How do you write a dissertation introduction?

A dissertation introduction is the opening chapter that defines your research problem, states your aims, and shows examiners why the study matters. For Vietnamese postgraduate researchers writing in English, a clear introduction is what turns an examiner from a sceptic into a reader who wants to know what you found.

The introduction is the most re-read chapter in a thesis and the one supervisors send back most often. This guide answers the seven questions Vietnamese master's and doctoral students ask MAAS mentors most when they sit down to write chapter one.

Author: MAAS Research Methods Publishing Desk · Reviewed by a Principal Academic Mentor (PhD, doctoral supervisor and thesis examiner)
Last updated: 2026-06-20
Category: research-methods

What is a dissertation introduction actually for?

Direct answer: The introduction has one job: to convince the reader that your research question is worth answering and that you are equipped to answer it. It establishes the topic, narrows to a specific problem, states your aim and questions, and signposts the chapters ahead. It frames the whole thesis rather than summarising your findings.

Evidence: Swales and Feak (2012) describe the introduction as the place where a writer creates a research space — moving the reader from a shared, general field down to the particular question only this study will address. It is an argument for relevance, not a literature dump; the detailed review belongs in its own chapter.

Example: A MAAS-coached master's student in management opened with three pages summarising every theory she had read. Her mentor reframed the chapter around one question — "why does this problem matter, here, now?" — and moved the summary into the literature review. Chapter one became four pages an examiner could follow in one sitting.

What must every dissertation introduction include?

Direct answer: A complete introduction contains a small set of recognisable components: background and context, the research problem, the aim and objectives, the research questions or hypotheses, the significance or rationale, the scope and limitations, and a short outline of the chapters. Naming each component as you draft stops you from leaving gaps an examiner will notice.

Evidence: University writing guides converge on these elements: background, problem, aim, questions, significance, scope, and thesis structure (Murray, 2017). Each one answers a question in the reader's mind — what is this about, what is wrong, what will you do, why care, and where is it going.

Example: A Vietnamese doctoral candidate in education submitted a strong-background introduction with no explicit scope. Her examiner asked why three obvious sub-topics were absent. Working the component checklist below with a MAAS mentor, she added two sentences defining scope, and the question disappeared at the viva.

How should you structure the introduction from broad to narrow?

Direct answer: Use a funnel: start wide with the established field, narrow to the gap others have left, then occupy that gap with your own study. This broad-to-narrow movement is the single most reliable structure for an academic introduction, and examiners are trained to look for it whether or not they name it.

Evidence: Swales (1990) formalised this pattern as the CARS model — Create a Research Space — built from three rhetorical moves. Bunton (2002) confirmed the pattern in PhD writing specifically, analysing 45 thesis introductions across eight disciplines and showing that the territory–niche–occupy sequence recurs across fields, extended by a final move that signposts the thesis structure.

Example: A MAAS client in finance kept opening with his own variables, leaving the reader no map of the field. His mentor walked him through the three moves below. He rewrote move by move: one page on the field, one paragraph on the gap, one occupying it. The same content suddenly read like a contribution, not a list.

How do you write an opening that makes an examiner keep reading?

Direct answer: Open with a claim of centrality — a sentence that shows the topic is important and current — not with a dictionary definition or a "since the dawn of time" line. Within the first paragraph, the reader should know your field, the kind of problem you address, and that the problem is live.

Evidence: Swales and Feak (2012) identify "claiming centrality" as the most common and most effective opening move in published research, precisely because it signals relevance immediately. Generic openings, by contrast, delay the point and make a reader work to find out why the chapter exists.

Example: A Vietnamese researcher in public health began with "Health is important to everyone." Her mentor replaced it with a specific, sourced claim about a measurable problem in her target population — the same work in half the words, and an immediate reason to read on.

How long should the introduction be, and when should you write it?

Direct answer: As a rough guide, the introduction runs about 5–10% of the whole thesis — a few pages for a master's dissertation, longer for a PhD — but the structure matters more than a word count. Draft a rough version early to clarify your aim, then write the final version last, once you know what you actually found.

Evidence: Murray (2017) advises treating the introduction as a living chapter: draft it early to focus the project, then rewrite it after the findings are settled so the promises it makes match the results you deliver. An introduction frozen at the proposal stage almost always over-claims or points at questions the thesis no longer answers.

Example: A MAAS doctoral client wrote a polished introduction in month two and never revisited it. At submission, three of its objectives no longer matched her analysis. Rewriting the chapter last, to align it with the real findings, took two days and removed her largest single source of examiner questions.

What introduction mistakes do Vietnamese and other ESL researchers make most?

Direct answer: The most common pattern in second-language theses is a strong, well-read territory move followed by a weak or missing niche — the writer reviews the field thoroughly but never states the gap sharply enough for the reader to see the contribution. Other frequent issues are an over-long introduction that merges into the literature review and aims that do not match the questions.

Evidence: Paltridge and Starfield (2019) note that second-language thesis writers often master the descriptive parts of the introduction while underplaying the argumentative niche move that justifies the study. A move analysis by Prasetyanti and Tongpoon-Patanasorn (2023) comparing native-English and ESL doctoral introductions found the gap-establishing move was the least consistently developed among the second-language writers.

Example: A Vietnamese PhD candidate's introduction reviewed forty studies impeccably but never said what was missing. Her MAAS mentor used the niche move as a checklist — one sentence beginning "However…" that named the gap — and the contribution that had been buried in her data became visible in the first three pages.

How do you revise the introduction so it aligns with the whole thesis?

Direct answer: Treat revision as alignment-checking, not polishing. Read the introduction beside your conclusion and confirm that every aim is answered, every question is addressed, and every promised chapter exists. Where the thesis evolved, change the introduction to match the thesis — not the other way around.

Evidence: Murray (2017) and Swales and Feak (2012) both frame the introduction and conclusion as a matched pair the reader uses to judge whether the thesis delivered what it promised. Misalignment between the two is a clear signal to an examiner that a thesis was not fully revised.

Example: A MAAS client's introduction promised a comparison her final thesis no longer made. Reading chapter one against chapter six side by side, her mentor flagged four mismatches. Fixing them through the Outline → Draft → Final model turned a chapter that contradicted the thesis into one that previewed it.

Frequently asked questions

How long should a dissertation introduction be?
A common guide is 5–10% of the total word count — often a few pages for a master's dissertation and longer for a PhD. Treat this as a rough range, not a rule, and always follow your department's and supervisor's specific guidance over any general figure.

Should I write the introduction first or last?
Both. Draft a rough version early to clarify your aim and questions, then write the final version last, after your findings are settled, so the chapter accurately promises what the thesis delivers.

What is the difference between the introduction and the literature review?
The introduction frames the problem and argues why your study matters; the literature review surveys and evaluates existing work in depth. The introduction may sketch the field briefly, but the detailed critical reading belongs in its own chapter.

Do I need research questions and hypotheses in the introduction?
Yes — your aim, objectives, and research questions (and hypotheses, if your design uses them) should appear clearly in the introduction so the reader knows exactly what the thesis will answer before they turn the page.

Can I use AI tools to draft my dissertation introduction?
AI can help you brainstorm structure or tighten sentences, but you must verify every claim, write the argument yourself, and follow your university's disclosure rules. The reasoning and the gap statement must be your own; treat AI as an assistant whose output you check, never as the author.

Can MAAS help me write my dissertation introduction?
Yes. MAAS Academic Mentoring coaches Vietnamese researchers through the introduction — mapping the territory–niche–occupy structure, sharpening the gap statement, and aligning aims with findings — using the Outline → Draft → Final model with PhD-level mentors. Book a consultation through our contact page.

Ready to write an introduction examiners take seriously?

The introduction sets the tone an examiner carries through every later chapter, and it is far easier to get right with a mentor who has supervised and examined theses. MAAS Academic Mentoring pairs you with a PhD-level mentor — 23% of our experts hold doctorates — for a free 20-minute consultation, matches you to the right advisor within 48 hours, and backs every engagement with our three-tier Pass / Merit / Distinction guarantee and a 90-day post-submission warranty. We coach; you stay the author, every step.

Book a dissertation mentoring consultation with MAAS →

Related guides

• How do you write a dissertation conclusion? — the chapter that answers back to your introduction
• How do you write research questions and objectives? — the aim and questions your introduction must state
• How do you write a theoretical framework? — the structure the introduction points toward
• How do you write a conceptual framework? — turning your introduction's logic into a model
• How do you identify a research gap for your paper? — the niche move at the heart of any introduction
• How do you write a literature review as a PhD student? — the chapter the introduction sets up
• How do you write a PhD research proposal? — where your introduction's argument first takes shape
• Academic Mentoring service — full mentoring tiers for thesis and dissertation support
• Dissertation Mentoring resource hub — chapter-by-chapter guides and templates
• Meet the MAAS expert network — the PhD-level mentors who supervise and examine theses

Tools & resources

• Academic Phrasebank — The University of Manchester — signposting phrases for each move
• The Final Chapter — University of Leeds — a dissertation planning resource

References

• Bunton, D. (2002). Generic moves in PhD thesis introductions. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 57–75). Longman.
• Murray, R. (2017). How to write a thesis (4th ed.). Open University Press.
• Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (2019). Thesis and dissertation writing in a second language: A handbook for students and their supervisors (2nd ed.). Routledge.
• Prasetyanti, D. C., & Tongpoon-Patanasorn, A. (2023). A move analysis of dissertation introductions written by native English speakers and Indonesian PhD candidates across disciplines. rEFLections, 30(2), 468–487. https://doi.org/10.61508/refl.v30i2.267462
• Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
• Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills (3rd ed.). University of Michigan Press.

This article is part of the MAAS Journal series for Vietnamese international postgraduate students and researchers. MAAS Academic Mentoring is an advisory partner — we coach authors through the Outline → Draft → Final delivery model with developmental feedback from PhD-level mentors. We do not write, submit, or guarantee acceptance of work on an author's behalf.