Research Process and Product Pyramid
Research is both a process and a product. While many in academia emphasize the latter—placing greater value and sense of accomplishment on the final paper, presentation, or project—the product is merely a snapshot of what was learned along the way. In contrast, the research process is where discovery, insight, and transformation truly occur.
Often, disciplinary biases suggest that some fields produce more valid, rigorous, or meaningful research than others. The Whitehurst Family Honors Program (WFHP) at Barton College challenges that assumption. We believe that when approached with purpose, integrity, and fervor, every research process—regardless of discipline—yields outcomes of equal intellectual value. Whether the final product is a scholarly paper, lab report, conference presentation, art exhibition, or theatrical performance, each output reflects the depth and rigor of inquiry behind it. They are, in essence, expressions of learning.
To that end, the WFHP follows a cross-disciplinary model that emphasizes both the research process and final product or output as equal components of critical inquiry. Furthermore, the model highlights how stages of inquiry connect across diverse academic fields. The following ten stages reflect a shared structure of research process that transcends disciplinary boundaries:
Inquiry and topic framing
Contextualizing information
Approach selection
Planning and preparation
Engagement and creation
Analysis and interpretation
Synthesis and integration
Documentation and articulation
Presentation and dissemination
Translation and adaptation
Imagine the research process as a funnel: the broadest layers appear at the top, where ideas and inspiration are abundant. As the process narrows, each stage becomes denser—more focused and refined, and more deeply connected to the discipline and the researcher’s intent. The product at the end is not the culmination of learning, but rather its most concentrated expression. Graphically, this funnel is represented as an inverted pyramid (see above).
The ten-stage model outlined is intentionally broad, allowing it to encompass a wide range of academic disciplines and modes of inquiry, but its strength lies in its flexibility. Whether a student is working in the natural or social sciences, creative arts or the humanities, the underlying structure can guide the research process from initial inquiry to the final product. To illustrate this variability, the linked table provides discipline-specific examples that align with each stage of the model. These examples are not exhaustive but merely representative majors at liberal arts institutions (including Barton College). They highlight how the process of research—when approached with intention—reveals deep commonalities across seemingly distinct fields, while also affirming the unique outputs that each discipline contributes to our collective understanding. In this way, the WFHP framework not only validates diverse scholarly and creative practices but encourages students to recognize research as a dynamic, iterative, and inclusive act—one that celebrates both process and product across academic boundaries.
In an interdisciplinary program such as the WHFP, the research process is rarely linear and often dynamic. Therein, the model allows researchers to explore the cross-disciplinary option of moving fluidly between disciplines, especially when their inquiry affords multiple ways of knowing or communicating. For example, a natural scientist who has just completed data collection (Stage 5: Engagement and Creation) might choose to shift to the creative arts domain to develop a visual installation or interpretive media piece that communicates their findings. Similarly, a social scientist might move from conducting interviews to developing a theatrical performance or documentary that gives voice to their participants. In such cases, researchers often need to revisit earlier stages within the new domain to effectively adapt their work for a new mode of expression. This kind of recursive movement is not a detour, but rather a hallmark of integrative thinking. It reflects the reality that in interdisciplinary work, research is not confined by academic boundaries but enriched by the interplay between them.
