How to Write Background of the Study

How to Write Background of the Study: Complete Guide for Filipino Researchers

Estimated reading time: 8 minutes

Why Your Background of the Study Really Matters

If you’re a Filipino researcher staring at a blank page, wondering how to write your Background of the Study, you’re not alone. This section is often where students get stuck—not because it’s inherently difficult, but because they don’t fully understand its purpose or how to approach it strategically.

Here’s the truth: your Background of the Study isn’t just a formality. It’s your opportunity to convince your thesis committee, academic advisors, or journal reviewers that your research deserves attention. It’s the bridge between “here’s what we already know” and “here’s why your study fills a critical gap.”

Many Filipino researchers struggle with this section because they’re juggling multiple challenges: meeting institutional guidelines from universities like UP, DLSU, or Ateneo; finding locally-relevant sources; and structuring their argument in a way that flows naturally from context to research problem. If you’re feeling overwhelmed by these demands, that’s completely normal—and it’s exactly why PremiumResearchers offers specialized support for Filipino academic writers. Our team understands the specific expectations of Philippine institutions and can help you craft a Background section that not only meets requirements but exceeds them.

But let’s start with the fundamentals. Understanding what this section needs to accomplish is your first step toward writing it successfully.

Understanding the Purpose Beyond Basic Requirements

The Background of the Study serves multiple functions in your research document. Yes, it provides context—but it does much more than that.

What Reviewers Actually Look For

When your thesis advisor or a journal reviewer reads your Background of the Study, they’re mentally asking these questions:

• Does this researcher understand the field? Your background demonstrates that you’ve done your homework and can synthesize existing knowledge.
• Is this research necessary? You need to show that a gap exists—that your research addresses something not yet adequately explored.
• Is this relevant to my institution/field? For Filipino researchers, this often means showing connection to local contexts, Filipino communities, or regional issues.
• Can this researcher think critically? It’s not just about listing studies; it’s about analyzing them, identifying limitations, and explaining why your approach is different or better.

In essence, your Background of the Study serves as proof that you’re a competent, thoughtful researcher who has identified a legitimate research problem. Without this foundation, even brilliant research methodology falls flat.

The Emotional Journey You’re Taking Readers On

A well-written Background section creates narrative momentum. You’re essentially taking readers on this journey:

1. Recognition: “Oh, this is an issue that exists and has been studied”
2. Curiosity: “What have researchers found so far? What remains unclear?”
3. Urgency: “This gap in knowledge needs to be filled. This matters.”
4. Anticipation: “I want to see what this researcher proposes to do about it”

If your Background section fails to create this journey, readers will be confused about why they should care about your research problem. That’s a fatal flaw in academic writing.

Four Essential Components Every Section Needs

Component 1: Historical Context (The Foundation)

Starting with historical context does two things: it legitimizes your topic and it shows readers that you understand how the field has evolved.

What to include: When did people first become interested in this topic? How has thinking about it changed over time? What major events or discoveries shifted the conversation?

For Filipino researchers specifically: Make sure you include local historical context when relevant. For example, if you’re researching mental health support systems, mentioning the shift from institutional care to community-based programs in the Philippines adds authenticity and relevance.

Practical example: “Research on social media’s impact on adolescent mental health emerged in the early 2010s as platforms like Facebook and later Instagram became mainstream. In the Philippine context, this became particularly relevant as smartphone penetration and internet access increased significantly between 2015-2020, making the Philippines one of the world’s highest social media users per capita.”

Notice how this example moves from global context to local reality. This is the approach that impresses Philippine academic institutions.

Component 2: Current State of Research (The Literature Review Integration)

This is where many researchers get bogged down. They try to review everything. Don’t do this. Instead, review strategically.

What to include:

• Major findings: What do most studies agree on?
• Conflicting evidence: Where do researchers disagree?
• Methodological gaps: Have most studies used the same approach? (If yes, that’s a problem—diversity in methodology strengthens a field)
• Population gaps: Have studies focused on specific populations while ignoring others?
• Geographic gaps: This is critical for Filipino researchers—have most studies been conducted in Western contexts, ignoring Filipino realities?

Common mistake: Students write: “Smith (2019) found X. Johnson (2020) found Y. Lee (2021) found Z.” This is just listing. Instead, write: “While early research suggested social media increases anxiety among adolescents (Smith 2019), more recent studies indicate the relationship is more nuanced, with outcomes depending heavily on how platforms are used (Johnson 2020; Lee 2021). However, most research has focused on Western adolescents; Filipino-specific contexts remain underexplored.”

See the difference? The second version groups findings, acknowledges complexity, and identifies a specific gap.

Component 3: Significance and Relevance (The “So What?” Factor)

This is where you answer the question every reviewer secretly asks: “Why should anyone care about this?”

Demonstrate significance on multiple levels:

• Academic significance: How does your research advance the field’s understanding?
• Practical significance: What real-world applications or improvements might result?
• Local significance: Why does this matter specifically to Filipino communities, organizations, or institutions?

For Filipino researchers: Don’t just cite international statistics. Find data relevant to the Philippines. According to the Philippine Statistics Authority or Department of Health? Reference those. According to the Mental Health Commission? Perfect. These local anchors make your significance argument infinitely stronger because it shows you’re not just applying Western research to a Filipino context—you’re addressing Filipino realities.

Example of weak significance: “Mental health is important.”

Example of strong significance: “The Philippine Health Statistics reported that depression and anxiety disorders affect approximately 3.4% of the Filipino population, yet there are only about 600 psychiatrists serving 115 million people. Understanding factors that impact adolescent mental health—particularly modifiable factors like social media use—could inform prevention strategies and support the Department of Health’s push toward community-based mental health services.”

Notice the second example includes specific statistics, institutions, and practical implications.

Component 4: Explicit Connection to Your Research Problem

This final component is your transition bridge. It connects everything you’ve established—the context, the literature, the significance—directly to the specific questions or hypotheses your research will address.

What to include: A clear statement that says something like: “Given these gaps in the literature and the urgency of addressing mental health in the Filipino adolescent population, this study will investigate [your specific research questions/objectives].”

Why this matters: Without this explicit connection, readers might think “This background is interesting, but I’m still not sure what this researcher is actually studying.” Make the connection obvious.

Example: “Therefore, this study seeks to examine the relationship between social media use patterns and mental health outcomes specifically among Filipino high school students aged 14-17, with particular attention to how cultural factors and peer relationships mediate this relationship. By doing so, we aim to provide evidence that can inform both school-based interventions and mental health policy in the Philippine context.”

Now readers know exactly what’s coming next.

Best Practices for Writing That Impresses Reviewers

Practice 1: Strategic Scope (Know What to Include and Exclude)

The biggest mistake researchers make is trying to include everything. Your Background of the Study should be approximately 15-25% of your total thesis length (consult your institution’s guidelines—UP, DLSU, and other Philippine universities often specify page counts).

Ask yourself: Is this directly relevant to my research problem? If the answer is no, even if it’s interesting, leave it out. If it’s tangentially related but not essential, condense it.

The “relevance test”: For each paragraph, write a one-sentence justification for why it’s necessary. If you can’t write a clear justification, that paragraph probably doesn’t belong.

Practice 2: Source Quality and Diversity

Reviewers can tell if you’ve actually read your sources or just cited them. Use sources strategically:

• Prioritize peer-reviewed journal articles over other sources (though books and reports have their place)
• Include recent research (last 5-10 years) to show you’re current, but also include foundational studies that established the field
• Balance international and local research—especially important for Filipino researchers. Your institution wants to see that you value local scholarship
• Use Philippine research databases: Google Scholar (scholar.google.com), Research Gate, institutional repositories from UP, DLSU, ADMU, and other universities

If you’re struggling to find high-quality Philippine sources on your topic, contact PremiumResearchers—our team has extensive access to Philippine academic resources and knows how to source locally-relevant research effectively.

Practice 3: Critical Analysis Over Description

Describing what researchers found is baseline. Analyzing what it means is where you demonstrate intelligence.

Weak approach: “Martinez (2022) found that peer support reduces anxiety in adolescents.”

Strong approach: “While Martinez (2022) documented anxiety reduction through peer support, the study was limited to urban middle-class adolescents in Metro Manila. This leaves open the question of whether similar mechanisms operate among adolescents in provincial areas or lower-income communities where social structures and access to resources differ significantly.”

In the strong approach, you’re acknowledging what was found while pointing out limitations. This demonstrates that you’re thinking critically, not just reading.

Practice 4: Create Logical Flow with Transitions

Your Background of the Study should read like a logical argument, not a collection of paragraphs. Use transitions that show relationships between ideas:

• “Building on this foundation…” (connecting to previous point)
• “However, these studies overlook…” (identifying a gap)
• “In the Filipino context, this becomes particularly relevant because…” (localizing the issue)
• “Consequently, there is a need to examine…” (moving toward your research problem)

These transitions guide readers through your logic. Without them, your section feels choppy and disconnected.

Practice 5: Develop an Academic Voice

Academic writing in the Philippines follows specific conventions. You should sound knowledgeable, measured, and professional—not overly casual, but also not robotically formal.

Too casual: “A lot of people use social media, so researchers have been looking at how it affects their mental health.”

Too formal: “The proliferation of social media utilization among adolescent populations has precipitated scholarly inquiry into the nexus of platform engagement and psychological well-being manifestations.”

Just right: “As social media use among adolescents has become widespread, researchers have increasingly examined its relationship with mental health outcomes.”

The “just right” version is clear, professional, and appropriately academic.

Avoiding Common Mistakes Filipino Researchers Make

Based on years of working with Filipino academic institutions, certain patterns emerge in what committees and advisors often critique:

Mistake 1: Ignoring Local Context

The most common feedback we hear from Philippine academic advisors: “This could be about any country. Make it specifically about the Philippines.”

If your research is on a Filipino topic but your Background reads like it could apply to Singapore, Thailand, or any other country, you’ve failed to ground it properly. Philippine universities want to see that you understand Filipino contexts, challenges, and realities.

Solution: Explicitly address why this topic matters in the Philippines. Reference Filipino statistics, policies, cultural factors, or social issues.

Mistake 2: Confusing Background with Literature Review

Your Background of the Study is NOT your Literature Review. These are related but distinct sections.

Background: “Here’s the context and why this matters” (broader, more narrative)

Literature Review: “Here’s what research has specifically found about my topic” (more detailed, exhaustive, systematic)

If your institution asks for a separate Literature Review chapter, your Background should be much shorter and more focused on context and gaps. If Literature Review is combined into Background, you’ll need more depth.

Check your institution’s specific guidelines. UP, DLSU, and others have different expectations.

Mistake 3: Weak Gap Identification

A vague gap (“not much is known about X”) is unconvincing. A strong gap is specific.

Weak: “There is limited research on how social media affects Filipino teenagers’ self-esteem.”

Strong: “While international research has identified social comparison on social media as a predictor of low self-esteem, no studies have examined how this operates specifically among Filipino adolescents, where family collectivism and peer relationships follow different patterns than Western contexts. This gap is significant because interventions developed from Western populations may not translate effectively to Filipino settings.”

The strong version explains specifically what’s missing and why it matters.

Mistake 4: Disproportionate Length

Some researchers write a 20-page Background for a 50-page thesis. This throws off the entire document’s balance.

Typical proportions:

• Background of the Study: 15-25% of total thesis
• Literature Review (if separate): 25-35%
• Methodology: 15-20%
• Results/Findings: 20-30%
• Discussion/Conclusion: 15-25%

Keep your Background focused and proportionate.

Mistake 5: Overstating Your Study’s Novelty

Don’t claim your research is the first to ever examine something if there’s any existing research on it. Instead, frame it as the first in a specific context or using a specific approach.

Overclaimed: “This is the first study to examine social media and mental health.” (Obviously false)

Appropriately positioned: “This is the first qualitative study to examine how Filipino adolescents from different socioeconomic backgrounds experience social media’s impact on self-esteem.” (Specific and credible)

Example Outline and Practical Framework

Let’s move from theory to practice. Here’s a detailed outline for a Background of the Study on a real topic that might interest Filipino researchers:

Research topic: “The Impact of Remote Work on Work-Life Balance Among Filipino Knowledge Workers”

This outline creates a narrative arc: (1) Here’s the context, (2) Here’s what we know globally but don’t know about the Philippines, (3) Here’s why it matters, (4) Here’s what I’m going to study.

Notice how it avoids being too broad (“work is changing”) and instead stays focused on a specific context (Filipino remote workers) and specific outcomes (work-life balance).

When Professional Help Makes a Real Difference

At this point, you might be thinking: “I understand what a Background of the Study is, but actually writing it is another matter entirely.”

That’s completely valid. Many Filipino researchers find themselves stuck not because they don’t understand the concept, but because they’re trying to juggle multiple challenges simultaneously:

• Finding and synthesizing relevant research across multiple languages and databases
• Understanding the specific expectations of their institution (UP vs. DLSU vs. ADMU have different conventions)
• Balancing comprehensiveness with conciseness
• Making their writing sound academically polished in English
• Maintaining focus on a specific gap while acknowledging broader context
• Integrating Filipino sources while engaging with international scholarship

This is exactly where professional research writing support becomes invaluable.

PremiumResearchers specializes in helping Filipino graduate and undergraduate researchers with precisely these challenges. Our team includes professionals familiar with Philippine academic institutions’ expectations and excellent at sourcing locally-relevant research.

Here’s what professional support typically includes:

• Research sourcing: We know where to find high-quality Philippine research on your topic
• Institutional guidance: We’ve worked with UP, DLSU, ADMU, UST, and other institutions and understand their specific preferences
• Structural design: We help you organize your background in a way that creates narrative flow and clearly identifies research gaps
• Writing refinement: We ensure your background sounds academically polished without being unnecessarily complex
• Gap identification: We help you articulate precisely what your research will fill—the most important element

If you’re finding yourself overwhelmed by this section, reach out to PremiumResearchers on WhatsApp or email us. We can discuss your specific research and how we can best support you. Many of our clients find that getting professional guidance on the Background of the Study actually makes the entire research process less stressful.

But even if you decide to write it yourself, the frameworks and practices outlined in this guide should significantly improve your draft.

Final Thoughts: Your Background Is Your Foundation

Writing a strong Background of the Study is not just about meeting a requirement. It’s about building credibility, establishing why your research matters, and creating a logical pathway into your study design.

The best Background sections accomplish something specific: they make readers think, “Yes, this research is necessary. I want to see what they found.” They don’t oversell or overstate; they make a measured, evidence-based argument for why the research is important.

For Filipino researchers, this also means grounding your work in Filipino realities—using local data, acknowledging cultural contexts, and demonstrating that you understand how your research problem manifests specifically in the Philippines.

If you’re ready to tackle your Background of the Study armed with these insights and frameworks, you’re in good position. If you find that writing it alone feels overwhelming, remember that seeking professional guidance is a smart strategic choice, not a failure. PremiumResearchers is here to support your research success.

Frequently Asked Questions