Transcript How to Write a Scientific Publication

HOW TO WRITE A SCIENTIFIC
PUBLICATION
Karl-Heinz Schwalbe
You just sit down and
start writing?
WHY DO SCIENTISTS WRITE?
Scientific research is not complete until the results have been
published.
Writing an accurate, understandable paper is therefore as
important as the research itself.
 To make a permanent, publicly accessible record of your
findings
 To convince your funding body to sink even more money into
your research
 Ego: Your work is your epitaph
 Your supervisor forces you
 No PhD without publication (the thesis is one…)
PAGE 2
STRUCTURE OF A PAPER
Scientific writing has to be simple, clear, and to the
point. No jargon or flowery literary embellishments,
no exaggeration. It may follow the structure:






Title: Why should somebody read the paper?
Introduction: What did you do? Why did you do it?
Materials/Methods: How did you do it?
Results: What did you find?
Discussion: What does it all mean?
Conclusions: What did we learn?
PAGE 3
TITLE
The title should be descriptive of the paper.
• Avoid complete phrases
• Avoid acronyms, in particular those invented by the
author
• Avoid mathematical symbols
• Avoid the term „novel“. Your work is supposed to be
novel anyway.
PAGE 4
ABSTRACT
• Typically, the abstract should be no more than 250 words.
• The abstract should be a single paragraph.
• The abstract should be written in the past tense (you have
already done the experiments!)
• The abstract should not cite references.
• The abstract should not use acronyms nor symbols.
What the abstract should say…….
1.
2.
3.
4.
State the principal objectives and scope of the investigation.
Briefly describe the methods employed.
Summarise the main results.
State the principal conclusions.
PAGE 5
KEYWORDS
•The keywords should cover the content of the
paper.
•They provide the profile of your paper for data
banks.
•Many journals provide a selection of keywords
from which you are supposed to choose.
INTRODUCTION
• This section provides the justification of the
work done.
• Give brief overview on state of the art of your
area.
• Cite the relevant literature.
• The final section should describe the gap in
knowledge you have filled and how you have
done it.
PAGE 7
MATERIALS / METHODS
• Write in the past tense.
• Include enough detail so that a competent worker
can repeat the experiments or simulations.
Details include materials, test pieces, methods
employed, parameters varied…..
This contributes to good scientific practice! (And also:
The reviewers have to be able to understand what you have
done!)
• Do not include results in this section.
PAGE 8
MATERIALS / METHODS, cont.
• Nowadays, it is much appreciated when experimental
and theoretical (analytical or numerical) work is
combined:
• Theoretical work without validation by experiments is
often of not much value.
• And also it is valuable to have experimental work
backed up by theoretical models.
PAGE 9
RESULTS
• The best way to present results is showing them as
clear diagrams, with explanations in the text.
• Be selective – you do not have to include every detail
you have obtained.
• It is not advisable to present results in figures and
tables.
• Reserve extensive interpretation of the results for the
Discussion section. However, a brief (one or two
sentences) discussion of an experimental result often
serves as a nice transition to the next simulation, or
experiment, and so gives the paper a “flow”.
PAGE 10
RESULTS, cont.
RESULTS,
cont.
• In papers on analytical work, please do not write
endless formulas. If you have very long
derivations it may make sense to shift some of
the derivations into an appendix. Otherwise the
reader may get lost.
• If you use numerous formulas and hence a large
number of mathematical symbols, PLEASE
PROVIDE A LIST OF SYMBOLS!!! Otherwise a
reader – and the reviewer(!) - may give up.
I use to return such papers without a list of
symbols.
DISCUSSION
RESULTS,
• Requires much skill, provides order and interpretation of
the results.
• A mere reporting of experimental results without
attempting to search for underlying mechanisms is of little
value and will usually not accepted for publication.
• Put your results into perspective by comparing them with
the state of the art described in the Introduction.
• Your results will thus contribute to the overall knowledge of
your area.
• Whenever possible, schematic representations of the
model(s) developed are a very versatile tool for conveying
your message to the reader.
DISCUSSIONcont.
DISCUSSION,
A compilation of numerous diagrams and
colour pictures does not make a scientific
paper.
Ordering the data and systematic
presentation and interpretation of the results
is an intellectual effort that has to be
performed by the author and not by the
reader.
CONCLUSIONS
DISCUSSION
• Start with a few phrases to summarise the
work done.
• List the main conclusions („lessons learned“).
• Perspectives for further work may be given.
• This section is frequently misunderstood to be
a repetition of the Abstract.
CONCLUSIONS
FINAL
REMARKS
• Put yourself into the position of the reader so
that you can explain what you have done.
• Do not forget Acknowledgements.
• Internal quality control is very important.
• We have given you some guidance on how to
organise your manuscript, but
THE SCIENCE IS YOUR JOB!