Getting published in academic journals
Kojo Ahiakpa (1) and Benjamin Karikari (2) provide a summary of the basic components that a normal research article ought to contain, including detailed information that should be contained in each section.
The Purpose of Research Writing
What kind of mind set should you have for a research writing project? The purpose of research writing is to clearly communicate your results to the audience for whom you are writing your paper. In addition, other researchers, funders and policymakers/implementors can also leverage your research to inform policymaking, while other researchers can use your work as a foundation for their own research.
By employing SMART goals, you can ensure that your writing project continues to move forward, that everyone involved in the project is held to account, that deadlines are met and that results are as expected
Approaching your research writing project
Develop a SMART research plan
Planning your research writing to achieve long-term goals in your scholarly publishing journey can be enhanced by setting SMART objectives, which are goals that are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This facilitates the transition from conceptualisation to writing of your manuscript. By employing SMART goals, you can ensure that your writing project continues to move forward, that everyone involved in the project is held to account, that deadlines are met and that results are as expected.
Your research writing plan should encompass the precise methods or procedures that will be used to undertake the research. This should span all stages of research and determine how one will move towards addressing the research problem; available resources, which may include people or a team, financing, equipment, software (for data processing and analysis), reagents and glassware (equipment and consumables). Also, the desired end result of the research, also known as the research objective, and the type of journal to which you plan to submit your manuscript for publication should be covered. In addition, you should define a contingency plan where you leave room to deal with unforeseen difficulties.
Many scientists and academics do not speak English as their first language, adding a layer of complexity to the task of scholarly writing. If you want to improve the quality of your written English, you should use any tools at your disposal (for example: Microsoft Word processor, Grammarly, Quill Bot, ChatGPT, Hyperwrite and others). There may be translators or scientific writers at larger institutions who could help you with your writing. If you do not have access to such materials and resources, you can learn from articles published in reputable journals and magazines.
Research ethics
If you are ever uncertain about the findings of an experiment, you should either rerun the experiment or redesign it. Even if the results of your experiment do not turn out the way you had expected, it is possible that you will still be able to publish a paper based on them
Ensure that your research project has received any necessary ethical permissions before continuing. Never make up or falsify data; it is unethical. If you are ever uncertain about the findings of an experiment, you should either rerun the experiment or redesign it. Even if the results of your experiment do not turn out the way you had expected, it is possible that you will still be able to publish a paper based on them. A significant number of researchers have gotten themselves into trouble for acting unethically while doing or communicating about their study. Ethics in research can be categorised into plagiarism - example; plagiarising or taking credit for the results of others; falsification - example; misreporting sources, data or faking results, distorting results contrary to your findings; and fabrication - example; submitting data whose accuracy/integrity cannot be guaranteed, concealing or destroying data or sources important for replication of the study, which can lead to sanctions/loss of job/qualifications and even lead to loss of human life owing to misinformation presented in literature (see, for example, https://www.purdue.edu/odos/osrr/honor-pledge/examples.html). For instance, Kenyatta University recently revoked a lecturer's PhD over plagiarism allegations (https://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/education/Kenyatta-University-revokes-lecturer-PhD/3126398-5286018-w8ggfxz/index.html). Another consequence of research misconduct could be the retraction of published papers (see https://lnkd.in/dCW3VM2C).
Review specific cases of plagiarism and academic misconduct here: https://kpu.pressbooks.pub/academicintegrity/chapter/a-few-famous-plagiarism-cases/
Motivation for research
Researchers, at some time in their careers, are confronted with the dreaded "blank page," where they will be at a loss as to where to begin or what they should write first. Explaining one's research in a way that is comprehensible to others and suitable for publishing is no easy task. If you invest a lot of time, energy and money into your research, you will develop a personal and emotional connection to the results. There is no doubt in your mind that the work you have done is valuable and significant to the field of study. However, the subjectivity that comes with such immersion can make it tough to step back and consider objectively how to best present the study in a clear and intelligible manner, so that others, who are likely not experts in your field, can also appreciate the importance of your results.
Early-career researchers face a lot of pressure to publish articles, whether to advance their careers, secure future funding, defend existing grants or fulfil the requirements for further studies (doctorate or postdoc). There is a lot of pressure like this on young scholars. In contrast, many early-career researchers and graduate students receive little guidance on how to properly develop a scientific paper. Especially for professional graduates such as clinicians, the clinical workload can be such that research and scientific writing are considered secondary tasks, not an immediate priority. Already there is a lot of competition for journal pages owing to the excellent quality of many manuscripts submitted to them. To increase the likelihood of your work getting accepted for publication, it is crucial that you follow the most basic guidelines. Do you not think your manuscript should be accepted or rejected based on its scientific merits, rather than because of the poor quality of the writing or the imprecise presentation of the data?
Therefore, we provide a step-by-step guide for writing a research paper. This experiential sharing will be general and applicable to the vast majority of fields, not just for the sciences but also applies to the humanities. We'll start with a high-level discussion of the main sections, then delve into the specifics of what you need to include in each. Finally, we'll provide a few recommendations for the abstract and title. The goal of this post is to help early-career researchers with limited experience in writing to confidently and independently develop a first manuscript that is sufficiently polished to be shared with co-authors and senior mentors for further refining into a publishable paper for submission to and eventual publication in a scholarly journal.
How to get started: Essential first steps
Selecting a target journal to submit to is a crucial first step before beginning any writing. Consequently, you'll need to modify not only the format, but also your overall strategy for writing, to best reach the target demographic you've identified.
There is a lot of ground to cover in your research before you can even begin to write your manuscript. By the time you come to the writing stage, you should have done this preliminary work, since it sets the stage for the research you'll be discussing. Investing time into developing a thorough methodology will pay huge dividends in the quality of the paper you will produce. Therefore, you may establish the current level of knowledge on your topic and guarantee the originality of your research by thoroughly reviewing the relevant literature you completed when designing your protocol, which we have called situation (S). As you read the research material, jot down notes on what you wish to cover, problems (P) you discovered in previous works and where you found them, along with any relevant sources. Jot down the questions (Q) you would like to ask and address in your research. In your attempt to find responses (R), determine what you need to do to find answers to your questions. Simply put, remember the SPQR strategy – situation, problems, questions and responses. A reference management software program (either a free version or a paid solution) developed expressly for managing references can be quite valuable for managing the mountain of references you will undoubtedly have to sift through to uncover the golden nuggets of information. We recommend either Mendeley or Endnote. If you have no practical experience with the numerous referencing software programs, consult some of your colleagues and learn from them, since this resource is becoming increasingly essential for a successful academic writing journey. The final results of the statistical analysis of your data will also be provided in most situations. These findings will serve as the basis for your results section. As you read over the results that will be visually depicted in the article, it is helpful to highlight the most important discoveries, so that you don't forget them.
Selecting a target journal to submit to is a crucial first step before beginning any writing. Consequently, you'll need to modify not only the format, but also your overall strategy for writing, to best reach the target demographic you've identified. Is it a multidisciplinary journal which non-specialists may read as well as those in your field, or a specialised journal whose readers are experts in your area? How much and what kind of information is necessary will change depending on your choice of journal. The editorial policies of the journal should be taken into account. For instance, some journals place a greater emphasis on applied research than others in the same discipline, while others place a greater emphasis on basic research. Decisions as to which journals to submit to are impacted by a number of factors, including the type of research, topic, novelty, impact of findings, open/subscription-based access and target audience of your article. However, before sending in your manuscript, you should ensure that it meets the standards of the target journal by carefully reading the author guidelines available on most journal websites.
The structure of scholarly articles
The majority of scientific articles follow the "Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion" (IMRaD) format. Naturally, there are some exceptions to this rule; however, you should always check the instructions for authors of the journal to which you wish to submit your article to ensure that this is, in fact, the recommended format. You can accomplish this by simply going online to the journal's website. We will only cover the IMRaD format for the purposes of this post, because this is the format that the vast majority of academic publishers use.
Subsequently, the sections of your article that you should include are the abstract, which is more or less a synopsis of the key components and findings, in addition to the title, of course. At the very end, there should be a conclusion and a list of the bibliographic references, as well as any tables and legends that accompany figures. This should be done before concluding the paper. In conclusion, it is recommended to include acknowledgements, a statement highlighting any potential conflicts of interest, and possibly also a statement on the authors' contributions.
The abstract: Signpost your article
The abstract provides an overview of the study in a nutshell. The abstract is usually read by a large number of people; it is often the first article component to be read yet the last to be written and revised. It offers editors and peer reviewers their first opportunity to evaluate your manuscript. The abstract should have a structure similar to that of the paper (a mini-IMRaD format). Some journals recommend the use of structured abstracts with standardised headings.
An abstract must have the following characteristics:
1. Its length should usually not exceed 200–250 words (depending on the journal);
2. It should contain key information drawn from all sections of the manuscript, including the main findings;
3. It should be limited to offering merely an introduction to the research;
4. It should never be more than one paragraph. Some abstracts include headings if the journal recommends this;
5. It should be subjected to careful review immediately upon completion of the manuscript;
6. You should avoid inclusion of any citations or references in the abstract.
The introduction
The purpose of your study and how it contributes to existing scientific knowledge should be made clear to the reader in the background material
The introduction provides the frontier of the research area following the SPQR strategy explained above. A quick summary of what is known about the topic from reliable sources is a good place to start. The next step is to narrow down the focus specifically, drawing attention to areas where there is still debate by highlighting them and any relevant background information that may be at odds with the current findings. This will logically lead to a statement highlighting an explicit gap in the knowledge that your study seeks to fill. Having now specified how your study is going to bring anything new insights, you should clearly outline your working hypothesis, followed by your objective(s) and the approach adopted to attain these purposes.
The purpose of your study and how it contributes to existing scientific knowledge should be made clear to the reader in the background material. It is expedient to cite only the most pertinent references from the vast literature on the subject. Similarly, it is not necessary to explain universal facts that may look unnecessarily simplistic or eminently clear. However, you need to strike a balance between providing limited context and too much information. At this point, it's important to keep in mind who you're writing for. For the reasons stated above, this will vary depending on the composition of the journal's readership. However, the context provided in a specialised journal may be more extensive and detailed than that provided in a whole-of-discipline journal.
Your introduction should lead naturally to the discovery of the knowledge void you intend to fill. This is where you can highlight the significance of your research and the novel insights it will provide. When applied to industry settings, will your findings make a difference? Will they provide definitive evidence for one side or the other, thereby facilitating a consensus among scientists on a contentious issue? Now is your time to sell your piece to the world, using only the correct language, of course.
Keep the writing focused and on topic, as much as possible. Each statement should advance your story. Keep in mind that many journals have a strict limit on word counts or pages permitted for the introduction. To find out how long an introduction should be, you should read the journal's author guidelines. There aren't any hard and fast rules, but generally speaking, an introduction shouldn't be longer than a page and a half, particularly in the sciences.
Research objective formulation (remember SMART) is crucial, so spend some time giving it some serious thought. The objective should be expressed clearly, it should specify which parameters you intend to evaluate and how you intend to do so. Remember that before beginning any research project, a documented protocol should be created, and that the goal you have outlined in the article is the same goal you will be aiming for in your protocol. It is helpful to pick a single formulation for your goal and stick with it throughout your work, including in the introduction, results, discussion, abstract and title. Do not worry too much about sounding redundant; it is not always terrible to repeat yourself. It reassures the reader that you know what you're talking about, and it keeps things consistent so that nobody gets confused. In most cases, the introduction is written in the present tense because you will be presenting facts and background information on the subject of your research.
Materials and methods
You should detail your methods sufficiently thoroughly that a careful reader with access to the same resources could undertake a similar study without consulting you. In contrast, if the specifics of any or all studies have previously been published elsewhere, a brief summary is all that is required; this summary should be followed by a citation to the publication(s). It is necessary to first specify the kind of study you did (field experiment, laboratory experiment, survey, etc.). If your study employs any non-standard research methodologies, you should provide an explanation and justification for their inclusion, either by referring to relevant literature and/or guidelines or by detailing the circumstances that led to their selection. Next, explain who or what you used as subjects of your study (plants, animals, human subjects, cells, etc). Human respondents make up the vast majority of a study's population in social research; hence, inclusion and exclusion criteria must be clearly articulated. It is important to detail the eligibility requirements and the methods used to determine if a respondent meets them. It is crucial to note that the introduction to the methods part of a survey study should include a brief explanation of the study's data sources, including inclusion and exclusion criteria and the total number of respondents. The number of participants recruited is considered a result and should be mentioned in the results section rather than the methods section. When doing prospective research, the inclusion and exclusion criteria should be described in the methods section.
Following a description of the study population, you can go on to discuss the techniques used to measure the major parameters of your study. Goals, both short- and long-term, as well as performance indicators, must be specified. To what extent the study succeeds will depend on this primary endpoint, so this is vital information. It is the sole basis for formally assessing the results of the study and, hence, requires careful consideration. Again, this would have been a consideration throughout the preliminary stages of planning. This highlights the importance of thoughtful discussion and deliberation on your research topic throughout the planning stage, which will make the actual writing of your paper much easier. Surveys, questionnaires or experiments used must be identified, as well as the manufacturer's name, location and nation, if relevant, when explaining the processes adopted. The reasoning behind each measurement can be summarised in a few easy phrases. Subheadings in the methods section might be useful for organising related information (such as demographic data) into manageable chunks on certain topics.
Briefly discussing ethical considerations, the procedures section should note that the study was given the green light by an ethics committee (or, if not, explain why not). Check that written informed consent was obtained from all participants (or from their legal guardians or surrogates), where appropriate. Journals typically require information like the name of the ethics committee, the date of approval and sometimes even the file number. It's also possible that people will have different ideas as to where to put things. The journal's authors' instructions should therefore be reread. You should detail the statistical analyses you ran in the final paragraphs of the methods section. Conventions for data presentation should be adhered to in introductory statements; for example, numerical data with a normal distribution are provided as means and standard deviations or median [interquartile range] for non-normally distributed data, and qualitative data are presented as numerical values (percentage). Finally, describe in full the tests you conducted, the multivariate analysis you used and the variables you compared.
Writing up the results
Keep in mind that figures and tables, or display objects, are effective means of communication ... Most readers will just skim these display pieces before diving into the main body of your article; as a result, we invest effort and time into making sure they are of the highest possible quality.
As some helpful hints, we have used the following approaches in writing the results section:
(i) For readers who might not read your materials and methods section, provide a brief description of your experiment without going into details (a setence or two). (ii) Highlight the most important trends in your results. (iii) Arrange the results logically. (iv) When describing events, use the past tense, but refer to tables and figures in the present tense.
Tables and figures should be numbered and referenced in the text as appropriate, provided with clear headings or captions, using the International System of Units (SI) for measurements and laid out in a way that makes them easy to read even if the reader has not read the rest of the paper. Include the table and figure number(s) in the text where referring to them. The interpretation of the results should not be too far removed from the section containing the tables and figures. Drawing your 3D figures in a program (Origin, GraphPad Prism, R, etc.) guarantees that they may be exported to any format you need. Through practice, we have learnt to employ composite figures to cut down on the overall number of figures used in our work. Keep in mind that figures and tables, or display objects, are effective means of communication because they lend an air of professionalism to your writing, pique and hold the interest of your readers and effectively deliver enormous amounts of complex information. Most readers will just skim these display pieces before diving into the main body of your article; as a result, we invest effort and time into making sure they are of the highest possible quality.
Discussion
...the discussion section gives authors a chance to explain the meaning of their findings. A clear and informative discussion aids the reader in grasping the study's significance
While the discussion is typically a breeze to write, it can be a real test for young academics just starting out. The breadth of our understanding of the topic is reflected here. In other words, the discussion section gives authors a chance to explain the meaning of their findings. A clear and informative discussion aids the reader in grasping the study's significance. Here, we apply a critical eye to our findings and talk about how they connect to the problem statement, research objectives, research gaps and hypotheses (if any). The discussion section also serves as a break to reflect on the literature review, so we draw parallels between our findings and those of other studies to corroborate, or otherwise, the validity of our own.
Keep in mind that your discussion doesn't have to match up with what's already known; instead, you should compare your results to previous studies, accentuating any discrepancies and offering explanations for variations in your findings. We discuss our study's contribution to the scientific literature, its practical consequences and potential future research avenues. Use the present tense while discussing the relevance and interpretation of your results, but use the past tense when providing a summary of your findings or comparing them to those of previously published studies, whether or not they corroborate your own. Don't restate findings; instead, reference supporting tables and figures where appropriate.
Conclusion
The conclusion provides a summary of the most important results and the implications of these findings. You draw attention to any significant new findings and acknowledge the constraints and positives of your research. It is expedient that you establish a connection between your prime findings and the aims of the study. Also, indicate whether or not your research questions were addressed, and state whether or not your hypotheses were accepted or rejected; and clearly highlight the most important questions for future research.
Written by Kojo Ahiakpa (1) and Benjamin Karikari (2).
(1) Research Desk Consulting Limited., P. O. Box WY 2918, Kwabenya-Accra, Ghana.
(2) Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Consumer Sciences, University for Development Studies, Tamale, Ghana.
Kojo Ahiakpa is an agribusiness consultant with Research Desk Consulting Limited in Accra, Ghana. He has published more than 60 research articles, book chapters and conference proceedings in reputable journals and serves as a reviewer for several journals. His research interests include crop genomics, olericulture, agribusiness and project management. He is an author, independent research trainer and entrepreneur.
Benjamin Karikari is an expert in modern crop improvement strategies with more than 45 published research articles. He serves as a reviewer for several peer-reviewed journals with international repute. He lectures and supervises undergraduate and graduate students at the Unversity for Development Studies in Tamale, Ghana.