Do not use proprietary, unidentifiable compounds. Present proper control experiments and statistics used, again to make the experiment of investigation repeatable. List the methods in the same order they will appear in the Results section, in the logical order in which you did the research:. Again, look at the journal's Guide for Authors, but an ideal length for a manuscript is 25 to 40 pages, double spaced, including essential data only.
Here are some general guidelines:. This section responds to the question "What have you found? The results should be essential for discussion. However, remember that most journals offer the possibility of adding Supporting Materials, so use them freely for data of secondary importance.
In this way, do not attempt to "hide" data in the hope of saving it for a later paper. You may lose evidence to reinforce your conclusion. If data are too abundant, you can use those supplementary materials. Use sub-headings to keep results of the same type together, which is easier to review and read.
Number these sub-sections for the convenience of internal cross-referencing, but always taking into account the publisher's Guide for Authors. For the data, decide on a logical order that tells a clear story and makes it and easy to understand. Generally, this will be in the same order as presented in the methods section. An important issue is that you must not include references in this section; you are presenting your results, so you cannot refer to others here.
If you refer to others, is because you are discussing your results, and this must be included in the Discussion section. Here you must respond to what the results mean. Probably it is the easiest section to write, but the hardest section to get right. This is because it is the most important section of your article. Here you get the chance to sell your data.
Take into account that a huge numbers of manuscripts are rejected because the Discussion is weak. You need to make the Discussion corresponding to the Results, but do not reiterate the results. Here you need to compare the published results by your colleagues with yours using some of the references included in the Introduction.
Never ignore work in disagreement with yours, in turn, you must confront it and convince the reader that you are correct or better. Avoid unspecific expressions such as "higher temperature", "at a lower rate", "highly significant". Avoid sudden introduction of new terms or ideas; you must present everything in the introduction, to be confronted with your results here.
Speculations on possible interpretations are allowed, but these should be rooted in fact, rather than imagination. To achieve good interpretations think about:. Revision of Results and Discussion is not just paper work. You may do further experiments, derivations, or simulations.
Sometimes you cannot clarify your idea in words because some critical items have not been studied substantially. This section shows how the work advances the field from the present state of knowledge. In some journals, it's a separate section; in others, it's the last paragraph of the Discussion section.
Whatever the case, without a clear conclusion section, reviewers and readers will find it difficult to judge your work and whether it merits publication in the journal. A common error in this section is repeating the abstract, or just listing experimental results. Trivial statements of your results are unacceptable in this section. You should provide a clear scientific justification for your work in this section, and indicate uses and extensions if appropriate.
Moreover, you can suggest future experiments and point out those that are underway. You can propose present global and specific conclusions, in relation to the objectives included in the introduction. Editors like to see that you have provided a perspective consistent with the nature of the journal. You need to introduce the main scientific publications on which your work is based, citing a couple of original and important works, including recent review articles. However, editors hate improper citations of too many references irrelevant to the work, or inappropriate judgments on your own achievements.
They will think you have no sense of purpose. The abstract tells prospective readers what you did and what the important findings in your research were. Together with the title, it's the advertisement of your article. Make it interesting and easily understood without reading the whole article. Avoid using jargon, uncommon abbreviations and references.
You must be accurate, using the words that convey the precise meaning of your research. The abstract provides a short description of the perspective and purpose of your paper. It gives key results but minimizes experimental details. However, the abstracts must be keep as brief as possible. Just check the 'Guide for authors' of the journal, but normally they have less than words. Here's a good example on a short abstract. In an abstract, the two whats are essential.
Here's an example from an article I co-authored in Ecological Indicators :. The title must explain what the paper is broadly about. It is your first and probably only opportunity to attract the reader's attention. In this way, remember that the first readers are the Editor and the referees. Also, readers are the potential authors who will cite your article, so the first impression is powerful!
We are all flooded by publications, and readers don't have time to read all scientific production. They must be selective, and this selection often comes from the title. Reviewers will check whether the title is specific and whether it reflects the content of the manuscript.
Editors hate titles that make no sense or fail to represent the subject matter adequately. Hence, keep the title informative and concise clear, descriptive, and not too long. You must avoid technical jargon and abbreviations, if possible. This is because you need to attract a readership as large as possible.
Dedicate some time to think about the title and discuss it with your co-authors. Here you can see some examples of original titles, and how they were changed after reviews and comments to them:. Keywords are used for indexing your paper. They are the label of your manuscript.
It is true that now they are less used by journals because you can search the whole text. However, when looking for keywords, avoid words with a broad meaning and words already included in the title. Some journals require that the keywords are not those from the journal name, because it is implicit that the topic is that. Only abbreviations firmly established in the field are eligible e. Again, check the Guide for Authors and look at the number of keywords admitted, label, definitions, thesaurus, range, and other special requests.
Here, you can thank people who have contributed to the manuscript but not to the extent where that would justify authorship. For example, here you can include technical help and assistance with writing and proofreading. Probably, the most important thing is to thank your funding agency or the agency giving you a grant or fellowship. In the case of European projects, do not forget to include the grant number or reference. Also, some institutes include the number of publications of the organization, e.
Typically, there are more mistakes in the references than in any other part of the manuscript. It is one of the most annoying problems, and causes great headaches among editors. Now, it is easier since to avoid these problem, because there are many available tools.
In the text, you must cite all the scientific publications on which your work is based. But do not over-inflate the manuscript with too many references — it doesn't make a better manuscript! Avoid excessive self-citations and excessive citations of publications from the same region. Minimize personal communications, do not include unpublished observations, manuscripts submitted but not yet accepted for publication, publications that are not peer reviewed, grey literature, or articles not published in English.
In general, you should minimize personal communications, and be mindful as to how you include unpublished observations. These will be necessary for some disciplines, but consider whether they strengthen or weaken your paper. You might also consider articles published on research networks prior to publication, but consider balancing these citations with citations of peer-reviewed research. When citing research in languages other than English, be aware of the possibility that not everyone in the review process will speak the language of the cited paper and that it may be helpful to find a translation where possible.
You can use any software, such as EndNote or Mendeley , to format and include your references in the paper. Most journals have now the possibility to download small files with the format of the references, allowing you to change it automatically.
Also, Elsevier's Your Paper Your Way program waves strict formatting requirements for the initial submission of a manuscript as long as it contains all the essential elements being presented here. Make the reference list and the in-text citation conform strictly to the style given in the Guide for Authors. Remember that presentation of the references in the correct format is the responsibility of the author, not the editor.
Checking the format is normally a large job for the editors. Make their work easier and they will appreciate the effort. In my next article, I will give tips for writing the manuscript, authorship, and how to write a compelling cover letter. Stay tuned! I have based this paper on the materials distributed to the attendees of many courses. It is inspired by many Guides for Authors of Elsevier journals. Some of this information is also featured in Elsevier's Publishing Connect tutorials.
I want to acknowledge Dr. And I would like to thank Dr. Alison Bert , Editor-in-Chief of Elsevier Connect; without her assistance, this series would have been impossible to complete. His main topic of investigation is marine ecology, and has published more than contributions, from which are in over 40 peer-reviewed journals, through his long career of 32 years of research.
During this time he has investigated in multiple topics and ecosystem components, having an ample and multidisciplinary view of marine research. We are always looking for ways to improve customer experience on Elsevier. We would like to ask you for a moment of your time to fill in a short questionnaire, at the end of your visit.
If you decide to participate, a new browser tab will open so you can complete the survey after you have completed your visit to this website. Thanks in advance for your time. About Elsevier. Set via JS. View by community or topic. Library Connect. Societies' Update. Healthcare Professionals.
Home Elsevier Connect 11 steps to structuring a science paper editors will take seriously. For example, since it was published, we have worked extensively with researchers to raise visibility of non-English language research — July 10, Update: In response to your feedback, we have reinstated the original text so you can see how it was revised. How to prepare a manuscript for international journals — Part 2 In this monthly series, Dr.
An article begins with the Title, Abstract and Keywords. Why did you do it? M ethods: How did you do it? R esults: What did you find? A nd D iscussion: What does it all mean? Zoe Doubleday, ecologist, University of Adelaide, Australia; co-author of a paper on embracing creativity and writing accessible prose in scientific publications. Always think of your busy, tired reader when you write your paper — and try to deliver a paper that you would enjoy reading yourself.
Why does scientific writing have to be stodgy, dry and abstract? Humans are story-telling animals. Doubleday et al. Trends Ecol. One of the principal problems with writing a manuscript is that your individual voice is stamped out. Writers can be stigmatized by mentors, manuscript reviewers or journal editors if they use their own voice.
It is a concern. Once the paper has a clear message, I suggest that writers try some vivid language to help to tell the story. But, ultimately, the editors let me keep it. Recently, after hearing me speak on this topic, a colleague mentioned that she had just rejected a review paper because she felt the style was too non-scientific.
She admitted that she felt she had made the wrong decision and would try to reverse it. It sounds good, but the purpose of a scientific paper is to convey information. Flourishes can be distracting. Figurative language can also bamboozle a non-native English speaker. My advice is to make the writing only as complex as it needs to be.
That said, there are any number of ways of writing a paper that are far from effective. One of the most important is omitting crucial information from the methods section. That can mean the research is a dead end. At the same time, authors should avoid being over-confident in their conclusions. Editors and peer reviewers are looking for interesting results that are useful to the field. Without those, a paper might be rejected. Unfortunately, authors tend to struggle with the discussion section.
They need to explain why the findings are interesting and how they affect a wider understanding of the topic. Authors should also reassess the existing literature and consider whether their findings open the door for future work. Stacy Konkiel, director of research and education at Altmetric, London, which scores research papers on the basis of their level of digital attention. Di Girolamo and R. Reynders J. Those findings tie in with my experience. My biggest piece of advice is to get to the point.
Authors spend a lot of time setting up long-winded arguments to knock down possible objections before they actually state their case. Make your point clearly and concisely — if possible in non-specialist language, so that readers from other fields can quickly make sense of it.
If you write in a way that is accessible to non-specialists, you are not only opening yourself up to citations by experts in other fields, but you are also making your writing available to laypeople, which is especially important in the biomedical fields. My Altmetric colleague Amy Rees notes that she sees a trend towards academics being more deliberate and thoughtful in how they disseminate their work. For example, we see more scientists writing lay summaries in publications such as The Conversation , a media outlet through which academics share news and opinions.
Career News 25 MAY Career Feature 21 MAY Career Column 21 MAY Nature Index 26 MAY An essential round-up of science news, opinion and analysis, delivered to your inbox every weekday. Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.
Advanced search. Skip to main content Thank you for visiting nature. View author publications. Interviews have been edited for clarity and length.
Many authors will write about their methods and results first, move on to draft the discussion and conclusion sections, and only then turn to the introduction. As a summary of the research paper, the abstract is almost always written or at least revised last.
Tables, figures and other visual aids to comprehension and analysis can be vital parts of a research paper and extremely helpful tools for both readers and the author. Designing and creating the tables and figures before writing about the information contained in them can enable the effective presentation of data, prevent unnecessary repetitions and constitute an efficient method for how to write a research paper.
Discussion and interpretation are essential aspects of a research paper, yet many research manuscripts are assigned poor grades by instructors or rejected by journal editors due to a shortage of intelligent and insightful interpretation. It is therefore imperative when considering how to write a research paper to reflect on the meaning and implications of the research findings and then discuss them logically for readers.
Published studies and other sources consulted during the research should be accurately cited when appropriate in a research paper both to support the new research and to pay due respect to research predecessors and their intellectual property. The style used to provide these in-text citations as well as the final list of complete references is usually dictated by guidelines or instructions, every detail of which must be followed precisely.
All forms of error must be avoided when determining how to write a research paper, so it is important to leave enough time for careful proofreading and editing to correct and improve content, language and formatting. Remember that a sloppy and poorly written manuscript is unprofessional and may suggest to a publisher or instructor that the research and analysis behind it are less than adequate as well.
Journal editing and proofreading services. Scientific editing services for publication success. Grant editing and proofreading services. Name Email Subscribe. You might be interested in Services offered by Proof-Reading-Service. Journal Editing Journal editing and proofreading services. Stored items might include figures, references, and ideas. Construct the tables, figures, and legends.
Yes, create figures and tables before the writing begins! The entire paper should be organized around the data you will present. By preparing the tables and figures and their legends and appropriate statistical analyses , you will be certain of your results before you worry too much about their interpretation. You also may be able to determine if you have all the data you need.
Note: except under unusual circumstance, you may not include any data that you have already published. Outline the paper. An outline is like a road map. An outline details how you will get from here to there, and helps ensure that you take the most direct and logical route. Do not start writing without it! If you have coauthors, you may wish to get feedback from them before you proceed to the actual writing phase.
Write the first draft. Write the first draft of the entire manuscript. If you are writing with coauthors, you may wish to assign different aspects of the manuscript to different authors. This can save time, allow more individuals to feel that are making substantive contributions to the writing process, and ensure the best use of expertise.
However, it also can lead to a mixture of styles. Thus, if you take this approach, be certain that the final product is carefully edited to provide a single voice. For a more extensive presentation of this and many other aspects of preparing a paper, see Day At this point, do not worry about it being intelligible.
That comes later. Some people recommend that you begin your writing with the Introduction and continue through in order each section of the paper. This can help ensure flow. However, others suggest that you start wherever you wish — anything to get rid of that blank screen or piece of paper.
If you are taking much more than two full days, you have probably paused to edit! Revise the manuscript. This step involves three major tasks, each to be carried out in the order given:. Make major alterations : Fill in gaps, correct flaws in logic, restructure the document to present the material in the most logical order.
Polish the style : Refine the text, then correct grammar and spelling. Format the document : Make your manuscript attractive and easy to read. It is important to do the tasks in the stated order. Otherwise, you may find yourself spending a lot of time revising material that you later delete. Check the references. Ensure that the citations are correct and complete. Do one last literature search to make certain that you are up to date.
Write the final title and abstract. Many changes are made during the editing process. Make certain that your title and abstract match the final version of your article. Reread the journal's Instructions to Authors. Review the details of how the manuscript is to be formatted and submitted. Revise where necessary. Prepare the final illustrations. Ensure that your tables, figures, and figure legends are complete, clear, self-contained, and in the format required by the journal.
Do not allow any chance for misunderstanding. Get feedback on your manuscript and then revise your manuscript again. Getting feedback is one of the most important things that you can do to improve your article. First, be sure your co-authors have had a chance to read and comment on the draft. Then, when it is ready, give the manuscript to some colleagues. Indicate when you would like to receive their comments, and what levels of information you would like e. After you get their comments, revise your manuscript to address their concerns.
Do not submit your manuscript until you feel it is ready for publication. Once it is accepted, further changes in your manuscript will be difficult and may also be costly. Submit the manuscript to the editor. Follow the Instructions to Authors to determine what items you need to submit, how to submit them, and to whom you should send them.
At this point you may wish to list possible reviewers or individuals to be avoided. If necessary, contact the editor to be sure that the manuscript was received. And if after a month you have not received a response concerning the acceptability of your manuscript for publication you may wish to contact the editor about this, too. Deal with reviewers' comments. Most manuscripts are not accepted on the first submission. However, you may well be invited to resubmit a revised manuscript.
If you choose to do so, you will need to respond to the reviewer comments. Do this with tact. Answer every concern of the reviewers, and indicate where the corresponding changes were made in the manuscript if they were, indeed, made. You do not need to make all of the changes that the reviewer recommended, but you do need to provide a convincing rationale for any changes that you did not make.
When you resubmit the manuscript, indicate in your cover letter that this is a revised version. An alternative is to submit the manuscript to another journal. However, if you do so, it may still be best to take the reviewer comments into consideration. Even if you feel that the reviewers have misunderstood something in your paper, others might do the same. Of course, if you submit to another journal you probably will need to modify the format.
And please note: You may not submit your manuscript to more than one journal at a time! Check the proofs. Once the manuscript is accepted and prepared for print, the publisher will send the corresponding author page proofs of the article. This may be accompanied by a list of queries, such as missing information regarding a reference. The proofs may be sent via e-mail or as hard copy.
If there is a chance that you will be away when the proofs arrive, have a plan for making certain that they are received and you are notified. You may only have 24—48 hr to return the proofs. Carefully correct any typos and factual errors. And read the manuscript for clarity — this is your last chance!
|How to write a research paper for journal publication||Rule 2: Create a detailed outline and discuss planning dissertation with your mentor and peers. Look at recent articles and judge their importance. Advertise About Contact Subscribe. Code Availability Not applicable. This positive feeling spills over into our work and life and has a very positive effect on our overall attitude.|
|How to write a research paper for journal publication||Why is your research important? The next element of the discussion is a summary of the potential impacts and applications of the research. Bio Victoria Reyes is a sociologist whose work examines how culture shapes global inequality. The preferred and unpreferred status of the music was operationalized along a continuum of pleasantness [ 4 ]. Phoenix: Oryx Press.|
|How to write a creative poem||Indicate when you would like to receive their comments, and what levels of information you would like e. Does the work have implications for clinical protocols or public policy? First, you want to trace previous work on the subject and set up the problem. Determine the basic forma t. The title is nonsense. Of course, this does not apply to online journals. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer.|
|Argumentative essay college||Only abbreviations firmly established in the field are eligible e. Skip to main content Thank you for visiting nature. You can include them as supplementary material. Discuss weaknesses and discrepancies. You will be able to see if something is missing in any of the sections or if you need to rearrange your information to make your point.|
Indicate when you would like until you feel it is be difficult and may also. Deal with reviewers' comments. Carefully correct any typos and. It is therefore imperative when these in-text citations as well research paper to reflect on publisher or defending your dissertation that the or rejected by journal editors proofreading and editing to correct. Scientific editing services for publication. Even if you feel that more individuals to feel that are making substantive contributions to present the material in the. This step involves three major the reviewers have misunderstood something the web site www. Ensure that your tables, figures, begin your writing with the clear, self-contained, and in the author page proofs of the. Reread the journal's Instructions to. Tables, figures and other visual aids to comprehension and analysis need to submit, how to submit them, and to whom only then turn to the.Prepare the figures and tables. up the Results. the Discussion. Finalize the Results and Discussion before.