Manuscript structure: How to convey your most important ideas through your paper

Manuscript structure: How to convey your most

important ideas through your paperimportant ideas through your paper

Helping you get published

The core purpose of writing a paper is to go beyond mere

presentation of facts and thoughts. It is to reach out to the

reader—to communicate your research effectively and help

readers understand the issues at hand.

This article introduces and illustrates various concepts for

Manuscript structure: How to convey your most important ideas through your paper

This article introduces and illustrates various concepts for

structuring a manuscript such that readers take away the

most important messages—the messages you want to

convey—after reading your paper.

A crucial point to remember while writing a paper is that

readers do not simply read; they interpret.1 Different

readers are likely to extract different meanings from your

paper, depending on their expectations or the clues they

receive from the manuscript’s structure. This brings us to a

concept that serves as the foundation of good writing

The philosophy behind good manuscript structure

concept that serves as the foundation of good writing

practices1:

Write with the reader in mind

A fitting analogy to the structure of most research manuscripts would be an

hourglass.2 The manuscript begins with broad statements, narrows down to the specifics

of your study, and ends with broad considerations. This section presents the basic

components of a manuscript and outlines the essential functions and content of each

part.2-6

Manuscript structure: The essential elements

Use this section to set the context for your study and problem. Remember that several

readers may not understand the significance of your study right away. Therefore, use

general language and carefully developed logic to guide your readers to the main

problem/objective of your study.

Introduction (What are you studying and why?)

DOs and DON’Ts

� Describe the rationale for undertaking the study

� Explain how the research makes an important contribution to the field or advances � Explain how the research makes an important contribution to the field or advances

knowledge

� State the research question clearly

� Explain the theoretical framework that the study is based on

� Provide a background of the problem or issue that your research aims to understand

or resolve, citing studies to support your arguments

� Summarize the current state of knowledge on the topic, citing studies as appropriate

X Don't review all studies that have ever been published on the topic

This section is the most specific to your study. A primary criterion for well-conducted

research is that it must be replicable. This means that another researcher should be able

to reproduce the results by following the methods detailed in your paper.

Methods (What did you do?)

DOs and DON’Ts

� Provide full details of all methods, techniques, and instruments

� Include photograph or diagram of the experimental setup� Include photograph or diagram of the experimental setup

� Describe the questionnaire, survey, or other data collection instruments

� Provide or cite studies that support the validity and reliability of the analysis methods

and instruments

� Describe the lab settings or environment

� Explain the analysis methods and why you chose them

X Don’t exclude important details simply to avoid a lengthy description of the methods

Include all the details of your data and results in this section. Highlight the most significant

findings in the text and then move on to the peripheral findings. Readers should be able to

understand your results without spending too much time reading this section.

Results (What did you find?)

DOs and DON’Ts

� Use tables and figures effectively to present results in a manner that’s easy to

understand at a glanceunderstand at a glance

� Describe the actual data rather than provide generalizations

� State the main findings in the text

� Highlight any unexpected or surprising results in the text

� Explain what the results are saying, rather them simply stating the statistical data (e.g.,

“X was found to substantially increase with Y [followed by statistical data]” rather than

“X and Y had a positive correlation of .73”)

X If you have illustrated the results of your study in figures and tables, do not include

detailed descriptions of these results in the text

A good discussion section extends the specific results to their broader implications, which

can then be tied in with the general background given in the introduction to maximize the

impact of the overall paper. Therefore, remember to go “back and forth” between your

discussion section and the introduction.

Discussion (What do your findings mean?)

DOs and DON’Ts

� Start by stating whether your hypothesis was supported

� Interpret the results: what do the results imply?� Interpret the results: what do the results imply?

� Relate your findings to those of previous studies, for example, whether your results

support or deviate from results in previous studies

� Explain how the study adds to previous knowledge

� Remember to mention any possible alternative explanations for the results

� Address the limitations of the study

X Don’t simply repeat the results again

X Don’t draw conclusions that are not supported by the data

In this section, state the main conclusions of the study in the context of the formulated

problem. By the time readers reach this part of the text, they should have understood

what you did and the outcomes of the research. Readers should be able to understand

how and why you reached your conclusions.

Conclusion (What have you learned from the study?)

DOs and DON’Ts

� Explain what you’ve learned from the study

� Ensure that the conclusion is directly related to your research question and stated � Ensure that the conclusion is directly related to your research question and stated

purpose of the study

� Elaborate on the broader implications of the research

� Suggest specific future avenues of research to advance the knowledge you’ve gained

from the study or answer questions that your study did not address

X Don’t oversell your research or “overgeneralize” the results, that is, stretch the study

findings to provide suggestions or conclusions that the research doesn’t really support

X Don’t simply summarize the results

A good writer is aware of what different types of readers may be expecting from the paper

and can structure a paper according to the readers’ expectations and backgrounds. Even a

general reader with little or no knowledge of the field should be able to get a broad

understanding of what you did and why.2

Avoid jargon. Clearly define key terms, especially ones that are not used in their

conventional sense or ones that few readers can be expected to be familiar with.

Writing for different groups of readers

conventional sense or ones that few readers can be expected to be familiar with.

If only specialists in your field can understand what you’re saying, your paper will not be

read by a wide audience. Lead readers up to the problem or theory you are studying.

Don’t assume that readers know everything about the topic of your research.

Writing for different groups of readers

No explanation: We investigate the role of reduced monoamine oxidase B (MAO B)

activity in smoker behavior.

Better: The enzyme monoamine oxidase B (MAO B) is involved in the breakdown of Better: The enzyme monoamine oxidase B (MAO B) is involved in the breakdown of

dopamine, a neurotransmitter implicated in reinforcing and motivating addictive

behaviours such as smoking. MAO B inhibition is associated with enhanced activity of

dopamine. We investigate the role of reduced MAO B activity in smoker behavior.

Conclusion

To be an effective author, keep the reader in mind while writing your paper. A well-

structured manuscript helps you enhance the flow of your ideas and tells readers what to

expect at different parts of the manuscript.


References:

1. G Gopen, J Swan The Science of Scientific Writing., American Scientist, 78, pp. 550–558

2. DJ Bern Writing the Empirical Journal Article., in The Compleat Academic: A Practical Guide for the

Beginning Social Scientist, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., New Jersey, USA

3. Characteristics of a High Quality Manuscript. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, available

online at http://www.nctm.org/publications/content.aspx?id=17149

4. J Samet. Dear Author—Advice from a Retiring Editor., American Journal of Epidemiology, 150, 433–

436

5. D Byrne. Common reasons for rejecting manuscripts at medical journals., Science Editor, 23, pp. 39–


5. D Byrne. Common reasons for rejecting manuscripts at medical journals., Science Editor, 23, pp. 39–

44

6. Characteristics of a High Quality Manuscript (for mathematics ). Journal for Research in

Mathematics Education. (n.d.).

Connect

http://www.facebook.com/Editage

http://www.twitter.com/Editagehttp://www.twitter.com/Editage

http://www.linkedin.com/company/cactus-communications