Preparing to Publish

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Understanding the organizational structure of a research article—its IMRD/C sections and their communicative goals—is the essential first step for learning how to write academic research effectively.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Standard structure: Research articles follow a consistent organizational pattern with Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion/Conclusion (IMRD/C) sections.
• Writer's perspective: The book aims to help readers understand research writing from the writer's viewpoint, focusing on goal setting and strategy implementation in each section.
• Visual metaphor: The hourglass image represents how research articles move from general to specific information and back to general.
• Common confusion: Research articles differ from other academic documents—while many texts have introductions and conclusions, research articles have additional consistent sections with specific purposes.
• Interactive learning approach: The text emphasizes hands-on activities to help students discover academic writing standards in their own disciplines.

📚 Purpose and approach of the textbook

🎯 Learning through writer's lens

• The book shifts focus from just reading research articles to understanding the writer's intentions in each part.
• Emphasis on two key elements:
  • Goal setting for each section
  • Strategy implementation to achieve those goals
• Students learn to think critically about what writers aim to accomplish, not just what content appears.

🔄 Interactive pedagogy

• The text includes intentional interactive tasks and activities throughout.
• Purpose: engage learners with material and help them discover standards in their own fields.
• Students explore published writing in their disciplines to understand how authors use section-specific goals and strategies.
• Recognition of quality research writing helps students draft their own empirical research and grow as independent writers.

🏛️ The IMRD/C structure

📋 Standard sections defined

IMRD/C: An acronym representing the complete list of sections in research articles—Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion/Conclusion.

The consistent sections are:

• Introduction
• Methods
• Results
• Discussion/Conclusion

⏳ The hourglass metaphor

• Research articles are commonly visualized as an hourglass shape.
• This image helps envision how the various sections relate to each other.
• The metaphor connects to information flow:
  • Some sections contain more general information
  • Other sections are more specific
• The visual demonstrates the organizational structure that will be explored in detail in later chapters.

🔍 Beyond basic document structure

• Research articles share some features with other academic documents (introductions and conclusions).
• However, research articles as a genre have additional consistent sections that distinguish them.
• These sections are not arbitrary—each has specific communicative purposes.

🔬 Understanding "research" in context

📖 Complexity of the term

• The word "research" is both simple and complex.
• It functions as both a noun and a verb, making it inherently nuanced.
• Different academic disciplines consider research from varying perspectives (the excerpt notes this complexity but does not elaborate further).

🎓 Scope of this textbook

• The book will narrow down which type of research it addresses.
• Focus is on empirical research that students will write up in article format.
• The text will explore research definitions to clarify the specific type under discussion.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

This e-book teaches scientific research writing through structured chapters that combine instructional content with interactive features designed to help readers understand, observe, and apply writing conventions in their own disciplines.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What the book covers: detailed descriptions of research article sections, authors' goals, strategies, and common elements across disciplines.
• How chapters are organized: written descriptions supplemented by five types of interactive callout boxes (Warm-Up, Explore and Apply, Examples, Key Takeaways, and Learning Objectives).
• Why interaction matters: reading and engaging with the featured components helps you process tips and strategies more effectively.
• Common confusion: don't just read passively—the book is designed for active engagement through reflection, observation, and application tasks.
• Who it's for: students and novice research writers navigating empirical research write-ups.

📚 Chapter structure and content

📝 What each chapter provides

The book presents:

• Detailed descriptions of research article sections
• Authors' main goals for each section
• Strategies authors intentionally apply to achieve those goals
• Common elements found in every research report, regardless of discipline

🎯 Learning Objectives

Learning objectives: statements that help you understand the intent of each portion of the book.

• Typically located at the start of chapters
• Orient you to what you can expect to have learned after reading the given chapter
• Set clear expectations before you engage with the material

🧩 Five interactive features

🔥 Warm-Up

Warm-up features: interactive tasks that prime you to engage with upcoming material.

What they include:

• Questions about your observations of writing in your discipline
• Short activities prompting reflection on your own writing process

Purpose:

• Help you engage with material in ways most relevant to you and your field
• Prepare your mind before diving into instructional content

📖 Examples

Examples features: real-world examples derived from actual peer-reviewed research publications.

Characteristics:

• Come from a variety of different disciplines
• Intended to better illustrate the instructional material in the particular section covered
• Show how concepts appear in published work

Don't confuse: these are not invented scenarios—they are drawn from actual peer-reviewed publications.

💡 Key Takeaways

Key takeaways features: quick summaries of the overall message of each section.

Function:

• Supply a thumbnail overview
• Serve as a useful reminder about what content is provided in that part of the book
• Help with quick review and reference

🔍 Explore & Apply

Explore and apply feature: tasks that encourage you to investigate writing conventions of your own discipline.

Two-part structure:

Part 1: Explore

• Specific tasks ask you to explore quality published research in your field
• Goal: match the goals and strategies instructed in the chapter with what you observe occurring in that writing

Part 2: Apply

• Suggestions for how to apply these goals and strategies
• Focus: constructing your own written drafts
• Bridges the gap between observation and practice

Example: After learning about a section's goals, you might examine three articles in your field to see how authors achieve those goals, then draft your own version using similar strategies.

🎓 Target audience and purpose

👥 Who should use this book

Primary audience:

• Students
• Novice research writers and scholars

What it helps with:

• Navigating academic writing, specifically empirical research write-ups
• Identifying functions of the research article as a whole
• Exploring authors' meaning as they write each section

🗺️ How to best use the material

The excerpt emphasizes intentional engagement:

Recommendation	Why it matters
Read and interact with callout boxes	Helps you process tips and strategies more effectively
Complete Warm-Up activities	Primes you for relevant engagement with your field
Study Examples from publications	Illustrates concepts in real-world context
Do Explore & Apply tasks	Connects instruction to your discipline and your own writing
Reference Key Takeaways	Provides quick reminders and review

Don't confuse: this is not a book to read straight through passively—the interactive features are essential to making the most of the content.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Research articles follow a consistent organizational structure (IMRD/C: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion/Conclusion) that moves from general to specific information and back, helping writers achieve specific communicative goals in each section.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Standard structure: Research articles consistently include Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion/Conclusion sections (abbreviated as IMRD/C).
• Visual metaphor: The hourglass image represents how research articles move from general information (Introduction) to specific details (Methods/Results) and back to general implications (Discussion/Conclusion).
• Empirical focus: This book focuses on empirical research articles—those verified through experience, observation, analysis, and conclusion, not solely theory.
• Genre as communicative event: Research articles are a recognized genre (type) with specific purposes and conventions that writers must understand from the writer's perspective.
• Applies across paradigms: The IMRD/C structure works for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research studies.

📐 The IMRD/C Structure

📋 The four core sections

The excerpt identifies the complete list of research article sections:

• Introduction
• Methods
• Results
• Discussion/Conclusion

IMRD/C: A common acronym for teaching the sections of a research article.

⏳ The hourglass visualization

• Research articles are often depicted as an hourglass shape.
• This visual demonstrates the organizational pattern from general to specific information and back.
• The structure helps readers understand how information flows through the article.

Why the hourglass works:

• Top (wide): Introduction contains more general information
• Middle (narrow): Methods and Results contain specific details
• Bottom (wide): Discussion/Conclusion returns to general implications

🔬 Understanding Research in This Context

🔍 What counts as research

The excerpt provides dictionary definitions showing research works as both noun and verb:

Research (noun): diligent and systematic inquiry or investigation into a subject in order to discover or revise facts, theories, applications, etc.

Research (verb): to investigate carefully; to make an extensive investigation into.

Related terms include: scrutinize, study, inquire, examine, investigate, explore.

🧪 Empirical research focus

Empirical: describes research that is not based solely on theory but rather is capable of being verified via experience, observation, analysis, and conclusion.

Key distinction:

• Theory is included in empirical research
• But empirical research must be verifiable through observation and experience
• This book focuses specifically on empirical research articles

Don't confuse: Empirical research still uses theory, but it's not solely theoretical—it requires observable verification.

🔀 Research paradigms covered

The excerpt mentions three predominant paradigms within empirical research:

• Quantitative studies
• Qualitative studies
• Mixed methods studies

Important note: The information in the book applies to any type of research manuscript across these paradigms.

📚 Genre and Communicative Goals

🎯 What is genre

Genre: At its most basic level, the French word for "type." In English for Academic Purposes, it refers to a communicative event that is widely recognized.

📝 Research article as genre

Common research genres mentioned:

• Research articles
• Grant proposals
• Conference papers
• Posters
• Abstracts

🎓 Writer's perspective emphasis

The book aims to help readers understand:

• The purposes of academic research writing from a writer's perspective
• Goal setting in various parts of the article
• Strategy implementation for achieving those goals

Why this matters: Recognizing what makes quality research writing in your field helps you write your own empirical research and supports growth as an independent research writer.

🛠️ Practical Application

📖 How to use this knowledge

The excerpt emphasizes that understanding organizational structure is the first step for learning research writing.

The book's approach:

• Chapters 3-6 will explore each IMRD/C section in depth
• Each section's communicative goals will be explained
• Strategies for achieving those goals will be provided
• The hourglass graphic will be used throughout for visualization

🎯 Learning outcomes

After understanding this structure, students should be able to:

• Explain the organizational structure of a research article
• Recognize the common sections
• Apply knowledge of structure to understand basic communicative goals
• Evaluate the organizational pattern in terms of general vs. specific information

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Research articles presenting empirical investigations follow a consistent IMRD/C structure (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion/Conclusion) that can be visualized as an hourglass moving from general to specific and back to general.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• IMRD/C structure: Research articles consistently include Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion/Conclusion sections.
• What "research" means: Diligent, systematic inquiry to discover or revise facts, theories, or applications; can function as both noun and verb.
• Empirical vs theoretical: The research articles discussed are empirical—verified through experience, observation, analysis, and conclusion—not based solely on theory.
• Common confusion: Research encompasses many activities, but this book focuses specifically on empirical research presented in formal articles, not all scholarly work.
• Paradigm variety: Empirical research includes quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies; the principles apply across all types.

📐 The Structure of Research Articles

📐 The IMRD/C framework

IMRD/C: An acronym representing the standard sections of a research article—Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion/Conclusion.

• Every research article as a genre contains these consistent sections.
• Like other academic documents, research articles start with introductions and end with conclusions, but they have additional standardized middle sections.
• The framework applies regardless of discipline or research paradigm.

⏳ The hourglass visualization

• Research articles are commonly depicted as an hourglass shape.
• This visual represents how sections move from general information (wide top) to specific details (narrow middle) and back to general implications (wide bottom).
• The hourglass helps writers and readers understand which sections contain broader context versus focused specifics.

Don't confuse: The hourglass is a conceptual tool for understanding information flow, not a rigid template that dictates length or importance of each section.

🔬 Defining Research

🔬 Dictionary definitions

The word "research" functions as both noun and verb:

Form	Definition	Key characteristic
Noun (1)	Diligent and systematic inquiry into a subject to discover or revise facts, theories, applications	Emphasizes process and purpose
Noun (2)	A particular instance or piece of research	Refers to specific work
Verb (intransitive)	To investigate carefully	Action without specified object
Verb (transitive)	To make an extensive investigation into	Action directed at specific matter

🔍 Related terminology

• Synonyms include: scrutinize, study, inquire, examine, investigate, explore.
• All denote "a serious look at some topic from some given perspective."
• The common thread is systematic, careful examination rather than casual observation.

🧪 Empirical research

Empirical research: Research that is not based solely on theory but is capable of being verified via experience, observation, analysis, and conclusion.

• Many academic activities qualify as "research," but this book focuses on empirical examinations.
• Theory is included and used, but empirical research goes beyond theoretical speculation.
• Verification through observable evidence distinguishes empirical work from purely theoretical work.

Example: An empirical study might test a theory by collecting data through observation or experimentation, then analyzing results to draw conclusions, rather than only discussing theoretical possibilities.

🔀 Research Paradigms

🔀 Three predominant types

Within empirical research, three main paradigms exist:

• Quantitative research studies
• Qualitative research studies
• Mixed methods research studies

🌐 Universal applicability

• The excerpt assumes readers already know which paradigm is typical for their field.
• The book does not define or describe these categories in detail.
• Key point: Information presented applies to any type of research manuscript, regardless of paradigm.

Don't confuse: The choice of paradigm (quantitative, qualitative, or mixed) does not change the fundamental IMRD/C structure or the principles of research article writing discussed in the book.

📝 Genre as a Framework

📝 What "genre" means

Genre: At its most basic level, the French word for "type"; in English for Academic Purposes, it refers to a communicative event that is widely recognized.

• Genre provides a framework for understanding research writing as a recognized communication pattern.
• Common research genres include: research articles, grant proposals, conference papers, posters, abstracts.
• Understanding genre helps writers meet reader expectations and communicate effectively within established conventions.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Genre is a widely recognized communicative event with particular characteristics, and understanding genre systems—including chains and ecologies—helps writers communicate research more effectively.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What genre means: at its most basic level, the French word for "type"; in academic writing, a communicative event with recognizable characteristics.
• Research article as a genre: the focus of this book; one type among many research-related genres (grant proposals, conference papers, posters, abstracts, job documents).
• Genre chains: genres that are antecedents of other genres, organized chronologically in sequences to achieve a communicative goal.
• Genre ecologies: interrelated and interacting genres that work together; the research article is only one piece of scholarly communication.
• Common confusion: a single research article is not isolated—it exists within chains (sequential) and ecologies (interacting networks) of related text types.

📚 Defining genre in academic contexts

📖 Basic definition

Genre: the French word for "type."

• In English for Academic Purposes, genre refers to a communicative event that is widely recognized.
• It is not just a category label; it describes a recognizable pattern of communication.

🔬 Research-related genres

The excerpt lists several common genres in research contexts:

Genre type	Examples
Core research outputs	Research articles, conference papers, posters, abstracts
Funding & proposals	Grant proposals
Job-related documents	Cover letters, research statements

• This book focuses specifically on the research article genre.
• Each genre has particular characteristics that can be studied and learned.

🎯 Why study genre characteristics

• One way to write better within a given genre is to explore its characteristics.
• Understanding what makes a genre recognizable helps writers meet reader expectations.
• Example: knowing the typical structure and goals of a research article helps a writer organize their findings effectively.

🔗 Genre systems: chains and ecologies

🔗 Genre chains

Genre chain: a genre that is an antecedent of another genre.

• First discussed in Swales (2004).
• Chains are chronologically organized in an order of sequences.
• One genre leads to or precedes another in a systematic way.
• Why it matters: studying genre chains helps learners understand research writing as systematized and sequential, not isolated.
• Example: a lab report might precede a conference presentation, which might precede a published research article—each is an antecedent of the next.

🌐 Genre ecologies

Genre ecologies: interrelated and interacting genres.

• First discussed in Erickson (2000).
• Genres do not exist in isolation; they interact and work together.
• The research article is only one piece of the communication that occurs between scholars.
• Don't confuse: chains are sequential (one after another); ecologies are networks (many genres interacting simultaneously or in overlapping ways).

🧩 Examples of research genre ecologies

The excerpt lists several text types that are part of research communication ecologies:

• Lab reports
• Conference presentations and published conference proceedings
• White papers
• Systematic reviews
• And more

All of these comprise a research communication genre ecology, meaning they interact and support the overall goal of scholarly communication.

🔍 Relationship to research writing

📝 Focus of this book

• The book focuses on the research article genre specifically.
• Information presented can be applied to any type of research manuscript (quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods).
• Understanding genre helps writers optimize their ability to communicate research successfully.

⏳ Sequential and networked communication

• Research writing is not a single, isolated act.
• It is part of a chain: earlier genres (e.g., lab reports) lead to later ones (e.g., published articles).
• It is part of an ecology: multiple genres (e.g., conference papers, white papers, reviews) interact and support each other.
• Example: a researcher might write a conference abstract (one genre), present findings at a conference (another genre), then expand the work into a full research article (yet another genre)—all part of the same communicative goal.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Research articles follow a consistent organizational structure (IMRD/C) that moves from general to specific and back to general, resembling an hourglass shape.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• IMRD/C structure: Research articles are organized into Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion/Conclusion sections, each with specific goals and strategies.
• Hourglass pattern: Introduction and Discussion/Conclusion are general/broad, while Methods and Results are specific/narrow.
• Cross-disciplinary consistency: The structure tends to be consistent across disciplines, though individual variation exists within specific disciplines or journals.
• Common confusion: Don't confuse the overall structure (which is consistent) with discipline-specific variations—the IMRD/C framework is standard, but details may vary by field or journal.

📐 The IMRD/C Framework

📐 What IMRD/C stands for

IMRD/C: The organizational structure of a research article, consisting of Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion/Conclusion sections.

• Each section has specific goals and strategies that help writers communicate research successfully.
• This structure is commonly referred to across academic writing contexts.
• The framework provides a systematic way to organize research communication.

🔄 Consistency and variation

• The structure tends to be rather consistent across disciplines.
• However, individual variation can occur:
  • Within your specific discipline
  • Within a particular academic journal
• Example: Two journals in the same field might both use IMRD/C but have different requirements for subsection organization or emphasis.

⏳ The Hourglass Model

⏳ Visual representation of structure

The excerpt uses an hourglass image to show the relationships between IMRD/C sections.

What the hourglass demonstrates:

• The shape reflects the level of generality vs. specificity in each section.
• Top of hourglass (wide): general/broad sections
• Middle of hourglass (narrow): specific/narrow sections
• Bottom of hourglass (wide): general/broad sections again

📊 Generality vs. specificity across sections

Section	Level of Generality	Position in Hourglass
Introduction	General/Broad	Top (wide)
Methods	Specific/Narrow	Middle (narrow)
Results	Specific/Narrow	Middle (narrow)
Discussion/Conclusion	General/Broad	Bottom (wide)

🔀 The argument flow

• The argument in a research article moves from being general to specific then back to more general again.
• This movement is not random—it reflects the logical progression of research communication:
  • Start broad to establish context and relevance
  • Narrow down to the specific study details
  • Broaden again to discuss implications and significance
• Don't confuse: "general" doesn't mean vague or unfocused; it means addressing broader context and significance rather than specific procedures or data.

🎯 Purpose of Each Section Type

🎯 General/broad sections (Introduction and Discussion/Conclusion)

• These sections frame the research in a wider context.
• They connect the specific study to larger questions, existing literature, and broader implications.
• Example: An Introduction might discuss a general problem in the field before narrowing to the specific research question.

🔬 Specific/narrow sections (Methods and Results)

• These sections focus on the particular details of the study.
• Methods: the specific procedures, materials, and approaches used
• Results: the specific findings and data from this particular study
• These sections are more concrete and detailed compared to the framing sections.
• Don't confuse: "specific" doesn't mean unimportant—these sections provide the empirical foundation that makes the broader claims in Introduction and Discussion credible.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Research articles follow an hourglass structure where the Methods and Results sections form the narrowest, most specific part of the manuscript, requiring detailed precision to explain exactly how the study was conducted.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Standard structure: empirical research manuscripts contain five sections—Introduction (with Literature Review), Methods, Results, and Discussion/Conclusion.
• Hourglass shape: articles move from general (Introduction) to specific (Methods and Results) and back to general (Discussion/Conclusion).
• Methods placement: the Methods section sits at the narrowest point of the hourglass, making it the most specific area of the entire article.
• Three communicative goals: contextualize methods, describe the study, and analyze the data.
• Common confusion: understanding why Methods must be narrow/specific rather than broad/general—specificity enables replication and validation.

📐 The hourglass structure

📐 Visual organization of research articles

The hourglass shape: a conceptual model showing that research articles start broad (Introduction), narrow to their most specific point (Methods and Results), then broaden again (Discussion/Conclusion).

• The shape helps writers understand which sections require general framing versus detailed specificity.
• As you move from Introduction toward Methods, content becomes progressively more specific.
• The Methods and Results form the "waist" of the hourglass—the most narrow, focused sections.

🔍 Why the middle must be narrow

• The excerpt positions Methods and Results as requiring the highest level of specificity.
• This narrowness contrasts with the broader scope of Introduction and Discussion sections.
• The specificity allows readers to understand exactly what was done and what was found.

🎯 Three goals of the Methods section

🎯 Goal framework

The excerpt identifies three main communicative goals:

Goal	Purpose
1. Contextualize the study's methods	Situate the methodological choices within the research context
2. Describe the study	Provide detailed explanation of what was done
3. Analyze the data	Explain how data were processed and examined

🧩 Contextualize the study's methods

• This goal connects the specific methods to the broader research landscape.
• It explains the "why" behind methodological choices.
• Example: An organization might explain why a particular data collection approach was chosen over alternatives.

📝 Describe the study

• This goal requires "a very detailed fashion" of explanation (as the excerpt states).
• The description must be specific enough for readers to understand exactly how the research was conducted.
• This is where the narrowness of the hourglass is most evident—maximum detail and precision.

📊 Analyze the data

• This goal addresses how the collected data were processed and examined.
• It complements the description by explaining the analytical procedures.
• Don't confuse: this is about explaining the analysis approach, not presenting the findings (which belong in Results).

🔗 Connection to Introduction goals

🔗 Progression from Introduction to Methods

The excerpt references Chapter 3's Introduction goals as context:

• Introduction goals (from earlier): establish knowledge territory, identify a niche, address the niche.
• Methods goals shift from justifying the research (Introduction) to explaining how it was executed.
• The transition represents the movement from broad framing to specific implementation in the hourglass model.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

An effective Introduction moves from broad to narrow through three goals—establishing a research territory, identifying a niche, and addressing that niche—to show readers where your study fits in existing literature and why it matters.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Three-goal structure: establish territory → identify niche → address the niche (fill the gap).
• Narrowing pattern: each goal becomes more specific, moving from big picture to problem to solution.
• Why Introductions are broad: they present the bigger picture, general background, and how your work fits into existing research.
• Common confusion: don't confuse "broad" with "vague"—Goal 1 establishes territory with known background and previous research, not just general statements.
• Foundation metaphor: the Introduction builds a visible foundation that attracts readers and prepares them to understand your research.

🎯 The three-goal framework

🎯 Overview of the structure

The excerpt describes Introductions using an hourglass or concentric circles metaphor:

• The Introduction starts broad (outer circle) and narrows progressively.
• Each goal is more specific than the previous one.
• This structure answers why Introductions are general compared to Methods and Results sections.

Goal	What it does	Specificity level
Goal 1: Establish territory	Show the big picture and existing literature	Broadest
Goal 2: Identify niche	Point to a gap or problem in the literature	More specific
Goal 3: Address niche	Propose your solution (your study)	Most specific

🔄 How the goals connect

• Territory → Problem → Solution: you move from what is known, to what is missing, to what you will contribute.
• The concentric circles get smaller, indicating this narrowing of content into more specific ideas.
• Don't confuse: "general" in Goal 1 does not mean irrelevant—it means establishing the broader context before zooming in.

🏗️ Goal 1: Establishing a Knowledge Territory

🏗️ What "establishing territory" means

Establishing a Knowledge Territory: explaining to your reader the big picture of where your study fits in the literature.

• You demonstrate knowledge of the topic and its relevance to the field.
• You show how your expertise fits into an existing body of work.
• This is the broadest part of the Introduction.

📚 What to include in Goal 1

• Generally known background information.
• Previous research on the topic.
• Information that is broad and general, not yet specific to your exact study.

Why it matters: Goal 1 prepares readers to understand your research by describing what is generally known and what has been previously researched.

🔑 Language cues for Goal 1

The excerpt provides examples of phrases that signal you are establishing territory:

• "well-established and rapidly expanding"
• "widespread in both natural and man-made..."
• "It is well known that..."
• "We also know that..."

These phrases show the writer is presenting established knowledge, not new findings.

Tip: The excerpt recommends Manchester's Academic Phrasebank website for more examples of such phrases.

🏛️ The foundation metaphor

• Think of Goal 1 as the foundation upon which you build the house of your research.
• Unlike architectural foundations, this foundation is on display for all to see.
• Your aim is not just to inform but also to attract the reader, draw them in, and maintain their interest.

Example: A writer might start by explaining that wood pellet production is a well-established industry with specific production volumes—this sets the stage before identifying what is unknown or problematic.

⚠️ Don't confuse

• Broad ≠ vague: Goal 1 should be general in scope but still grounded in real background and previous research.
• Territory ≠ your contribution: Goal 1 describes what is already known; your specific contribution comes in Goals 2 and 3.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

The first goal of an effective research Introduction is to establish a knowledge territory by demonstrating expertise and showing how your research fits into the existing body of work in your field.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What Goal 1 accomplishes: presents the big picture, general background, and previous research to show where your study fits in the literature.
• Why it's the broadest part: Goal 1 is intentionally general, providing the foundation before narrowing to specific problems and solutions.
• Three core strategies: claim centrality of your topic, provide relevant general background, and review informative previous research.
• Common confusion: Goal 1 is not just listing facts—it's about attracting readers and establishing your credibility while building the foundation for your research.
• Language cues matter: specific phrases and reporting verbs signal to readers that you are establishing territory.

🏗️ The foundation metaphor

🏗️ Building the research house

Goal 1 prepares your reader to understand your research better by describing what is generally known and what has been previously researched.

• The excerpt compares Goal 1 to an architectural foundation—but unlike hidden foundations, this one is "on display for all to see."
• Your aim is not just to inform but also to attract the reader, draw them into the research, and maintain their interest.
• This foundation demonstrates your expertise and shows how it fits into an existing body of work.

📐 The narrowing structure

The excerpt describes Introduction goals using concentric circles that get progressively smaller:

• Outermost circle (Goal 1): the territory—the broadest, most general part.
• Middle circle (Goal 2): the problem/niche—more specific than the territory.
• Innermost circle (Goal 3): your proposed solution—the most specific part.

This visual shows why Introductions move from broad to narrow: each goal becomes more focused and specific.

🎯 Strategy 1: Claiming centrality

🎯 What claiming centrality means

Claiming centrality: a strategy used to focus the reader's attention on the reasons that your research belongs within the bigger picture of the topic.

• It's about stating the importance of your study and/or the amount of attention other scholars have paid to the issue.
• You implement this by pointing out the broader scope of interest and noting related investigations.
• This highlights the significance of your claims and shows the study has potential for prominence within your discipline.

📍 When and how to use it

• Claiming centrality generally occurs quite early in an Introduction, often as the very first sentence.
• However, strategies do not occur in a set order—writers can use them wherever most useful or relevant.
• Example from the excerpt: "Meat tenderness is an important issue in beef cattle because it has a major impact on consumer satisfaction."

🔑 Common vocabulary

The excerpt lists typical words associated with claiming centrality:

Category	Words
Importance indicators	pivotal, focal, fundamental, instrumental, vital, critical, essential
Strength indicators	potent, powerful, crucial
Scope indicators	widely-used, extensive, growing, primary, requisite

🌍 Strategy 2: Providing general background

🌍 What general background includes

Providing general background: a strategy that usually combines a variety of different types of information, which may be related to theory, practice, methodology, or any other shared area of knowledge within the discipline.

• Academics use this strategy as a tool to position the research within a framework (theoretical, conceptual, or informational).
• It supports the reader's understanding of the study by establishing a frame of reference.
• The key is making general statements about your topic.

🔍 Language signals

Writers often use adverbs to emphasize the general nature of their statements:

• usually
• typically
• commonly
• generally
• mostly

Example from the excerpt: "Routine detection of C. albicans in blood is time consuming and typically involves the use of blood cultures..."

⚠️ Important clarification

Don't confuse: it is not a requirement to use an adverb in every sentence providing general background. Adverbs are merely one way to accomplish the goal. Each discipline has its own conventions and each author has their own style, but there are many similarities and patterns in the language used.

📚 Strategy 3: Reviewing previous research

📚 What this strategy accomplishes

Reviewing previous research: the third strategy a writer can utilize for establishing territory in an Introduction, which acknowledges the many contributions of other scholars by synthesizing and criticizing previous research.

• Often called the "literature review" section.
• Provides a demonstration of expertise about a topic.
• Supports the reader's understanding and expands your ethos as an author and academic.
• Contributes to the credibility of your research.

🗣️ Reporting verbs

This strategy commonly uses reporting verbs—words that directly quote someone else's ideas. These verbs are nuanced and can convey the writer's stance (supportive, doubtful, neutral, etc.).

Common reporting verbs from the excerpt:

Neutral/descriptive	Interpretive	Demonstrative
describe, mention, state, note	explain, argue, claim, suggest, propose	demonstrate, show, indicate, find, focus

📖 Common phrases

The excerpt provides examples of frequent language patterns for referring to previous work:

• "Studies of X show the importance of..."
• "Extensive research has shown that..."
• "Previous research has found..."
• "Recent evidence suggests that..."
• "There is a growing body of literature that recognizes..."
• "Factors found to be influencing X have been explored in several studies."

🎨 Formatting variety

Don't confuse: different disciplines use many different formatting styles including endnotes, footnotes, in-text citations, direct quotes, indirect quotes, and parentheticals. The strategy remains the same even though the format varies.

🔄 How the three strategies work together

🔄 Flexibility in application

• All three strategies (claiming centrality, providing background, reviewing previous research) work together to establish the knowledge territory.
• There is no set order—writers use them wherever they seem most useful or relevant in a given Introduction.
• The language possibilities are "almost infinite," though patterns and similarities exist across disciplines.

🎪 The dual purpose

When establishing territory, you are simultaneously:

1. Informing: demonstrating knowledge of the topic and its relevance to the field.
2. Persuading: attracting the reader, drawing them into the research, and maintaining their interest.

This foundation is visible and must be compelling, not just informative.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Identifying a niche means pointing out gaps, problems, or unanswered questions in existing research to justify where your study will make a contribution.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What a niche is: a gap in the field that your research will address, allowing you to narrow from general territory to a specific problem.
• How to signal the shift: writers typically use contrast words (however, despite, yet) to transition from establishing territory (Goal 1) to identifying the niche (Goal 2).
• Five strategic options: indicate a gap, highlight a problem, raise general questions, propose general hypotheses, or present justification—you don't need to use all five.
• Common confusion: general questions/hypotheses in Goal 2 are about the field's open issues, NOT your specific research questions (those come later).
• Why it matters: identifying the niche shows readers where your work fits and why it's needed.

🔄 The transition from territory to niche

🔄 How the shift works

• After establishing the broader research territory (Goal 1), you narrow down to one aspect that still needs attention.
• The visual in the excerpt shows the niche (red) embedded within the territory (blue), representing progressive narrowing.
• This shift signals limitations or incompleteness in current research and emphasizes the need to address them.

🔀 Contrast signals

Writers often begin Goal 2 with words that indicate opposition or negation:

• Contrast conjunctions: however, nevertheless, yet, unfortunately, but
• Negative quantifiers: no, little, none, very few, neither…nor
• Negation terminology:
  • Verbs: fail, lack, overlook
  • Adjectives: inconclusive, misleading, scarce, elusive, limited, questionable
  • Nouns: failure, limitation, gap, dearth, lack
  • Adverbs: rarely, scarcely, barely, hardly

Example: "Processed products containing OFSP have been studied…However, information on how well provitamin A survives processing is still patchy."

🕳️ Strategy 1: Indicating a gap

🕳️ What this strategy does

Indicating a gap: revealing a lack of research on a certain topic or area that needs to be filled.

• You underscore what is unknown, show connections between what is known and what requires investigation, and demonstrate critical evaluation.
• This may connect implicitly or explicitly to your present study's goals.

📝 Example language

From the excerpt:

• "A relatively unexplored issue in attachment theory…"
• "Although the specific purpose of adult neurogenesis is not entirely clear…"

From the Academic Phrasebank:

• "Previous studies of X have not dealt with…"
• "Researchers have not treated X in much detail."
• "The existing accounts fail to resolve the contradiction between X and Y."

Don't confuse: indicating a gap is about what the field hasn't done yet, not about flaws in what has been done (that's highlighting a problem).

⚠️ Strategy 2: Highlighting a problem

⚠️ What this strategy does

Highlighting a problem: articulating an issue that needs to be solved or an area for improvement in the research area.

• You signal an existing issue, raise a concern, demonstrate critical evaluation, and possibly connect to your study's goals.
• This differs from indicating a gap because it focuses on problematic aspects of existing work, not just missing pieces.

📝 Example language

From the excerpt:

• "The ramifications of this false consensus effect may be problematic: if members of organizations erroneously assume…"
• "Unfortunately, it is very easy to overfit a model…This situation would probably result in biased predictions…"

The language emphasizes consequences and concerns about current approaches.

❓ Strategy 3: Raising general questions

❓ What this strategy does

Raising general questions: highlighting questions about the current body of research on your topic.

Two ways to implement:

1. Direct questions: using actual question marks
2. Indirect questions: presenting questions as statements

📝 Example language

From the excerpt:

• "What solution provides the best economic value?"
• "How can the process of dynamic evaluation be studied?"
• "The issue…raises the methodological question of who is in the best position to rate in-progress artworks."

⚠️ Important distinction

Don't confuse: these are general questions about the field, NOT your specific research questions (which will be discussed later in the paper).

Example: "How do emotions arise? Do they arise via low-level processes…Or do they arise via high-level, top-down cognitive appraisal processes…?" These are broad field questions, not the author's specific research questions.

🔮 Strategy 4: Proposing general hypotheses

🔮 What this strategy does

Proposing general hypotheses: predicting future findings or implications in a hypothetical manner.

• Like the previous strategy, these are general hypotheses about the field, NOT your specific research hypotheses.
• Use language indicating the hypothetical nature: conditional statements (if X were Y, then…) and words like may, might, likely, possible, expected.

📝 Example language

From the excerpt:

• "One hypothesis is that the highly anionic lipids…facilitate antimicrobial action…"
• "The lack of negative charges…may reduce the extent of binding…"
• "The possibility of secondary hybridisation…cannot be excluded."

The language emphasizes speculation and possibility rather than definitive claims.

✅ Strategy 5: Presenting justification

✅ What this strategy does

Presenting justification: motivating the need for research or demonstrating its value after discussing the gap, problem, question, or hypothesis.

• Usually occurs after you've used one of the previous four strategies.
• You justify why the research is needed or demonstrate its worth to the field.

📝 Example language

From the excerpt:

• "The study of solar hard X-ray flare spectra may provide some useful information for solar flares, such as the acceleration mechanisms…"
• "Empirical evidence describing the temporal development of local plastic flow is greatly desired. Therefore, novel experimental techniques are being developed to characterize…"

🎯 Purpose

This strategy helps readers appreciate how the paper advances the field. As one source notes, a good research writer develops the ability "to say the same things that have been said many times before but in a different, interesting, intriguing way."

🧩 Putting it all together

🧩 Flexibility in application

Aspect	What the excerpt emphasizes
Must you use all five strategies?	No—the "and/or" after each strategy means they are options, not a checklist
Disciplinary variation	Some disciplines typically use certain strategies and not others
Style preferences	Certain writing styles may prefer some strategies over others

🎯 The overall function

When you identify a niche, you:

• Signal a turn from the overview to a specific aspect needing attention
• Flag limitations or incompleteness in current research/practice
• Give readers an orientation to how your work fits into the field
• Set up the necessity and value of your current research study

Remember: these are guidelines based on linguistic research of published articles, not rigid rules. You decide which strategies work best for your topic, style, and discipline.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Goal 3 allows writers to directly explain how their research fills the identified gap, typically by stating purpose, methods, and value before the research questions appear.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What Goal 3 does: defines how your study addresses the niche and contributes to existing research; may briefly explain outcomes.
• When it appears: usually the last part of the Introduction, just before research questions.
• Nine possible strategies: you can choose which ones fit your topic, style, and discipline—you don't need to use all of them.
• Common confusion: this is not a rigid formula; writers have freedom to organize strategies in whatever order best accomplishes the communicative goal.
• Key language features: highly contextualized words (this, the present study, we, I, now, here) and purpose verbs (aim, investigate, examine).

🎯 Core strategies for stating purpose and scope

🎯 Introduce your research descriptively

This strategy concerns how writers note the main characteristics of their research and provide information that highlights their goals and intentions.

• It is a general description of the research, not yet a specific announcement of aims.
• Writers often use contextualized words: this, the present study, we, I, now, here.
• Example: "Using these data, in this article I examine the validity of the tests..."
• Don't confuse: this is broader than announcing the purpose; it sets the stage without stating explicit objectives.

🎯 Announce the purpose of the study

• Clearly articulates the researcher's intentions by specifying how objectives address gaps.
• Common purpose words: aim, purpose, goal, objective, target.
• Frequent structure: "to + verb" (e.g., to show, to compare, to evaluate).
• Example: "One goal of the present article is to show that..."
• Sample starters from the Academic Phrasebank:
  • The specific objective of this study was to…
  • This study set out to investigate the usefulness of…
  • This research examines the emerging role of X in the context of…

❓ Strategies for questions and hypotheses

❓ Present research questions

• Directly states what queries were made about the data.
• Helps readers navigate the manuscript by highlighting main topics.
• Two forms:
  • Direct questions: use question-word order and end with "?" (e.g., "Does strategic planning increase or decrease the number of NPD projects?").
  • Indirect questions: questions in statement form, often starting with whether or if (e.g., "whether the growth gains experienced from fertilization resulted in lower SG...").
• Common question starters: who, what, when, where, how, why, to what degree, do/did, have/has.

❓ Present research hypotheses

• Shares what the writer has found or hopes to find, directly relevant to objectives or questions.
• Introduces assumptions to be tested, clarifies expectations, speculates about potential outcomes.
• Common verbs: hypothesize, suggest, expect, predict.
• Also uses subjunctive mood (would expect, could be possible) and modals (could, might, may).
• Example: "We hypothesize that perceptions of adaptivity mediate the relation between adaptive instruction and learners' motivations..."
• Caution: be careful with synonyms for hypothesis; nuanced meanings can carry different connotations.

🔬 Strategies for methods, definitions, and outcomes

🔬 Summarize methods

• Presents procedures for the first time, but only as a summary—not too detailed.
• Can use either passive or active voice; choice depends on disciplinary conventions.
• Example (passive): "Data for this study were collected using…"
• Example (active): "We empirically test this proposition by building a model..."
• Sample starters:
  • This study was exploratory and interpretative in nature.
  • Both qualitative and quantitative methods were used in this investigation.
  • A combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches was used in the data analysis.

🔬 Clarify definitions

• Informs the reader of terms or concepts as they are used in the research.
• Explains terminology, provides working definitions, clarifies concepts.
• May show how terms differ from typical field usage to avoid misinterpretation.
• Definitions may come from previous research or be newly coined by the author.
• Example: "High reliability organizations (HROs) refer to organizations or systems that operate in complex and hazardous conditions and yet consistently achieve nearly error-free performance."
• Sample starters:
  • Throughout this paper, the term 'X' will refer to…
  • It is necessary here to clarify exactly what is meant by…
  • According to Smith (2002), X can be defined as follows: '…'

🔬 Announce principal outcomes

• Briefly states the most important results; a preview of the full Results section.
• Shows which specific findings contribute to addressing the niche.
• Common verbs: find, show, indicate, reveal, explain, demonstrate, determine, prove, establish.
• Example: "Importantly, we found that a ZPI variant with P1 arginine reacted at a diffusion-limited rate with f Xa."
• Remember: preview only the most important findings; details belong in the Results section.

💡 Strategies for value and structure

💡 State value

• Explains the significance of the research; argues that the study provides an important contribution.
• Often uses modals (can, could, might, may) combined with verbs like offer, provide, generate, contribute.
• Also uses adjectives/adverbs: possible, potential, likely, probably.
• Example: "The acquired information could provide answers to food safety issues for locally processed meat production..."
• Sample starters:
  • This is the first study to…
  • This study provides new insights into…
  • The findings should make an important contribution to the field of…
  • It is hoped that this research will contribute to a deeper understanding of…

💡 Outline the structure

• Previews the organization of the manuscript; gives readers insight into how the paper is structured.
• Functions like written directions, guiding readers to specific content.
• Typically begins with an overview sentence followed by a section-by-section list.
• Example: "The article is structured as follows. The rest of the Introduction reviews the related literature. Section 2 describes the data..."
• Sample starters:
  • This paper begins by… It will then go on to…
  • The remaining part of the paper proceeds as follows:…
  • The overall structure of the study takes the form of six chapters, including…

🔑 Important reminders

Point	What it means
No linear order	You don't have to organize strategies in a fixed sequence
Selective use	Some strategies are used more extensively than others
Combination allowed	Different strategies can be combined for stronger effect
Disciplinary variation	Strategy use varies by field conventions
Writer's judgment	Evaluate your intentions and assess how well you accomplish goals

🔑 Two critical aspects when writing

1. Subject matter: writers move from general to specific—notice how you do (or do not do) this.
2. Quality of claims: how you say something is as important as what you say; use strong arguments to enhance claim quality.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Introduction sections require flexible, strategic choices rather than rigid formulas, and writers must critically evaluate how well their chosen strategies accomplish their communicative goals.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• No fixed order: The three communicative goals (Establish Territory, Identify Niche, Address Niche) do not need to follow a linear sequence.
• Flexible strategy use: Some strategies are used more extensively than others, and different strategies can be combined for stronger effect.
• Disciplinary variation: Strategy use varies depending on field-specific conventions.
• Common confusion: Writers may think all strategies must be used or in a specific order—instead, choose what works best for your topic and discipline.
• Critical reading helps writing: Analyzing published introductions for goals/strategies improves your own writing.

📐 Organizational flexibility

📐 Non-linear structure

• The excerpt emphasizes "no linear order for organizing your content to fulfill these communicative goals."
• You do not need to address Goal 1, then Goal 2, then Goal 3 in sequence.
• Writers have freedom to arrange strategies in whatever order best serves their purpose.

🔀 Variable strategy emphasis

• "Some communicative strategies are used more extensively than others."
• Not all nine strategies for Addressing the Niche need to be implemented.
• Choose strategies that work best for your specific topic, style, and discipline.

🤝 Combining strategies

• Different strategies can be combined to achieve a stronger communicative effect.
• This suggests layering multiple approaches rather than treating each as isolated.

🎓 Disciplinary and contextual factors

🎓 Field-specific conventions

• "The use of strategies varies depending on disciplinary conventions."
• What works in one field may not be standard in another.
• Writers should explore published work in their target discipline or journal.

✍️ Writer responsibility

• "It is up to us as academic writers to evaluate our writing intentions and assess the degree to which we accomplish our goals."
• Self-assessment is essential—not just following a template.

📚 Learning through critical reading

📚 Read before you write

• The excerpt recommends reading critically and looking for the goals/strategies presented.
• Analyzing published introductions trains you to recognize effective patterns.

🔍 Two key aspects to notice

Aspect	What to observe	Why it matters
Subject matter movement	Writers move from general to specific	Shows how to structure progression of ideas
Quality of claims	HOW you say something, not just WHAT	Strong argumentation enhances claim quality

🎯 Movement from general to specific

• Notice "how you do (or do not do) this" in your own writing.
• This connects to the hourglass model mentioned in the broader context.

💪 Argument quality over content alone

• "What you say is not as important as HOW you say it."
• Use your ability to compose strong arguments to enhance the quality of your claims.
• This emphasizes rhetorical skill and persuasive writing.

🎯 Three communicative goals recap

🎯 The framework

The excerpt references three goals that structure introduction sections:

1. Establish a Knowledge Territory: Demonstrate existing knowledge while maintaining reader interest
2. Identify a Niche: Point out the problem or gap in literature
3. Address the Niche: Justify the research without being formulaic

🔓 Freedom within structure

• Writers have "the freedom to present your research in whatever way you feel best accomplishes these communicative goals."
• The goals provide direction, not a rigid formula.
• Don't confuse: having a framework does not mean following a lockstep template.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Introduction sections must accomplish three sequential communicative goals—establishing a knowledge territory, identifying a gap or problem, and addressing that niche—to justify the research and engage readers.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Three-goal structure: Introductions follow a progression from broad context (what is known) to specific gap (what is missing) to research justification (how this study addresses the gap).
• Goal 1 – Establish a Knowledge Territory: Demonstrate existing knowledge in the field while maintaining reader interest.
• Goal 2 – Identify a Niche: Point out the specific problem or gap in the literature that motivates the research.
• Goal 3 – Address the Niche: Justify the current research in a non-formulaic way, with freedom in how to present it.
• Common confusion: The Introduction is not just background—it must actively build toward the research justification by exposing what is insufficient, contradictory, or problematic in existing work.

🎯 The three communicative goals

🎯 Goal 1: Establish a Knowledge Territory

Demonstrate what you know and what has already been established in the field while holding the attention of the reader so that they are interested enough to keep reading.

• This goal sets the stage by showing the current state of knowledge.
• It is not merely listing facts; it must engage the reader and demonstrate your command of the field.
• The excerpt emphasizes dual purposes: showing expertise and maintaining interest.

Why it matters:

• Readers need context to understand why the research is important.
• Without engagement, readers may not continue to the rest of the article.

🔍 Goal 2: Identify a Niche

Point out exactly what is the problem or gap in the literature, which sets the reader up for the third and final communicative goal of an Introduction.

• This goal narrows from the broad territory to a specific problem.
• The niche is the "missing piece" that justifies new research.
• The excerpt notes this goal "sets the reader up" for the final goal—it creates logical flow.

How to identify a niche:

• Expose insufficient findings from past research.
• Point to contradicting results in the literature.
• Highlight problematic aspects of existing work.

Example: An organization reviews existing studies and finds that no research has examined a particular variable under specific conditions—this gap becomes the niche.

✅ Goal 3: Address the Niche

Justify the research without being formulaic; as a writer, you have the freedom to present your research in whatever way you feel best accomplishes these communicative goals.

• This goal explains how the current study fills the identified gap.
• The excerpt emphasizes non-formulaic presentation—writers have creative freedom.
• The justification should feel natural, not mechanical.

Don't confuse: "Address the niche" does not mean simply stating "we will study X." It means showing why and how your research meaningfully fills the gap.

📚 Literature review integration

📚 Role in the Introduction

• The literature review is commonly included within the Introduction section.
• It follows the same three-goal structure outlined above.
• The excerpt describes it as a "comprehensive synthesis of relevant research."

🔬 How literature review supports the goals

The literature review serves as a means to:

• Establish the knowledge territory (Goal 1) by synthesizing what is known.
• Identify the niche (Goal 2) by critiquing past findings.
• Expose the need for current research through analysis of insufficient, contradicting, or problematic findings.

Why critique matters:

• Simply summarizing past work is not enough.
• The critique reveals gaps and problems, which justifies the new study.

🏛️ Structure and flexibility

🏛️ Sequential progression

The three goals follow a logical order:

Goal	Function	Movement
1. Establish Territory	Show what is known	Broad context
2. Identify Niche	Show what is missing	Narrow to gap
3. Address Niche	Show how study fills gap	Specific justification

🎨 Writer freedom

• The excerpt emphasizes that writers have "freedom to present your research in whatever way you feel best accomplishes these communicative goals."
• There is no single formula; the approach should fit the discipline and journal.
• The goals are fixed, but the strategies to achieve them are flexible.

Practical implication:

• Before writing, explore published articles in your target discipline or journal.
• Look for how other authors achieve these goals—similarities and differences may be discipline- or journal-specific.

🔗 Transition to Methods

🔗 Hourglass structure

• The excerpt introduces the concept that research articles follow an hourglass shape.
• The Introduction is broad (top of hourglass).
• The Methods and Results are narrow/specific (middle of hourglass).
• The Discussion/Conclusion broadens again (bottom of hourglass).

🔗 From general to specific

• As you move from Introduction to Methods, content becomes increasingly specific.
• The Introduction ends with justification for the study; the Methods begins with detailed procedures.

Don't confuse: The Introduction's specificity (identifying a precise niche) is different from the Methods' specificity (detailed procedures). The Introduction narrows conceptually; the Methods narrows procedurally.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

The Methods section of a research article serves three main communicative goals—contextualizing the study methods, describing the study, and analyzing the data—each achieved through specific strategies that establish credibility and transparency.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Three main goals: Methods sections contextualize study methods, describe the study itself, and explain data analysis procedures.
• Describing data analysis: includes the actual analysis procedures, statistical techniques, coding schemes, and tools used.
• Establishing credibility: involves providing rationales for analysis choices, ensuring reliability, and acknowledging limitations or uncertainties.
• Common confusion: data analysis description vs. credibility—describing what was done is separate from explaining why it's trustworthy or interpreting limitations.
• Discipline variation: Methods sections follow these goals across disciplines, but specific strategies may vary by field or target journal.

📊 Goal 3: Analyzing the Data

📝 Strategy: Describing the data analysis

Describing the data analysis: provides a description of the actual analysis (with/without certain tools) in terms of how the data analysis was done and what procedures were used for analysis (e.g., statistical techniques, coding schemes, etc.).

• This strategy focuses on the concrete procedures used to process and analyze data.
• It answers "what did you do?" rather than "why did you do it?"
• Includes specifics like statistical tests, software options, and methodological steps.

What to include:

• Statistical techniques employed
• Coding schemes used
• Specific analytical procedures
• Software options or settings

Example: Researchers might report generating least squares means and using pairwise t-tests when significant values were observed, or conducting factor analysis to check for common method bias.

🔍 Strategy: Establishing credibility

Establishing credibility: means that you provide a rationale for the analysis and/or data processing and indicates statistical or other procedures employed to ensure credibility (e.g., reliability calculations).

• This strategy addresses why the analysis is trustworthy and what steps ensure validity.
• Goes beyond describing procedures to justify choices and acknowledge constraints.
• Recognizes pre-existing limitations and explains interpretations of observations.

Key aspects:

• Providing rationales for analytical choices
• Documenting reliability calculations
• Acknowledging uncertainties or complications
• Explaining conservative approaches to prevent misclassification

Don't confuse: Describing analysis (what you did) vs. establishing credibility (why it's reliable and what limitations exist).

Example: Researchers might note they used a conservative indicator to prevent misclassification, or tentatively interpret certain data due to complications with partitioning measurements.

🎯 Overall Purpose of Methods Sections

🎯 Three communicative goals

The Methods section serves to provide necessary detail through:

Goal	Purpose
Contextualizing the study methods	Situating the methodological approach
Describing the study	Detailing study procedures and design
Analyzing the data	Explaining data collection, processing, and analysis

📐 Information provided

Methods sections comprehensively document how researchers:

• Collected data
• Manipulated data
• Screened and cleaned data
• Coded data
• Analyzed data

🔬 Discipline-Specific Considerations

🔬 Exploring published writing

• The three main goals apply across disciplines
• Specific strategies may vary by field or target journal
• Researchers should examine published articles in their discipline to identify similarities and differences
• Journal-specific conventions may influence how goals are achieved

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

An effective Methods section must contextualize the study's procedures with enough specificity that a reader could replicate the research based solely on what is written.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Core purpose: The Methods section should enable replication—readers must be able to conduct the same study based on your description alone.
• Three main goals: Contextualize the study's methods (Goal 1), describe the study (Goal 2), and analyze the methods (Goal 3, mentioned but not detailed in this excerpt).
• Specificity is paramount: Detail is of utmost importance; imagine someone trying to replicate your work and ensure they have everything they need.
• Goal 1 focus: Contextualizing means providing a complete "picture" of procedures—answering who, what, when, where, how, and why.
• Six strategies for Goal 1: Reference previous works, provide general information, identify the methodological approach, describe the setting, introduce subjects/participants, and rationalize pre-experiment decisions.

🎯 Goal 1: Contextualize the Study's Methods

🎯 What contextualization means

To contextualize methods: explain all of the conditions in which the study occurred.

• Contextualization provides the "picture" or background of the procedures you followed.
• Think of it as answering the classic questions: who, what, when, where, how, and why.
• The goal is to completely describe the circumstances surrounding the research.
• Example: If you studied gas emissions from reactors, you would define key terms (gas release vs. gas emission), specify room temperature and pressure assumptions, and explain the equations used.

🔍 Why specificity matters

• Replication test: Imagine a reader wants to replicate your research. Would they be able to conduct the same study based on what you wrote? The answer must be YES.
• Specificity requires attention to detail in every aspect of the methodology.
• By contextualizing, describing, and analyzing, you explain exactly what, when, where, and how you did what you did.

📚 Six strategies for contextualizing

📚 Strategy 1: Referencing previous works

• What it does: Relates your research to existing literature by directly referencing another author or explicitly mentioning a study.
• Purpose: Validates or justifies decisions about data collection, procedures, or analyses.
• Can occur almost anywhere in the Methods section.
• Example phrases:
  • "The balanced Latin-square method proposed by Edwards (1951) was used..."
  • "The Eulerian-granular model in ANSYS 12.0 was used... taken from the literature [32]."
• Common vocabulary includes: "Many researchers have utilised X to measure...", "X is one of the most common procedures for determining...", "Recent advances in X methods have facilitated investigation of..."

📚 Strategy 2: Providing general information

• What it does: Gives background specific to the methods—theoretical, empirical, informational, or experiential.
• Purpose: Builds a bridge connecting your study to others that used the same or similar methodology; includes preliminary hypotheses or interpretations.
• Adds to specificity and level of detail.
• Example: "The animals used during this study were slaughtered in accredited slaughterhouses according to the rules on animal protection defined by French law..."
• Example: "This study focused on stemwood when examining alternative woody biomass management regimes for loblolly pine."

📚 Strategy 3: Identifying the methodological approach

• What it does: Pinpoints the exact method adopted to accomplish the study's goals.
• When to use: If there was a specific set of procedures or a predetermined framework for carrying out the study.
• Purpose: Introduces the methodological approach or experimental design, announces credible research practices known in the field, and possibly transitions to describing experimental procedures.
• Example: "In both seasons, the experiments were arranged in a complete randomized block design with four replications..."
• Example: "To address these hypotheses rigorously, we conducted a randomized controlled trial with children clustered within schools."
• Common phrases: "The solution was then assayed for X using the Y method.", "Analysis was based on the conceptual framework proposed by Smith et al. (2002)."

📚 Strategy 4: Describing the setting

• What it does: Tells the reader about where or under what conditions the study happened.
• Focus: The place, conditions, and surroundings—answers the "where" and "when" questions.
• Details the characteristics of the environment in which the research was conducted.
• May include place, temperature, and temporal descriptors (time of year).
• Example: "The mares were admitted at day 310 of pregnancy, housed in wide straw bedding boxes and fed with hay and concentrates twice a day."
• Example: "All three studies were performed in the eastern half of the SRS in the RCW management area..."
• Don't confuse with Goal 2: Describing the setting references inherent characteristics of the context/environment, not characteristics of materials used or experimental procedures.

📚 Strategy 5: Introducing the subjects/participants

• What it does: Describes the characteristics of your sample—whether human, animal, or inanimate.
• For human studies: Answers the "who" question.
• For non-human studies: Often answers the "what" question.
• Describes subjects/participants and their original/pre-experimental characteristics: properties, origin, number, composition/construction, etc.
• Details the process by which subjects/participants were recruited/selected.
• Example: "Participants in this study included 10 TAs enrolled in this French doctoral program."
• Example: "The Mexican populations, Chetumal and Tulum (Mex-1 and Mex-2, respectively), have large resin-producing glands, while the Venezuelan populations... have smaller glands."
• Common phrases: "The cohort was divided into two groups according to...", "A random sample of patients with... was recruited from...", "Just over half the sample (53%) was female..."
• Why it matters: Makes an argument for the value of your sample, given the important role a sample plays in study design.

📚 Strategy 6: Rationalizing pre-experiment conditions

• What it does: Shows the reader how you attained your specific sample or decided about methods prior to carrying out experimental procedures.
• Explains inclusion or exclusion criteria.
• Example: "The literature review presented above leads us to formulate our research questions more precisely..."
• Example: "We defined two sub-samples of LAEs split at R = 25.5... to enable a direct comparison with... star-forming galaxies in the same range of redshift."
• Common phrases: "Criteria for selecting the subjects were as follows:", "Publications were only included in the analysis if...", "Five individuals were excluded from the study on the basis of..."

🛠️ Common language patterns for Goal 1

🛠️ Standard phrases and structures

The Methods section often uses frequently adopted words or phrases. Key patterns include:

Type of Language	Example
Infinitive of purpose	"To measure X, we...", "To establish X, the participants were..."
Expressing purpose with "for"	"For the questions in the interview, we adapted...", "For the purpose of analysis, X was..."
Sequence words (timing)	"Prior to", "After"
Passive voice verbs	"All participants were sent...", "The data were normalized using..."
Adverbs of manner	"A sample was then carefully injected into...", "The mixture was then gradually heated..."
"Using" + instruments	"Data were collected using Xs...", "The subjects were recruited using email..."

🛠️ Why these patterns matter

• Methods sections are often rote narratives of procedures.
• Even if readers skim an article, they typically read the methods with careful attention to details.
• Using standard language helps ensure clarity and meets disciplinary expectations.

🔬 Goal 2: Describe the Study (overview)

🔬 What Goal 2 accomplishes

• Primary portion of the Methods section—where you include details of what you actually did to conduct the research.
• Explains how, when, and where you obtained the data, and describes that data.
• If your study involves variables, highlights their purpose and explains why certain variables were or were not included.
• Details experimental procedures and notes tools, instruments, materials, or equipment used.
• Provides a rationale for decisions made during data collection, analysis, and interpretation.

🔬 Seven strategies for Goal 2

The excerpt introduces seven strategies for describing the study:

1. Acquiring the data
2. Describing the data
3. Identifying variables
4. Describing experimental/study procedures
5. Describing tools/instruments/materials/equipment
6. Rationalizing experiment decisions
7. Reporting incrementals

(Note: The excerpt provides examples for Goal 2 but does not detail all seven strategies; only "Acquiring the Data" is partially introduced at the end.)

🔬 Example of Goal 2 in practice

• A phenomenological study example describes: the philosophical approach (Husserl and Heidegger), the data collection method (qualitative, in-depth interviews), why semi-structured interviews were chosen (time-intensive but efficient), recruitment strategy (maximize diversity through professional listing services and social networks), and participant characteristics (12 Dutch citizens, ages 20–72, various occupations, six women and six men).
• A chemistry study example describes: the location of atoms, parameters for the supercell, the focus on the metallic edge, and the software package used (DMol3) to determine charges.

🔑 Key takeaways

🔑 Remember the core principle

• Goal #1 of the Methods section is Contextualizing the Study's Methods.
• You do not need to include all six strategies—they are simply possibilities for reaching the goal.
• The strategies are: referencing previous works, providing general information, identifying the methodological approach, describing the setting, introducing subjects/participants, and rationalizing pre-experiment decisions.

🔑 The replication standard

• Always ask: Could someone replicate my study based on what I've written?
• If the answer is yes, you have achieved the necessary level of specificity and detail.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Methods Goal 2 requires researchers to paint a complete picture of their data and all tools, resources, materials, and processes used from start to finish, enabling future replication and establishing transparency.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What Goal 2 accomplishes: provides a comprehensive description of data acquisition, experimental procedures, tools/materials, and the rationale behind methodological choices.
• Seven possible strategies: acquiring data, describing data, identifying variables, describing procedures, describing tools/materials, rationalizing decisions, and reporting incrementals.
• Common confusion: reporting incrementals vs. actual results—incrementals are brief mentions of preliminary observations that clarify next steps, not the final study findings.
• Language patterns: Methods sections commonly use past tense (active and passive voice), present tense for standard tools, and sequence phrases to guide readers through procedures.
• Flexibility principle: not all seven strategies are required; writers select strategies appropriate to their specific study and discipline.

📥 Data acquisition and description

📥 Acquiring the data

Acquiring the data: a writer's description of the collection and data-recording process.

• This strategy explains how data were obtained (sampling, selecting, measuring) and what was done to the data (preparing, tabulating, estimating).
• Answers: when, where, and how did you acquire your samples?
• Example: A researcher recruited 12 Australian university students who invited Japanese contacts to participate, collecting data from 30 participants in existing relationships (not artificially paired).
• Example: High-quality fluorescent polystyrene latex spheres with specific diameters were used as tracer particles, with peak intensities measured at different distances from the in-focus plane.

📊 Describing the data

• Follows acquisition; elaborates on features such as measurement units, scales, qualities, or quantities.
• Justifies the quality of your sample through detailed description.
• Example: Relative quantification was determined using specific software, with the highest intensity sample used as reference (value = 1), averaging three biological replicates and at least two technical repetitions.
• Example: Age was weakly related to performance and therefore excluded from analyses; supplementary analyses confirmed that ESL, IQ, or arithmetic scores did not alter findings.

🔬 Variables and procedures

🔬 Identifying variables

Identifying variables: distinguishes which parts of data were manipulated or used to influence findings.

• Labels include constant vs. subject-to-change conditions or factors during the experiment.
• Example: A range of 0.01-10.0 mL of zinc oxide nanocrystals was added to vials, with a control vial containing the same amount of one compound plus a deprotonating agent.
• Example: Researchers adopted a highly formalized procedure for selecting controls to reduce differences between experimental and control samples in a quasi-experimental study.

🔬 Describing experimental/study procedures

• Outlines step-by-step actions in sufficient detail for future replication.
• Describes what was done to cause an outcome or lead to specific results.
• Example: "Participants were asked to record their steps for 4 days over the following week."
• Example: "The mold was then attached to the bottom pedestal, the membrane stretched over the end platen and sealed using two o-rings."
• Voice and tense: Both active and passive voice are used, typically in past tense; some disciplines use present simple tense for experimental steps.

🛠️ Tools, rationale, and incrementals

🛠️ Describing tools/instruments/materials/equipment

• Explains the materials (physical or abstract) used in data acquisition or experimental procedures.
• Does NOT include the process of obtaining/creating them or how they were used—only what they are.
• Example: "The basic liquid medium consisted of chicken feather meal 20; NaCl, 0.5; KH2PO4, 1.0 and K2HPO4, 6.0 at pH 7.5."
• Example: "The MLAT (Modern Language Aptitude Test) short version contains all sections relevant to vocabulary learning."
• Tense choice: Past tense for study-specific materials; present tense for standard/conventional tools familiar to readers.

💡 Rationalizing experiment decisions

Rationalizing experiment decisions: provides reasoning or explanation for choices made in the experimental process.

• Justifies choices, connects them to research purposes/questions, establishes credibility.
• Example: "Since one aim was to investigate students' impressions regarding the process, it was decided that the same dimensions and indicators could be used."
• Example: "Yield was not determined by combine harvesting because of the wide range of harvest maturity dates within the study."
• Makes the research process transparent for readers.

📈 Reporting incrementals

• Reports preliminary findings, observations, or measurements that clarify next steps or justify particular techniques.
• Helps readers understand why procedures were completed in a particular way.
• Example: "The final R- and R-free values after data refinement were 21.6% and 28.7%, respectively."
• Example: "Although the same amounts of reactants were used, slight differences in stirring speed likely contributed to the size variations."
• Important caveat: Do NOT confuse with actual study results—these are small mentions of noteworthy incremental findings that may or may not connect to final results.

📝 Language patterns and conventions

📝 Common vocabulary and structures

Sequence phrases:

• "To begin this process, ..."
• "The first step in this process was to ..."
• "The second method used to identify X involved ..."

Passive voice verbs:

• "All participants were sent ..."
• "The data were normalized using ..."
• "Ethical approval was obtained from ..."

Expressing purpose with "for":

• "For the attitude questions, a Likert scale was used."
• "For the purpose of analysis, two segments were extracted ..."

Adverbs of manner:

• "The medium was then aseptically transferred ..."
• "A sample was then carefully extracted ..."

Using + instruments:

• "Data were collected using two high spectral resolution Xs."
• "Using the X-ray and looking at the actual X, it was possible to identify ..."

📝 Disciplinary trends

• Predominant use of present and present perfect tenses, past passive and past active voice.
• Common use of modifiers (adjectives and adverbs).
• These characteristics strengthen claims by highlighting contributions and downplaying uncertainty.
• Author representation varies: some use "we" or "I," though usage is inconsistent across disciplines.

🎯 Key takeaways

🎯 The seven strategies (all optional)

Strategy	Purpose
Acquiring the data	Explain collection and recording process
Describing the data	Elaborate on features, units, scales, qualities
Identifying variables	Distinguish manipulated/influential parts
Describing procedures	Outline step-by-step actions for replication
Describing tools/materials	List physical/abstract materials used
Rationalizing decisions	Justify choices and connect to research goals
Reporting incrementals	Note preliminary findings that clarify next steps

🎯 Remember

• You do NOT need all seven strategies—select those appropriate to your study.
• Goal 2 is about what happened during data collection, distinguishing it from Goal 3 (what happened after data collection during analysis).
• Sufficient detail enables replication while maintaining transparency about methodological choices.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Goal 2 of the Methods section paints a complete picture of the data and all tools, procedures, and decisions used from start to finish, enabling readers to understand and potentially replicate the study.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What Goal 2 accomplishes: describes the entire research process including data collection, materials, procedures, and decision rationale.
• Seven possible strategies: acquiring data, describing data, identifying variables, describing procedures, describing tools/materials, rationalizing decisions, and reporting incrementals.
• Flexibility in application: you do not need to use all seven strategies—select those relevant to your study.
• Common confusion: reporting incrementals vs. actual results—incrementals are small noteworthy observations during the process, not final study findings.
• Language patterns: Methods sections typically use past tense for procedures, present tense for standard tools, and both active and passive voice depending on discipline.

📥 Data acquisition and description

📥 Acquiring the data

Acquiring the data: a writer's description of the collection and data-recording process.

• This strategy illustrates how data were obtained (sampling, selecting, measuring) and what was done to prepare the data (preparing, tabulating, estimating).
• Answers the questions: when, where, and how did you acquire your samples?
• Includes basic measurement strategies and data preparation steps before analysis.
• Example: "12 Australian university students were recruited, who in turn invited their Japanese contacts to participate. In total, data was collected from 30 participants."

📊 Describing the data

• Typically follows the acquisition strategy.
• Elaborates on features such as measurement units, scales, qualities, or quantities.
• Particularly important for justifying the quality of your sample.
• Pay close attention to detail—this establishes credibility.
• Example: "The final data result from averages of three biological replicates and at least two technical repetitions."

Don't confuse: acquiring vs. describing—acquiring explains the collection process; describing elaborates on the characteristics and features of what was collected.

🔬 Variables and procedures

🔬 Identifying variables

Identifying variables: distinguishes which parts of your data were manipulated or used to influence the findings.

• Common labels include:
  • Constant vs. subject-to-change conditions
  • Factors during the experiment
  • Control vs. experimental groups
• Example: "A control vial had the same amount of 1-CO2H as the other vials but contained 5 μL of 0.100 M NMe4OH5H2O to deprotonate the molecule."

🧪 Describing experimental study procedures

• Describes what you did to cause an outcome or lead to specific results.
• Outlines steps in sufficient detail for future replication.
• Accomplished by providing step-by-step actions.
• Example: "At the initial login, participants were asked to record their steps for 4 days over the following week."

Verb tense note: Authors use both active and passive voice, frequently in past tense. Some disciplines use present simple tense for experimental steps.

🛠️ Materials and justifications

🛠️ Describing tools/instruments/materials/equipment

• Explains the materials (physical or abstract) used in data acquisition or experimental procedures.
• Useful for replication by other researchers.
• Does not include the process of obtaining/creating tools or how they were used—only describes what they are.
• May appear in various parts of the Methods section, not only in procedure descriptions.

Tense	When to use	Example context
Past tense	Materials specifically designed/chosen for this study	"The basic liquid medium used for activation consisted of..."
Present tense	Standard or conventional tools familiar to readers	"The MLAT is usually administered in two versions..."

💡 Rationalizing experiment decisions

Rationalizing experiment decisions: provides reasoning or explanation for choices made in the experimental process.

• Useful for:
  • Justifying choices
  • Connecting choices to research purposes and questions
  • Establishing credibility
  • Indicating the objective for certain experimental steps
• Makes the research process transparent for readers.
• Example: "Since one aim of the study was to investigate students' impressions regarding the process enacted during the Role Play, it was decided that the same dimensions and indicators could be used."

📈 Reporting incrementals

📈 What incrementals are

• Reports preliminary findings, results of observations, and/or measurements during the experimental process.
• Serves to promote understanding of next steps or choices made.
• Clarifies methods and/or justifies the use of particular techniques or procedures.
• Brief reporting of what occurred in the experimental process.

⚠️ Important distinction

Don't confuse: incrementals vs. actual study results.

• Incrementals are small mentions of noteworthy findings or observations during the process.
• They may or may not be directly connected to final study results.
• Example: "Although the same amounts of reactants were used to produce the 508 and 625 nm particles, slight differences in stirring speed likely contributed to the size variations."

📝 Common language patterns

📝 Sequence phrases

• "To begin this process, ..."
• "The first step in this process was to ..."
• "The second method used to identify X involved ..."

📝 Passive voice verbs

• "All participants were sent ..."
• "The data were normalized using ..."
• "Ethical approval was obtained from ..."

📝 Expressing purpose with "for"

• "For the attitude questions, a Likert scale was used."
• "For the purpose of analysis, two segments were extracted..."
• "For the estimation of protein concentration, 100 μL of protein sample was mixed with..."

📝 Adverbs of manner

• "The medium was then aseptically transferred to a conical flask."
• "A sample of the concentrate was then carefully extracted from..."
• "The tubes were methodically collected by..."

📝 Using + instruments

• "Data were collected using two high spectral resolution Xs."
• "Semi-automated genotyping was carried out using X software and..."
• "Using the X-ray and looking at the actual X, it was possible to identify..."

🎯 Disciplinary trends

🎯 Common linguistic characteristics

Research on Methods sections across disciplines shows:

• Predominant use of present and present perfect tenses
• Verbs in past passive and past active voice
• Modifiers such as adjectives and adverbs

🎯 Author representation

• Some disciplines use "we" or "I" pronouns
• Context and rationale for use seem inconsistent among disciplines
• Choice may strengthen claims by calling attention to contributions while downplaying uncertainty

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

The third goal of the Methods section is to explain how data were analyzed after collection, demonstrating the quality and credibility of analytical procedures without presenting actual results.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Core purpose: explain how data were analyzed, not the results themselves—this comes after data collection (Goal 2).
• Three main strategies: preparing the data, describing the data analysis procedures, and establishing credibility.
• Common confusion: Goal 2 vs Goal 3—Goal 2 covers what happened during data collection; Goal 3 covers what happened after data were collected.
• Why it matters: persuades readers about the quality of analysis and validates that procedures led to credible findings.
• May include: data preparation steps, statistical techniques, coding schemes, reliability measures, and acknowledgment of limitations.

📋 What Goal 3 accomplishes

📋 Overview of data analysis

Goal 3: Analyzing the Data—to overview the data analysis by explaining how the data have been analyzed (without describing the results of that analysis).

• Provides a preview of central research pieces: objectives, questions/hypotheses, procedures/methods, and main results.
• Authors may outline their papers to help readers understand the structure.
• Sometimes includes explanations of actions taken prior to analysis, when researchers prepare data for analysis and interpretation.

🎯 Persuasive function

• The goal is to persuade readers about the quality of the data analysis.
• Makes a claim that the study's procedures have led to valid and credible findings.
• Authors make arguments about the value of the reported work to justify addressing gaps in the literature.

🔧 Strategy 1: Preparing the data

🔧 What data preparation includes

Preparing the data: describes what was done to the data and how the data were prepared for analysis.

This strategy explains:

• Data selection, collection, and preparation (sampling, screening, cleaning, inclusion/exclusion, correction)
• Data manipulation (transforming, coding, tabulating, estimating)
• Tools used to accomplish these processes

📝 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

• Mention which data were included in the research.
• Also mention which data were excluded from the analysis.
• Example sentence starters from the excerpt:
  • "Criteria for selecting the subjects were as follows:"
  • "Five individuals were excluded from the study on the basis of…"
  • "Publications were only included in the analysis if…"

🛠️ Example applications

From the excerpt's examples:

• Generating least squares means and separating them with pairwise t-tests when significant values were observed.
• Trimming data by scanning for values that did not support general consensus.
• Associating electronic measurements with averaged human assessments.

📊 Strategy 2: Describing the data analysis

📊 What to describe

Describing the data analysis: provides a description of the actual analysis (with/without certain tools) in terms of how the data analysis was done and what procedures were used.

Key elements:

• Statistical techniques employed
• Coding schemes used
• Specific analytical procedures
• Software or tools utilized

🔍 Example from published research

The excerpt provides examples showing:

• Regression analysis on country-year variables with control variables.
• Factor analysis to check for common method variance bias.
• Use of specific software (e.g., PROC MIXED from SAS Institute).
• Reanalysis using different designs (e.g., split-plot design with cultivars as whole plots).

⚙️ Level of detail

• Explain the "how" of analysis without describing results.
• Include enough detail that readers can understand and potentially replicate the analytical approach.
• Mention interactive combinations of variables when relevant to understanding the analysis.

✅ Strategy 3: Establishing credibility

✅ What credibility measures include

Establishing credibility: provide a rationale for the analysis and/or data processing and indicate statistical or other procedures employed to ensure credibility.

This strategy covers:

• Reliability calculations
• Recognition of existing or pre-existing limitations
• Explanation or interpretation of certain observations or measurements
• Justification for analytical choices

🔒 Building reader confidence

• Demonstrates that the researcher has considered potential weaknesses.
• Shows awareness of complications or uncertainties in the analysis.
• Example: acknowledging that interpretation is tentative due to uncertainties in data partitioning.
• Example: explaining conservative indicators to prevent misclassification.

🎯 Rationale and transparency

• Explain why certain analytical decisions were made.
• Note follow-up work when relevant.
• Mention steps taken to reduce bias (e.g., paired surveys to reduce single-informant bias).
• Confirm absence of common method bias through appropriate testing.

🔄 Distinguishing the three Methods goals

🔄 Goal 2 vs Goal 3 comparison

Aspect	Goal 2: Describe the Study	Goal 3: Analyze the Data
Timing	What happened during data collection	What happened after data were collected
Focus	Acquiring data, describing procedures, identifying variables	Preparing, analyzing, and validating data
Content	Study procedures, tools, materials, experimental design	Statistical techniques, coding, credibility measures

Don't confuse: Goal 2 is about the study itself; Goal 3 is about what you did with the data once you had it.

📌 All three strategies are optional

• You do not need to include all three strategies (preparing, describing, establishing).
• They are possibilities for reaching the goal of Analyzing the Data.
• Choose strategies based on what is relevant to your specific research and discipline.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

The data analysis component of a Methods section must describe how data were processed and analyzed, establish the credibility of those procedures, and acknowledge any limitations or interpretive complexities.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Goal 3 focuses on data analysis: describing actual analysis procedures, statistical techniques, coding schemes, and tools used.
• Three key strategies: describing the data analysis itself, establishing credibility through rationale and validation procedures, and acknowledging limitations.
• Credibility matters: researchers must explain reliability calculations, statistical procedures, and steps taken to reduce bias.
• Common confusion: describing what was done vs. why it's credible—both are needed; the first explains procedures, the second justifies them.
• Transparency about limitations: effective Methods sections recognize uncertainties and explain interpretive challenges rather than hiding them.

📊 Describing the Data Analysis

📊 What this strategy covers

Describing the data analysis: provides a description of the actual analysis in terms of how the data analysis was done and what procedures were used for analysis (e.g., statistical techniques, coding schemes, etc.).

• This is the "what we did" part—the concrete steps and tools.
• Includes statistical techniques, software, coding methods, and processing steps.
• Should specify whether certain tools were used or not used.

🔢 Statistical and analytical procedures

The excerpt provides examples showing:

• Specific statistical tests (e.g., least squares means, pairwise t-tests, significance thresholds like P < 0.05)
• Analysis techniques for reducing bias (e.g., factor analysis to check for common method variance)
• Pairing or matching strategies (e.g., paired surveys from buyers and suppliers)

Example: A study might generate means for all variables and, when significant differences are observed, separate those means using specific statistical tests.

🎯 Establishing Credibility

🎯 What credibility means here

Establishing credibility: means that you provide a rationale for the analysis and/or data processing and indicates statistical or other procedures employed to ensure credibility (e.g., reliability calculations).

• Not just what you did, but why it's trustworthy.
• Includes validation steps, reliability checks, and bias-reduction measures.
• Gives recognition to limitations and explains how you addressed them.

🛡️ How to establish credibility

The excerpt shows two approaches:

Acknowledging uncertainties:

• Researchers may "tentatively interpret" certain data when complications exist.
• Example: When determination of a measurement is complicated by uncertainties in how different types of data are separated, researchers state this openly and note it as ongoing work.

Preventing misclassification:

• Using conservative indicators to avoid false categorization.
• Example: An indicator might be designed to be "very conservative" to prevent potential misclassification of subjects as much as possible.

⚠️ Don't confuse credibility with perfection

• Establishing credibility does not mean claiming everything is perfect.
• It means being transparent about limitations and explaining interpretive challenges.
• The excerpt emphasizes "explains or interprets certain observations or measurements" as part of credibility.

🗂️ Overall Structure of Methods Goal 3

🗂️ What Goal 3 encompasses

The excerpt identifies Goal 3 as "Analyzing the Data," which includes:

Strategy	Purpose
Describing the data analysis	Explain what procedures were used
Establishing credibility	Justify why the analysis is trustworthy

📝 Key takeaway from the excerpt

Overall, this goal provides information about how the researchers collected, manipulated, screened, cleaned, coded, and analyzed their data.

• This is a comprehensive view: not just final analysis, but all data handling steps.
• Includes collection, manipulation, screening, cleaning, coding, and analysis.
• All these steps should be documented to give readers a complete picture.

📚 Context: Methods Section Overview

📚 Three main goals of Methods sections

The synopsis indicates three communicative goals:

1. Contextualizing the study methods
2. Describing the study
3. Analyzing the data (Goal 3, covered in this excerpt)

🎓 Discipline-specific variation

• The excerpt advises exploring published writing in your specific discipline or target journal.
• Look for similarities and differences that are discipline- or journal-specific.
• Methods sections may vary in emphasis and detail across fields.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

The Results section of a research article occupies the narrow, specific middle of the hourglass structure by reporting findings that directly address the identified research niche through four communicative goals.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Hourglass structure: research articles move from general (Introduction) to specific (Methods and Results) back to general (Discussion), with Results being one of the most specific sections.
• Four main goals: Approaching the niche, Occupying the niche, Construing the niche, and Expanding the niche guide the writing of Results sections.
• Niche continuity: the niche (need, problem, or gap) identified in the Introduction is investigated in Methods and answered in Results.
• Common confusion: some disciplines separate Results from Discussion while others combine them; Goals 3 and 4 only appear in combined Results/Discussion sections.
• Specificity principle: Results sections are intentionally narrow, presenting only the most representative findings organized by research questions or hypotheses.

📐 The Hourglass Structure of Research Articles

📐 Five standard sections

Research articles typically contain five sections regardless of discipline or journal:

• Introduction (including Literature Review)
• Methods
• Results
• Discussion/Conclusion

⏳ Why the hourglass shape matters

The hourglass shape indicates whether content will be general or specific across sections.

• Broad top: Introduction starts general, surveying the field
• Narrow middle: Methods and Results are the most specific pieces of the entire article
• Broad bottom: Discussion/Conclusion returns to broader implications

The move toward the middle allows researchers to "hone in on your exact study's parts, so the content will necessarily narrow in scope."

🔗 Logical progression through sections

Each section builds on the previous:

• Introduction identifies the niche (need, problem, or gap)
• Methods provides procedures for investigating that niche
• Results provides answers by reporting findings
• Discussion interprets those findings

🎯 The Four Communicative Goals

🎯 Overview of goals

The Results section aims to achieve four main communicative goals:

1. Approaching the niche
2. Occupying the niche
3. Construing the niche
4. Expanding the niche

🔀 Variation by discipline

Important distinction: Not all Results sections include all four goals.

Goals	When they appear
Goals 1 & 2 (Approaching and Occupying)	Always present in Results sections
Goals 3 & 4 (Construing and Expanding)	Only present in combined Results/Discussion sections

• Some disciplines use separate Results and Discussion sections
• Others integrate findings with interpretation in a combined "Discussion" section
• The goals must still be accomplished somewhere in the paper—the question is where readers will find them

🚪 Goal 1: Approaching the Niche

🚪 What "approaching" means

Approaching the Niche: showing a progression from all preceding parts (Introduction and Methods) to the Results or findings.

The major aim is to demonstrate logical connection and continuity across sections.

🔗 Why progression matters

The progression carries multiple layers of meaning:

• Validity of findings: findings have a logical connection to general information from the field
• Methods validation: findings are connected with methods, and methods were valid
• Field connection: results reiterate and further validate the research within the broader context

🛠️ How to approach the niche

The connection is often made by:

• Repeating relevant information from earlier sections
• Giving a preview of results
• Reiterating the niche to show how findings address it

Example: A researcher might briefly restate the research question before presenting the corresponding finding, creating a bridge from Methods to Results.

📊 Characteristics of Effective Results Sections

📏 Specificity and brevity

• Results sections tend to be one of the shorter sections of the paper
• Successful research writers present only the most representative findings
• Avoid including every piece of data; focus on what directly addresses research questions

🗂️ Organization principle

Findings should be organized according to:

• Research questions outlined in previous sections, OR
• Hypotheses outlined in previous sections

This organization maintains the logical thread from Introduction through Results.

📈 Presentation formats

Results can be reported as text, tables, figures, or all three.

Researchers choose the format that best communicates their specific findings to readers.

⚠️ Don't confuse: narrow vs. incomplete

• Narrow/specific does NOT mean leaving out important findings
• It means focusing on findings that directly address the research niche
• The specificity comes from tight alignment with research questions, not from omitting relevant data

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

The Results section aims to present findings in a way that demonstrates a logical progression from the research gap (niche) identified in the Introduction through the Methods to the specific findings, thereby showing how the study fills that gap.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Four main communicative goals: Approaching the niche, Occupying the niche, Construing the niche, and Expanding the niche guide the writing of the Results section.
• Specificity is key: The Results section is one of the most specific (narrow) parts of the research manuscript, presenting only the most representative findings organized by research questions or hypotheses.
• Logical connection matters: Results must show valid connections to the field's general information and to the Methods section, not just dump findings without context.
• Common confusion: Whether to separate or combine Results and Discussion—some disciplines use separate sections while others integrate findings with interpretation; Goals 3 and 4 only appear in combined Results/Discussion sections.
• Approaching the Niche strategy: The first goal re-emphasizes the research gap and methodology to show progression and validate findings.

🏗️ Structure and scope of the Results section

📐 The hourglass shape

• Research manuscripts follow an hourglass structure: broad at the beginning (Introduction), narrow in the middle (Methods and Results), then broad again (Discussion/Conclusion).
• The Methods and Results sections are the most specific pieces of the entire article.
• As you move toward the middle of the manuscript, content necessarily narrows in scope to focus on the exact study's parts.

📏 Characteristics of effective Results

• Brevity: The Results section tends to be one of the shorter sections when separated from Discussion.
• Selectivity: Present only the findings that are the most representative, not all findings.
• Organization: Findings are organized according to the research questions or hypotheses outlined in previous sections.
• Format flexibility: Results can be reported as text, tables, figures, or all three.

🔀 Disciplinary variation

Aspect	Variation	Implication
Section structure	Some disciplines separate Results and Discussion; others integrate them	Combined sections include all four goals; separated sections may place Goals 3–4 in Discussion
Reporting style	Varies by discipline and journal	Check target journal conventions

🎯 The four communicative goals

🎯 Overview of the goals

The Results section aims at achieving four main communicative goals:

1. Approaching the niche
2. Occupying the niche
3. Construing the niche
4. Expanding the niche

🔑 Understanding "niche"

The niche is the area of the research where you have identified a need, problem, or gap.

• The meaning is exactly the same as in the Introduction section.
• The niche traces through the manuscript: Introduction identified and addressed it, Methods provided procedures for investigating it, Results provide the answers by reporting findings.

✅ Which goals are required

• Always present: Goals 1 and 2 (Approaching and Occupying the niche) will definitely be part of your Results section, whether or not it is combined with Discussion.
• Conditionally present: Goals 3 and 4 (Construing and Expanding the niche) will only be present if you have a combined Results/Discussion section.
• Important note: Goals 3 and 4 must still be accomplished in your paper—the only question is where your reader will find them (in a separate Discussion section or integrated).

🚶 Goal 1: Approaching the Niche

🎯 What this goal means

Goal 1, Approaching the Niche, means that you articulate the progression from the start of your manuscript up to this point.

• The major aim is to show a progression from all the other preceding parts (Introduction and Methods) to the Results.
• You need to show how the gap is being filled with your results.
• Don't confuse: This is not a place to dump your findings into the paper; you must demonstrate the connection between general information, specific methods, and results.

🔗 Why progression matters

The progression carries multiple layers of meaning:

• Validity of findings: Your findings have a logical connection to general information from the field.
• Methodological validity: The findings are connected with your methods, and your methods were valid.
• Field connection: The connection reiterates and further validates the information and processes/procedures written in the Methods section.

🛠️ Three strategies for Goal 1

The excerpt identifies three strategies to successfully achieve Approaching the Niche:

1. Providing general information
2. Restating study specifics
3. Justifying study specifics

📚 Strategy: Providing general information

Providing general information is a strategy used to show the reader your thinking about how the results may be understood or confused.

• Purpose: Reiterate any information that the reader may have forgotten (or may not have read at all).
• How it works: Link the information back to your Introduction, where you justified the need for the study in the first place.
• Function: Provide context for the study and the results inside a specific "territory" (knowledge space).
• What to reference: You may refer back to methods, techniques, processes, or practices.
• Example: Before presenting findings, remind the reader of the specific research gap or the particular methodological approach that makes these results meaningful.

🔄 Connecting to previous sections

As you write this part, consider:

• What you wrote in the Introduction: Specifically, the niche (research gap).
• What you wrote in the Methods: The choices you made regarding methodology.
• Why the similarity in goal names: The similarity between Introduction goals and Results goals is no coincidence—it emphasizes the importance of linking results to the established niche rather than simply reporting findings without context.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Approaching the Niche in the Results section means demonstrating a logical progression from the Introduction and Methods to your findings, validating that your results fill the gap you identified earlier in the paper.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What "Approaching the Niche" means: showing how your results connect to the gap/need/problem you identified in the Introduction and the methods you chose.
• Why progression matters: it validates that your findings have a logical connection to the field and that your methods were sound.
• Three strategies to accomplish this goal: providing general information, restating study specifics, and justifying study specifics.
• Common confusion: this is not a place to simply "dump" findings; you must actively demonstrate connections between the field, your methods, and your results.
• Key function: re-emphasizing aspects from Introduction and Methods helps readers (who may have forgotten or skimmed) understand your results in context.

🔗 What Approaching the Niche accomplishes

🔗 The progression from earlier sections

• The Results section must show a logical flow from Introduction → Methods → Results.
• This progression validates your findings in two ways:
  • Your findings connect to general information from the field (established in the Introduction).
  • Your findings connect to your methods, confirming those methods were valid.
• The similarity between goal names in the Introduction ("Approaching the Niche") and Results is intentional—you must link back to the gap you established at the start.

🎯 Filling the gap, not dumping data

• Goal 1 is about articulating how the gap is being filled with your results.
• Don't confuse: this is not simply reporting findings; it requires demonstrating the connection from general field information → specific methods → results.
• You accomplish this by re-emphasizing particular aspects from both Introduction and Methods sections.

✅ What gets validated

• Your findings are valid because they have a logical connection to the field.
• Your methods are validated through their connection to your results.
• The information and procedures from your Methods section are reiterated and further validated.

🛠️ Strategy 1: Providing general information

🛠️ What this strategy does

Providing general information: a strategy used to show the reader your thinking about how the results may be understood or confused.

• This is your opportunity to reiterate information the reader may have forgotten (or may not have read at all).
• It links information back to your Introduction, where you justified the need for the study.
• It provides context for the study and results inside a specific "territory" (knowledge space).

🗺️ How it orients readers

• You may refer back to methods, techniques, processes, or practices used in your field.
• You can indicate the order of information you are presenting as results.
• You can highlight noteworthy aspects on which readers should focus.
• Think of it like road signs: just as signs help you know where you're going, this strategy helps readers understand your organizational intentions.

📝 Examples from published research

• Example: "Monitoring results are presented by station in the following section. The monitoring data are divided into pre-, during-, and post-construction periods. These periods were determined by observation and are somewhat arbitrary, as construction projects are a continuum with no distinct breaks."
  • This orients readers to the organization (by station, by time period) and clarifies a potential confusion (the periods are somewhat arbitrary).
• Example: "This section presents results for our various test corpora and classifiers. We will first verify [another study's] finding that combining features of different methods helps."
  • This previews the order and highlights what to focus on.

🔄 Strategy 2: Restating study specifics

🔄 What this strategy does

Restating study specifics: a strategy to restate various characteristics of your methodology, such as the overall approach, research questions, and/or hypotheses.

• The purpose is to connect methodology to the respective results.
• Readers need to understand the results, and briefly reminding them how those results were obtained helps accomplish this.
• Sometimes this is done by pointing to visual representations (graphs, tables).

🧩 Why restatement helps

• It helps readers situate your findings within the larger body of literature.
• It clarifies connections between motivations, methods, and results.
• Don't forget: readers may have forgotten or skimmed earlier sections, so restatement aids comprehension.

📝 Examples from published research

• Example: "We hypothesized that JM6 acts as a prodrug and would be metabolized under acidic conditions in the gut to slowly release Ro 61-8048 and thereby provide long-lasting inhibition of KMO. To investigate the pharmacokinetic properties of JM6, we treated wild-type (WT) mice with a single high dose of JM6 (300 mg/kg p.o.) and measured JM6 and Ro 61-8048 in plasma, brain, muscle, and liver by liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (LC/MS) 5 hr after administration."
  • Restates the hypothesis and the specific methods used to test it.
• Example: "In Table 2, we test for the effects of culture on individual preferences for redistribution and explore the effects of traditional economic determinants of preferences. A one unit increase in the mean preference for redistribution in the individual's country of birth, calculated on a 1 to 5 scale, is associated with a 0.36 unit increase in the individual's own preference for redistribution (column 1). This effect is highly statistically significant (t=4.08)."
  • Restates what is being tested and points to the table.

⚖️ Strategy 3: Justifying study specifics

⚖️ What this strategy does

Justifying study specifics: providing the reader with an understanding of how you have progressed from the literature to the justification of the study, to the research questions, to the methods, and now, finally, to your results.

• You provide justifications for study-related choices to increase the credibility of your results.
• This anticipates criticism, similar to what you did in the Methods section.
• Providing sound reasoning or rationale for certain study choices is like answering readers' questions before they are asked.

🛡️ How justification increases credibility

• Just as you anticipated criticism in the Methods section to make methods credible, you anticipate criticism in Results to make findings credible.
• Reiterating the importance of decisions made along the way strengthens your argument.
• This strategy provides an overarching perspective that guides readers to better comprehension.

📝 Examples from published research

• Example: "This flow was chosen because it has a streamwise component, in the x-direction, that varies over the cross section but does not provide flow in the y- or z-directions."
  • Justifies why this particular flow was chosen.
• Example: "Previous studies results showed that 25.0 mu M NAA was the lowest concentration among the three auxins tested that resulted in 100% rooting. Thus, 25.0 mu M NAA was selected as the most effective treatment and used in all further experiments."
  • Justifies the choice of concentration based on previous results.

🎯 Why these strategies matter

🎯 Addressing different reader behaviors

• Readers who read everything: may have forgotten important information by the time they reach Results.
• Readers who skim: may arrive at Results with only a vague understanding of what you set out to accomplish.
• Employing these strategies guides both types of readers to better comprehension.

🎯 The key connection

• These strategies connect the beginning of your manuscript to the main objective: the Results.
• They help readers understand your findings from an overarching perspective.
• They validate the entire research process from literature review through methodology to findings.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Goal 2 of the Results section focuses on presenting new research findings in explicit, informative ways to fill the knowledge gap established in the Introduction, without yet interpreting or evaluating those findings.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What Goal 2 accomplishes: introduces new knowledge that was previously insufficient or lacking in the research area by presenting study results.
• How to present results: use multiple formats (text, charts, tables, equations, images, diagrams) to help readers understand findings in different ways.
• What NOT to do: avoid commenting on, interpreting, or evaluating findings at this stage—simply present the information.
• Common confusion: Goal 2 is about filling the gap (presenting results), not discussing what the results mean (that comes later in Results or Discussion sections).
• Two key strategies: reporting specific results and indicating alternative presentation of results.

📊 What Goal 2 achieves

🎯 Purpose of occupying the niche

• This goal represents the transition from pointing out a gap (in the Introduction) to filling that gap with new knowledge.
• The new information addresses what was previously insufficient or lacking in the research area.
• You are introducing readers to knowledge gained from your research.

🚫 What to avoid

• Do not write your beliefs, interpretations, or evaluations of the results.
• Do not comment on or discuss the findings while working on Goal 2.
• All evaluative comments occur either:
  • Later in the Results section (if Results and Discussion are combined), or
  • In the Discussion section.

📝 Strategy 1: Reporting specific results

📝 What this strategy does

Reporting specific results: a strategy used to introduce the quantitative or qualitative results of your study.

• Presents the actual findings from your research.
• Makes connections between results and your original goals, research questions, and/or hypotheses from the Introduction.

🔤 Forms of presentation

Results can be reported in three ways:

• Narrative form: sentences within paragraphs
• Numerical form: tables and equations
• Graphic form: figures

Example: "The emission spectra of the ZnO NCs displayed the characteristic green emission."

Example: "A significant increase in crop phytotoxicity was observed for both glyphosate-susceptible maize and soybean plants."

✍️ Common sentence starters

• The first set of questions aimed to …
• To compare the difference between …
• The purpose of Experiment 3 was to …
• Simple statistical analysis was used to …
• The next question asked the informants …
• To assess X, the Y questionnaire was used

💡 Level of detail

The amount of detail to provide depends on:

• Individual writer practices
• Journal requirements
• Disciplinary conventions

🖼️ Strategy 2: Indicating alternative presentation of results

🖼️ What this strategy does

Indicating an alternative presentation of results: a strategy that allows a writer to point out and/or summarize the results in a more visual form.

• Refers to visuals to guide the reader to a more complex view of the results.
• Uses visual supplements (not just text) to present findings.
• Encourages better understanding by presenting results in multiple formats.

📈 How it works

• You reference figures, tables, or other visuals that display your results.
• This adds specificity and detail beyond the written content.
• Helps readers more accurately comprehend your findings.

Example: "Figure 5B represents the log10 of the ratio between the gene expression levels at different time points."

Example: "Figure 3 illustrates the Hybrid tom and hen turkey growth performance during the one-year monitoring period."

✍️ Common sentence starters

Table references:

• Table 1 shows/compares/presents/provides …
  • an overview of …
  • the experimental data on X
  • the summary statistics for …

Figure references:

• Figure 1 illustrates/presents/compares/summarizes …
  • some of the main characteristics of …
  • the difference in the two groups of …
  • the results of …

🎯 Why multiple formats matter

🎯 Benefits of varied presentation

• Helps readers understand findings in multiple ways (visual, spatial, textual).
• Adds to the specificity and level of detail of the results.
• Showcases findings outside of the written content of the article.
• Provides a supplement to the text-based report.

🔍 Don't confuse

• Presenting results (Goal 2) vs. interpreting results (comes later): at this stage, you are showing what you found, not explaining what it means or why it matters.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Goal 3 in the Results section allows authors to comment on and frame their findings by interpreting results in relation to the study context and existing literature, helping readers understand how the findings fit within the discipline.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What Goal 3 does: provides commentary and interpretation of reported results, explaining findings and relating them to other literature in the discipline.
• When to use it: typically after reporting findings in Goal 2; Goal 3 follows the report with interpretation.
• Five strategies: comparing with literature, accounting for results, explicating results, relating to expectations, and acknowledging limitations.
• Common confusion: Goal 3 may or may not appear in the Results section—it appears if Results and Discussion are combined, but may be absent if they are separate sections.
• Why it matters: Goal 3 helps describe and evaluate reported results, strengthening credibility and connecting findings to the broader body of knowledge.

📚 Purpose and placement of Goal 3

📚 What Goal 3 accomplishes

Goal 3 (Construing the Niche): the main aim is to comment on and frame the results of the current study.

• This commentary explains findings and develops understanding of how they relate to other literature in the discipline.
• It is a prime opportunity to evaluate how presented results fit in the pre-existing literature.
• Goal 3 allows authors to both describe and evaluate the reported results.

🔄 Relationship to Goal 2

• In most sections, there is no set order to goals and strategies, but Results Goals 2 and 3 typically follow a particular order.
• Goal 2 first: simply report the results.
• Goal 3 second: follow that report with attempts to interpret the results in relation to what has occurred in the study and what has been reported in other relevant research.
• Don't confuse: Goal 2 is about reporting findings; Goal 3 is about interpreting and framing them.

📍 When Goal 3 appears

Manuscript organization	Goal 3 presence
Results and Discussion combined	Goal 3 will be included
Results and Discussion separate	Goal 3 may not be present in Results; author may discuss results in later sections

🔍 Strategy 1: Comparing results with literature review

🔍 What this strategy does

Comparing results with the literature review: a strategy where authors compare the results of their current study with reported findings, theoretical beliefs, and/or previously stated assumptions or predictions in their discipline.

• Authors must attempt to match what they wrote about in the Introduction to underscore similarities and/or differences between their research findings and previous research findings.
• This is an opportunity to support explanations and/or claims with what is known from previous research.
• It shows how the results relate to the body of existing knowledge on the topic of current research and strengthens the credibility of findings.

📝 How to accomplish it

• Compare your findings with relevant literature.
• Cite the literature you are comparing with.
• Example language: "These observations are consistent with previous researchers' findings that..." or "...was found to agree well with the value reported by..."
• Example: "The short action time of 0.4s estimated based on the micro-PIV measurements was found to agree well with the value reported by Demuren et al. (2009)."

🧮 Strategy 2: Accounting for results

🧮 What this strategy does

Accounting for results: reflects on the nature of your study's results to point out what may have contributed to your results or outcomes and suggest reasons for, hypotheses about, speculations for, and/or assumptions that may account for certain findings.

• By using this strategy, you are working to justify the basis of the results.
• You explain why certain results may have occurred.

🛠️ How to accomplish it

• This step can be completed with or without referencing previous research.
• Writers often use hedging techniques to express uncertainty or caution.
• Example language: "it is likely that..." or "may have been a result of..."
• Example: "The discrepancy of the downtime NH3 ER (0.14 vs. 0.88 g d-1 bird-1) may have been a result of differences in litter source (rye hull vs. shavings) and clean-out practices..."

🔒 Understanding hedging

Hedging: how a writer expresses certainty or uncertainty.

• Often in academic writing, a writer may not be sure of the claims being made, or the evidence is not very strong.
• It is common to use cautious language that indicates uncertainty (hedging language).
• Two primary language tools for hedging:
  1. Adjectives and adverbs of likelihood (e.g., likely, possibly, probably)
  2. Modal verbs (e.g., may, might, could)

💡 Strategy 3: Explicating results

💡 What this strategy does

Explicating results: a strategy that helps to explain the reported results in the context of the study.

• Writers accomplish this by interpreting, inferencing, and possibly citing literature to give meaning to the results.
• It helps make immediate deductions from the results, provide logical interpretations, and prepare for further discussion of the results outside the context of the study.

📝 How to accomplish it

• Interpret what the results mean in the context of your study.
• Make logical deductions from the findings.
• Example language: "this finding suggests that..." or "These results indicated that..."
• Example: "Indeed, this finding suggests that strength of ties, per se makes little difference, at least in our context, in the extent to which bridging promotes individual innovativeness."
• Example: "These results indicated that SsoPox immobilized on nanoalumina membranes can indeed attenuate the production of P. aeruginosa quorum-sensing-associated virulence factors."

🎯 Strategy 4: Relating to expectations

🎯 What this strategy does

Relating to expectations: used to reason about the anticipated or unanticipated research findings and/or observations.

• This step is typical when you want to point out expected or unexpected results.
• It allows you to express attitudes about findings (often with regards to surprising or unsatisfactory results).
• You can connect the findings to original hypotheses, possibly stating whether or not they are confirmed or supported.

📝 How to accomplish it

• Point out whether results were expected or unexpected.
• Express your attitude about surprising, striking, or counterintuitive findings.
• Example language: "One of the most striking findings is that..." or "Perhaps the most intriguing finding..." or "Interestingly, the X was observed to..." or "This result is somewhat counterintuitive."
• Example: "One of the most striking findings is that all participants spent some time on both kinds of problems (i.e., there were neither floor nor ceiling effects), and there was considerable variability in time spent on both types of problems."
• Example: "Perhaps the most intriguing finding of our single-crystal X-ray analyses comes from the location of the protons in compound."

🎨 Language options

Common sentence starters for this strategy include:

• Interestingly, the X was observed to...
• This result is somewhat counterintuitive.
• The most striking result to emerge from the data is that...
• This is a surprising/significant/interesting/remarkable/unexpected/disappointing result/outcome.

⚠️ Strategy 5: Acknowledging limitations

⚠️ What this strategy does

Acknowledging limitations: important in any study in order to justify what went wrong in the study, avoid over-generalizations about the study's findings, anticipate potential criticism from other scholars in the field, and possibly transition to recommendations for future research.

• This strategy helps you be transparent about weaknesses or constraints in your study.
• It prevents readers from drawing conclusions that are too broad.
• It shows awareness of potential criticism.

📝 How to accomplish it

• Identify what was not possible to conclude or what went wrong.
• Explain why certain data had to be excluded or why conclusions are limited.
• Example language: "It was not possible, however, to conclude..." or "Due to the unexpected..." or "...had to be excluded...as they were not representative..."
• Example: "It was not possible, however, to conclude from the derived s-value what the molar mass of this species is due to uncertainties of hydrodynamic shape and because the reaction boundary of a rapidly interacting system always sediments slower than the sedimentation coefficient of the complex species."
• Example: "Due to the unexpected low bird number (an inadvertent error during bird transfer from the brooder barn to the grower barn) and considerable bird number changes of flock 1 at the tom site, data for one entire investigated flock had to be excluded from the ER assessment, as they were not representative of natural flocking patterns."

🔀 Moving between findings

🔀 Transitioning effectively

• Because the presentation of results can become quite complex, you need to distinguish between what you accomplished (your methods) and what you found (your findings).
• As you move between various findings, use transition phrases to guide readers.
• Suggested transition language:
  • If we now turn to...
  • A comparison of the two results reveals...
  • Turning now to the experimental evidence on...
  • Comparing the two results, it can be seen that...
  • The next section of the survey was concerned with...
  • In the final part of the survey, respondents were asked...

🎓 Summary of Goal 3 strategies

🎓 Why these strategies matter

• More than likely, all readers will choose to read this portion of your paper, even if they don't read other sections.
• These strategies help you consider which aspects of your results to focus on.
• They strengthen the credibility and clarity of your findings by connecting them to the broader literature and context.

🎓 The five strategies

1. Comparing results with literature review: relate your findings to previous research.
2. Accounting for results: suggest reasons or hypotheses for why you got certain results.
3. Explicating results: interpret and give meaning to the results in the context of your study.
4. Relating to expectations: point out expected or unexpected findings and express attitudes about them.
5. Acknowledging limitations: justify what went wrong, avoid over-generalizations, and anticipate criticism.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Expanding the Niche develops evaluations of results to connect the current study to the broader discipline through generalization, value statements, implications, and future directions.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• When Goal 4 appears: more likely in combined Results-Discussion sections; may appear in Discussion instead if sections are separate.
• Four strategies available: generalizing results, stating the value, noting implications, and proposing directions (authors choose which to employ).
• Purpose of expansion: relates specific findings to broader disciplinary context and demonstrates the study's contribution.
• Common confusion: Goals vs strategies—all four goals must be accomplished like a checklist, but strategies are optional tools for completing goals.
• Why it matters: helps readers understand the significance, applicability, and broader meaning of the research beyond immediate findings.

🔄 Generalizing Results

🔍 What generalization means

Generalizing results: inferring or deducing meaning from results and developing general claims or conclusions.

• Not just restating findings; it's about broadening their scope and meaning.
• Authors move from specific data points to larger patterns or principles.

🛠️ How to generalize

Authors typically accomplish generalization by:

• Summarizing or synthesizing major findings
• Making deductions to broaden the scope of specific results
• Expanding meaning outside the study's framework
• Considering generalizability, transferability, and validity

💡 Examples in practice

• Determining general principles from separate experiments (e.g., "through the separate experiments, we determined that...")
• Drawing broader conclusions about populations or phenomena (e.g., "This is further evidence that combat veterans experience direct cumulative disadvantage")

💎 Stating the Value

🎯 What stating value accomplishes

Stating the value: demonstrating the noteworthiness or importance of the study by pointing out the most relevant findings.

• Advocates for the importance of results and/or the study as a whole
• Highlights specific contributions to the discipline
• Helps readers understand why findings matter

📣 How to emphasize value

Authors can use phrases that signal importance:

• "These findings are especially significant in that..."
• "The most noteworthy finding is that..."
• "What stands out in the results is..."
• "This finding is quite revealing in several ways"

🔑 Key distinction

Don't confuse: stating value is not the same as generalizing—generalization broadens scope, while stating value emphasizes importance and contribution.

🌐 Noting Implications

🚀 What noting implications means

Noting implications: informing readers of the potential implications and/or application of the results and/or the entire study.

• Explains how results could be applied more broadly to research, practice, or theory
• Shows larger impact beyond the current work
• Points out possible consequences of findings or the study itself

🔗 How implications connect findings to practice

This strategy helps authors:

• Explain broader applications in the discipline
• Show impact beyond immediate results
• Connect findings to future research or practical use

💡 Examples of implication statements

• "This panel will be an excellent resource for future association studies"
• "The theoretical solution can be used to effectively estimate the flow velocity distribution"
• "These findings may help us to understand..."
• "The present study raises the possibility that..."

📋 Strategy Overview

🗂️ Four strategies for Goal 4

Strategy	Purpose	What it does
Generalizing results	Broaden scope	Infers meaning and develops general claims from specific findings
Stating the value	Emphasize importance	Demonstrates noteworthiness and contribution to discipline
Noting implications	Show applications	Explains potential broader applications and consequences
Proposing directions	Guide future work	(Mentioned but not detailed in excerpt)

⚙️ How to use strategies

• Strategies are options, not requirements—choose which ones fit your study
• All four goals must be accomplished (checklist approach)
• Not all strategies need to be employed for every goal
• Selection depends on study type, discipline, and journal requirements

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

The Results section requires accomplishing four distinct communicative goals through a variety of optional strategies, all of which must be addressed like a checklist to effectively expand the niche of your research.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Four communicative goals: The Results section has more communicative goals (four) than preceding sections, requiring careful attention to complete all of them.
• Goals vs strategies distinction: Goals must ALL be accomplished like a checklist, while strategies are simply options for completing those goals (you will not employ all of them).
• Goal 4 focuses on expansion: "Expanding the Niche" can be achieved through generalizing results, stating value, noting implications, or proposing directions.
• Common confusion: More goals does not necessarily mean a longer section—it means more careful planning to address each goal.
• Discipline-specific variation: Patterns for achieving these goals may differ by discipline or target journal, requiring exploration of published examples.

🎯 The Four-Goal Framework

🎯 Understanding the goal structure

• The Results section is unique in having four communicative goals compared to other sections.
• This multiplicity requires systematic attention rather than simply writing longer content.
• The excerpt emphasizes that length is not the issue—completeness is.

✅ Goals as checklist items

Goals should ALL be accomplished like a checklist.

• Every goal must be addressed; none are optional.
• This is different from strategies, which offer choices.
• Think of goals as mandatory checkpoints in your writing process.

🚀 Goal 4: Expanding the Niche

🚀 Four strategies for expansion

The excerpt identifies four distinct approaches to expanding your research niche:

Strategy	What it means
Generalizing results	Extending findings beyond the specific study context
Stating the value	Articulating the importance or contribution of findings
Noting implications	Identifying what the findings mean for theory, practice, or future work
Proposing directions	Suggesting next steps or future research paths

💬 Language patterns for expansion

The excerpt provides specific sentence starters to help accomplish Goal 4:

For assumptions and possibilities:

• "It can therefore be assumed that the …"
• "An implication of this is the possibility that …"
• "The present study raises the possibility that …"

For emerging issues:

• "One of the issues that emerges from these findings is …"
• "Some of the issues emerging from this finding relate specifically to …"

For understanding and development:

• "These findings may help us to understand …"
• "This finding, while preliminary, suggests that …"
• "This finding has important implications for developing …"

For broader significance:

• "This observational study suggests that a diet rich in X may help prevent …" (example of domain-specific application)
• "These findings raise intriguing questions regarding the nature and extent of …"
• "This combination of findings provides some support for the conceptual premise that …"

🔍 Why these starters matter

• They provide concrete templates for moving from specific results to broader implications.
• Each starter signals a different type of expansion (assumption, possibility, implication, question).
• Using these patterns helps ensure you are genuinely expanding the niche rather than just restating results.

🔧 Strategies vs Goals Distinction

🔧 How to use strategies

• Strategies are options, not requirements.
• You select strategies based on what best serves your specific goals and content.
• Don't confuse: You don't need to use every strategy, but you do need to accomplish every goal.

📋 Practical application approach

The excerpt recommends a systematic process:

1. Explore published examples: Look at your discipline or target journal to identify how others achieve these goals.
2. Identify patterns: Find similarities and differences that are discipline- or journal-specific.
3. Outline your section: Determine how to incorporate similar patterns before drafting.
4. Check completeness: Ensure all four goals are addressed, even if the section is concise.

📚 Additional Resources and Context

📚 External guidance

The excerpt mentions free online resources for additional support:

• "Tips on Writing Results for a Scientific Paper"
• "Ten Simple Rules for Better Figures"

These supplement the goal-and-strategy framework with practical writing and visualization advice.

🔄 Transition to Discussion

• The synopsis marks the end of Results section guidance.
• The next chapter (Chapter 6) covers Discussion/Conclusion sections.
• Understanding that Results has four goals helps distinguish it from the Discussion, which has its own distinct communicative purposes.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

The Discussion/Conclusion section is the broadest part of a research article, moving from the specific findings back to general implications, and many writers find it the most challenging to write because of its complexity and need for cautious language.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• The hourglass shape: research articles start broad (Introduction), narrow to specifics (Methods/Results), then broaden again (Discussion/Conclusion).
• Structural variation: some manuscripts combine Results + Discussion, others combine Discussion + Conclusion; the choice depends on the research topic, discipline norms, journal preferences, and writer style.
• Five core goals: re-establish territory, frame principal findings, reshape territory, establish additional territory (plus one more not fully listed in the excerpt).
• Common challenge: the Discussion/Conclusion is often the hardest section for novice researchers because of its complexity and the need to interpret results without repeating them.
• Two key principles: be positive about your own limitations and constructive about others'; interpret results rather than simply restating them.

🏛️ The hourglass structure of research articles

🏛️ Five standard sections

Research articles typically contain:

• Introduction (including Literature Review)
• Methods
• Results
• Discussion/Conclusion

These sections appear regardless of discipline or journal, though their organization may vary.

⏳ From broad to narrow to broad again

The excerpt uses an hourglass metaphor to describe the article's structure:

Section	Scope	Position in hourglass
Introduction	Broad/general	Top (wide)
Methods	Narrow/specific	Middle (narrow)
Results	Most specific	Middle (narrowest point)
Discussion/Conclusion	Broad/general again	Bottom (wide)

• You begin with a general perspective, narrow down to the most specific details in Methods and Results, then expand back to broader implications.
• The Discussion/Conclusion returns to generality after the specificity of the middle sections.

🤔 Why the final section must be general

The excerpt poses a warm-up question: why does the Discussion/Conclusion need to be more general than Methods and Results?

• The Methods and Results are narrow because they describe what you specifically did and found.
• The Discussion/Conclusion must interpret those findings in a broader context and explain their wider significance.
• Example: after reporting specific measurements (Results), you discuss what those measurements mean for the field as a whole (Discussion).

🔀 Structural flexibility and choices

🔀 Three common organizational patterns

The excerpt notes variation in how sections are combined:

1. Results + Discussion combined, Conclusion stands alone
2. Results stands alone, Discussion + Conclusion combined
3. (Implied: all three sections separate)

🧭 What drives the choice

Several factors influence which structure to use:

• The research itself: the topic and content may naturally suit one pattern over another.
• Discipline norms: some fields tend toward one organizational style.
• Journal preferences: target journals may have specific expectations.
• Writer style: your own preferences and strengths.

Your job as a writer/researcher is to know which option is best by taking into account all stakeholders as well as your own style preferences.

• Don't confuse: there is no single "correct" structure; the best choice depends on context and audience.

🎯 The five goals of Discussion/Conclusion

🎯 Overview of the goals

The excerpt lists the main objectives for the final section:

1. Re-establish the territory
2. Frame the principal findings
3. Reshape the territory
4. Establish additional territory
5. (A fifth goal is mentioned but not named in the excerpt)

🔁 Echoing earlier goals

• The names of these goals are familiar because they echo goals from other manuscript sections.
• This makes sense because the Discussion/Conclusion involves review and synthesis of earlier material.
• Example: "re-establish the territory" mirrors the Introduction's goal of establishing territory, but now you're revisiting it with your findings in mind.

💡 Key principles for writing Discussion/Conclusion

💡 Two general pieces of advice

The excerpt (citing Wallwork, 2016) offers two overarching guidelines:

1. Be positive about your own limitations, and constructive when discussing what you believe to be the limitations of others.

   • Acknowledge weaknesses in your study without being overly negative.
   • When critiquing other research, be constructive rather than dismissive.

2. Interpret your results without repeating them.

   • Don't simply restate what you already reported in the Results section.
   • Instead, explain what the results mean and why they matter.
   • Example: instead of "We found X increased by 20%," write "The 20% increase in X suggests that [interpretation]."

🚧 Why this section is challenging

• Many novice researchers find the Discussion section the most difficult to write.
• The Academic Phrasebank website notes the complexity and the need for cautious language.
• The excerpt promises language suggestions throughout the chapter to help writers get started.
• Don't confuse: difficulty doesn't mean it's optional—understanding the goals is key to overcoming the challenge.

📝 Sentence starters for expanding findings

📝 Useful phrases for implications and interpretations

The excerpt provides a list of sentence starters to help frame your discussion (these appear to be from an earlier section on "Expanding the Niche"):

• "It can therefore be assumed that the …"
• "An implication of this is the possibility that …"
• "The present study raises the possibility that …"
• "One of the issues that emerges from these findings is …"
• "Some of the issues emerging from this finding relate specifically to …"
• "These findings may help us to understand …"
• "This finding, while preliminary, suggests that …"
• "This finding has important implications for developing …"
• "This observational study suggests that a diet rich in X may help prevent …"
• "These findings raise intriguing questions regarding the nature and extent of …"
• "This combination of findings provides some support for the conceptual premise that …"

🛠️ How to use these starters

• They help you move from reporting results to interpreting and expanding on them.
• Notice the cautious language: "may help," "while preliminary," "raises the possibility."
• Example: instead of stating a definitive conclusion, you write "This finding, while preliminary, suggests that [interpretation]," acknowledging uncertainty while still drawing meaningful insights.

🔍 Exploring discipline-specific patterns

🔍 Before you write: explore published examples

The excerpt recommends a pre-writing exploration step:

• Look at published articles in your discipline or target journal.
• Identify where the goals and strategies from this chapter appear.
• Note similarities and differences that are discipline- or journal-specific.
• Determine how to incorporate similar patterns into your own Results and Discussion sections.

📚 Additional resources mentioned

The excerpt references free online resources for further guidance:

• "Tips on Writing Results for a Scientific Paper"
• "Ten Simple Rules for Better Figures"
• The Academic Phrasebank website (for cautious language and Discussion section help)

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

The Discussion/Conclusion section serves five specific objectives that help writers contextualize findings, interpret results without repetition, and reshape the research territory while using cautious, constructive language.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Five core goals: Re-establish the territory, frame the principal findings, reshape the territory, establish additional territory, and one more (the excerpt lists four explicitly).
• Why it's challenging: Many novice researchers find this section the most difficult because of its complexity and the need for cautious language.
• Key writing principles: Be positive about your own limitations, constructive about others' limitations, and interpret results without repeating them.
• Common confusion: Don't confuse "re-establishing territory" (Discussion/Conclusion Goal 1) with "establishing territory" (Introduction goal)—the former revisits the bigger picture after presenting results; the latter introduces it at the start.
• Structural flexibility: Results and Discussion may be combined or separate, depending on the topic, discipline, journal, and writer's style.

📐 Structural options and decision factors

📐 Three common patterns

The excerpt describes flexibility in organizing the final sections of a manuscript:

Pattern	Structure	When to use
Combined Results + Discussion	Results and Discussion merged; Conclusion stands alone	Topic/content drives this choice
Separate Results	Results stand alone; Discussion and Conclusion combined	Discipline or journal preference
Writer's choice	Any of the above	Consider stakeholders and personal style

🧭 How to decide

• Consider the research topic/content itself.
• Check discipline norms and journal preferences.
• Balance stakeholder expectations with your own style preferences.
• The excerpt emphasizes: "It's your job as a writer/researcher to know which option is the best."

🎯 The five objectives framework

🎯 Overview of the goals

The excerpt introduces five goals for finalizing a research article (though only four are explicitly named):

1. Re-establish the territory
2. Frame the principal findings
3. Reshape the territory
4. Establish additional territory
5. (Not detailed in this excerpt)

🔄 Why the names echo earlier sections

• The goal names are familiar because they echo goals from other manuscript parts (especially the Introduction).
• This overlap makes sense because review is a primary focus of the final section.
• Example: "Establish the territory" (Introduction) vs. "Re-establish the territory" (Discussion/Conclusion)—both deal with situating research in the broader field, but at different stages.

✍️ Core writing principles

✍️ Interpret, don't repeat

"Interpret your results without repeating them."

• The Discussion/Conclusion is not a summary that restates what was already said in Results.
• Instead, it explains what the results mean in the broader context.
• Don't confuse: repeating data vs. interpreting significance—the former belongs in Results; the latter belongs here.

🤝 Be constructive and positive

"Be positive about your own limitations, and constructive when discussing what you believe to be the limitations of others."

• Acknowledge your study's limitations in a positive, non-defensive way.
• When discussing others' work, be constructive rather than dismissive or overly critical.
• This tone helps maintain credibility and professional respect.

⚠️ Use cautious language

• The Academic Phrasebank website notes that writers find this section difficult partly because of the need to use cautious language.
• Cautious phrasing reflects appropriate humility about claims and interpretations.
• Example: Avoid absolute statements; prefer hedged language when discussing implications.

🗺️ Goal 1: Re-establishing the Territory

🗺️ What this goal does

Re-establishing the Territory: remind the reader how your research fits into the bigger picture, or territory, of the field.

• This goal revisits the idea of "territory" introduced in the Introduction (Goal: Establish the Knowledge Territory).
• Functions are similar between Introduction and Discussion/Conclusion, but the timing and purpose differ.
• Purpose: provide a foundation for the Discussion and better contextualize the argument that follows.

🔄 How it differs from Introduction's "Establish Territory"

• Introduction (Establish Territory): Introduces the research space at the start; sets up the problem/gap.
• Discussion/Conclusion (Re-establish Territory): Revisits the research space after presenting results; reminds readers of the broader context.
• Don't confuse: The Introduction establishes context before the study; the Discussion re-establishes it after results are known.

🛠️ Four strategies for Goal 1

The excerpt lists four strategies to re-establish the territory:

1. Drawing on general background: Prepare the reader with broader/more general terms using theories and frameworks.
2. Drawing on study-specific background: Use information specific to your study.
3. Announcing principal findings: State the main results.
4. Previewing content: Signal what the Discussion will cover.

🌍 Strategy: Drawing on general background

Drawing on general background: a writer prepares the reader for the upcoming discussion of the research results in broader/more general terms.

How to do it:

• Incorporate theories and frameworks that underlie your study.
• Use your own background knowledge, citations, or a combination of both.

Why it matters:

• Provides needed informational background.
• Offers a conceptual frame of reference for the reader.
• Reminds the reader of the problem, issue, or gap that motivated the study.
• Shows how the current study fits in the targeted knowledge/research space.

Key shift:

• The writing becomes general again, signifying a shift from the narrow/detailed nature of the middle two sections (Methods and Results).
• Example: After presenting specific data in Results, the Discussion zooms back out to connect findings to broader theories or ongoing debates in the field.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

The first goal of the Discussion/Conclusion section is to re-establish the territory by reminding readers how the research fits into the broader field and providing a foundation for the argument that follows.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What re-establishing means: revisiting the "territory" (the bigger picture of the field) to contextualize your research, similar to how the Introduction establishes territory initially.
• Four strategies available: drawing on general background, drawing on study-specific background, announcing principal findings, and previewing content.
• Common confusion: this is not simply repeating the Introduction—it shifts from the narrow/detailed middle sections (Methods and Results) back to a more expansive picture of how the study fits into the literature.
• Why it matters: provides a foundation for the Discussion and helps readers understand the context before you interpret results.
• Flexibility: not all four strategies are always necessary; choice depends on the writer, discipline, and journal.

🌍 What re-establishing the territory means

🌍 The concept of "territory"

Re-establishing the territory: reminding the reader how your research fits into the bigger picture, or territory, of the field.

• This goal echoes the Introduction's first goal ("Establish the Knowledge Territory"), but now you revisit it at the end of the manuscript.
• The function is to provide a foundation for the Discussion and better contextualize the argument that follows.
• It marks a shift: the writing becomes general again after the narrow/detailed nature of the Methods and Results sections.

🔄 How it differs from the Introduction

• Don't confuse: this is not just repeating the Introduction.
• The Introduction establishes territory for the first time; the Discussion re-establishes it after presenting detailed findings.
• The excerpt emphasizes "review is a primary focus of the final section," so some overlap in naming makes sense.

📚 Strategy 1: Drawing on general background

📚 What it means

Drawing on general background: preparing the reader for the upcoming discussion of research results in broader/more general terms.

• You incorporate your understanding of the theories and frameworks that underlie your study.
• Can be done with your own background knowledge, with citations, or with a combination of both.

🎯 Three purposes

1. Provide informational background and a conceptual frame of reference for the reader.
2. Remind the reader of the problem, issue, gap, etc. that motivated the study.
3. Show how the current study fits in the targeted knowledge/research space.

💬 Useful sentence starters

When referring back to literature (whether in your literature review or not):

• Several reports have shown that …
• As mentioned in the literature review, …
• Prior studies that have noted the importance of …
• Very little was found in the literature on the question of …
• A strong relationship between X and Y has been reported in the literature.

🔀 Supporting or contradicting previous findings

The excerpt provides two categories of sentence starters:

Support Previous Findings	Contradict Previous Findings
These results further support the idea of …	These results are contrary to those of Smith et al. (2001) who found …
… are consistent with data obtained in …	… are in opposition to previous studies which have suggested that …
… match those observed in earlier studies	… do not support the previous research
… are in line with those of previous studies	… differ from the findings elsewhere
… corroborate the ideas of Smith and Jones (2008)	… call into question the results of others

🔍 Referring back to research questions

Another way to accomplish this strategy is to make reference back to the research question or aim/objective:

• The third question in this research was …
• An initial objective of the project was to identify …
• The present study was designed to determine the effect of …
• With respect to the first research question, it was found that …

🔬 Strategy 2: Drawing on study-specific background

🔬 What it means

Drawing on study-specific background: reiterating relevant study specifics (e.g., methods, approaches, experimentation, procedures, analysis, hypotheses/research questions, etc.).

• Similar to the previous strategy, but focuses on your own study's specifics rather than the broader literature.

🎯 Four purposes

1. Help the reader understand how the results were obtained.
2. Remind the reader of study specifics relevant to the results and/or claims discussed further.
3. Clarify the connection between certain study specifics and respective results.
4. Re-emphasize the reliability of discussed findings.

💬 Useful sentence starters

• This study has identified …
• This study has shown that …
• These experiments confirmed that …
• The investigation of X has shown that …
• The results of this investigation show that …
• Multiple regression analysis revealed that the …
• The most obvious finding to emerge from this study is that …
• One of the more significant findings to emerge from this study is that …

🔍 Example scenario

Example: A study on hydraulic jumps might state, "Since we consider sinusoidal bottom contours we describe the hydraulic jumps in terms of the Froude number at the inclination angle of the channel."

• This reminds readers of the specific methodological approach used.
• It clarifies how the results were obtained.

🏆 Strategy 3: Announcing principal findings

🏆 What it means

Announcing principal findings: highlighting results by explaining, synthesizing, and/or reviewing what you discovered.

🎯 Three purposes

1. Emphasize takeaways from the research.
2. Show how you've accomplished the objectives of the research.
3. Demonstrate which specific discoveries occupy the identified niche in the sub-area of your discipline or field.

💬 Useful sentence starters

• One interesting finding is …
• The current study found that …
• Another important finding was that …
• The most interesting finding was that …
• The results of this study show/indicate that …
• On the question of X, this study found that …
• The most obvious finding to emerge from the analysis is that …
• The results of this study did not show that …/did not show any significant increase in …

🔍 Example scenario

Example: A study on plant pathogens might state, "A major finding of this study is that short and long-term androstenedione supplementation did not increase the serum testosterone concentration in young men with normal serum testosterone levels."

• This clearly highlights a principal finding.
• It emphasizes a key takeaway for readers.

🗺️ Strategy 4: Previewing content

🗺️ What it means

Previewing content: designating the organization of your writing.

🎯 Three purposes

1. Guide the reader through your ideas.
2. Clarify how you envision the content fulfilling your communicative goals.
3. Point out noteworthy features of the research.

🔍 Example scenarios

Example: "Next, we provide evidence that AAP2 functions in xylem-phloem transfer of amino acids."

• This tells readers what to expect in the next section.
• It helps organize the flow of ideas.

Example: "There are multiple implications and discussion points – practical and theoretical – to address when interpreting the results of this pilot study."

• This previews the structure of the discussion to come.
• It signals to readers what types of content will follow.

🔑 Key takeaways

🔑 Summary of Goal 1

The first communicative goal in the Discussion and Conclusion section is called Re-establishing the Territory, and there are four strategies that can be used to successfully accomplish this goal:

1. Drawing on general background, and/or
2. Drawing on study-specific background, and/or
3. Announcing principal findings, and/or
4. Previewing content.

⚠️ Important note

• The use of "and/or" at the end of each strategy indicates that it is not always necessary to utilize each individual strategy.
• These are variable by writer, discipline, and journal.
• Choose the strategies that best fit your research and audience.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Framing Principal Findings is the communicative goal in which researchers discuss and establish the meaning of their results by positioning them within existing literature through four key strategies: accounting for results, explicating results, relating to expectations, and addressing limitations.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What this goal does: positions your study's outcomes so readers can understand them, typically within already existing literature on the topic.
• Four strategies available: accounting for results (explaining what contributed to findings), explicating results (explaining implications), relating to expectations (comparing to hypotheses), and addressing limitations (acknowledging shortcomings).
• Primary association: these strategies are mainly associated with discussion of results rather than drawing conclusions about the entirety of the research.
• Common confusion: when addressing limitations, don't over-emphasize deficiencies—balance acknowledgment of shortcomings with highlighting contributions using hedging and boosting language appropriately.
• Flexibility: you don't need to use all four strategies; they are variable by writer, discipline, and journal.

🔍 Strategy 1: Accounting for Results

🔍 What accounting for results means

Accounting for results: a way to reflect on or further consider the findings of your study, clarifying what may have contributed to, caused, or otherwise affected the results or outcomes.

• This strategy helps you explain why certain findings occurred.
• You can accomplish this with or without referencing previous works.
• You may suggest reasons or hypotheses that could account for certain findings and justify the nature of results.

💬 Language for general explanations

When providing general comments and explanations, use phrases like:

• "A possible explanation for this might be that..."
• "This result may be explained by the fact that..."
• "These results are likely to be related to..."
• "It seems possible that these results are due to..."

Example: "These changes are most probably related to modifications in N uptake into aap2 mesophyll cells, as suggested by upregulation of amino acid importer LHT1 and increased uptake of 14C-label."

⚠️ Language for inconsistent findings

When reporting inconsistent, counterintuitive, or contradictory findings, use phrases like:

• "This inconsistency may be due to..."
• "This discrepancy could be attributed to..."
• "It is difficult to explain this result, but it might be related to..."
• "The possible interference of X cannot be ruled out."
• "The reason for this is not clear but it may have something to do with..."

Example: "That multiple genes in this pathway are underexpressed in hybrids of both species pairs perhaps is a cause or consequence of their sterility."

📖 Strategy 2: Explicating Results

📖 What explicating results means

Explicating results: explaining the reported results in the context of the study and/or in a broader context of the discipline, considering results and their implications.

• This is where you guide readers' interpretations by making an argument explaining your own reasoning.
• While readers will develop their own interpretations for why findings turned out as they did, you want to guide their views.

🔗 Connecting to previous research

When reporting findings in line with previous research, use phrases like:

• "Several reports have shown that..."
• "As mentioned in the literature review..."
• "Prior studies that have noted the importance of..."
• "A strong relationship between X and Y has been reported in the literature."
• "These factors may explain the relatively good correlation between X and Y."

Example: "We must therefore conclude, to use the terminology of Goodlad et al. (1979), that the content standards, as formulated by the relevant official bodies, have not been properly incorporated into the formal curriculum, despite their authoritative national status."

🎯 Explaining effectiveness

Example: "This research also showed that the effectiveness of rotations at reducing the weed seedbank was dependent on the specific crop that initiated the rotations."

Don't confuse: Explicating results is about explaining implications and context, while accounting for results is about explaining causes and contributing factors.

🎲 Strategy 3: Relating to Expectations

🎲 What relating to expectations means

Relating to expectations: reasoning about the researchers' anticipated or unanticipated findings and/or observations.

You can use this strategy to:

• Point out expected or unexpected results
• Express your attitudes about the results (often concerning surprise or unsatisfactory findings)
• Connect findings to initial hypotheses (describe how findings were or were not confirmed)

✅ Confirming hypotheses

Example: "Hypothesis 1 is verified by unchanged oil content values in rain-fed plot."

😮 Expressing surprise or unexpected findings

Use phrases like:

• "Surprisingly, X was found to..."
• "What is surprising is that..."
• "One unanticipated finding was that..."
• "This finding was unexpected and suggests that..."
• "Contrary to expectations, this study did not find a significant difference between..."

Example: "Interestingly, relative to inulin the dimer exhibited higher activity than the tetramer."

📊 Reporting non-significant results

• "However, the observed difference between X and Y in this study was not significant."
• "However, the ANOVA (one way) showed that these results were not statistically significant."

⚖️ Strategy 4: Addressing Limitations

⚖️ What addressing limitations means

Addressing limitations: evaluating the study by pointing out shortcomings and/or minimizing deficiencies in the research.

• No study is perfect, so it's important to acknowledge shortcomings.
• Important: Don't over-emphasize deficiencies—balance acknowledgment with highlighting contributions.

🛡️ Hedging language (softening claims)

Use hedging when you want to be cautious about limitations:

• "These findings may be somewhat limited by..."
• "These findings cannot be extrapolated to all patients."
• "These data must be interpreted with caution because..."
• "In observational studies, there is a potential for bias from..."
• "These results should be interpreted with caution."

💪 Boosting language (emphasizing strengths)

Use boosting when highlighting contributions despite limitations:

• "In spite of its limitations, the study certainly adds to our understanding of the..."
• "Notwithstanding the relatively limited sample, this work offers valuable insights into..."
• "Obviously, caution must be advised, but we want to emphasize..."
• "Regardless of the imperfect design, there are definite benefits to the study's

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Goal 3 redefines the research area by connecting your study's contribution to prior knowledge, either supporting or countering previous findings to update the field's understanding of the topic.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What Goal 3 does: redefines the research area based on your study's contribution and connects new knowledge to prior studies.
• Two strategies available: supporting with evidence (when results align with previous research) or countering with evidence (when results contradict prior findings).
• Common confusion: you don't need to use both strategies—only use countering if your results actually contradict previous work; use supporting when they confirm it.
• Why it matters: Goal 3 gives an update on the topic within your field by showing how your findings fit into the existing research territory.
• Real research is messy: most studies have some results that align with prior work and others that present contradictory evidence, which is normal in scientific discovery.

🤝 Supporting with Evidence

🤝 What this strategy means

Supporting with evidence: explains how the research findings reiterate findings from other studies.

• This strategy highlights the complementary or supplementary contribution your results make.
• It confirms or supports assertions made by other researchers and/or your own assertions based on findings.
• You are showing that your work aligns with what others have found.

📋 How to write it

For one particular finding:

• "This finding was also reported by [Author] ([Year])."
• "This finding is consistent with that of [Author] ([Year]) who …"
• "This also accords with our earlier observations, which showed that …"
• "It is encouraging to compare this figure with that found by [Author] ([Year]) who found that …"

For results as a whole:

• "These results further support the idea of …"
• "These results confirm the association between …"
• "These results are consistent with data obtained in …"
• "These results match those observed in earlier studies."
• "These results corroborate the ideas of [Authors] ([Year]), who suggested that …"

💡 Example from the excerpt

Example: "This supports previous findings that early and late growth in mice occur under different genetic regulation ([Authors], [Years])."

• The writer is showing their findings repeat or confirm what others have already discovered.
• This strengthens the credibility of both the current study and the prior research.

⚠️ Don't confuse

• Supporting with evidence is not just citing previous work—it's specifically showing how your results align with or confirm what others found.
• It's different from simply reviewing literature; you're making an explicit connection between your findings and theirs.

🔄 Countering with Evidence

🔄 What this strategy means

Countering with evidence: used when some or all of your results are contrary to those in previous research studies.

• This strategy is for when your findings contradict or differ from prior research.
• You are showing that your work challenges or updates what others have found.
• The excerpt emphasizes "advising cautious interpretation" when presenting contradictory findings.

📋 How to write it

Phrases for contradictory findings:

• "This study has been unable to demonstrate that …"
• "However, this result has not previously been described."
• "This outcome is contrary to that of [Author] ([Year]) who found …"
• "This finding is contrary to previous studies which have suggested that …"
• "In contrast to earlier findings, however, no evidence of X was detected."
• "However, the findings of the current study do not support the previous research."
• "[Author] ([Year]) showed that … This differs from the findings presented here …"

Phrases for different measurements:

• "The yields in this investigation were higher compared to those of other studies."
• "The overall level was found to be 15%, lower than that of previously reported levels."
• "The levels observed in this investigation are far below those observed by [Author] ([Year])."

💡 Examples from the excerpt

Example 1: "[Author] found a nonlinear resonance at a waviness smaller than ours. However, the one he found numerically for the capillary-gravity regime in rather thick films is quite different from our observations."

• The writer acknowledges prior work but clearly states their observations differ.

Example 2: "The molecular mass of deglycosylated inulinase from [various species] … which differ strongly from the results obtained for exoinulinase from [another species]."

• The writer shows their measurements are not consistent with what others have reported for similar organisms.

⚠️ Don't confuse

• Countering with evidence is not attacking or dismissing previous research—it's presenting your different findings while acknowledging the prior work.
• It's different from identifying limitations; you're showing actual contradictory results, not just explaining why your study might have limitations.

🧩 When to Use Which Strategy

🧩 Decision framework

Situation	Strategy to use	What to do
Your results align with previous studies	Supporting with evidence	Show how your findings confirm or complement prior work
Your results contradict previous studies	Countering with evidence	Present the differences and acknowledge the contradiction
Some results align, others contradict	Both strategies	Use supporting for aligned findings, countering for contradictory ones
All results are entirely new (no prior work)	Neither strategy needed	Focus on other goals instead

🔍 The messy reality of research

• The excerpt emphasizes: "Most research is somewhat messy, meaning that you may have results that lend themselves to incongruous, inconsistent, or even conflicting implications."
• This is normal in scientific discovery.
• You may need to use both strategies in the same Discussion/Conclusion if different aspects of your findings relate differently to prior work.
• Don't force yourself to use both strategies if your results are consistently aligned or consistently contradictory.

📌 Key reminder

• "It isn't necessary to include both of these strategies."
• You should only use both "if some of your findings are in line with previous research and other aspects present contradictory evidence to what has been done in the field."
• The writing goals and strategies help "keep us on track when reporting such issues."

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Goal 4 enables writers to expand beyond their immediate results by generalizing findings, asserting their study's value, noting broader implications, and proposing future research directions.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• What Goal 4 accomplishes: expands the conversation to show how findings fit into the larger literature and research space.
• Four strategies available: generalizing results, stating the value, noting implications, and proposing directions—writers may use any combination depending on their study.
• Why it's called "additional territory": enlarging the focus demonstrates expansion of the research space where future work can extend the knowledge generated.
• Common confusion: this is not just summarizing your own results; it's about connecting them to the bigger picture and opening pathways for others.
• Language patterns: writers use present-tense verbs to show confidence, transitional expressions to signal goals, and more general language than in Methods/Results sections.

🔍 The four strategies explained

🔍 Generalizing results

Generalizing results: drawing inferences to bolster overall arguments and conclusions by summarizing or synthesizing findings.

• This strategy shows how your work fits into the existing body of literature.
• You enhance the value of findings by pointing out how results transfer, compare, or contrast with previous conclusions.
• It's also a chance to highlight reliability and/or validity, making findings more generalizable.
• Example: "The results of this study thereby show that the choice of the best model depends on the error measurement which depends on the ultimate purpose of the forecasting procedure."

💎 Stating the value

Stating the value: characterizing the most salient results to show the centrality of the study within the field.

• This strategy lets you advocate for the significance of your work and label your exact contribution.
• You're essentially saying "here's what makes this study important to the discipline."
• Example: "The finding that TAF7 functions independently of a TAF1/TFIID complex significantly extends the growing body of evidence..."
• Don't confuse with generalizing: stating value is about asserting importance, not about transferability.

🌐 Noting implications

Noting implications: highlighting the potential implications of results and/or the study as a whole.

• Explain how findings could be applied to future research, practice, or theory development.
• Shows the larger impact and notifies readers of possible consequences.
• Can address multiple audiences: researchers, practitioners, policymakers, or citizens.
• Example: "These findings signal a need to consider refining specialty care delivery processes to more efficiently use the specialist workforce."
• Example: "Policymakers and citizens should note these long-term consequences of war as U.S. soldiers continue to fight..."

🔮 Proposing directions

Proposing directions: making recommendations or suggestions about next steps for your research or further research in the same area.

• A means of proposing practical applications of results.
• Makes an argument for the need for future research or the opportunity to expand the niche.
• Can be divided into two categories:

Recommendations for future research	Recommendations for practice or policy
"Further research is recommended to confirm..."	"There is, therefore, a definite need for..."
"A natural progression of this work is to analyze..."	"A key policy priority should therefore be..."
"The precise mechanism of X remains to be elucidated."	"This information can be used to develop targeted interventions..."
"More research using controlled trials is needed..."	"Unless governments adopt X, Y will not be attained."

• Example: "It would be interesting to design breeding experiments to explore if high AGPase activity late in grain filling stage cosegregates with enhanced seed weight..."

🗣️ Language characteristics

🗣️ Tone and verb tense patterns

• Discussion/Conclusion sections are more general than Methods and Results sections.
• Writers use language to highlight generality: "Overall," "In general," "On the whole," etc.
• Present-tense verbs denote confidence and demonstrate belief in the validity, reliability, and strength of design, findings, and conclusions.
• Past simple verbs review background information, reiterate objectives, or remind readers about procedures, methodology, hypotheses, and/or research questions.
• More positive tone overall compared to earlier sections.

🧭 Overt transitional expressions

Writers commonly use explicit phrases to highlight their communicative goals:

• "Our major aim has been attained by..."
• "Some limitations of this study include..."
• "Future work will need to explore..."

These transitions help readers follow the writer's purpose and understand which Goal 4 strategy is being employed.

🎯 Purpose and positioning

🎯 Why "additional territory" matters

• The name reflects the expansion of research space for the issue and discipline.
• It is within this additional space that future research can extend the knowledge generated in your study.
• This goal moves the focus beyond what happened inside your research project to what it means outside of it.
• Shows how results add to or relate to existing knowledge within the discipline, pointing out the work's value.

📝 Flexibility in application

• You don't need to use all four strategies—choose based on your study's nature.
• Research is often messy, with results that may be incongruous, inconsistent, or even conflicting.
• The strategies help keep you on track when reporting complex or contradictory findings.
• Each writer, discipline, and journal has unique stylistic norms, so there's no single "correct" way.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

The Discussion/Conclusion section finalizes a research article by expanding beyond the immediate study to situate findings within the broader discipline, evaluate implications, and establish the work's value through four main goals.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Four main goals: Re-establish the territory, frame the principal findings, reshape the territory, and establish additional territory.
• Shift in scope: Unlike Methods and Results (which focus inside the research project), the Discussion/Conclusion expands meaning beyond the study to relate results to existing knowledge.
• Language characteristics: More general language, overt transitional expressions, positive tone, present-tense verbs for confidence, and past simple verbs to review background.
• Common confusion: The final section is not just a summary—it must convincingly finalize the scientific argument and demonstrate the work's value to the discipline.
• Two core functions: Review and compile ideas retrospectively; evaluate the research overall and recommend improvements or future trends.

🎯 The four main goals

🎯 Goal 1: Re-establish the territory

• Reminds readers of the broader research context and field.
• Uses past simple verbs to review background information and reiterate objectives.
• Example: A writer might revisit the research gap or problem that motivated the study.

🔍 Goal 2: Frame the principal findings

• Highlights the key results of the study.
• Presents findings with confidence using present-tense verbs.
• This is where writers demonstrate belief in the validity, reliability, and strength of their design and findings.

🔄 Goal 3: Reshape the territory

• Interprets results and evaluates their implications.
• Situates findings within existing literature to show how they add to or relate to current knowledge.
• This is where the "inside" focus of Methods/Results shifts to an "outside" perspective connecting to the discipline.

🚀 Goal 4: Establish additional territory

• Expands comments to broaden the topic beyond the immediate study.
• Allows writers to:
  • Draw conclusions or make generalizations
  • Assert the value of the work
  • Remark on implications
  • Suggest directions for future work
• Example language: "Ensuring appropriate systems, services, and support for X should be a priority for…"

🗣️ Language and tone characteristics

🌐 General language

• Discussion/Conclusion sections are more general than Methods and Results.
• Common expressions to highlight generality:
  • "Overall"
  • "In general"
  • "On the whole"

🧭 Overt transitional expressions

Writers use explicit phrases to signal their communicative goals:

• "Our major aim has been attained by…"
• "Some limitations of this study include…"
• "Future work will need to explore…"

✅ Positive and confident tone

Language feature	Purpose	Example context
Present-tense verbs	Denote confidence and certainty	Demonstrating belief in validity and reliability
Positive tone	Highlight strength of findings	Asserting the value of the work
Past simple verbs	Review background	Reiterate objectives, procedures, methodology, hypotheses, or research questions

Don't confuse: Present tense is not just about current time—it signals the writer's confidence in the findings' ongoing validity, while past simple reviews what was done or known.

📚 Core functions of Discussion/Conclusion

📖 Function 1: Review and compile

To review and compile ideas and arguments, which may include a kind of retrospective view of the main areas covered in the writing.

• This is a backward-looking function.
• Writers synthesize the key points and arguments made throughout the article.
• It's not merely repetition—it's compilation that shows how pieces fit together.

🔬 Function 2: Evaluate and recommend

To evaluate the research overall, which could also involve recommending improvements and considering coming trends.

• This is both evaluative and forward-looking.
• Writers assess the research's strengths and acknowledge limitations.
• They point toward future directions and potential improvements.
• Example: Suggesting what future work will need to explore based on current findings.

🎓 Best practices and discipline-specific considerations

📝 No single "correct" way

• Each writer, discipline, and journal has unique stylistic norms.
• There are many different best practices rather than one rigid formula.
• Writers should explore published work in their discipline or target journal to identify similarities and differences.

🔍 How to apply these principles

The excerpt recommends:

1. Explore: Look at published writing in your discipline or target journal
2. Identify: Find the goals and strategies presented in this chapter
3. Note variations: See where discipline- or journal-specific differences appear
4. Model: Outline your Discussion/Conclusion using the structuring and placement of goals and strategies as a template

🎯 The final impression

• The Discussion/Conclusion is the last aspect of your work that readers will examine.
• It must convincingly finalize the scientific argument that has been unfolding through each section.
• This section demonstrates how results add to or relate to existing knowledge within the discipline.
• It explicitly points out the value of the work to the field.

Don't confuse: The Discussion/Conclusion is not just "what happened" (that's Results)—it's "what it means" and "why it matters" to the broader discipline.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Informative abstracts function as stand-alone miniature versions of research articles that help readers decide whether to read the full work and guide reviewers through the paper.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Two major functions: previewing/summarizing academic work and proposing academic work (research articles, theses, dissertations, conference presentations, book chapters).
• Stand-alone requirement: a successful abstract answers key wh-questions (who, why, what, where, how) to become a complete, independent document.
• Four main purposes: serve as miniature versions, act as screening devices, preview and aid navigation, and provide reviewers a roadmap.
• Common confusion: abstracts can be informative or indicative, and either type can be structured or unstructured—this excerpt focuses specifically on informative abstracts for research articles.
• Why it matters: manuscript acceptance is often decided based on the abstract alone, making it "the most important single paragraph in an article."

📋 Types and scope

📋 Narrowing down the focus

The excerpt acknowledges multiple abstract types but clarifies its scope:

• Informative vs indicative: both types exist.
• Structured vs unstructured: either type 1 or type 2 can be presented in structured format.
• This excerpt's focus: informative abstracts that appear at the beginning of research articles.

🎯 What work abstracts describe

Abstracts may accompany:

• Research articles
• Theses or dissertations
• Conference presentations
• Book chapters

Don't confuse: the excerpt discusses abstracts for various academic outputs, but emphasizes research article abstracts as the primary example.

🔍 Core functions

🔍 Two major functions (Swales and Feak)

The excerpt cites two broad roles:

1. Previewing or summarizing academic work
2. Proposing academic work

These functions apply regardless of the specific output type (article, thesis, presentation, etc.).

🗺️ Four main purposes for research articles

Based on multiple sources reviewed in the excerpt, informative abstracts serve four goals:

Purpose	What it means
Stand-alone miniature	Summarizes topic, motivation, methodology, and main results in a self-contained form
Screening device	Helps readers decide whether to read the full article
Navigation preview	Contributes to understanding and navigating the whole article
Reviewer roadmap	Guides reviewers through the paper they are evaluating

Example: A reader scanning dozens of abstracts can use them as filters to identify which full articles are worth their time.

📊 Why abstracts are critical

• Publication of research manuscripts is highly competitive.
• Acceptance is often decided based on reading the abstract alone.
• The American Psychological Association calls a well-prepared abstract "the most important single paragraph in an article."
• The excerpt emphasizes: "That's a big job for such a small amount of text!"

❓ Essential wh-questions

❓ Questions that shape content

To determine what to include, answer these wh-questions:

• Who: the audience and their expertise level on the topic or within the discipline
• Why: the motivation/justification for the research
• What (research questions): the research questions or hypotheses
• What (methods): the methods used
• What (findings): the general findings/conclusions
• What (implications): the implications for the subject matter or field
• Where: where the abstract will be published
• How: how the abstract should be formatted

✅ The stand-alone test

A successful abstract answers these questions as a way of becoming a stand-alone document.

• "Stand-alone" means the abstract must be complete and understandable without reading the full article.
• It provides "a miniature version, or microcosm, of the manuscript."
• Readers should grasp the core contribution from the abstract alone.

Don't confuse: an abstract is not just a teaser or introduction—it must deliver the key findings and conclusions, not merely hint at them.

📐 Structure preview

📐 Two-part discussion ahead

The excerpt announces that the following material will be divided into:

1. Functions of an abstract: examining purposes and goals for writing one
2. Forms of an abstract: emphasizing language issues that arise during writing

This structure separates why abstracts are written from how they are written.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

An informative abstract serves as a stand-alone miniature version of a research article that helps readers decide whether to read the full paper, and its quality is critical because manuscript acceptance often depends on the abstract alone.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Why abstracts matter: acceptance of manuscripts is often based on reading the abstract alone, making it "the most important single paragraph in an article."
• Four main purposes: serve as stand-alone summaries, act as screening devices, preview the full article, and provide reviewers a roadmap.
• Five structural goals: introduce the topic, present the purpose, explain methods, highlight results, and provide conclusions/implications.
• Common pattern: Goals 2 (purpose) and 4 (results) appear most often; Goal 5 (conclusions) appears least often because many researchers write abstracts before completing their studies.
• How to distinguish: an abstract is not just a summary—it must function independently as a "microcosm" of the entire manuscript.

🎯 The four main purposes of abstracts

📄 Stand-alone miniature version

An informative abstract provides "a miniature version, or microcosm, of the manuscript."

• The abstract must summarize the topic, motivation, methodology, and main results in a way that makes sense without reading the full article.
• It is not merely an introduction or teaser; it is a complete, condensed representation of the research.
• Example: A reader should be able to understand what was studied, how it was done, and what was found—all from the abstract alone.

🔍 Screening device

• Abstracts help readers decide whether to invest time reading the full article.
• Because publication is highly competitive and reviewers often read only the abstract first, this screening function is critical.
• Don't confuse: the abstract is not just a hook to attract readers; it must provide enough substantive information to support an informed decision about reading further.

🗺️ Navigation and preview tool

• The abstract contributes to a reader's ability to navigate the whole article by previewing its structure and content.
• It sets expectations for what the reader will encounter in each section.

🧭 Roadmap for reviewers

• Reviewers use the abstract as a guide to the paper they are evaluating.
• A clear abstract helps reviewers understand the research quickly and assess its contribution.

🏗️ The five structural goals

🌱 Goal 1: Introduce the topic and motivation

Guiding questions:

• What is already known about the topic?
• Why is the topic important?

What this means:

• Provide background information that situates the research.
• Briefly explain why the study matters or what gap it addresses.
• Example: An abstract might state what previous research has established and why further investigation is needed.

🎯 Goal 2: Present the purpose or goals

Guiding question:

• What is this study about?

What this means:

• Clearly state the research objective or question.
• This is one of the two most common goals in abstracts (along with Goal 4).
• The purpose should be specific enough to orient the reader to the study's focus.

🔬 Goal 3: Explain methods and techniques

Guiding question:

• How was the study carried out?

What this means:

• Describe the methods, materials, participants, and techniques used.
• Provide enough detail for readers to understand the research approach without overwhelming them.
• Example: An abstract might mention the type of experiment, sample size, or analytical techniques.

📊 Goal 4: Highlight the most important results

Guiding question:

• What was discovered as a result?

What this means:

• Present the key findings of the study.
• This is one of the two most common goals in abstracts (along with Goal 2).
• Focus on the most significant results, not every detail.

💡 Goal 5: Provide conclusions and implications

Guiding question:

• What do the findings mean?

What this means:

• Point out implications or recommendations based on the results.
• This is the least likely goal to appear in abstracts.
• Why it's often missing: many researchers write abstracts before completing their studies, so they cannot yet explain what the findings mean.
• Don't confuse: this goal is about interpretation and significance, not just restating results.

📋 Patterns and practical considerations

📈 Which goals appear most often

Goal	Frequency	Reason
Goal 2 (Purpose)	Most common	Essential for orienting readers to the study's focus
Goal 4 (Results)	Most common	Readers need to know what was discovered
Goal 5 (Conclusions)	Least common	Often written before study completion, making interpretation premature

⚠️ Timing challenge

• Many researchers write abstracts before finishing their studies.
• This timing makes it difficult to include Goal 5 (conclusions/implications) because the findings have not yet been fully analyzed or interpreted.
• The abstract may need to be revised after the study is complete to include meaningful conclusions.

🔗 Connection to article structure

• The five goals correspond to the IMRD/C sections of a research article (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion/Conclusion).
• Each goal in the abstract mirrors a major section of the full paper, reinforcing the abstract's role as a "microcosm" of the manuscript.

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

Abstract writing requires careful attention to length constraints, strategic word choices (especially pronouns, verb tenses, and modals), and selective citation practices to create a concise, self-contained summary that bridges the title and the full manuscript.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Length varies by context: journal abstracts typically range from 150-250 words, while conference abstracts may be longer (~500 words), and some formats use very short abstracts (~50 words).
• Word choice is driven by function: the abstract's purpose determines language decisions, including pronoun use, verb tense selection, and modal verb choices that signal certainty levels.
• Verb tense patterns matter: abstracts typically begin and end in present tense, with past tense often used for methods and results, though present tense can strengthen claims about findings.
• Common confusion about citations: while many sources say "never cite in abstracts," citations may be necessary when responding directly to specific research, using coined terms, or conducting replication studies.
• Best practice for drafting: include every important word from the title in the abstract and follow the IMRD/C order to maintain coherence with the full article.

📏 Length requirements and constraints

📏 Typical word counts by format

The excerpt identifies three main length categories:

Format	Typical Length	Notes
Unstructured journal abstracts	150-200 words	Without subheadings
Structured journal abstracts	~250 words	With headings
Conference submissions	~500+ words	Disciplinary differences allow longer formats
Short communications (IEEE)	~50 words	Specific article type in certain journals

🎯 Why length matters

• Abstracts are often used as a "gateway into acceptance," especially for conferences.
• The word/character limit is the first thing to determine when writing an abstract.
• Each journal has specific requirements available on their website.
• Although challenging to summarize an entire study in a few hundred words, length requirements are straightforward to follow once identified.

🔤 Word choice strategies

👤 Pronouns: navigating personal references

The excerpt addresses confusion about personal pronoun use in academic writing:

General guidance:

• Third person "they" or "s/he" is widely accepted when writing about others' work.
• Second person "you" is typically avoided.
• First person pronouns (I, me, my, we) show much variation even among expert writers.

Best practice recommendation:

• Use "they" as the most frequent and acceptable choice regardless of number (singular or plural) or gender.
• This pronoun can have antecedents that are male, female, singular, or plural.
• Most style guides advise against first and second person pronouns and the singular masculine "he."

Don't confuse: The singular "they" is not grammatically incorrect—it has been the most frequent personal pronoun for at least two decades and is supported by current writing guidelines.

⏰ Verb tense: signaling time and strength

General pattern:

Abstracts tend to begin and end in the present tense but vary significantly in their mid-sections.

Tense by section:

• Purpose/background: often past tense
• Methods: often past tense
• Results: often past tense
• Generalizability or significance: present tense to boost importance

Strategic tense choice: The excerpt provides a comparison showing how tense affects stance:

1. Past tense: "Our results showed that there were significant differences between the two types of X."
2. Present tense: "Our results show that there are significant differences in the two types of X."

The second sentence presents a stronger stance because present tense is typically used for facts, general truths, or fixed circumstances, while simple past tense indicates actions that may not continue into the present.

Example: When you want to emphasize that findings have ongoing relevance, choose present tense; when describing what was done in a specific study, use past tense.

🎚️ Modal verbs: expressing certainty levels

Modal verbs indicate stance; they allow the writer to strengthen or weaken a claim.

The nine modal verbs: can, could, may, might, should, must, had better, ought to, will/shall

Why modals matter:

• Each verb carries a level of certainty or doubt.
• They are useful tools for hedging or boosting claims about findings.
• The abstract is crucial for representing your work, so careful modal use is essential for striking the right tone regarding confidence level.
• Other words (adverbs and adjectives like "possibly/possible" or "obviously/obvious") can also indicate tentative or confident stances.

Don't confuse: Modal verbs are not just grammatical requirements—they are strategic choices that communicate your level of confidence in your claims.

📝 Grammatical patterns in abstracts

📊 "That" clauses for reporting results

A 2005 linguistic study of over 200 abstracts from six disciplines found:

Key finding:

Writers tended to use "that" clauses when writing about their results.

Examples:

• "The study's results indicate that..."
• "The findings confirm that..."

Usage patterns:

• In full articles: used in Introduction to review literature ("Other studies have shown that...") and in Results section
• In abstracts: primarily used to highlight findings, not to review literature in detail

🗣️ Common reporting verbs

The excerpt provides a table of highly-frequent reporting verbs often used with "that" clauses:

Category examples	More examples	Additional examples
describe, show, reveal	study, demonstrate, note	point out, indicate, report
observe, assume, claim	assert, examine, state	believe, mention, reveal
argue, discuss, find	suggest, focus, provide	propose, reveal, write

Important considerations:

• Each verb has its own level of certainty (e.g., "assert" is more confident than "indicate").
• Verbs can be combined with adverbs (e.g., "possibly," "certainly") and/or modal verbs to strengthen or weaken claims further.
• Writers should be familiar with the exact meaning of each verb before using it.

📚 Citation practices in abstracts

🤔 The citation debate

Common advice (internet majority): Do not cite sources in abstracts.

Reasons given for avoiding citations:

• To focus on your work, not someone else's
• To present a self-contained work without need for outside reference
• To reduce unnecessary words given the small word count limit

✅ When citations may be necessary

Despite common advice, the excerpt identifies situations where citations are appropriate:

• When doing research that is a direct response to another researcher's findings, theories, or claims
• When using a little-known term coined by someone in particular
• When conducting a replication study or meta-analyses

🎯 Best practice recommendation

The best practice is not to cite sources in an abstract unless it is absolutely necessary.

How to decide:

1. Read the Instructions for Authors for your target journal
2. If no guidelines exist, examine abstracts of previously published papers in that journal
3. If still unclear, contact the editor

Don't confuse: "Academic writing is often not black and white, wrong or right, no or yes"—the citation question depends on context, discipline, journal, and the specific nature of your research.

🔗 Connecting abstract to full article

🌉 The abstract as a bridge

One best practice is to include every important word from the title in the abstract.

Why this matters:

• The abstract's placement and function within a research article is to bridge the title and the text of the manuscript
• This helps you consider the content of the abstract appropriately

📋 Following IMRD/C order

General pattern: Abstracts present information in the same order as the research article: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion/Conclusion.

Note about the final section:

• The conclusion section (Goal 5) may or may not be included based on what stage the research is in
• Many researchers write abstracts prior to completing their studies, making it difficult to explain what findings mean
• Regardless of whether conclusions are included, the abstract will flow in this general IMRD/C order

🎨 Flexibility within guidelines

The excerpt emphasizes throughout that:

• There are "not rules to follow, but rather choices you can make" about what language to include or exclude
• Variations exist at the level of writer, journal, and discipline
• The information provided consists of suggestions based on linguistic research and general academic writing standards, not prescriptive rules

🧭 Overview

🧠 One-sentence thesis

An effective abstract achieves five communicative goals—introducing the topic, stating the purpose, explaining methods, highlighting results, and presenting conclusions—while adapting to the specific conventions of the target journal and discipline.

📌 Key points (3–5)

• Five goals framework: abstracts should introduce the topic, present research purpose, explain methods, highlight key results, and provide conclusions with implications.
• No universal rules: variations exist across writers, journals, and disciplines, so prescriptive rules cannot be applied uniformly.
• How to navigate variation: consult the target journal's Instructions for Authors and examine previously published abstracts in that journal.
• Common confusion: there is no single "correct" abstract format—what works depends on field conventions and journal requirements.

🎯 The five communicative goals

🎯 Goal 1: Introduce the topic

• Provide background information to contextualize the research.
• Briefly motivate the study—explain why the topic matters or why the research was undertaken.
• This sets the stage for readers unfamiliar with the specific problem.

🎯 Goal 2: Present the purpose

• State the goals or objectives of the research clearly.
• This tells readers what the study aimed to accomplish.

🎯 Goal 3: Explain the methods

• Describe the methods, materials, participants, and techniques used.
• Readers need to understand how the research was conducted.
• Keep this section concise but informative enough to convey the approach.

🎯 Goal 4: Highlight key results

• Present the most important findings.
• Focus on results that directly address the research purpose.
• Don't include every detail—select what matters most.

🎯 Goal 5: Provide conclusions

• Offer an overview of conclusions.
• Point out implications or recommendations that emerge from the results.
• This shows readers the broader significance of the work.

🧩 Using the framework effectively

🧩 Guiding questions as a tool

• Each goal comes with guiding questions (not detailed in this excerpt, but referenced).
• These questions help writers target what to include for each goal.
• The framework provides a structure for achieving a concise yet clear summary.

🧩 Balancing brevity and clarity

• The abstract must be short but still communicate all five goals.
• Writers must select information carefully—what is essential vs. what can be omitted.

🔄 Navigating variation across contexts

🔄 Why variation exists

The excerpt emphasizes that abstract conventions differ at three levels:

Level	What varies
Writer	Individual stylistic approaches and choices
Journal	Specific formatting and content requirements
Discipline	Field-specific norms and expectations

• Because of this variation, prescriptive rules cannot be provided that apply universally.
• Don't confuse: the five-goal framework is a general guide, not a rigid template.

🔍 How to identify the right approach

The excerpt recommends a three-step strategy:

1. Check Instructions for Authors: the target journal may provide explicit guidelines about abstract content and format.
2. Examine published abstracts: if guidelines are unclear or absent, look at abstracts in recent articles from that journal to identify common patterns.
3. Contact the editor: if the first two steps don't clarify expectations, reach out directly.

🔍 What to look for in published examples

• Notice what other writers in your field and target journal include or omit.
• Pay attention to length, level of detail for each goal, and any structural patterns.
• Example: some journals may emphasize results and conclusions more heavily; others may require detailed methods.

💡 Key takeaways for practice

💡 The framework as a target

• The five goals and their guiding questions give writers a target for their abstract.
• This helps ensure the abstract functions as an effective summary of the research.

💡 Flexibility is necessary

• There is no single "correct" way to write an abstract.
• Writers must adapt to the conventions of their specific context (discipline, journal, and their own style).

💡 Active research is required

• Writing an effective abstract requires paying attention to:
  • Author Instructions
  • Published examples in the target journal
  • Norms in your field
• This research phase is part of the writing process, not separate from it.