“Synopsis” names two different documents in Indian universities, and half the drafts that come back have simply been written as the wrong one. One is a proposal: written before the work, for the doctoral committee, to get the topic approved. The other is a summary of completed research: written at the end, submitted with or before the thesis, for the examiners and the research centre.
Find out which one your department means before you write a page. The two share a title, a page limit and almost nothing else, because one is in the future tense and the other is in the past.
The proposal version — how to narrow a topic into a question a committee will approve, and what makes them reject one — is covered step by step in our guide to writing a PhD synopsis for your doctoral committee. This guide does the thing that guide does not: it gives you a real format, read from a named university’s regulations, and a specimen written out.
A real format, from a named ordinance
Anna University’s Ph.D. Regulations 2025 devote a section to the preparation of the synopsis, and the specification is unusually concrete. It is reproduced here so you can see the shape of a real requirement; your own university’s ordinance governs your case, and the numbers will differ.
| Element | Specification (Anna University Ph.D. Regulations 2025) |
|---|---|
| What it must contain | The research problem, the methodology used for tackling it, and a summary of the findings |
| Length | Not exceeding 15 pages of typed matter, counted from the first page to the last, including the list of publications and patents |
| Running order | 1. Cover page and title page · 2. Text divided into suitable headings, numbered consecutively · 3. References, not more than 15, in alphabetical order · 4. List of publications in international journals or patents, with the impact factor stated for journals |
| Paper | Standard A4, 297 mm × 210 mm, preferably not lower than 80 GSM |
| Margins | Top 30–35 mm · Bottom 25–30 mm · Left 35–40 mm · Right 20–25 mm |
| Type | Times New Roman, font size 13, one-and-a-half line spacing |
| Tables and figures | One or two may be included at appropriate places, conforming to the margins |
| Page numbers | Arabic numerals, upper right corner, 20 mm from the top, last digit in line with the right margin, no punctuation |
| Binding | Black calico cloth with a flexible cover of thick white art paper; cover printed in black, with text identical to the title page |
Three of these are worth pausing on. Fifteen pages including the publication list means the publication list eats your argument, so count it early. No more than fifteen references is a severe constraint that forces you to cite the load-bearing sources only. And the text is divided into headings you choose, numbered consecutively — the regulations do not prescribe the headings, which is exactly why a specimen helps.
The running order also tells you something about the document’s purpose: it ends with your publications and their impact factors. This is a pre-submission synopsis, and the publication requirement it reflects is set out in our guide to how many papers are required before PhD thesis submission.
A worked synopsis, section by section
Below is a specimen for a pre-submission synopsis in a social science or management discipline, with an indicative page budget against a fifteen-page limit. Square brackets mark what only you supply; nothing in it names a real institution, study or finding.
Title page (page 1)
[TITLE OF THE THESIS]
SYNOPSIS OF THE THESIS
Submitted by
[NAME OF THE SCHOLAR]
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
[FACULTY / DEPARTMENT]
[UNIVERSITY]
[CITY AND PIN][MONTH YEAR]
1. Introduction and the research problem (about 2 pages)
[Two paragraphs of context, narrowing from the field to the specific setting.] The problem this research addresses is that [measurable departure or absence] in [defined setting], while [the decision or practice that continues regardless].
Existing research on [topic] is located in [other setting, population or period], and studies of [your setting and population] have not been reported. As a result, [named decision-maker] operates without evidence on [the missing thing].
This is the statement of the problem, compressed. Six worked versions of it across disciplines are in our guide to the statement of the problem for an Indian dissertation.
2. Review of literature (about 2 pages)
[One paragraph per strand, each making a claim about the body of work rather than narrating studies.] Studies in this area converge on [finding], differing mainly in [dimension] [cite; cite]. A second strand, working from [framework], reports [contrasting finding] [cite].
Neither strand has examined [your population] or measured [construct] through [approach], which is the gap this study addresses.
With fifteen references available in total, this section is where the discipline bites. Cite the sources that carry the argument and leave the rest to the thesis. The synthesis moves that make two pages do this much work are set out in our annotated review passages.
3. Objectives of the study (half a page)
The aim of the study is to [single sentence].
The specific objectives are:
1. To [verb] [construct] among [population] at [setting].
2. To compare [construct] between [group A] and [group B].
3. To examine the relationship between [X] and [Y].
4. To [derived objective, if any].
Objectives in a synopsis carry the same weight as in the thesis, and the verb is what an examiner reads. The verb-to-design mapping is in our guide to objectives and the design each verb commits you to.
4. Hypotheses, where the design has them (a quarter page)
H01: There is no significant difference in [construct] between [group A] and [group B].
H02: There is no significant relationship between [X] and [Y].
5. Methodology (about 3 pages)
Research design. [Design], selected because [reason tied to the objectives]. The study is cross-sectional, so the findings support statements of association and group difference rather than causal inference.
Population and sample. The target population comprised [units] in [boundary] during [period]; the accessible population comprised [narrower units] for which permission was obtained on [date]. [Technique] sampling yielded [n] units, of which [n] provided usable data.
Tools. [Named standardised tool], and an investigator-constructed [instrument] of [n] items across [n] dimensions, content-validated by [n] experts and yielding a reliability of [value] on a try-out of [n] respondents.
Data collection. Between [dates], after approval from [named committee] vide [reference] dated [date], with written informed consent from all participants.
Analysis. [Software]. Objective 1 addressed through [statistics]; Objective 2 tested using [test] at [alpha]; Objective 3 through [test]. Effect sizes reported alongside significance tests.
Five sub-headings, one short paragraph each, and every claim traceable to the thesis. The full-length version of each is in our written-out methodology chapter, and the sampling paragraph is expanded in our guide to population and sample with the paragraph you have to write.
6. Results and findings (about 4 pages)
[Objective 1.] [Construct] among [population] was found at a [level] level, with a mean of [value] and a standard deviation of [value]; [percentage] of respondents fell in the [band] category.
[Objective 2.] A significant difference was found between [group A] and [group B], [test statistic and p-value], with [group] scoring higher. The effect size was [value], indicating a [magnitude] difference.
[Objective 3.] [Construct] was significantly related to [variable], [statistic and p-value].
[Table 1: one table summarising the objective-wise results, within the margin specification.]
This is the section that distinguishes a pre-submission synopsis from a proposal, and it is the section examiners read first. Report findings against objectives in the same order and with the same numbering as the objectives section, one paragraph per objective.
7. Discussion and conclusion (about 2 pages)
The finding that [result] is consistent with [cite] and diverges from [cite], a divergence attributable to [setting, population or measurement difference].
The study contributes [one sentence naming the contribution in the terms of the gap stated in Section 1].
The findings are limited to [accessible population], rest on [self-report or secondary data], and are cross-sectional; they therefore describe association rather than causation.
The middle paragraph is the one to write last and most carefully. It has to answer the gap you named on page one, in the same words, or the document does not close.
8. References (about 1 page) and 9. List of publications
[Up to 15 references, alphabetical, in the style your ordinance prescribes.]
[Publications: each with the full citation and, for journals, the impact factor as the regulations require.]
If any of your references are legal materials, statutes or judgments, they follow a different form; ours are set out in the guide to citing Indian Acts and judgments in a thesis.
The page budget, and where it goes wrong
| Section | Indicative pages | Where scholars overspend |
|---|---|---|
| Title page | 1 | — |
| Introduction and problem | 2 | General background that could apply to any study |
| Review of literature | 2 | Study-by-study narration; a compressed Chapter 2 |
| Objectives and hypotheses | 1 | — |
| Methodology | 3 | Textbook definitions of design and sampling |
| Results | 4 | Reproducing every table from Chapter 4 |
| Discussion and conclusion | 2 | Recommendations the study did not test |
| References and publications | 1 | Exceeding the reference cap |
The largest single saving is in methodology: the synopsis records what you did, not what the options were. The second largest is in results, where one summary table usually replaces four.
If it is a proposal synopsis instead
Everything changes tense and section 6 disappears. The structure becomes: introduction and problem, review of literature, research gap, objectives, hypotheses, proposed methodology, expected outcomes, proposed chapter plan, timeline, and references. The document argues that the study is worth doing and can be done, rather than reporting that it was.
Two sections carry the weight there. The chapter plan shows you can see the finished thesis, and the timeline shows the study fits inside your remaining registration. If yours has already been returned, the recovery sequence is in our guide to fixing a synopsis rejected by the doctoral committee.
Five faults that send a synopsis back
- The wrong document. A proposal submitted where a summary of completed work was required, or the reverse. Ask first; it is the cheapest question you will ever ask your guide.
- Findings that do not match the objectives. Four objectives, three results, no explanation. Report one paragraph per objective, in order.
- A compressed thesis rather than a synopsis. Every chapter reduced proportionally, so nothing is legible. Cut whole categories of content instead: definitions, options not taken, tables that repeat each other.
- Over the page or reference limit. Both are counted, and both are usually stated in the ordinance. Exceeding them is the one rejection that costs nothing to avoid.
- A conclusion that does not answer the stated gap. Read section 1 and section 7 together, aloud, before binding.
The front matter and binding follow the same logic as the thesis itself, and the specimen certificate and title-page requirements of two named ordinances are in our guide to thesis format templates, title page, certificate and declaration. What happens after the synopsis is submitted is covered in our guide to the PhD pre-submission presentation in India.
Writing the synopsis out of the thesis rather than beside it
A pre-submission synopsis is a compression of a document that already exists, and it goes wrong when it is written from memory instead of from the thesis. Tesify keeps the objectives, methodology and results in one view, so the synopsis can be assembled from what the chapters actually say and the numbers in it still match the tables they came from.
Assemble your synopsis in Tesify
Frequently asked questions
What is a synopsis in an Indian PhD?
It is one of two documents. A proposal synopsis is written before the research to obtain approval from the doctoral committee. A pre-submission synopsis summarises completed work, including findings, and is submitted with or before the thesis. Your department decides which one it means.
How many pages should a synopsis be?
Your ordinance decides. Anna University’s Ph.D. Regulations 2025 cap it at fifteen pages of typed matter counted from the first page to the last, including the list of publications. Other universities set different limits, so check yours before you draft.
How many references can a synopsis have?
Again, by ordinance. Anna University limits it to fifteen, in alphabetical order. A cap of that size forces you to cite only the sources your argument rests on, which is a useful discipline in itself.
Does the synopsis include results?
The pre-submission version does; it is the point of the document. A proposal synopsis reports no results and states expected outcomes instead.
What tense should a synopsis be written in?
A pre-submission synopsis is in the past tense throughout, because the work is done. A proposal synopsis is in the future tense. Mixing the two is the most visible sign that a document was converted from one to the other without being reread.
Does the synopsis need a certificate page?
Many universities require the supervisor’s certificate with the synopsis, and some require the Head of the Department’s countersignature. It is an ordinance question, and the answer is in your department’s submission checklist.
Can I reuse synopsis text in the thesis?
Text you wrote yourself can be reused, but be aware of how it interacts with the similarity check, since the same passages appearing twice in your own documents can register. Ask how your institution configures the check before you decide.
How many tables can I include?
Anna University permits one or two tables or figures at appropriate places, conforming to the margin specification. Where your ordinance is silent, one summary table covering the objective-wise results usually serves better than several detailed ones.
What binding does a synopsis need?
Anna University specifies black calico cloth with a flexible cover of thick white art paper, printed in black with text identical to the title page. Other universities differ, and some accept a soft-bound or spiral copy, so confirm before printing.
Should the synopsis include the impact factor of my publications?
Where the ordinance asks for it, yes. Anna University’s regulations require the impact factor to be stated for journal publications in the list. Take the figure from the publisher’s or the indexing body’s own page rather than from a third-party site.
How long does approval take?
That depends on your university’s committee calendar rather than on the document, and the queues are usually the binding constraint. Our guide to the PhD thesis submission timeline works through planning around them.