population or context, which can limit the generalizability of the findings to other populations or contexts.
• Potential bias : Researchers may have biases or conflicts of interest that can influence the findings and conclusions of the research study. Additionally, participants may also have biases or may not be representative of the larger population, which can limit the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Accessibility: Research reports may be written in technical or academic language, which can limit their accessibility to a wider audience. Additionally, some research may be behind paywalls or require specialized access, which can limit the ability of others to read and use the findings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

AI Index Report

Welcome to the seventh edition of the AI Index report. The 2024 Index is our most comprehensive to date and arrives at an important moment when AI’s influence on society has never been more pronounced. This year, we have broadened our scope to more extensively cover essential trends such as technical advancements in AI, public perceptions of the technology, and the geopolitical dynamics surrounding its development. Featuring more original data than ever before, this edition introduces new estimates on AI training costs, detailed analyses of the responsible AI landscape, and an entirely new chapter dedicated to AI’s impact on science and medicine.

Read the 2024 AI Index Report

The AI Index report tracks, collates, distills, and visualizes data related to artificial intelligence (AI). Our mission is to provide unbiased, rigorously vetted, broadly sourced data in order for policymakers, researchers, executives, journalists, and the general public to develop a more thorough and nuanced understanding of the complex field of AI.

The AI Index is recognized globally as one of the most credible and authoritative sources for data and insights on artificial intelligence. Previous editions have been cited in major newspapers, including the The New York Times, Bloomberg, and The Guardian, have amassed hundreds of academic citations, and been referenced by high-level policymakers in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, among other places. This year’s edition surpasses all previous ones in size, scale, and scope, reflecting the growing significance that AI is coming to hold in all of our lives.

Steering Committee Co-Directors

Ray Perrault

Steering committee members.

Erik Brynjolfsson

John Etchemendy

Katrina Ligett

Terah Lyons

James Manyika

Juan Carlos Niebles

Vanessa Parli

Yoav Shoham

Russell Wald

Staff members.

Loredana Fattorini

Nestor Maslej

Letter from the co-directors.

A decade ago, the best AI systems in the world were unable to classify objects in images at a human level. AI struggled with language comprehension and could not solve math problems. Today, AI systems routinely exceed human performance on standard benchmarks.

Progress accelerated in 2023. New state-of-the-art systems like GPT-4, Gemini, and Claude 3 are impressively multimodal: They can generate fluent text in dozens of languages, process audio, and even explain memes. As AI has improved, it has increasingly forced its way into our lives. Companies are racing to build AI-based products, and AI is increasingly being used by the general public. But current AI technology still has significant problems. It cannot reliably deal with facts, perform complex reasoning, or explain its conclusions.

AI faces two interrelated futures. First, technology continues to improve and is increasingly used, having major consequences for productivity and employment. It can be put to both good and bad uses. In the second future, the adoption of AI is constrained by the limitations of the technology. Regardless of which future unfolds, governments are increasingly concerned. They are stepping in to encourage the upside, such as funding university R&D and incentivizing private investment. Governments are also aiming to manage the potential downsides, such as impacts on employment, privacy concerns, misinformation, and intellectual property rights.

As AI rapidly evolves, the AI Index aims to help the AI community, policymakers, business leaders, journalists, and the general public navigate this complex landscape. It provides ongoing, objective snapshots tracking several key areas: technical progress in AI capabilities, the community and investments driving AI development and deployment, public opinion on current and potential future impacts, and policy measures taken to stimulate AI innovation while managing its risks and challenges. By comprehensively monitoring the AI ecosystem, the Index serves as an important resource for understanding this transformative technological force.

On the technical front, this year’s AI Index reports that the number of new large language models released worldwide in 2023 doubled over the previous year. Two-thirds were open-source, but the highest-performing models came from industry players with closed systems. Gemini Ultra became the first LLM to reach human-level performance on the Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU) benchmark; performance on the benchmark has improved by 15 percentage points since last year. Additionally, GPT-4 achieved an impressive 0.97 mean win rate score on the comprehensive Holistic Evaluation of Language Models (HELM) benchmark, which includes MMLU among other evaluations.

Although global private investment in AI decreased for the second consecutive year, investment in generative AI skyrocketed. More Fortune 500 earnings calls mentioned AI than ever before, and new studies show that AI tangibly boosts worker productivity. On the policymaking front, global mentions of AI in legislative proceedings have never been higher. U.S. regulators passed more AI-related regulations in 2023 than ever before. Still, many expressed concerns about AI’s ability to generate deepfakes and impact elections. The public became more aware of AI, and studies suggest that they responded with nervousness.

Ray Perrault Co-director, AI Index

Our Supporting Partners

Analytics & Research Partners

Stay up to date on the AI Index by subscribing to the  Stanford HAI newsletter.

IAEA reports enhanced safety at Dutch research reactor

!{Model.Description}

The four-day mission was conducted at the request of the Authority for Nuclear Safety & Radiation Protection (ANVS - Autoriteit Nucleaire Veiligheid en Stralingsbescherming), the Dutch regulatory body, and was hosted by the operating organisation TU Delft Reactor Institute (RID) at the Delft University of Technology. Earlier in April, the 3 MWt research reactor ended a six-month shutdown for the installation of a cold neutron source, which uses very low energy neutrons to study materials with large dimensions. It has since resumed operation to complete the commissioning of the cold neutron source.

The mission team comprised two experts from Argentina and India, as well as one IAEA official. They visited the reactor and its associated facilities and observed resumed operations, reviewed documents and held technical discussions with the reactor’s management and operating personnel.

“RID has addressed most of the review recommendations made in 2021 and achieved significant safety enhancement,” said Kaichao Sun, mission team leader and Nuclear Safety Officer at the IAEA. “Efforts remain needed to ensure the highest level of safety during the ongoing commissioning tests, following the recent major modifications at HOR.”

The team assessed that RID has strengthened the organisational effectiveness and operational programmes through:

• Completion of an analysis for RID organisational restructuring options and clarification of roles and responsibilities;
• Revision of operational limits and conditions, with clear distinctions between safety limits and safety system settings;
• Development of an asset management database for the HOR operating programmes and technical modifications; and
• Improvement of emergency preparedness by conducting drills.

The findings from the mission indicate the need for continued safety enhancements in areas that are related to:

• Reassessment and development of a specific set of operational limits and conditions associated with the commissioning stages of testing the new installation of the cold neutron source; and
• Revision of the area classification and zoning systems for radiological protection, considering the laboratories located within the reactor site.

“This INSARR follow-up mission effectively improved the safety awareness. In particular, the extensive and detailed discussions on the safety assessment gave us new insights on this topic,” said Camiel Kaaijk, Head of Reactor Development Department.

Image: TU Delft Reactor Institute

• Terms and conditions
• Privacy Policy
• Newsletter sign up
• Digital Edition
• Editorial Standards

• Dutch Bros -stock
• News for Dutch Bros

Bank of America Securities Keeps Their Buy Rating on Dutch Bros Inc (BROS)

Bank of America Securities analyst Sara Senatore maintained a Buy rating on Dutch Bros Inc ( BROS – Research Report ) today. The company’s shares opened today at $29.96.

Senatore covers the Consumer Cyclical sector, focusing on stocks such as Chipotle, Darden Restaurants, and McDonald’s. According to TipRanks , Senatore has an average return of 9.7% and a 53.85% success rate on recommended stocks.

In addition to Bank of America Securities, Dutch Bros Inc also received a Buy from Piper Sandler’s Brian Mullan in a report issued on April 9. However, on April 19, Barclays maintained a Hold rating on Dutch Bros Inc (NYSE: BROS).

The company has a one-year high of $36.17 and a one-year low of $22.67. Currently, Dutch Bros Inc has an average volume of 2.03M.

Based on the recent corporate insider activity of 85 insiders, corporate insider sentiment is negative on the stock. This means that over the past quarter there has been an increase of insiders selling their shares of BROS in relation to earlier this year. Last month, TSG7 A Management LLC, a Major Shareholder at BROS sold 6,832,269.00 shares for a total of $218,421,296.31.

TipRanks has tracked 36,000 company insiders and found that a few of them are better than others when it comes to timing their transactions. See which 3 stocks are most likely to make moves following their insider activities.

Dutch Bros Inc (BROS) Company Description:

Dutch Bros Inc is a growing brand in the foodservice and restaurant industry in the United States. It has two operating segments. The company-operated shops segment, which is the key revenue driver, represents coffee shop sales to customers. The Franchising and other segment represents bean and product sales to franchisees and includes the initial franchise fees, royalties, marketing fees, and lease income.

Read More on BROS:

• Dutch Bros Inc Announces Executive Team Expansion and New Appointments
• Dutch Bros Inc: IPO Progress and Stockholder Agreement Updates
• Dutch Bros falls -7.3%
• Dutch Bros falls -6.3%
• Dutch Bros 8M share Spot Secondary priced at $34.00

Dutch Bros News MORE

Related stocks.

Chinese Spies Target Dutch Industries to Strengthen Military, Intelligence Agency Says

FILE PHOTO: Employees are seen working on the final assembly of ASML's TWINSCAN NXE:3400B semiconductor lithography tool with its panels removed, in Veldhoven, Netherlands, in this picture taken April 4, 2019. Bart van Overbeeke Fotografie/ASML/Handout via REUTERS//File Photo

AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - Chinese spies have targeted the Dutch semiconductor, aerospace and maritime industries to try to strengthen China's armed forces, the Dutch military intelligence agency MIVD said in its annual report published on Thursday.

As part of an ongoing trend of Chinese political espionage against the Netherlands and its allies, China is investing heavily in the collection of western knowledge and technical capabilities, the agency said.

"China wants to be independent from western knowledge and technology (and) wants to build a military that can match any other," the MIVD said.

"To do so, it needs advanced technology it doesn't yet fully possess. It tries to get this abroad, using legal means such as research and investments, but also through its intelligence agencies."

Dutch intelligence agencies first publicly attributed cyber espionage to China in February, when they said state-backed cyber spies had gained access to a Dutch military network last year.

Last year, the Netherlands joined a U.S. effort to keep certain chipmaking technology from China for national security reasons, restricting the export by leading chipmaking equipment maker ASML of certain deep ultraviolet (DUV) equipment for Chinese customers.

Photos You Should See - April 2024

Earlier this month, the U.S. government also pressed the Netherlands to stop ASML from servicing some tools in China, according to people familiar with the matter.

In its annual report, the MIVD said China continued to target western armed forces for their knowledge on modern weapon systems and operational expertise, while also seeking out other advanced industries.

"China tries to get hold of technology in the Netherlands in various ways, using a combination of (cyber) espionage, company insiders, acquisitions, circumvention of export restrictions and reverse engineering of technology for which no licenses are required," the agency said.

The agency said Chinese intelligence agencies had broadened the scope, intensity and technical level of its cyber campaigns over the last year.

Chinese universities also play an important role in gathering intelligence, it said, as scientists who work with western companies often also work for China's security services and state companies.

(Reporting by Bart Meijer; editing by Barbara Lewis)

Copyright 2024 Thomson Reuters .

Join the Conversation

Tags: Europe , intellectual property , Netherlands

America 2024

Health News Bulletin

Stay informed on the latest news on health and COVID-19 from the editors at U.S. News & World Report.

Sign in to manage your newsletters »

Sign up to receive the latest updates from U.S News & World Report and our trusted partners and sponsors. By clicking submit, you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions & Privacy Policy .

You May Also Like

The 10 worst presidents.

U.S. News Staff Feb. 23, 2024

Cartoons on President Donald Trump

Feb. 1, 2017, at 1:24 p.m.

Photos: Obama Behind the Scenes

April 8, 2022

Photos: Who Supports Joe Biden?

March 11, 2020

High Court to Again Weigh Abortion Law

Laura Mannweiler April 23, 2024

Takeaways From Pecker’s Trump Testimony

Lauren Camera April 23, 2024

Biden, Trump: Trail v. Trial

Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder April 23, 2024

Judge Rips Trump Team on Gag Order

New Home Sales See a Spring Bump

Tim Smart April 23, 2024

What to Know: Trump Trial Day One

Lauren Camera April 22, 2024