Unit 7 The Scientific Paper 22-23

T7
Part III:
The scientific article
Scientific
publications
© Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

Contents
1. General considerations.
2. Introduction.
3. Methodology.
4. Results and Discussion.
5. Conclusions.
6. Title and abstract.
7. The publishing process

© Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados 2
1. General considerations
A scientific article or “paper” is an academic work that is usually published
in an academic journal.
In other words, a research paper is a piece of academic writing based on

its author’s original research on a particular topic, and the analysis and
interpretation of the research findings.
Alternatively, there are articles which summarize the most important

findings in a given realm.
© Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados 3
The research paper must include all the information needed to replicate the
experiments, getting the same conclusions as well as carrying out the same
literature search (citations and references).
Research papers are usually written in formal (or at least neutral) English.
The final aim of any scientific project is to publish one or more papers then sharing
the results with the scientific community.
4 © Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

In scientific writing, IMRAD (introduction, methods, results, and discussion) refers to a
common organization structure. IMRAD is the most prominent norm for the structure of a
scientific journal article of the original research type.
Science writing is much easier than it looks because the structure and language are
conventional.
Original research articles are typically structured in the following order:
1) Introduction: aims of the study, research questions, state of the art…
2) Methods: materials, methodology, techniques…
3) Results & Discussion: findings, debates, discussion, comparisons…
4) Conclusions: summary, achieved goals, future work…

The shape of a research article is symmetrical:
Abstract
More general
Introduction
More specific
Methodology
Central report section

Results &
Discussion
More specific
Discussion/
Conclusion More general

Option 1 Option 2
Title Title
Authors and affiliation Authors and affiliation
Abstract Abstract
Key words Key words
Introduction Introduction
Methodology Methodology
Results & Discussion Results
Conclusions Discussion & Conclusions
Acknowledgements Acknowledgements
References References

Other parts of the article may be:
Supporting information: additional calculations, additional tables, additional figures,

supplementary data, further information about methods and materials.
Acknowledgements: to thank other scientists and sources of funding.
The authors thank Dr. G. L. Smith, from University of…, for useful discussions.
The research has been supported by projects…
JJSP acknowledges a Ph.D. grant from…

2. Introduction
You need to write an opening sentence which enables you and your reader
to get in or start your paper.
The first paragraph should be general and catchy. In other words, it should
be attractive/appealing to a broad audience.
You need to define your aims and to explain why this area of knowledge is
interesting, and why you article is relevant.

2. Introduction
It is also important to highlight your main findings: results and a brief
discussion of their meaning.
Since what you want is to share your results and conclusions with the
scientific community, your main findings and their meaning are often
present in more than one section of the article: introduction, results,
discussion and conclusions.

2. Introduction
It is important to explain:
➢ Aims of the study.
➢ Current situation and previous researches in the same field.
➢ Importance for society.
➢ Research questions.
➢ Possible answers to your research questions: hypotheses.
➢ Predictions.
➢ Main findings.

2. Introduction
Component Elements
Establish the importance of your field
Provide background facts / information (possibly from

1 research)
Define the terminology in the title/key words
Present the problem area/current research focus
2 Previous and/or current research and contributions
Locate a gap in the research
3 Describe the problem you will address
Present a prediction to be tested
4 Describe the present paper

2. Introduction
1) Establishing significance:
Much research in recent years…
A major current focus in…
Numerous experiments have established that…
… have generated considerable recent research interest.
… vital for two important reasons: …
… over 95% …
It is generally accepted that…
… are attracting widespread interest in fields such as…
… play an important role in…

2. Introduction
1) Establishing significance:
The importance of…
A fundamental issue…
A generally accepted classification of…
Nowadays…
It was already in the XVI century that physicians started…
It is generally assumed that…
In the last century…
Regarding the present use of…
Among the possible photoreactions that pyrimidine nucleobases of nucleic acids may undergo on ultraviolet
radiation…
2. Introduction
2) Previous and/or current research and contributions:
This phenomenon was demonstrated by…
… were found in…
In their study…
Initial attempts focused on identifying the cause of…
… has been shown to…
Early data was interpreted in the study by…
… has been proposed for…
… were reported in…
Their study suggested/highlighted/emphasized/…
An alternative approach was developed by…

2. Introduction
3) Gap/problem/question/criticism
Few researchers have addressed the problem of…
… is still under debate.
There remains a need for…
… have been largely unsuccessful…
Unfortunately, …
An alternative approach is necessary.
… remains unclear.
… was far from optimal.
Although…
… on a scale hitherto unknown…
The lack of systematic and modern studies on…

2. Introduction
4) The present work
The aim of this article is…
This paper focuses on…
The purpose of this study is to describe and examine…
In order to investigate…
In this paper we present…
In the present study an analysis of… is carried out.
The approach we have used in this study aims to…
This paper is organized as follows: …
The main goal of the present contribution is…

3. Methodology
The title of this section varies in different disciplines and in different journals (one should
always read the Guide for Authors):
Materials and Methods
Procedure
Experiments
Experimental section
Methodology
The Methodology should contain sufficient detail for readers to replicate the work done and
obtain similar results.
However, the authors usually summarize the methodology and further information is
included in sections such as Additional information or Supporting information.
3. Methodology
Not all articles include this section (e.g. narrative reviews, which include neither original
results nor search strategies; and letters due to its brevity). In case of short articles (i.e.
letters), they usually include the methods used in the “supporting information”.
The “methodology” has to do with:
➢ Materials and equipment.
➢ Study subjects (people, animals…).
➢ Calculations.
➢ Description of the statistical analysis of the data (formulas, equations…).
➢ How you carried out the literature search (in systematic reviews).
3. Methodology
Component Elements
Provide a general introduction and overview of the
materials/methods
Restate the purpose of the work

1
Give the source of materials/equipment/methodology used
Supply essential background information

Provide specific and precise details about materials and methods
(i.e. quantities, temperatures, duration, sequence, conditions,
locations, sizes)
2
Justify choices made
Indicate that appropriate care was taken
3 Relate materials/methods to other studies
4 Indicate where problems occurred

3. Methodology
1) Provide general introduction and overview of the materials/methods and
give the source of materials/equipment used:
The impact tests used in this work…
All reactions were performed…
All cell lines were generated…
In the majority of tests…
… was obtained from …
… were used…

3. Methodology
1) Provide general introduction and overview of the materials/methods and
give the source of materials/equipment used:
The material investigated…
… was carried out…
The experiments were conducted at a temperature of…
All calculations reported here employed…
All calculations in the present paper were performed with…
Geometries were obtained by computing analytical gradients…

3. Methodology
2) Supply essential background information:
... was measured at…
… is aligned with…
… are positioned near…
… are embedded in…
… is attached to…
… was mounted on top of…
…was located…

3. Methodology
3) Provide specific and precise details about materials and methods:
… was adapted…
… was added…
… was selected…
… was optimized…
… were calculated…
… was used…
Using the information obtained from the model calculations…

3. Methodology
4) Justify choices made:
To validate the results…
… in order to determine…
For the sake of simplicity…
By partitioning…
… with the intention of…
The advantage of…
Because…
To take advantage of…

3. Methodology
5) Indicate that appropriate care was taken:
The samples were slowly and carefully…
… at least three times.
… was monitored constantly for a period of 24 hours.
… for immediate analysis.
Frequent…

3. Methodology
6) Relate materials/methods to other studies:
… as reported elsewhere/previously.
A revised version of…
We modified…
In out implementation we follow…
According to…
… partly based on…
A novel step was…
… as suggested by…

3. Methodology
7) Indicate where problems occurred:
Inevitably…
…, however, …
Although…
... differ slightly from…
While…
… this was a problem…

4. Results and Discussion
The title of this section varies in different disciplines and journals. Instead of Results, it is
sometimes called Analysis or Data Analysis.
In a narrative review, this section may well not be present, as opposed to systematic
reviews, which may well display new ideas or trends.
The table below shows four options for the subtitles from this point until the end of the
paper:
Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4
Results or Data Results or Data Results and Results or Data

Analysis Analysis Discussion Analysis
Discussion and
Discussion Discussion
Conclusions
Conclusions Conclusions
It is useful to understand the difference between:
➢ The explanation of a result: why it occurred as it did.
➢ The evaluation of a result: what the numbers mean.
➢ The implication of a result: what the result suggests or implies.
At this stage your explanations should be limited to fairly direct comments about your
results.
You will move on to broader explanations and implications in the Discussion.

For instance, khellin is a photosensitizer used in PUVA therapy (psoralen + UV-A radiation)
which absorbs at energy = 4.00 eV.
Explanation of the result: how did we get this number? Describe the theoretical background
and how you computed it.
Evaluation of the result: if this value makes sense or not, if this value is in agreement with
previous findings and/or your hypothesis…
Implication of the result: compare this value with that of other similar drugs, i.e. is khellin
more suitable than other drugs?

Results do not speak for themselves!
You may describe your results in very different ways:
The two curves are very similar
OR
The two curves are noticeably

different

Your readers need to know what the numbers or quantities mean in order to understand them.
Example: one table or graph of your results shows that the effect you were looking for occurred in
23% of cases. You can communicate this as:
✓ A strong result: in as many as 23% of cases.
✓ A weak result: in only 23% of cases.
Losing the opportunity to communicate what your results mean can cause problems. Maybe you think
that 23% is a high percentage, but the reader may decide that 23% of cases is low.

If you do not describe or comment on your results in words, the reader may perceive them
differently from you.
One way to communicate your interpretation of the results is to use adverbs of frequency:
The effect was seen frequently (if you believe that 23% of occasions is evidence of a high
level of frequency).
The effect was seen occasionally (if you believe that 23% of occasions is evidence of a low
level of frequency).
When you describe your results, you may want to indicate the relationships or connections
between the events that you observed (causality).
You can not take a cause-effect relationship for granted. You have to explain and justify it.
X produced Y
X originated in Y
X is a consequence of Y
X often caused Y
X could have caused Y

✓ Clear/strong causal connection: cause, produce, be due to

✓ Partial cause: be a factor in, contribute to
✓ Initial or first cause in a causal chain: originate in, initiate
✓ Weak causal connection: be related to, link
✓ Add a frequency qualifier: ✓ Add a quantity qualifier:

x often caused y x caused y in many cases
x commonly caused y x caused y in some cases/to some extent
x rarely caused y x caused y in virtually all cases

Component Elements
Revisiting the research aim/existing research
1 Revisiting/expanding methodology
General overview of results
Invitation to view results
2 Specific/key results in detail, with or without explanations
Comparisons with results in other research
Comparisons with model predictions
3 Problems with results
4 Possible implications of results
37 5
© Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados Mapping (relationship to existing research)
1) Revisiting the research aim/existing research:
Since… was investigated experimentally.
We reasoned that…
In earlier studies…
The main purpose of this work…
As mentioned previously, the aim of the tests was…
In this work, we sought to establish a methodology for…
It was suggested in the Introduction that…
In their seminal work, Flopps et al. analyzed…

2) General overview of results:
It is apparent that both...
It is evident that these results are in good agreement with…
In general, …
… have an overall strong concordance with…
On the whole, …
… were similar in all cases.

3) Invitation to view results:
The data in Fig. 18 indicate…
Figure 3 illustrates…
… are reported in Fig. 6.
… can be seen in Fig. 1.
Comparing Figs. 1 and 4…
The data shown in Table 1 demonstrate that…
The results are summarized in Table 4.

4) Specific/key results in detail:
There was a lower proportion of…
… there were different…
As can be seen… was unchanged.
… did not occur…
… dropped from…
… levelled off…

4) Specific/key results in detail:
In the majority of cases…
… satisfactory results from…
… was dramatic.
A significant improvement…
… are essentially the same…

5) Comparisons with other results:
It is evident that… in exceptionally good agreement with…
… are almost identical…
… strongly confirm…
… correlation with…
This is consistent with…
The results are qualitatively similar to those of earlier simulation studies.
These trends are in line with…

6) Problems with results:
The correlation between the two methods was somewhat less…
It should, however, be noted that…
Nevertheless…
… was only obtained at…
Reasonable results were obtained…
It is difficult to…
Although…
Future work should include…
… of no significance
7) Possible implications of results:
This suggests that…
These curves indicate that…
Empirically, it seems that…
… suggesting that…
It could be inferred…
This indicates that…
It is therefore speculated that…
The results seem to indicate that…
It is evident that…
8) Mapping (relationship to existing research):
To the knowledge of the authors, the data in Figs. 4 6 is the first of this kind.
To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first study to compare the effects of…
… are comparable to…
Similar…
Our results are in general agreement with previous…
Unlike…

The Discussion section may be a separate section, or may be included either in the Results
section (Results and Discussion) or in the Conclusion section (Discussion and Conclusions).
In all the cases the key point is discussing the numbers and results obtained previously, in order
to interpret data and observations (correlations, trends, meaning…).
Maybe it is better to analyze both the Results and the Discussion simultaneously, especially in
experimental sciences when one has to deal with a large number of results.

Therefore, usually you discuss the results as you display them in the Results
& Discussion section.
Nevertheless, in the Conclusions you often emphasize the key points of the
Discussion, in order to highlight your findings.
Since the discussion of your results is probably the most important part of
your article, it is present in more than one section of the paper.

Saying what your results are is the central function of the Results
section.
Talking about what your results mean is the central function of the
Discussion.
Explaining why your work is relevant is the main goal of the Conclusions.

5. Conclusions
One should end the article by helping the readers move out of the article,
emphasizing the gist of your work and the most important findings.
Then you need to write a final section to get out at the end of the paper.
Now the order is just the reverse with respect to the Introduction:
1) In the Introduction, you wrote about the work of other researchers,

creating a kind of research map for your readers so that they could see
what type of work existed in this field.
In the Conclusions, you locate your study in relation to that research map.

5. Conclusions
2) You then went on in the Introduction to locate a gap in the research or describe a problem
associated with existing research.
In the Conclusions, you are expected to say to what extent you have responded to that gap or
solved that problem.
3) At the end of the Introduction, you wrote about the present paper, creating an interface
with the content of your own work so that you could move the reader on to the central report
section of your paper.
In the Conclusions, it is common to begin by revisiting some aspect of your work, so as to
create that interface in reverse and enable you to move away from the central report section.
5. Conclusions
Component Elements
Revisiting previous sections
1
Summarising/revisiting general or key results
Achievement/contribution
2
Refining the implications
Limitations
3 Current and future work
Applications

5. Conclusions
1) Achievements/contributions:
… is a novel finding.
We identify dramatically different profiles in…
Our results provide compelling evidence that…
Our data rule out the possibility…
A straightforward analysis…
Our study provides the framework for…
Our results provide a clear distinction between…

5. Conclusions
2) Limitations/current and future research:
Our results are encouraging and should be validated in…
… these effects remain to be determined.
This finding is promising and should be explored with…
Future work should focus on…
An important question for other studies is…

5. Conclusions
3) Applications/applicability/implementation
Our technique can be applied to a wide range of…
… therefore could be used for…
This approach has potential in areas such as…
It should be possible, therefore…
The solution method could be applied…
This could eventually lead to…

6. Title and abstract
The title, abstract, and keywords play a pivotal role in the communication of research.
Without them, most papers may never be read or even found by interested readers.
Most electronic search engines, databases, or journal websites will use the words found in
your title and abstract, as well as your list of keywords, to decide whether and when to
display your paper to interested readers.
Abstracts compete for attention in on-line databases. Its main goal is to encourage the
reader to download the article and to facilitate that reading by providing a brief preview.

The title and abstract are often the only parts of a paper that are freely available online.
Hence, once readers find your paper, they will read through the title and abstract to
determine whether or not to purchase a full copy of your paper/continue reading.
What is more, the abstract is the first section of your paper that journal editors and
reviewers read. While busy journal editors may use the abstract to decide whether to send
a paper for peer review or reject it outright, reviewers will form their first impression
about your paper on reading it.

However “good” and well-written the abstract is, it needs to have an independent validity.
It should make sense as a standalone, self-contained and self-explanatory description of the

research article, and readers should be able to understand the key points and results of the
research even if they never see the whole article.
Both the Title and the Abstract are the last part of the paper to be written.
Finally, the keywords are just 4 or 5 words which may define your work.

Generally between 100 and 300 words in length, abstracts are of different types:
✓ Descriptive abstracts, usually used in the social sciences and humanities, do not give
specific information about methods and results.
✓ Informative abstracts are commonly used in the sciences and present information on the
background, aim, methods, results, and conclusions.
✓ Structured abstracts are essentially informative abstracts divided into a series of

headings (e.g., Objective, Method, Results, Conclusion) and are typically found in
medical literature and clinical trial reports.

Component Elements
1 Background → Aim → Problem → What the paper does
2 Methodology/Materials
3 Results → Achievements/Contribution → Implications
4 Applications
5 Limitations → Future work

A good research paper title:
1) Condenses the paper’s content in a few words.
2) Captures the readers’ attention.
3) Differentiates the paper from other papers of the same subject area.
Keep it simple, brief and attractive.
Use appropriate descriptive words.
Avoid abbreviations and jargon.

Examples:
Unified model for…
A study of a…
An Experimental and Theoretical Investigation of…
Looking for…
A theoretical insight into…
The role of…
On the production of…
Correlating…
How…?
…: A Systematic Review











After finishing the paper, one should decide which the target journal will be.
Depending on the value of your work, you may reach better or worse journals.
In addition, if you think that your results are interesting in many realms, you may try to
publish it in a general journal. Otherwise, it is better to try in a specialized one.
Take into account that the editor may reject your paper, and then you will need other
alternatives.

After submitting the paper, if the editor accepts it, then the peer-review process starts.
The editor will send your paper to three referees which are experts in your field.
Traditionally, peer reviewers are anonymous.
It constitutes a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the

relevant field. Peer review methods are employed to maintain standards of quality, improve
performance, and provide credibility.

Peer review is generally considered necessary to academic quality and is used in most
major scientific journals, but does by no means prevent publication of all invalid research.
The peer review helps the publisher (that is, the editor-in-chief or the editorial board)
deciding whether the work should be accepted, considered acceptable with revisions, or
rejected.
Referees' evaluations usually include an explicit recommendation of what to do with the

manuscript or proposal.

Scientists study Scientists write

something about their results
Scientists revise the Editor send

comments and resubmit reviewers’
the article with comments to the
improvements scientists
Peer reviewers receive Journal editor receives

the article and provide the article and send it
feedback to the editor out for peer review

Obviously you as an author have the opportunity to discuss the comments of any given referee. Then
the editor decides who is right. If there is a strong controversy, new referees may be required.
Once your paper is accepted, then the author(s) should receive the galley proofs (the preliminary
version) in 3 — 5 weeks, then the manuscript should be published on the Web in 4 — 6 weeks, and in a
print issue in 8 — 10 weeks.
the new articles are highlighted in

the webpage of any journal




© Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

Unit 7 The Scientific Paper 22-23

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Unit 7 The Scientific Paper 22-23

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

T7

© Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

4. Results and Discussion.

6. Title and abstract.

7. The publishing process

In other words, a research paper is a piece of academic writing based on

Alternatively, there are articles which summarize the most important

4 © Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

Original research articles are typically structured in the following order:

1) Introduction: aims of the study, research questions, state of the art…

2) Methods: materials, methodology, techniques…

3) Results & Discussion: findings, debates, discussion, comparisons…

4) Conclusions: summary, achieved goals, future work…

5 © Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

Central report section

6 © Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

Authors and affiliation Authors and affiliation

Key words Key words

Results & Discussion Results

Conclusions Discussion & Conclusions

7 © Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

Supporting information: additional calculations, additional tables, additional figures,

Acknowledgements: to thank other scientists and sources of funding.

The research has been supported by projects…

JJSP acknowledges a Ph.D. grant from…

8 © Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

9 © Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

10 © Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

➢ Aims of the study.

➢ Current situation and previous researches in the same field.

➢ Importance for society.

➢ Possible answers to your research questions: hypotheses.

11 © Copyright Universidad Europea. Todos los derechos reservados

Establish the importance of your field

Provide background facts / information (possibly from

Define the terminology in the title/key words

Present the problem area/current research focus

2 Previous and/or current research and contributions

Locate a gap in the research

3 Describe the problem you will address

Present a prediction to be tested

4 Describe the present paper

A major current focus in…

Numerous experiments have established that…

… have generated considerable recent research interest.

… vital for two important reasons: …

It is generally accepted that…

… are attracting widespread interest in fields such as…

… play an important role in…

The importance of…

A generally accepted classification of…

It was already in the XVI century that physicians started…

It is generally assumed that…

In the last century…

Regarding the present use of…

This phenomenon was demonstrated by…

… were found in…

Initial attempts focused on identifying the cause of…

… has been shown to…

Early data was interpreted in the study by…

… has been proposed for…

… were reported in…