Research Paper Outline: APA and MLA Templates With a Sample

An outline for a research paper does more work than an outline for a short essay, because a research paper has fixed sections that readers expect in a fixed order. The outline’s job is to fit your argument and evidence into those sections before you write a single paragraph. Done right, it turns a ten-page paper into a series of half-page writing tasks. Done badly (or skipped), it produces the familiar draft where the literature review is four pages, the analysis is one, and the conclusion apologizes for both.

This page covers the two shapes a research paper outline takes, gives a template for each, fills one in completely, and explains the formatting conventions instructors ask for. If you need the general reasoning behind outlining, Outlines for Essays: Which Kind to Use and How to Scale It covers that ground; this page is specific to the research paper.

Which shape your paper takes

Before choosing a template, identify which kind of research paper you are writing. There are two, and they outline differently.

The empirical paper reports a study: you collected or analyzed data and are telling the reader what you found. It follows the IMRaD structure (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion). Psychology, nursing, biology, education, sociology, and most social sciences use it, almost always in APA style.

The argument paper makes a claim about texts, events, ideas, or evidence other people gathered, and defends it. History, literature, philosophy, and many first-year composition courses assign this kind, most often in MLA style, sometimes Chicago.

The difference is where the evidence comes from. Your own data: IMRaD template. Sources you read and interpret: argument template.

Template 1: IMRaD outline (APA-style empirical paper)

This template follows the sections of an APA paper in order, so the outline doubles as a map of the finished manuscript. The level-1 headings become your APA level-1 section headings; for how those headings are formatted on the page, see APA Headings.

Title: [Working title naming variables and population]
Thesis / Research question: [One sentence: what you tested and what you expected]

I. Introduction
   A. Problem and why it matters
   B. What prior research has established
      1. Finding cluster 1 (and its main sources)
      2. Finding cluster 2 (and its main sources)
      3. Gap or contradiction the present study addresses
   C. Present study
      1. Research question
      2. Hypothesis (or hypotheses)

II. Method
   A. Participants (who, how many, how recruited)
   B. Materials or measures (each instrument, what it measures)
   C. Procedure (what participants did, in order)
   D. Design and analysis plan

III. Results
   A. Descriptive statistics / preliminary checks
   B. Test of hypothesis 1
   C. Test of hypothesis 2
   D. Additional or unexpected findings

IV. Discussion
   A. Restatement of main finding in plain language
   B. Interpretation relative to prior research (ties back to I.B)
   C. Limitations
   D. Implications and future directions
   E. Conclusion sentence(s)

References
Appendices (if any)

Two features are worth noticing. The Introduction’s section B and the Discussion’s section B are mirrors: what prior research said, and what your findings say back to it. Building both into the outline keeps the paper from ending in a vacuum. Second, each Results entry pairs with a hypothesis from the Introduction, so you can see at a glance whether every hypothesis gets tested and every test has a hypothesis.

How the outline maps to an APA paper

Students searching for a “sample APA format paper” usually want to know what goes where. The outline above answers that in order:

The title page and running elements are formatting, not outlining. For a walkthrough of the whole manuscript, How to Format a Research Paper in APA Style, Step by Step is the fuller guide.

Template 2: Argument outline (MLA-style humanities paper)

Argument papers have no prescribed sections, so the outline is built from the argument itself. Each main heading is one reason the thesis is true; each sub-entry is the evidence for that reason. MLA papers rarely use headings in the text, so this outline is a plan for paragraphs, not a set of labels that will appear on the page.

Title: [Working title]
Thesis: [Arguable claim with the central reason built in]

I. Introduction
   A. Context the reader needs (the text, event, or debate)
   B. The question or problem the paper takes up
   C. Thesis statement

II. Background (only if the reader cannot follow the argument without it)
   A. Key terms defined
   B. Necessary history or summary, kept short

III. First supporting claim
   A. Evidence (quotation, document, example) with source
   B. Analysis: what the evidence shows and why it supports the thesis
   C. Second piece of evidence
   D. Analysis

IV. Second supporting claim
   A. Evidence with source
   B. Analysis
   C. Evidence with source
   D. Analysis

V. Third supporting claim (often the strongest, placed last)
   A. Evidence with source
   B. Analysis

VI. Counterargument
   A. The strongest objection, stated fairly, with its source
   B. Concession (what the objection gets right)
   C. Rebuttal (why the thesis holds anyway)

VII. Conclusion
   A. Thesis restated in light of the evidence
   B. Wider implication or the question the paper opens

Works Cited

The counterargument section is not optional in a research paper; a paper that never engages an opposing reading looks under-researched. Where you place it is flexible. Some writers put it after the background so the rest of the paper answers it. The template puts it late so the rebuttal lands close to the conclusion. For citation conventions in this format, What Is MLA Format? A Plain-Language Guide for Humanities Writers explains parenthetical citations and the Works Cited page.

A filled sample outline

The sample below uses the argument template for a hypothetical 2,500-word history paper. The topic, sources, and evidence are invented for demonstration; what matters is how the entries are written.

Title: Streetcars Before Suburbs: Transit Lines and the Shape of an
       Early Twentieth-Century American City

Thesis: In the fictional city of Harlow between 1900 and 1925, streetcar
routes did not follow residential growth but caused it, because
developers bought land along planned lines before construction began,
built housing to match the fare structure, and then lobbied to block
competing routes.

I. Introduction
   A. Harlow in 1900: a compact city, walking distances, four
      streetcar lines radiating from the central square
   B. The question: did the lines follow the houses, or the houses
      follow the lines?
   C. Thesis (as above)

II. Background
   A. How private streetcar franchises worked: city grants exclusive
      route, company builds and operates, fixed nickel fare
   B. The three developers whose records survive (invented names:
      Marsh Land Company, Ellery & Sons, Northside Improvement)

III. Developers bought land ahead of construction
   A. Evidence: Marsh Land Co. deed records, 1904–1906, showing
      purchases along the future Route 7 corridor eighteen months
      before the franchise vote
   B. Analysis: the purchases only make sense if Marsh knew the route;
      Marsh's president sat on the transit board
   C. Evidence: Ellery & Sons advertisement, 1908, promising a
      "five-cent ride downtown" for lots on a line not yet built
   D. Analysis: the line was being sold as a feature before it existed,
      so demand was manufactured, not followed

IV. Housing was built to match the fare structure
   A. Evidence: lot sizes along Route 7 versus lots beyond the terminus
      (assessor maps, 1912)
   B. Analysis: uniform narrow lots on the line, larger irregular lots
      beyond it; the flat fare made every stop equally valuable, so
      developers subdivided densely along the whole corridor
   C. Evidence: Northside Improvement's plat filing tied lot prices to
      walking minutes from each stop
   D. Analysis: transit access was priced explicitly, which shows
      developers treated the line as the product

V. Developers blocked competing routes
   A. Evidence: council minutes, 1917, petition against a proposed
      crosstown line signed by all three developers
   B. Analysis: a crosstown line would have opened land they did not
      own; the petition's stated reason (traffic) does not survive
      inspection because the proposed line crossed empty parcels

VI. Counterargument
   A. Objection: population growth was citywide, so lines were laid
      wherever people already were (the "transit follows demand"
      reading in older city histories)
   B. Concession: the first two lines, built in the 1890s, did follow
      existing neighborhoods
   C. Rebuttal: the post-1900 lines ran through farmland at the time
      of construction; the deed records in III show land changing hands
      before, not after, the lines opened

VII. Conclusion
   A. In Harlow, the streetcar was a development tool first and a
      transportation service second
   B. Implication: histories that treat suburban growth as the cause
      of transit expansion may have the sequence backward

Works Cited

What to notice. Every evidence entry names a specific source and what it shows, so drafting a paragraph from it takes no further planning. Every analysis entry explains why the evidence proves the claim above it, which is the step weak papers skip. The counterargument concedes something real (the 1890s lines) rather than a straw version. And the thesis contains the three reasons that become sections III, IV, and V, so a reader can check the outline against the thesis in seconds. A five-paragraph version would collapse III, IV, and V into single paragraphs; the research paper expands each into a two- or three-paragraph section because each claim has several pieces of evidence.

Alphanumeric vs decimal format

Two numbering systems are in common use. Instructors sometimes require one; otherwise, pick one and be consistent.

Alphanumeric uses Roman numerals, capital letters, Arabic numerals, and lowercase letters, in that order:

I. Main section
   A. Sub-point
      1. Detail
         a. Sub-detail
   B. Sub-point
II. Main section

This is the default in most composition courses and what both templates above use. It is easy to read at a glance because the level is visible from the symbol, not just the indent.

Decimal uses nested numbers:

1.0 Main section
   1.1 Sub-point
      1.1.1 Detail
      1.1.2 Detail
   1.2 Sub-point
2.0 Main section

Decimal outlines are common in engineering, business, and the sciences. Every entry’s full position is encoded in its label: 2.3.1 is the first detail under the third sub-point of the second section, without counting indents.

Three rules apply to both systems:

1. No single sub-entries. If section II has an A, it needs a B. A lone A means the point belongs in the parent entry, not below it.
2. Parallel form at each level. If I.A is a sentence, I.B is a sentence. If III’s sub-entries are “Evidence / Analysis” pairs, so are IV’s.
3. Consistent depth. Go to the third level everywhere or nowhere. An outline that reaches sub-details in one section and stops at main headings in another signals that the thin section is under-researched.

Building the outline from your notes

The outline is the last planning document, not the first. Write the thesis before anything else, even if it is rough, because every entry will be tested against it. Then sort your notes into piles by the claim they support; each pile becomes a main section, and a pile with one note is not a section. Order the sections (fixed for IMRaD; for argument papers, most-accepted claim first, strongest last). Write sub-entries as evidence-and-analysis pairs. Finally, read only the main headings: they should form a short summary of the argument, and any heading that does not support the thesis is either off-topic or a sign the thesis is incomplete.

Common mistakes

• Outlining the sources instead of the argument. Main headings that read “Smith’s study,” “Jones’s book,” “Lee’s article” produce a paper that summarizes three sources in turn. Headings should be claims; sources appear under them.
• A literature review with no gap. In IMRaD outlines, section I.B.3 is where the paper earns its existence. If you cannot write the gap entry, you do not yet know why your study matters.
• Limitations as an afterthought. Leaving IV.C as the single word “Limitations” guarantees a weak paragraph. Name at least two specific limitations in the outline.
• Evidence without analysis. A sub-entry that reads “Quote from Act 3” with no partner entry produces a paragraph that quotes and moves on.
• Counterargument left for the draft. If the objection is not in the outline, it will be sketched in one sentence at the end of the paper, where it looks like a concession under pressure.

Checklist before you draft

• Thesis stated at the top in one arguable sentence
• Paper type identified (IMRaD or argument) and matching template used
• Every main heading is a claim or a fixed section name, not a source
• Every piece of evidence has an analysis entry beside it
• No level has a lone A or a lone 1
• Same depth reached in every section
• Counterargument section present with a concession and rebuttal (argument paper) or limitations named specifically (IMRaD)
• Main headings, read alone, summarize the argument
• Numbering format (alphanumeric or decimal) consistent throughout
• Each lowest-level entry corresponds to roughly one paragraph

Frequently asked questions

Does the outline get handed in with the paper?

Only if the assignment says so, and then it usually goes as a separate page before the paper or as a preliminary submission a week or two earlier. When it is graded, instructors check that the thesis appears at the top, that every main heading supports it, and that the format (alphanumeric or decimal) is consistent. Ask which format the course prefers before you build it.

How detailed should a research paper outline be?

Detailed enough that each lowest-level entry becomes one paragraph or one clearly bounded piece of a paragraph. For a 10-page paper that usually means 25 to 40 entries across three levels. If an entry would take three paragraphs to write, split it; if two entries would share a paragraph, merge them. The test is whether you could draft from the outline without stopping to plan.

Should the outline use full sentences or short phrases?

Phrases are faster and fine for your own use. A sentence outline, where every entry is a complete claim, takes longer but exposes weak reasoning early, because a phrase like “Limitations” can hide the fact that you have not decided what the limitations are. Many instructors require sentence outlines for that reason. A workable compromise is sentences at the first two levels and phrases below them.

Can the outline change after I start writing?

It should. Drafting reveals gaps and mis-ordered sections that no outline predicts. Treat the outline as a plan you revise, not a contract. The one thing to protect is the thesis at the top: if drafting changes your claim, rewrite the thesis first, then check every main heading against the new version before continuing.