Japan Soociety for the Promotion of Science（学術振興会）provides Research Fellowships for Young Scientists（特別研究員）.
Here are the details of this fellowship. In addition, a Japanese Ph.D who has won it explains tips for winning it. The original text is written in Japanese, which is translated into English here. So, if you can understand Japanese, you had better read the original one.
JSPS Research Fellowships for Young Scientists (DC)
Purpose
Awarded to excellent young researchers in Japan, these fellowships offer the fellows an opportunity to focus on a freely chosen research topic based on their own innovative ideas. Ultimately, the program works to foster and secure excellent researchers.
Eligibility
Those who enrolled in a doctoral course in Japan as of April 1 of the first fiscal year of the fellowship（2026）.
※applicants are not required to be affiliated with an institution at the time of application.
The only thing needed is to meet the eligibility requirements stipulated in the fellowship application guidelines on April 1 of the first fiscal year of the fellowship.
Nationality
All countries
Academic Level
Doctoral course
Target fields
All fields of the humanities, social sciences and natural sciences
Fellowship Categories
·DC1: Enrolled in the first year or the equivalent of a doctoral course
·DC2: Enrolled in the second or third year or the equivalent of a doctoral course
Screening Process
A fair and transparent screening process is carried out by JSPS’s Screening Committee for Young Researcher Fellowships, comprising frontline Japanese researchers.
Screening policy
(i) That the applicant provides the background leading to the establishment of the research theme, and that the approach is significant; that the method of research is unique, and that the future prospects of the research project are described.
(ii) That the applicant has great potentials to become an outstanding researcher who will shoulder the future of science.
Selection Ratio(2024)
DC1: 15.1%
DC2: 17.1%
Obligations and Compliance Rules (main items)
JSPS Research Fellows must observe the conditions stipulated in the JSPS Research Fellowships for Young Scientist’s compliance rules and procedural guidelines (“Guidelines”) during the fellowship tenure.
The JSPS Research Fellowships for Young Scientist’s compliance rules and procedural guidelines (日本学術振興会特別研究員遵守事項および諸手続の手引) [Japanese]
Except in cases of suspension of fellowship for childbirth/childcare or due to illness/injury, fellows must focus on their research based on the research plan stated in their application form during the fellowship tenure.
Fellows must submit required reports by the stipulated deadlines.
In principle, fellows may not have any status other than a JSPS Research Fellow with a few exceptions. If they accept a full-time position or an equivalent job, JSPS may disqualify the fellow and terminate the fellowship.
Fellows may receive a salary or a wage, or obtain other equivalent financial assistance under the conditions JSPS stipulates.
JSPS has a set of requirements for research funding support other than the monthly stipends and Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows that Fellows may receive during their fellowship tenure.
Fellows are not allowed to receive certain funds, including those provided by the national government for the purpose of supporting living expenses, and student loans from the Japan Student Services Organization (JASSO), during their fellowship tenure. For details, see III-14 in the Guidelines.
Scholarship Ammount and Duration
1) Stipend (free to use)
DC1: 200,000~230,000/month for 3 years
DC2: 200,000~230,000/month for 2 years
2) Research grant (Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows)
Up to 1.5 million yen/year
Starting date of fellowship tenure
April 1
How to apply
Through your university in Japan
Application Period
From mid-April to June 3, 2025 at 5 p.m. (JST)
Tips for winning this fellowship
This section is written by a Japanese Ph.D who won this fellowship.
The original text is written in Japanese, which is translated into English here. So, if you are able to understand Japanese, you had better read the original one.
Some assumptions you should know and advice on the entire research proposal
You should know the situation that the JSPS reviewers are in.
It is mainly university faculty researchers who will read your application. Most researchers are usually very busy with teaching, research, university administration, and miscellaneous duties. Many of them may have less than 10% of their total time available for research for themselves.
Under such circumstances, they are assigned the job of DC reviewers. Each reviewer is assigned a large number of applications. Therefore, the examiners read and score a large number of applications in a very limited amount of time.
Not only the content but also the format is important.
Therefore, it is important that the application be written in a way that is easy to read and understand. Sentences that are difficult to read or whose meaning is unclear will not be read carefully.
Formality is also important. Fonts that are too small or lines that are too spaced may result in a substantive negative evaluation. At various times, you yourself should skim over the application you are in the process of preparing. If you are annoyed by what you read, you should improve it.
If you start reading from the beginning and the application is not well formatted or well written, you will not be able to finish it. In this respect, the JSPS application form has the same fate as a general thesis.
Make it easy to understand and stress-free to read. Make some effort to make it easy to understand and read without stress. Here are two typical ideas.
First, include easy-to-understand figures. It is recommended that you use at-a-glance conceptual diagrams of the most important parts of your research plan. However, diagrams that are difficult to understand are counterproductive.
Incidentally, you can pass the examination even if you do not insert diagrams. If you think you can insert effective diagrams, just insert them.
Second, use boldface type and underlining in important parts. As often seen in textbooks, emphasize important parts in this way.
However, using too much boldface and underlining is counterproductive. It is not clear what is important.
At the most, bold and underlined parts should be no more than one-third of a paragraph. It is best if you only skim over those parts so that you can get a general idea of the research.
If you are writing in paragraph form, only the topic sentences should be bolded.
In addition, use headings as appropriate.
Get a general idea of who the judges are!
DC applications are reviewed by a panel of judges. There is some historical data available on the type of professionals who are on the jury. If you are interested and have time, you may want to take a look. However, it is only available in Japanese.
In addition, you can also get a rough idea of what kind of researchers specializing in the field you are applying for will be on the jury. The list is publicly available.
For example, for DC1 sociology, the review set includes sociology, social welfare, home economics, tourism, and gender-related fields. You can check the examination sets here. If you have the interest and time, check it out.
Here is an important point. That is, among the group of reviewers who read your application, there are usually only 1-2 people who can be considered experts in your research. The rest are researchers in peripheral areas.
Therefore, the majority of your group of reviewers is likely to be from peripheral areas. I should say that they are not outside your field, but it depends on the nature of your research. It could be said that it depends on the compatibility between your research and your examination set.
In any case, you need to make sure that your application is written in a way that teachers in the surrounding areas will be able to read and understand your application. For example, you will have to decide how much jargon to use. If you have to use jargon, add a brief explanation.
At the same time, keep in mind that there will be at least one expert on the jury. Therefore, your research proposal should be written in a way that it is readable by experts, but at the same time understandable by researchers in peripheral fields.
It is a good idea to have a professor in a peripheral field read and check your research plan after you have written it in one step.
Tips for Writing a Research Plan
From here, let’s get into the research plan of the application form. The instructions given by JSPS in the application form are indicated by quotations in “.
(1) Outline and position of the research
This section should be kept to one page.”
“Please provide the title of the research project and an outline of the research”.
The outline of the research cannot be completed until the entire research plan is firmly in place. You may leave it alone for the time being. When you have completed about 70% of your research plan, write an outline as a trial, and after you have completed 10%, complete the outline as well.
The research outline is very important. If the first part of the application, the abstract, is not well written, the rest of the application may not be read properly.
Just as the introduction to a dissertation is very important, the opening summary is very important in this application as well. A bad first impression may not be recoverable, so make sure your outline is perfect.
As a matter of formality, add subheadings.
For example
【Title of research】: An approach to accurately determine the approximate number of marine resources.
【Outline of the research】
In this research, … (Contents of the outline below)
“Describe the positioning of the research that you will pursue as JSPS Research Fellow, including the current trends, issues, and other background information on the relevant research area, and how you came to conceive your research plan.”
The overall flow is as follows.
1、What have previous studies clarified or demonstrated in your field of research?
→This is the part where you show the achievements of previous research. This section describes how far previous researchers have established knowledge in the field. What and to what extent is already known in the current state of the art?
In doing so, write in a way that also conveys why such research is important and significant. This is to make the professors in the surrounding fields believe that your research is important.
As you probably realize when you are writing your paper, it is very important to clearly state the significance of your research. Organizing this prior research is key in communicating it to those in the surrounding area as well.
Your research is to overcome this prior research, so if the subject matter to be overcome is trivial, then your research is not important either. Therefore, it is necessary for the people in the surrounding area to recognize the results of the prior research as important in the first place. Write it that way.
Example (this is a fictitious example)
<In recent years, the number of earthquakes in Japan has been increasing and their magnitude has been growing. For this reason, seismology has been working hard to develop methods for earthquake prediction. As a result, two methods of earthquake prediction are currently considered to be the most promising.
One is based on the history of earthquakes (Yamada 2020). The other is based on satellite measurements of the earth’s surface (Becker 2022).
(Continued below)
(*A summary of the literature information is presented at the end of this block. (This is sort of an endnote to the paper.)
Yamada, Taro (2020), “On Improved Methods of Earthquake Prediction Based on History,” ●● Publisher.
Becker (2022) … >.
*Naturally, <> is unnecessary in the actual text. Here, for convenience, <> is used to indicate the scope of the example text.
2, What problem has conventional research not yet solved? Why can it be said that this is a problem that needs to be solved? Why and how did you realize the issue (how did you come up with the idea)?
→In 1, you explain what is known so far from previous research, and in 2, you explain what is not yet known.
（In 2, you explain what is not yet known (i.e., you will argue that the purpose of your research is to clarify what is not yet known (but is still important)).
Or, in 2, you will show what is wrong with the research in 1.
(→ You will argue that the purpose of your research is to solve that problem).
Example.
＜But these methods make it nearly impossible to predict earthquakes that occur on the seafloor. However, undersea earthquakes can cause tsunamis. As in the case of the Great East Japan Earthquake, tsunamis are one of the greatest disasters caused by earthquakes. Therefore, we need to develop methods for predicting seafloor earthquakes as well＞
The bibliography of previous studies mentioned above is written after this sentence, because 1 and 2 are a set.
Therefore, the flow of this first page is as follows.
【Title of research project: ●●】
【Outline of the research】
This research is…
【 Background of the research】
In recent years, damage from earthquakes has been increasing in Japan, and the magnitude of such damage is becoming larger. For this reason, seismology has worked hard to develop methods for earthquake prediction. [omitted] As in the case of the Great East Japan Earthquake, tsunami is one of the greatest disasters caused by earthquakes. Therefore, it is necessary to develop methods for predicting undersea earthquakes as well.
Reference list (← this subheading is unnecessary)
Kimura, Taro (2020) “Research on Wild Animals” ●● Press
Research objectives, contents, etc.
“（i）State the objectives, methods, and details of the research in the research plan you will pursue as JSPS Research Fellow. “
From here, you will start explaining the contents of the research you are going to conduct as a JSPS DC.
Research Purpose
Formally speaking, the purpose of your research is to solve the issues and problems of the aforementioned previous research. Conversely, check carefully to make sure that your research objective is not unrelated to the issues and problems of the previous research.
In your description of your research objective, your first sentence should briefly explain your research objective. It is okay if its content overlaps somewhat with the research outline.
How does your research differ from prior research, what problem does it solve, and thus how is it superior? Show them briefly here. The details will be explained later, so just give a general outline here.
Example
【Purpose of the study】
The purpose of this research is to solve this problem by focusing on its serious problem of disparity and introducing a new approach called ■■, while critically incorporating the results of previous research called ●●. By doing so, it is possible to accurately understand ▲▲, a phenomenon that has been overlooked in the past.
(For a more detailed explanation, please refer to the following page.)
Research Methods
The way methods are written will differ considerably between the humanities and the sciences. In the sciences, most papers will have a methods section. The research proposal will be written in much the same way as the methods section.
In the humanities, you may not bother to provide a coherent description of your methods in your paper. In that case, you may not know what to write in this methods section. So, let us describe some patterns.
One of the easiest to explain as a method is the name of the approach. These are “regression analysis” in econometric analysis, for example. In these cases, explain in the Methods section what approach is used for what kind of data.
Fieldwork is another easy one to explain. Describe the areas where you will do fieldwork, for how long, and for what purpose.
Questionnaires are also easy to explain. Describe the purpose, scope, and duration of the project.
Perhaps the most common problem is the researcher who does not use these methods, but rather reads books and the like. If you are a classroom researcher, write the following as a method
If you are using manuscripts or audio materials from archives, museums, etc., write what you are using the materials for, from where, and for what purpose. The same applies to historical materials that are out of print or otherwise difficult to obtain.
If old primary documents are available in electronic archives, you may write about them. Especially if it is a (paid) professional electronic archive, you should write about it. It lets the judges know that you have done your research well.
Write down what you plan to read primarily as primary literature. You will be reading a variety of things, but which historical documents are your main targets?
If it is a voluminous book, which parts in particular will you read, for what purpose, and with what focus? Will you combine a quantitative approach or not?
If you have enough space, you may write about important secondary literature as well.
*Write here, too, indicating the bibliographic information. At the end of this block, provide a list of references.
Description of Research
What will be done to achieve the above-mentioned objectives by the above-mentioned methods? Write an outline of what you will do. However, since a detailed chronological description (annual plan) will follow shortly after, a brief outline will suffice in this “Description of Research” section.
“(ii) Give a specific description of your research plan, what you aim to establish, and to what extent. This should be in line with the funding category (the range of total budget) you choose for Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows (See the remark* below).”
Write the specific research plan in chronological order and in fiscal year order.
Separate them into 2026, 2027, and so on.
What you should write specifically depends on the nature of your research, but here are some examples.
If you need to learn a language or research approach, how do you plan to learn it? A class at some university, language school, research institute, etc.
For what purpose and in what kind of workshop?
If it is a classroom study, what will you read and for what purpose (with a list of references)?
How will you present the results of your research? For example, at what academic conference will you present your research (or apply for such a conference)? What kind of paper you plan to write and where you plan to submit it for peer review.
Characteristics and impact of your research
“iii) Explain also, the features and uniqueness of your research (comparison to prior studies, etc., expected impacts upon completion of the research, future prospects, etc”
There are three main points to write about here.
The first is the originality of your research in your field. This point has already been demonstrated to some extent through the organization of previous research. Show it in a concise summary.
Alternatively, you may explain here the significance and uniqueness of your research that you have not yet explained. Argue this to the satisfaction of the reviewers who are experts in your own field of research.
Second, the impact your research will have on research in the surrounding area. Second, the impact of your research on the research in the surrounding area, or the significance and importance of your research in the surrounding area. Make a strong appeal to the reviewers in the surrounding fields.
To do this, of course, you need to do some preliminary research. Providing appropriate references will show the reviewers that you have done your research in the surrounding areas as well.
It is a good idea to find out in advance what your peripheral areas are for the DC review. As mentioned above, the surrounding areas will be determined by the area(s) you are applying for. A set of review areas is shown on this page in Japanese.
Third, after you have completed this research, what direction you would like to take the results of this research further. In other words, it is the future agenda of your research and the direction of your research in the mid- to long-term for about 10 years.
The Gakushin DC evaluates the future potential of researchers who are just starting out and decides whether to accept or reject them. Therefore, you should research and write about your future direction carefully.
” (iv) If your research plan is positioned as part of the research activities of your affiliated laboratory, identify the portion you will be responsible for.”
This is often seen in the sciences. Rather than thinking about it on your own, check it carefully with your academic advisor before writing it.
Protection of Human Rights and Compliance with Laws
“Use this column to describe the actions and measures you will implement if your [2. Research Plan] includes research activities that require actions based on guidelines, laws and regulations, etc. (including guidelines, laws and regulations, etc. of the countries/regions in which joint international research may be conducted), including research that requires obtaining consent and/or cooperation of counterparts, research that requires special attention in the handling of personal information, and research that requires actions related to bioethics and/or biosafety. Provide specific information on the status of the approval process, as this will apply to surveys, research, experiments, and other activities that would require approval by an internal or external intelligence committee, ethics board, or other review boards, for example, questionnaire/interview/behavioral surveys involving personal information (including personal histories and videos), surveys, etc. of domestic and foreign cultural heritage sites, use of donated specimens, research of invasive nature, human genome analysis, genetic recombination experiments, and animal testing. Indicate “not applicable” if this does not apply to your research plan.”
If applicable, please research and write it down carefully. If this section is not written properly, your evaluation may be significantly lowered. Please consult with your academic advisor or someone else who knows more about the subject.
Self-analysis on applicant’s ability to conduct research
“Provide specific statements on (1) your strengths in research, and (2) qualities that you think you will need to acquire for further growth as researcher, each in the relevant research area and in relation to your past engagements in research activities, etc., including the Research Plan proposed in this Application.”
“・In entering your statements for (1) and (2) below, be specific in describing your strengths/qualities in research, e.g., from the perspective of independence, inspiration, problem-solving abilities, breadth/depth of knowledge, technical/communication/presentation skills, etc. Try to be creative in how to present them, for example, by itemizing the strengths/qualities as necessary. Also indicate any impact to the research which is worth noting that occurred due to suspension of research activities. (1) Your strengths in research (Note) Delete this line and the explanation below in italics when completing this Application Form. Sample・Describe your strength, listing the outcome (papers, etc.) of past research activities, if any, to evidence your statement. In showing the outcome (papers, etc.), provide sufficient information so that the works can be identified. (Example) Academic papers (Indicate whether the paper has been peer-reviewed. Only selected peer-reviewed publications can be marked “reviewed.”) Provide the title, author(s), name of journal, volume, pp (first page number-last page number), and year of publication. (Example) Publication of research findings (Indicate oral presentation or poster, and whether the presentation has been peer-reviewed.) Provide the author(s), title, name of conference, identifier/code of your paper, etc., venue, month and year of the conference. (Do not include presentations that are planned to be published, unless the application for presentation has already been accepted.) (2) Qualities that you think you will need to acquire for further growth as researcher”
Before starting…
First of all, there are some assumptions to be taken into consideration when writing this section. The Gakushin DC is financed by Japanese taxpayers’ money. Therefore, we are trying to determine whether you, the applicant, are a researcher who should be deliberately fostered with taxpayer funds.
The qualities of young researchers that should be fostered with taxpayer funds include “independence in research, conceptual ability, problem-solving ability, breadth and depth of knowledge, technical skills, communication skills, and presentation skills. What kind of researcher is a researcher who possesses all of these qualities?
At the very least, we can say that we are not looking for researchers who stay in their ivory towers and devote themselves solely to their personal research interests. On the contrary, we are looking for researchers who can collaborate with other researchers to develop the discipline.
In the first place, it is believed that a discipline is not developed by a researcher alone, but by a community of researchers such as an academic society. Therefore, not only personal qualities such as the ability to conceive ideas and the breadth and depth of knowledge, but also initiative, communication, and presentation skills are also criteria.
Furthermore, researchers are expected to be active in reaching out to local communities in Japan, the nation, and the world, rather than being active only in universities and research institutes. This is why problem-solving ability has become a criterion. Because “funded by taxpayers’ money,” it would seem that researchers selected for the Gakusho DC should return the benefits of their research results to taxpayers (the general public).
Therefore, this part of the application would indicate that you are a young researcher who deserves to be fostered with such taxpayer funds. More specifically, we will explain four main points.
As a researcher,
1, What have I done so far?
- “What can I do at present?
- , “What am I not capable of?
- “What should I do in the future to overcome these problems?
1, What have I done so far?
First, for 1, list the results of your research to date. These are the above-mentioned papers, research publications, and so on.
However, many DC1 applicants may not have any particular research achievements. In that case, list any other items that could be used to prove your research ability. For example, scholarships you have won, or qualifications or certifications related to languages or studies.
2、What can I do at present?
Self-analyze your qualities as a researcher with regard to the above-mentioned initiative. What will be accepted as the basis for this analysis may vary from one judge to another. Therefore, if there is a reasonable possibility that it will be considered as evidence, it is better to write it down.
The following is an explanation of each of the following categories: initiative in research, conceptualization, problem solving, breadth and depth of knowledge, technical skills, communication skills, and presentation skills.
Initiative in Research
This can be called the ability to take action in research. For example, if you voluntarily investigate something in your master’s thesis that others did not because it seemed too difficult, it is evidence of your initiative.
If you did group research with others in high school, college, or graduate school, and participated in some competitions and achieved some results, this can be evidence of your initiative. Especially if you were a leader.
Imagination
If the content of your thesis, such as a master’s thesis, is original, it can be used as evidence of conceptual ability. Be specific about how you came up with the idea. If possible, also write an expert’s evaluation of it.
If you have contributed to solving a problem in the community and your method was original, you can use that as evidence as well.
If you have entered a product development contest, and your idea was adopted and commercialized, this can also be used as evidence.
Problem-solving skills
If you have entered some kind of problem-solving contest and achieved results, you can use that as evidence. For example, a policy proposal contest.
If you have contributed to solving problems in your local community through volunteer activities or clubs, you may want to mention that as well.
Breadth and depth of knowledge
The results of the above-mentioned language and other certifications and exams can be used as evidence. In the case of languages, you may want to include your study abroad experience as evidence.
If you have degrees in more than one field, you should present them as well.
Relevant professional experience, such as in engineering or international relations, can be used as knowledge. If you have relevant professional experience in such fields, use that as evidence as well.
Competence
If you have had training in a laboratory in using specific laboratory equipment, or if you have taken classes in using analytical software, etc., you may want to mention these facts.
As for English writing skills, a TOEFL or other writing score can be used as evidence.
Communication Skills
Various facts can be used as evidence, such as inviting other friends to a reading group at a university or graduate school, or inviting some researchers as a member of an academic circle and holding an academic event (at a school festival, etc.).
If you can communicate in a foreign language, you should write about it. The language scores and study abroad experience mentioned above can be evidence.
Presentation skills
If you have won prizes in presentation competitions, write about it.
3、”Currently, what am I not able to do?
4、”What should I do in the future to overcome this problem?
Write answers to the following questions: “Please also write about the elements you consider necessary for your further development as a researcher and the things you are eager to work on in the future.
This is the place to write specific ways to approach the image of a researcher required by the JSPS, rather than the image of the researcher you really want to be.
You have already written what you could write about your research initiative, knowledge, and skills. Not many people have a good balance of all the elements.
Among the elements you were not able to write much about, you may want to choose those that are particularly important for your future research. Describe how you can improve and reinforce yourself with respect to those elements.