If you’re a PhDer, you’ve probably heard these terms thrown around in seminars, thesis committees, and paper reviews: “What’s your contribution?” and “Why is this significant?” At first glance, these might seem like the same question asked in different ways. But they’re not. Understanding the difference between research contribution and significance can be the key to writing a compelling thesis, winning over reviewers, and ultimately making an impact in your field.

Here’s a break down of the two terms.

What is a research contribution?

Your research contribution is the specific, concrete thing you’re adding to your field. Think of it as your unique gift to the academic community. It’s what makes your research original and distinguishes it from everything that came before (see last post).

Contributions can take many forms. You might develop a new theoretical framework that helps explain a phenomenon no one fully understood. Perhaps you’ve created an innovative methodology that allows researchers to measure something previously unmeasurable. Maybe you’ve produced empirical findings that challenge conventional wisdom, or you’ve synthesised existing knowledge in a way that reveals new patterns and insights.

The key word here is “new.” Your contribution answers the question: What didn’t exist before that now exists because of your research? How have you reduced ignorance about your topic? What do people know now that you’ve done your research that they didn’t know before? For example, if you’re researching climate change communication, your contribution might be a new typology of how different demographic groups respond to climate messaging. In the humanities, it might be a fresh interpretation of historical texts to illuminate past and present cultural practices.

Your contribution is tangible and specific. It’s something you can point to and say, “Here. This is what I’ve done.”

What is research significance?

Now, significance is where things get exciting. This is where you explain why anyone should care about your contribution. It’s the “So What?” and “Now What?” of your research.

Significance addresses the potential impact, value, and implications of your work. It connects your specific contribution to larger concerns in your field, adjacent disciplines, practical applications and/or society at large. While contribution is about what you’ve done, significance is about why it matters.

Let’s go back to our examples. That new typology of climate communication responses? Its significance might be that it enables policymakers and advocacy groups to craft more effective campaigns, potentially accelerating climate action when time is running out. The efficient algorithm? It could reduce computational costs for machine learning applications, making Gen AI more accessible to smaller organisations and researchers in developing countries. The historical reinterpretation? It might reshape how we understand cultural identity formation in ways that speak to contemporary debates about representation and belonging.

Significance extends beyond your immediate findings. It encompassese who benefits from your research, what problems it solves, what new questions it opens up, and how it might influence future scholarship or practice.

Why the distinction matters

However, articulating significance is where many PhDers stumble. You can have a solid contribution but fail to articulate its significance, leaving examiners/readers/reviewers wondering why they should care. Conversely, you might be passionate about a significant problem but lack a clear, original contribution, resulting in work that feels important but unfocused or derivative.

The magic happens when contribution and significance align. Your specific addition to knowledge should connect meaningfully to something that matters in the world beyond your dissertation.

When you’re writing your research proposal or thesis introduction, you need both. Examiners, readers and reviewers want to know what you’re doing that’s new (contribution) and why it’s worth doing (significance). When you’re defending your work, you’ll need to speak to both with clarity and confidence.

Start by asking yourself these questions: What problem am I addressing? What question am I answering that hasn’t been answered before in quite this way? What am I the first person to do, discover, or create? How have I confirmed, challenged or reframed something that is already in my field? How have I moved the field along?

Read your literature review with fresh eyes. Where are the holes/debates? Where do scholars say “more research is needed”? Where do existing theories break apart or methods fall short? Where are there other ways of approaching a known question? Your contribution lives in those spaces.

But be specific – and realistic. Your PhD doesn’t need to revolutionise your entire field, that’s a lot of pressure and usually unrealistic. But it should add something different, even if it’s a focused advance in a particular area.

Writing about significance

For significance, think beyond the academy. Who else cares about this problem? Practitioners? Policymakers? Communities? Industries?

Consider multiple levels of significance. There’s theoretical significance, where your work advances scholarly understanding. There’s methodological significance, where your approach enables new kinds of research. There’s practical significance, where your findings can be applied to solve real-world problems. And there’s social significance, where your research addresses issues that affect people’s lives.

Don’t be shy about making bold claims for your significance, but make sure you can back them up. Connect the dots explicitly between your specific contribution and its broader implications. Show your reasoning. Don’t succumb to feelings of imposter-ness at this stage!

And watch out for common pitfalls.

One trap is conflating the two. PhDers sometimes describe their contribution by only talking about significance, saying things like “This research is important because mental health matters.” Yes, mental health matters, but that doesn’t tell us what you’re specifically contributing.

Another pitfall is underselling your significance. You’ve spent years on this research. You believe in it. Don’t hide that passion behind hedging language. If your work has implications for practice, policy, or theory, say so clearly.

Finally, avoid the opposite problem: overclaiming. Saying your dissertation will “transform the field” or “solve climate change” will raise eyebrows. Be ambitious but grounded in what your research actually demonstrates.

In sum

As you progress through your PhD, keep returning to these two questions: What am I contributing? Why does it matter?

• Contribution = What you’re adding (the specific advance/addition)
• Significance = Why it matters (the broader impact and value)

Write your answers down as you go along. It’s never too early to start thinking about contribution and significance. Put your current versions on sticky notes above your desk. Practice explaining them in one sentence each. When you can articulate both clearly and compellingly, you’ll find that everything else, your literatures work, methodology and discussion will fall into place more easily. And your conclusion will be strong, authoritative and credible.

Every PhD thesis needs both a clear contribution and well-articulated significance. They work together like two sides of a coin. Your contribution gives you credibility and originality. Your significance gives your work relevance and impact. And next time someone asks what you’re working on, don’t just describe your methods or your topic. Tell them what you’re contributing and why it matters. That’s the story of your research, and it’s worth telling well.