And your thesis statement must show the reality. It induces readers to assume that I will argue against them in the main body. To check if you have created a debatable thesis statement for the research paper, you must figure out whether it is debatable. It means that you must make reader argue either for or against this statement. It is a general truth. The list below provides examples of verbs that express communication actions: clarify This paper clarifies the role of soils in.
The body Even the most logical structure is of little use if readers do not see and understand it as they progress through a paper. Thus, as you organize the body of your paper into sections and perhaps subsections, remember to prepare your readers for the structure ahead at all levels. You already do so for the overall structure of the body the sections in the object of the document at the end of the Introduction. You can similarly prepare your readers for an upcoming division into subsections by introducing a global paragraph between the heading of a section and the heading of its first subsection.
This paragraph can contain any information relating to the section as a whole rather than particular subsections, but it should at least announce the subsections, whether explicitly or implicitly. An explicit preview would be phrased much like the object of the document: "This section first. In any case, the paragraphs in these sections should begin with a topic sentence to prepare readers for their contents, allow selective reading, and — ideally — get a message across.
Materials and methods This paragraph of materials and methods expresses the main idea first, in a topic sentence, so readers immediately know what it is about. Most Materials and Methods sections are boring to read, yet they need not be.
To make this section interesting, explain the choices you made in your experimental procedure: What justifies using a given compound, concentration, or dimension? What is special, unexpected, or different in your approach? Mention these things early in your paragraph, ideally in the first sentence. If you use a standard or usual procedure, mention that upfront, too. Do not make readers guess: Make sure the paragraph's first sentence gives them a clear idea of what the entire paragraph is about.
If you feel you cannot or need not do more than list items, consider using a table or perhaps a schematic diagram rather than a paragraph of text. Results and discussion This paragraph of results and discussion above can easily be rewritten below to convey the message first, not last. The traditional Results and Discussion sections are best combined because results make little sense to most readers without interpretation.
When reporting and discussing your results, do not force your readers to go through everything you went through in chronological order. Instead, state the message of each paragraph upfront: Convey in the first sentence what you want readers to remember from the paragraph as a whole. Focus on what happened, not on the fact that you observed it. Then develop your message in the remainder of the paragraph, including only that information you think you need to convince your audience.
The conclusion This paragraph of results and discussion above can easily be rewritten below to convey the message first, not last. In the Conclusion section, state the most important outcome of your work.
Do not simply summarize the points already made in the body — instead, interpret your findings at a higher level of abstraction. Show whether, or to what extent, you have succeeded in addressing the need stated in the Introduction. At the same time, do not focus on yourself for example, by restating everything you did.
Rather, show what your findings mean to readers. If your pilot study influences your biological rationale or hypothesis, you need to describe it in your Introduction. If your pilot study simply informs the logistics or techniques, but does not influence your rationale, then the description of your pilot study belongs in the Materials and Methods section.
They are filter-feeding crustaceans with a transparent exoskeleton that allows easy observation of heart rate and digestive function. Thomas et al found that Daphnia heart rate increases significantly in higher water temperatures.
Therefore, D. ABSTRACT Given the latent concern of scientists and editors on the quality of scientific writing, the aim of this paper was to present topics on the recommended structure of peer-reviewed papers. We described the key points of common sections of original papers and proposed two additional materials that may be useful for scientific writing: one particular guide to help the organization of the main ideas of the paper; and a table with examples of non desirable and desirable structures in scientific writing.
Oppositely, every scientific production that has the aim to effectively contribute to the development of Science uses the existing knowledge as a start point to propose methodological innovations and to find new results. Knowledge update is generated by a collaboration network among scientists all over the world 1.
The "trigger" of this update is the publication of papers, and the "gear" that moves it is citation, which is a direct consequence of the quality and the relevance of a study.
In this scenery, there is, internationally, an increasing concern with the quality of scientific writing 3. In Brazil, the number of courses and discussions about the theme has been increasing significantly, especially in universities and scientific events.
This debate has the intention to discuss comprehensive characteristics, such as the relevance of publishing a research and the most appropriate means to disseminate it, as well as specific issues regarding the presentation of a scientific paper.
In Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, this theme has been approached in the last national conventions, and the participation of speech-language pathologists and audiologists in scientific writing courses is more and more frequent. In view of the relevance of this theme to Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, the aim of this paper was to present some topics on the recommended structure for publication in peer-reviewed journals.
The choice of which category is more appropriate to report a specific research depends on the nature of the study and the editorial characteristics of the journal where the authors intend to have it published. The categories of articles usually found in Health Sciences journals are: case reports, review articles, systematic reviews, meta-analysis articles and, finally, original research articles.
The scientific manuscript must be able to outline, as clear and simple as possible, the "scientific history" of a research. As "scientific history" we understand the whole sequence of events that motivated, conducted, and based the proposal of a study, the methodological choices, and the interpretation of the results. At this point lies the first challenge of scientific writing: to appropriately choose the content of the article.
Only the set of data that effectively contribute to the scientific community must be selected 4 , and that does not imply the inclusion of all measures and analyses conducted - especially if the study derives from a broader research project. On the other hand, to fragment the study in many similar "micro-articles" decreases the impact and the innovative character of the research. Hence, precision and novelty are essential concepts which must guide the writing process of the manuscript.
As obvious as it may seem, the scientific paper must necessarily comprise key points in each section. The macro-structure of original articles traditionally uses the IMRD model Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion , a non-arbitrary format that directly reflects the process of scientific creation and discovery 5.
The key points to each of these sections are detailed below, based on the main suggestions and comments from Zeiger 6. Finally, we propose a schematic material with the aim to help the authors to organize their ideas in a logic and concise manner Appendix 1 , added by examples of desirable and undesirable structures in scientific writing, putting into practice the concepts presented Appendix 2.
If these criteria are accomplished, the reader will more likely keep his interest and attention to the next sections of the paper. The structure of the Introduction usually starts from what is known or established on the theme, towards the issue that remains unknown and will be studied.Therefore, if the aim of the study is to describe epidemiological data or to characterize a population, information such as subject's mean age and duration of therapy must be described in the Results section. In this way, do not attempt to "hide" data in the hope of saving it for a later paper. The Abstract must be clear both for those readers who will and those who will not read the full article. Consumer report kitchen range the reference list and the in-text citation conform that scientific was collected are stated. Avoid excessive self-citations and excessive citations of publications from the same region. The paper has a significant impact on the frequency a paper is cited 9 and, for this reason, should be informative and succinct. If specimens were collected for study, where and when strictly to the example given in the Guide for. After all, very few people know you well enough, college essays it should instead there introduction be double and the community of Newport Coast.
Oppositely to all the previous sections of the paper, which use the past tense, the Conclusion should be written in the present. Moreover, abstracts and titles well structured, informative and reflective are key points to the successful indexation of scientific publications 3 , and thus deserve great attention from editors and reviewers.
You must avoid technical jargon and abbreviations, if possible. Explanation In most ecosystems, the supply of nitrogen is the most limiting factor to plant growth. The Materials and Methods section provides sufficient detail for other scientists to reproduce the experiments presented in the paper. Difficulties in achieving reliable and consistent quality stem largely from the formation of thermal gradients that often occurs during conventional sintering processes.
The information mentioned in this item can be considered a guide to reproducing the study, in which the measures and the way the experiment was conducted should be described in details. A summary is a brief restatement of preceding text that is intended to orient a reader who has studied the preceding text. The results should be directly and strictly related to the objectives. Editors hate titles that make no sense or fail to represent the subject matter adequately. This paper clarifies the role of CxHc on calcium oscillations in neonatal cardiac myocytes and calcium transients induced by ATP in HL-cells originated from cardiac atrium and in HeLa cells expressing connexin 43 or Hirsch JE.
For the data, decide on a logical order that tells a clear story and makes it and easy to understand. In this scenery, there is, internationally, an increasing concern with the quality of scientific writing 3. For the staining of F-actin, cells were washed and suspended in Rh-ph solution Molecular Probes, Inc. Second, state the need for your work, as an opposition between what the scientific community currently has and what it wants.
Finally, they structure the content in the body in theorem-proof fashion, stating first what readers must remember for example, as the first sentence of a paragraph and then presenting evidence to support this statement. ABSTRACT Given the latent concern of scientists and editors on the quality of scientific writing, the aim of this paper was to present topics on the recommended structure of peer-reviewed papers. In this scenery, there is, internationally, an increasing concern with the quality of scientific writing 3. Mention these things early in your paragraph, ideally in the first sentence.
Move from the general to the specific. It is important, thus, that the author clearly states which gaps his work intends to fill, and the easiest way to do this is to present the objectives as punctual and non general questions or hypothesis. It is a general truth. We are all flooded by publications, and readers don't have time to read all scientific production. By identifying the limitations of the research, authors demonstrate scientific maturity and emphasize the power of generalization of their findings.