Scribd
Upload
44 views

Overall Structure: - The General Structure of A Full Article

The document provides guidance on the typical structure and components of a scientific research article, including sections such as the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and references. It notes that the typical length for a full article is 25-30 pages and provides information on formatting the different sections, such as allocating 1-2 manuscript pages typically for the introduction and 2-4 pages for the methods section. The document also offers tips for writing the results and discussion section, such as interpreting results for readers and discussing limitations and implications.

Uploaded by

shiraz ali
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
44 views

Overall Structure: - The General Structure of A Full Article

The document provides guidance on the typical structure and components of a scientific research article, including sections such as the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and references. It notes that the typical length for a full article is 25-30 pages and provides information on formatting the different sections, such as allocating 1-2 manuscript pages typically for the introduction and 2-4 pages for the methods section. The document also offers tips for writing the results and discussion section, such as interpreting results for readers and discussing limitations and implications.

Uploaded by

shiraz ali
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 24

Overall Structure

• The general structure of a full


article
– Title
– Authors Make them easy for
searching (informative,
– Abstract attractive, effective)
– Keywords
– Main text (IMRAD)
• Introduction
• Methods
• Results
• And
• Discussion (Conclusion)
– Acknowledgements
– References
– Appendix (Supplementary
material)
Typical length of a full article
• Total 25-30 pages (double-space, 12 pts)

Content Length
Abstract 1 paragraph
Introduction 1.5-2 manuscript pages
Methods 2-4 manuscript pages
Results and Discussion 10-12 manuscript pages
Conclusions 1-2 manuscript pages
Figures 6-8
Tables 1-3
References 20-50 items
Elsevier Author Workshop
Methods
• The style of “Methods” section depends
on the type of the article.
• Basin principle
– Provide sufficient information so that a
knowledgeable reader can reproduce the
experiment, derivation, or simulation.
Methods per type of paper
• Empirical papers
– Describe the methods of data collection, analysis, and
measurement
– Identify the statistical methods if they are used : sample size,
type of analyses, alpha level, statistical software used

• Case study papers


– Cite corresponding references if necessary
– Specify the value of the key parameters and the experimental
settings for your case
Methods per type of paper
• Methodology papers
– Address the model and the theoretical frame work of the
methodology
– Describe the tests designed to examine both the effectiveness
and the performance of the new method

• Theory papers
– Define or construct the model
– Provide the complete inference of the main theme of the
article
– Indicate the corresponding simulations if appropriate
Results and Discussion
• Structures of results & discussion, and conclusion

1 2 3

Results
Results
Results &
Discussion
Discussion
Conclusion Conclusion
Results and Discussion
• Results
– What are the results of your paper?

• Discussion
– How are your results related to previous research work?
Framework for Results and
Discussion
A. Review
– Review of the purpose/methodology of the paper OR general
summary of the most significant results

B. Background
– Background about theory/research aims/methods used (include
references)

C. Results
– A summary or reference to specific tables/figures (more detailed next
slide)
Framework for Results and
Discussion
C. Results
1. Background: Information that is helpful to understand the
table/figure before the actual results are reported
2. Location: Indicates which table/figure (or other type of data) is being
discussed
3. Method: Explanation of the specific methods used to obtain the
specific data being discussed in the particular paragraph
4. Description: Physical features of table/figure such as type of line (e.g.,
dotted, dashed), patterns, colors, x and y axes values, insert, etc.
5. Process: Instructions or explanation of how something works or is
designed rather than describing data
Framework for Results and
Discussion
C. Results
6. Results: Reports the most important data in the figure or table
7. Claim: Analysis of the researcher based on the data
8. Hypothesis: Supported or not.
9. Explanation: Reasons for unexpected results or data that is difficult
to interpret, differences with previous findings
10. Comparison: Comparison with other data in the paper such as
simulation/theoretical, comparing two techniques, or comparing
results from previous research
11. Conclusion: Conclusion of a single table/figure or an analysis
paragraph
Framework for Results and
Discussion
D. Limitations
– Limitations of the study (e.g., small sample size, limited variables,
simulation only, etc.)

E. Recommendations
– Policy suggestions, change to practice, implications for the field, etc.
F. Future work
– Future work by the authors or needed in the field
G. Significance of the paper
– General conclusion about the significance of the research as a whole
to the field
Best Practices
• Help reader to understand how you analyze the data
– Reporting results only such as ‘increased’ or ‘correlated’ may not be
clearly understood by all readers.
– Highlighting words like interestingly, surprisingly, importantly,
unfortunately, much more efficient, extremely low, significantly
higher help the reader to interpret the data.
– “Of note”, “is should be noted that”, “Note that” are also often
used to help the reader to find significant results.
Best Practices
• Use references in all sections of your paper
– Use references throughout your paper to support the validity
of your results
Best Practices
• Go one step further: discuss the implications of your
research
– The word “could” is often used to indicate implications
Best Practices
• Future research: Identify areas of further research or
unresolved problems to be solved
Best Practices
• Write your conclusions as precisely as possible, even in
the abstract
– In your conclusion section, although not required, it is a good
idea give precise conclusions and avoid vague words like
better, good, effective, useful, valuable, etc. Say exactly the
results you found if possible.

X -> The method is robust.


O -> This method is 35% faster in terms of
computation time than existing methods, reducing
cost by 15%.
Best Practices
• Promote yourself
– We make a significant contribution to …
– Our method is a novel approach solving …
Useful Checklist: Result section
1. I do not merely describe all of the results, but interpret the
important results for the reader. I use words like “significant,
moderate, unexpectedly, surprisingly and interestingly,” to
interpret the results and not just give a list of results.

2. If appropriate, I have pointed out any problems or


inconsistencies with the data (not the same as limitations of the
paper).

3. If my results are statistical, I have done all the necessary tests to


determine the validity of the results.
Useful Checklist: Result section
4. If my paper does not have a separate “Discussion” section, I
have included references that compare my findings with the
results in previous research papers.

5. I have used the past tense to talk about the specific results of
my paper but I have used the present tense to talk about
descriptions of figures or tables and generalizations based on
my results of general statements about my whole field.

6. My Tables have titles on the top but my figures have captions


on the bottom.
Useful Checklist: Discussion
section
1. I discuss only the most significant findings and do not simply
repeat the results section with more commentary.

2. I have noted any problems with the methods or data. I note the
implications of these problems and how they might affect the
validity of my conclusions.

3. My discussion section includes references from other papers to


either support or compare my research.

4. I have identified and clearly explained the importance of the


findings for the field as a whole.
Useful Checklist: Discussion
section
5. I have mentioned whether my results support or differ from
previous research in the field. If they differ, I have attempted to
explain why.

6. I have mentioned some possible areas for further research, the


importance of the findings or the implications and possible
applications of the research (not all are required in all fields).

7. I have analyzed the structure of papers in my field to


understand the relationship between the results, discussion and
conclusion sections.
Assignment #4: Results and
Discussion / Conclusion
• Analyze results and discussion section of the paper in your
field
• Use the following framework
A. Review
B. Background
C. Results, either a summary or reference to specific
table/figure (C 1-11 in the following slide)
D. Limitations
E. Recommendations
F. Future work
G. Significance of the paper
Assignment #4: Results and
Discussion / Conclusion
C. Results, either a summary or reference to specific
table/figure
1. Background
2. Location
3. Method
4. Description
5. Process
6. Results
7. Claim
8. Hypothesis
9. Explanation
10. Comparison
11. Conclusions of a single figure/table
Assignment #4: Results and
Discussion / Conclusion
• In your homework:
– Write your name
– Indicate title, author, and journal of the paper that you
selected
– Copy the paragraphs/sentences into a table and label the
corresponding category in a separate column
• Due date: May 13th

You might also like