assignment 3 research paper first draft

The Savvy Scientist

Experiences of a London PhD student and beyond

How to Write the First Draft of an Academic Research Paper

Actually making a start and putting together a first draft can certainly be the biggest stumbling block to getting a paper submitted. Unless you make a start, it’ll never progress! Drafting your first paper is even more difficult when you don’t yet have experience writing papers and submitting them to journals.

I know from experience how daunting the prospect can be and just how easy it is to unnecessarily procrastinate for months. But it doesn’t have to be difficult and the main thing is making a start. I’m here to try and help making the process less daunting for you!

This guide to drafting your first academic paper forms part of the publishing series . I suggest reading these associated posts in particular:

• What to publish
• When to publish
• Where to publish

What to include in your first draft of an academic research paper

Let me start by saying that no one should be expecting for your first draft to be perfect! I wasted months of time on my first paper because I wanted to perfect everything, down to the wording, before sharing it with my supervisor. This is completely the wrong approach!

Instead of perfecting your first draft, just work to form the rough structure of your paper around whatever you want your key message to be. We discussed this further in the separate post: Deciding what to publish from your PhD work . Simply try to ensure your first draft roughly tells the story of what you want your main message to be.

It is absolutely fine for your first draft to be a rough cut, it should simply serve as a starting point. Therefore for example you can include extra figures you’re not sure about to be able to discuss with your co-authors whether or not they should be included. Throughout the drafting process you want to aiming to make your key message as clear and robust as possible but for now it’s fine to not be sure on the finer details. It may help to look at your favourite papers from the literature to get an idea what papers in your field typically include.

For now, don’t worry the quality of the written text, or finalising your figures. You want to use the first draft to form the rough structure and be a starting point for discussion with co-authors.

Let’s now discuss how to structure your first draft.

Structuring your first draft

If you already have a certain journal in mind to submit your paper to, how you structure your draft may slightly depend upon the format that the journal asks for. It’s a good idea to check their Author Instructions page which should include a “Guide for Authors”: a walkthrough of each section of the paper. Oftentimes there may even be a template you can download including section titles and advice for structuring your text.

If you don’t yet have a journal in mind, don’t worry. For the most part all journals follow the same format. For an original research paper, usually you’ll include sections as follows:

• Abstract – typically around 200-250 words or less.
• Introduction
• Conclusions – sometimes appears as the final paragraph of the discussion section.

Then followed by Author Contributions, Funding sources, Acknowledgments, Conflicts of Interest, any Supplementary files or Appendix and finally the list of References. None of these sections you really have to worry about at this stage.

Let’s go through roughly what to include in each section:

Introduction:

• A brief review of previous literature to set the scene;
• The motivation for the study;
• The aims of your study;
• Sometimes you may include a very brief overview of your main findings. See what other papers in the journal do.

Always include enough detail for someone else to be able to repeat your experiments, including:

• How many samples did you test? How did you process them? Were there inclusion/exclusion criteria?
• If you synthesised or processed physical samples, what materials have you used? Include processing temperatures, durations of each step etc.
• What equipment and consumables did you use? Include the item code, model number and manufacturer.
• How did you process the data? Name the software package, version and operations you performed.
• Details of any statistical analysis: software packages, models, methods, inclusion/exclusion criteria and so forth.

In all instances where you followed a method developed in another paper, include a reference to that paper. Not only is it good practice to give credit where it is due but you’ll have an easier time with peer review demonstrating you’re following the convention.

Remember, you shouldn’t be discussing findings in your results section, simply presenting them. Therefore there shouldn’t really be any suggesting why the results are a certain way. The exception is where the journal specifically allows results and discussion sections to be combined. Further on in this post is a section about choosing figures and results to include in your paper, and most of these will appear in your results section.

• Your results should aim to convince the reader of your key message.
• Be conscious that when first looking at your paper, most readers will go straight to looking at your figures.
• Cite every figure you include, in the order you include them. Clearly explain what is being presented.

Discussion:

The way I was taught to write a discussion was to simply use four paragraphs/sections covering:

• Your key finding . You can even start it with the sentence “The most important finding of this work was”
• Comparison to previous literature . How do your findings compare to other papers? What was the same? What was different? How do your findings progress the field? What would you recommend next?
• Limitations . Every study has limitations, don’t try and hide them. Be honest with what wasn’t ideal during your study. Examples may be: small sample size, imperfect analysis, impractical sample processing. If you can, cite other papers which relate to these limitations: either in regards to why it’s not such a big problem, how it is common problem, or potential solutions or improvements for future studies. In any case, be honest. You can recommend future work to overcome these limitations if appropriate.
• Conclusions . Give a brief set of conclusions with reference to the potential impact of your work for future studies.

You can see how I used exactly this format for a recent paper available here .

Eager to learn more about the steps involved in publishing your first paper? My academic publishing series is now available as a free eBook which you can read offline. Click the button below for access.

In which order should you write the sections of the first draft?

Everyone writes papers differently, so what works for me may not work well for you. Personally once I start a document for a new paper, I typically write notes for each section as I think of them but go with the following strategy to get the text written.

Generally it is acknowledged that the methods section is an easy section to write, so I would suggest starting there. Even if you’ve got writer’s block, writing your methods is pretty robotic and shouldn’t require much thought. It simply involves writing down the process you went through to collect all your data. Writing the methods is an easy starting point which should give you confidence to dive into the other sections. In the above graphic I’ve separated the conclusions from the discussion but often the conclusions will simply be the final paragraph of the discussion section.

After the methods you can start drafting your key results and your discussion will naturally follow from there. If you follow the structure for the discussion as outlined in the section above, it should also be formulaic and pretty easy to write if you’ve got a clear message.

By all means crack on with the introduction whenever you fancy. If you’re in the mood to write it, don’t stop yourself! I personally like to write notes for it and include key references as I’m going along, but write the bulk of it after the methods, results and the bulk of the discussion.

Usually it is recommended to write the abstract last once everything else is finalised.

Choosing which figures to present

Remember you’re creating a story around your key message. As such all your figures should be helping to convince your reader of your key message.

• Be aware that there are sometimes limits on the maximum number of figures you’re allowed to include (around 8) in the main text of your paper. Usually you can move figures to a supplementary section if necessary. Prioritise the most impactful figures to illustrate your main point.
• Each figure should aim to address a certain point around your key message to convince readers. You can combine figures as panels within a larger figure but only do so if they address the same overall point. Don’t confuse readers by combining loads of unrelated things just because you’re running out of space!
• Always make sure the caption fully describes what the figure is showing. The figure and caption should explain what is going on without the reader having to read any of the main text. What type of equipment generated the data? How many samples were tested? What do the error bars show? What is the scale? For stats: what is the p-value?

You may need a figure to describe your methods but after that usually you’ll try to include figures in an order which tells a story. Importantly: this order may not be the one in which experiments actually took place. You’re trying to tell a story to get a message across, not write a diary! It’s no problem to move sections of results around if it makes for a more convincing message, especially for readers who may only have a quick glance through your paper.

For example you may wish to start with your key finding, then follow with any validation work, then finally include more details to convince the reader. It will really depend on what suits the work you’re doing, but remember that you have full control and your aim should be to make a clear story.

My top tips for putting together your first draft of the paper

Iterate quickly.

My main bit of advice is to get a first draft put together pretty quickly otherwise you risking wasting lots of time like I did! I wish I had sent the initial drafts of my first paper to my supervisor sooner. I spent far too long trying to perfect it down to the exact phrasing of sentences. There is no point getting to this level of detail if there is potentially an improved completely different direction to take the paper in!

What I’ve found to work really well is to set deadlines with your supervisor to ensure you are making progress to submission. You don’t have to have the full paper available all at once. I have had calendar invites set up saying by a certain date I’d have sections of the paper sent across, and to limit procrastination no date was more than four weeks away.

After your supervisor(s) has had a look, send it across to any co-authors. It may take a few iterations until everyone is happy. Once you have the backing of your coauthors, don’t be scared to submit your manuscript slightly sooner than you feel comfortable.

A reviewer is pretty unlikely to outright reject your paper if they want more experiments to be carried out: they’ll ask for what they want in the review process.

Always think about the next publication

Once you start writing, you may struggle deciding what to include and what not to. Remember though that this doesn’t mean you need to delay publishing if you already have a clear story. Unless all your work sits together very neatly, please resist the urge to include everything in a single paper.

If you’ve got results you’d like to publish but they don’t sit nicely with the main message of this paper, you can always consider publishing them separately later. It is much more important to create a clear message with a coherent story than to include extra work just because you did it!

Although some academics shun the “salami slice” connotations of having many smaller papers, it doesn’t always make sense to force different experiments together in to one paper. I recently published two different papers in the same special issue of a journal, both were related but had very different messages:

• Quantifying 3D Strain in Scaffold Implants for Regenerative Medicine
• Exploratory Full-Field Mechanical Analysis across the Osteochondral Tissue—Biomaterial Interface in an Ovine Model

It wouldn’t have made for a stronger paper to combine them because in essence they were telling separate stories.

It’s fine for your first draft if you’re not exactly sure what to include. Once you’ve got the rough form of the paper sorted, you can add or reduce bits as necessary. The key thing is to get a first draft done to get the framework for the paper. No one is expecting it to be perfect!

Word vs LaTex

I know some people enjoy using LaTex for their documents, but I’ve never used it. Everyone I’ve always worked with uses Word, so even if I was keen to use LaTex I’m not sure that it would be that easy to collaborate on documents to track changes etc. Journals will often request the paper to be submitted as a Word document so probably save using LaTex for your own internal reports or theses.

Keep your data, files and figures organised

This point extends far beyond your first draft of a paper! Once you start iterating on papers, it becomes more important than ever to know where all your key files are. Ensure you keep different version of documents clearly labelled.

Be prepared for reviewers to ask for modifications to figures or data to be reanalysed.

What I do is keep a folder for the paper and include the main working draft plus other relevant documents like notes or draft of the cover letter. I then have subfolders for data, figures and old drafts.

Aim to present figures with a clear message which are easy to “get”

Making figures is the focus of a whole other post which will follow this one. In short:

A lot of readers will initially flick through your paper and skip straight to your figures. It’s really important that the figures tell the story clearly and can be understood by just looking at the figure and caption. Also, if the readers don’t like the look of your figures, or can’t understand them, they’re less likely to bother reading the rest of the paper. Again, have a look at how published papers present their work to get some ideas.

You’ll want to make your figures in such a way that they can be amended easily to account for any adjustments suggested by co-authors or reviewers. I use a combination of Excel and Photoshop for most of my figures. There are lots of alternatives depending on what you’re presenting, GIMP is a free alternative to Photoshop.

If you make them in Paint and someone suggests making some alterations, it could take you ages. Instead if you make them in a non-binding software like Photoshop you can easily make non-destructive changes element by element.

It is worth spending time creating nice figures. Having polished figures makes your submission look more professional, ensuring the underlying science is easy to understand is critical too. Plus you can use them elsewhere, such as in presentations or other documents.

Got a draft? What happens next

The hard work is far from over once you have your first draft but you’ve overcome a really big hurdle in the journey to getting your work published. Now it’s time to discuss your draft with co-authors, incorporating feedback and changes into subsequent drafts.

There is no certain number of drafts you should expect to go through before submission, just know that you could endlessly spend time finding things to add (discussed here ) and you should be very conscious to avoid doing! For my papers I think it took around four drafts until we felt happy enough to submit. Not all of your co-authors have to give feedback for every draft, I’d suggest the main people you’ll be liaising with will be your supervisor(s) though it’s certainly important that everyone has an opportunity to help.

Once all of the authors, including yourself, are happy with the paper, speak to your supervisor for how to proceed with submission. Some supervisors like to lead the submission whereas others prefer for the student to do so, and then to transfer “corresponding authorship” at the final stages before publication.

In any case, be prepared to feel vulnerable when you do eventually submit the research paper to a journal. This can be completely normal, your work is going to get critiqued! But remember that you’ve done great and rather than leave the data on a computer you’re motivated to pursue publication in turn helping progress your field. Well done!

I hope this post has helped with your first draft of a paper! Remember that you can find the other posts in the series here: Writing an academic journal paper series. Next we’ll be covering creating figures and dealing with reviewers.

Please let me know what you thought of it or if there are any other details of publishing which you’d like help with .

Share this:

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)

Related Posts

Thesis Title: Examples and Suggestions from a PhD Grad

23rd February 2024 23rd February 2024

How to Stay Healthy as a Student

25th January 2024 25th January 2024

How to Master LinkedIn for Academics & PhD Students

22nd December 2023 22nd December 2023

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Privacy Overview

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Yale J Biol Med
• v.84(3); 2011 Sep

Focus: Education — Career Advice

How to write your first research paper.

Writing a research manuscript is an intimidating process for many novice writers in the sciences. One of the stumbling blocks is the beginning of the process and creating the first draft. This paper presents guidelines on how to initiate the writing process and draft each section of a research manuscript. The paper discusses seven rules that allow the writer to prepare a well-structured and comprehensive manuscript for a publication submission. In addition, the author lists different strategies for successful revision. Each of those strategies represents a step in the revision process and should help the writer improve the quality of the manuscript. The paper could be considered a brief manual for publication.

It is late at night. You have been struggling with your project for a year. You generated an enormous amount of interesting data. Your pipette feels like an extension of your hand, and running western blots has become part of your daily routine, similar to brushing your teeth. Your colleagues think you are ready to write a paper, and your lab mates tease you about your “slow” writing progress. Yet days pass, and you cannot force yourself to sit down to write. You have not written anything for a while (lab reports do not count), and you feel you have lost your stamina. How does the writing process work? How can you fit your writing into a daily schedule packed with experiments? What section should you start with? What distinguishes a good research paper from a bad one? How should you revise your paper? These and many other questions buzz in your head and keep you stressed. As a result, you procrastinate. In this paper, I will discuss the issues related to the writing process of a scientific paper. Specifically, I will focus on the best approaches to start a scientific paper, tips for writing each section, and the best revision strategies.

1. Schedule your writing time in Outlook

Whether you have written 100 papers or you are struggling with your first, starting the process is the most difficult part unless you have a rigid writing schedule. Writing is hard. It is a very difficult process of intense concentration and brain work. As stated in Hayes’ framework for the study of writing: “It is a generative activity requiring motivation, and it is an intellectual activity requiring cognitive processes and memory” [ 1 ]. In his book How to Write a Lot: A Practical Guide to Productive Academic Writing , Paul Silvia says that for some, “it’s easier to embalm the dead than to write an article about it” [ 2 ]. Just as with any type of hard work, you will not succeed unless you practice regularly. If you have not done physical exercises for a year, only regular workouts can get you into good shape again. The same kind of regular exercises, or I call them “writing sessions,” are required to be a productive author. Choose from 1- to 2-hour blocks in your daily work schedule and consider them as non-cancellable appointments. When figuring out which blocks of time will be set for writing, you should select the time that works best for this type of work. For many people, mornings are more productive. One Yale University graduate student spent a semester writing from 8 a.m. to 9 a.m. when her lab was empty. At the end of the semester, she was amazed at how much she accomplished without even interrupting her regular lab hours. In addition, doing the hardest task first thing in the morning contributes to the sense of accomplishment during the rest of the day. This positive feeling spills over into our work and life and has a very positive effect on our overall attitude.

Rule 1: Create regular time blocks for writing as appointments in your calendar and keep these appointments.

2. start with an outline.

Now that you have scheduled time, you need to decide how to start writing. The best strategy is to start with an outline. This will not be an outline that you are used to, with Roman numerals for each section and neat parallel listing of topic sentences and supporting points. This outline will be similar to a template for your paper. Initially, the outline will form a structure for your paper; it will help generate ideas and formulate hypotheses. Following the advice of George M. Whitesides, “. . . start with a blank piece of paper, and write down, in any order, all important ideas that occur to you concerning the paper” [ 3 ]. Use Table 1 as a starting point for your outline. Include your visuals (figures, tables, formulas, equations, and algorithms), and list your findings. These will constitute the first level of your outline, which will eventually expand as you elaborate.

The next stage is to add context and structure. Here you will group all your ideas into sections: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion/Conclusion ( Table 2 ). This step will help add coherence to your work and sift your ideas.

Now that you have expanded your outline, you are ready for the next step: discussing the ideas for your paper with your colleagues and mentor. Many universities have a writing center where graduate students can schedule individual consultations and receive assistance with their paper drafts. Getting feedback during early stages of your draft can save a lot of time. Talking through ideas allows people to conceptualize and organize thoughts to find their direction without wasting time on unnecessary writing. Outlining is the most effective way of communicating your ideas and exchanging thoughts. Moreover, it is also the best stage to decide to which publication you will submit the paper. Many people come up with three choices and discuss them with their mentors and colleagues. Having a list of journal priorities can help you quickly resubmit your paper if your paper is rejected.

Rule 2: Create a detailed outline and discuss it with your mentor and peers.

3. continue with drafts.

After you get enough feedback and decide on the journal you will submit to, the process of real writing begins. Copy your outline into a separate file and expand on each of the points, adding data and elaborating on the details. When you create the first draft, do not succumb to the temptation of editing. Do not slow down to choose a better word or better phrase; do not halt to improve your sentence structure. Pour your ideas into the paper and leave revision and editing for later. As Paul Silvia explains, “Revising while you generate text is like drinking decaffeinated coffee in the early morning: noble idea, wrong time” [ 2 ].

Many students complain that they are not productive writers because they experience writer’s block. Staring at an empty screen is frustrating, but your screen is not really empty: You have a template of your article, and all you need to do is fill in the blanks. Indeed, writer’s block is a logical fallacy for a scientist ― it is just an excuse to procrastinate. When scientists start writing a research paper, they already have their files with data, lab notes with materials and experimental designs, some visuals, and tables with results. All they need to do is scrutinize these pieces and put them together into a comprehensive paper.

3.1. Starting with Materials and Methods

If you still struggle with starting a paper, then write the Materials and Methods section first. Since you have all your notes, it should not be problematic for you to describe the experimental design and procedures. Your most important goal in this section is to be as explicit as possible by providing enough detail and references. In the end, the purpose of this section is to allow other researchers to evaluate and repeat your work. So do not run into the same problems as the writers of the sentences in (1):

1a. Bacteria were pelleted by centrifugation. 1b. To isolate T cells, lymph nodes were collected.

As you can see, crucial pieces of information are missing: the speed of centrifuging your bacteria, the time, and the temperature in (1a); the source of lymph nodes for collection in (b). The sentences can be improved when information is added, as in (2a) and (2b), respectfully:

2a. Bacteria were pelleted by centrifugation at 3000g for 15 min at 25°C. 2b. To isolate T cells, mediastinal and mesenteric lymph nodes from Balb/c mice were collected at day 7 after immunization with ovabumin.

If your method has previously been published and is well-known, then you should provide only the literature reference, as in (3a). If your method is unpublished, then you need to make sure you provide all essential details, as in (3b).

3a. Stem cells were isolated, according to Johnson [23]. 3b. Stem cells were isolated using biotinylated carbon nanotubes coated with anti-CD34 antibodies.

Furthermore, cohesion and fluency are crucial in this section. One of the malpractices resulting in disrupted fluency is switching from passive voice to active and vice versa within the same paragraph, as shown in (4). This switching misleads and distracts the reader.

4. Behavioral computer-based experiments of Study 1 were programmed by using E-Prime. We took ratings of enjoyment, mood, and arousal as the patients listened to preferred pleasant music and unpreferred music by using Visual Analogue Scales (SI Methods). The preferred and unpreferred status of the music was operationalized along a continuum of pleasantness [ 4 ].

The problem with (4) is that the reader has to switch from the point of view of the experiment (passive voice) to the point of view of the experimenter (active voice). This switch causes confusion about the performer of the actions in the first and the third sentences. To improve the coherence and fluency of the paragraph above, you should be consistent in choosing the point of view: first person “we” or passive voice [ 5 ]. Let’s consider two revised examples in (5).

5a. We programmed behavioral computer-based experiments of Study 1 by using E-Prime. We took ratings of enjoyment, mood, and arousal by using Visual Analogue Scales (SI Methods) as the patients listened to preferred pleasant music and unpreferred music. We operationalized the preferred and unpreferred status of the music along a continuum of pleasantness. 5b. Behavioral computer-based experiments of Study 1 were programmed by using E-Prime. Ratings of enjoyment, mood, and arousal were taken as the patients listened to preferred pleasant music and unpreferred music by using Visual Analogue Scales (SI Methods). The preferred and unpreferred status of the music was operationalized along a continuum of pleasantness.

If you choose the point of view of the experimenter, then you may end up with repetitive “we did this” sentences. For many readers, paragraphs with sentences all beginning with “we” may also sound disruptive. So if you choose active sentences, you need to keep the number of “we” subjects to a minimum and vary the beginnings of the sentences [ 6 ].

Interestingly, recent studies have reported that the Materials and Methods section is the only section in research papers in which passive voice predominantly overrides the use of the active voice [ 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 ]. For example, Martínez shows a significant drop in active voice use in the Methods sections based on the corpus of 1 million words of experimental full text research articles in the biological sciences [ 7 ]. According to the author, the active voice patterned with “we” is used only as a tool to reveal personal responsibility for the procedural decisions in designing and performing experimental work. This means that while all other sections of the research paper use active voice, passive voice is still the most predominant in Materials and Methods sections.

Writing Materials and Methods sections is a meticulous and time consuming task requiring extreme accuracy and clarity. This is why when you complete your draft, you should ask for as much feedback from your colleagues as possible. Numerous readers of this section will help you identify the missing links and improve the technical style of this section.

Rule 3: Be meticulous and accurate in describing the Materials and Methods. Do not change the point of view within one paragraph.

3.2. writing results section.

For many authors, writing the Results section is more intimidating than writing the Materials and Methods section . If people are interested in your paper, they are interested in your results. That is why it is vital to use all your writing skills to objectively present your key findings in an orderly and logical sequence using illustrative materials and text.

Your Results should be organized into different segments or subsections where each one presents the purpose of the experiment, your experimental approach, data including text and visuals (tables, figures, schematics, algorithms, and formulas), and data commentary. For most journals, your data commentary will include a meaningful summary of the data presented in the visuals and an explanation of the most significant findings. This data presentation should not repeat the data in the visuals, but rather highlight the most important points. In the “standard” research paper approach, your Results section should exclude data interpretation, leaving it for the Discussion section. However, interpretations gradually and secretly creep into research papers: “Reducing the data, generalizing from the data, and highlighting scientific cases are all highly interpretive processes. It should be clear by now that we do not let the data speak for themselves in research reports; in summarizing our results, we interpret them for the reader” [ 10 ]. As a result, many journals including the Journal of Experimental Medicine and the Journal of Clinical Investigation use joint Results/Discussion sections, where results are immediately followed by interpretations.

Another important aspect of this section is to create a comprehensive and supported argument or a well-researched case. This means that you should be selective in presenting data and choose only those experimental details that are essential for your reader to understand your findings. You might have conducted an experiment 20 times and collected numerous records, but this does not mean that you should present all those records in your paper. You need to distinguish your results from your data and be able to discard excessive experimental details that could distract and confuse the reader. However, creating a picture or an argument should not be confused with data manipulation or falsification, which is a willful distortion of data and results. If some of your findings contradict your ideas, you have to mention this and find a plausible explanation for the contradiction.

In addition, your text should not include irrelevant and peripheral information, including overview sentences, as in (6).

6. To show our results, we first introduce all components of experimental system and then describe the outcome of infections.

Indeed, wordiness convolutes your sentences and conceals your ideas from readers. One common source of wordiness is unnecessary intensifiers. Adverbial intensifiers such as “clearly,” “essential,” “quite,” “basically,” “rather,” “fairly,” “really,” and “virtually” not only add verbosity to your sentences, but also lower your results’ credibility. They appeal to the reader’s emotions but lower objectivity, as in the common examples in (7):

7a. Table 3 clearly shows that … 7b. It is obvious from figure 4 that …

Another source of wordiness is nominalizations, i.e., nouns derived from verbs and adjectives paired with weak verbs including “be,” “have,” “do,” “make,” “cause,” “provide,” and “get” and constructions such as “there is/are.”

8a. We tested the hypothesis that there is a disruption of membrane asymmetry. 8b. In this paper we provide an argument that stem cells repopulate injured organs.

In the sentences above, the abstract nominalizations “disruption” and “argument” do not contribute to the clarity of the sentences, but rather clutter them with useless vocabulary that distracts from the meaning. To improve your sentences, avoid unnecessary nominalizations and change passive verbs and constructions into active and direct sentences.

9a. We tested the hypothesis that the membrane asymmetry is disrupted. 9b. In this paper we argue that stem cells repopulate injured organs.

Your Results section is the heart of your paper, representing a year or more of your daily research. So lead your reader through your story by writing direct, concise, and clear sentences.

Rule 4: Be clear, concise, and objective in describing your Results.

3.3. now it is time for your introduction.

Now that you are almost half through drafting your research paper, it is time to update your outline. While describing your Methods and Results, many of you diverged from the original outline and re-focused your ideas. So before you move on to create your Introduction, re-read your Methods and Results sections and change your outline to match your research focus. The updated outline will help you review the general picture of your paper, the topic, the main idea, and the purpose, which are all important for writing your introduction.

The best way to structure your introduction is to follow the three-move approach shown in Table 3 .

Adapted from Swales and Feak [ 11 ].

The moves and information from your outline can help to create your Introduction efficiently and without missing steps. These moves are traffic signs that lead the reader through the road of your ideas. Each move plays an important role in your paper and should be presented with deep thought and care. When you establish the territory, you place your research in context and highlight the importance of your research topic. By finding the niche, you outline the scope of your research problem and enter the scientific dialogue. The final move, “occupying the niche,” is where you explain your research in a nutshell and highlight your paper’s significance. The three moves allow your readers to evaluate their interest in your paper and play a significant role in the paper review process, determining your paper reviewers.

Some academic writers assume that the reader “should follow the paper” to find the answers about your methodology and your findings. As a result, many novice writers do not present their experimental approach and the major findings, wrongly believing that the reader will locate the necessary information later while reading the subsequent sections [ 5 ]. However, this “suspense” approach is not appropriate for scientific writing. To interest the reader, scientific authors should be direct and straightforward and present informative one-sentence summaries of the results and the approach.

Another problem is that writers understate the significance of the Introduction. Many new researchers mistakenly think that all their readers understand the importance of the research question and omit this part. However, this assumption is faulty because the purpose of the section is not to evaluate the importance of the research question in general. The goal is to present the importance of your research contribution and your findings. Therefore, you should be explicit and clear in describing the benefit of the paper.

The Introduction should not be long. Indeed, for most journals, this is a very brief section of about 250 to 600 words, but it might be the most difficult section due to its importance.

Rule 5: Interest your reader in the Introduction section by signalling all its elements and stating the novelty of the work.

3.4. discussion of the results.

For many scientists, writing a Discussion section is as scary as starting a paper. Most of the fear comes from the variation in the section. Since every paper has its unique results and findings, the Discussion section differs in its length, shape, and structure. However, some general principles of writing this section still exist. Knowing these rules, or “moves,” can change your attitude about this section and help you create a comprehensive interpretation of your results.

The purpose of the Discussion section is to place your findings in the research context and “to explain the meaning of the findings and why they are important, without appearing arrogant, condescending, or patronizing” [ 11 ]. The structure of the first two moves is almost a mirror reflection of the one in the Introduction. In the Introduction, you zoom in from general to specific and from the background to your research question; in the Discussion section, you zoom out from the summary of your findings to the research context, as shown in Table 4 .

Adapted from Swales and Feak and Hess [ 11 , 12 ].

The biggest challenge for many writers is the opening paragraph of the Discussion section. Following the moves in Table 1 , the best choice is to start with the study’s major findings that provide the answer to the research question in your Introduction. The most common starting phrases are “Our findings demonstrate . . .,” or “In this study, we have shown that . . .,” or “Our results suggest . . .” In some cases, however, reminding the reader about the research question or even providing a brief context and then stating the answer would make more sense. This is important in those cases where the researcher presents a number of findings or where more than one research question was presented. Your summary of the study’s major findings should be followed by your presentation of the importance of these findings. One of the most frequent mistakes of the novice writer is to assume the importance of his findings. Even if the importance is clear to you, it may not be obvious to your reader. Digesting the findings and their importance to your reader is as crucial as stating your research question.

Another useful strategy is to be proactive in the first move by predicting and commenting on the alternative explanations of the results. Addressing potential doubts will save you from painful comments about the wrong interpretation of your results and will present you as a thoughtful and considerate researcher. Moreover, the evaluation of the alternative explanations might help you create a logical step to the next move of the discussion section: the research context.

The goal of the research context move is to show how your findings fit into the general picture of the current research and how you contribute to the existing knowledge on the topic. This is also the place to discuss any discrepancies and unexpected findings that may otherwise distort the general picture of your paper. Moreover, outlining the scope of your research by showing the limitations, weaknesses, and assumptions is essential and adds modesty to your image as a scientist. However, make sure that you do not end your paper with the problems that override your findings. Try to suggest feasible explanations and solutions.

If your submission does not require a separate Conclusion section, then adding another paragraph about the “take-home message” is a must. This should be a general statement reiterating your answer to the research question and adding its scientific implications, practical application, or advice.

Just as in all other sections of your paper, the clear and precise language and concise comprehensive sentences are vital. However, in addition to that, your writing should convey confidence and authority. The easiest way to illustrate your tone is to use the active voice and the first person pronouns. Accompanied by clarity and succinctness, these tools are the best to convince your readers of your point and your ideas.

Rule 6: Present the principles, relationships, and generalizations in a concise and convincing tone.

4. choosing the best working revision strategies.

Now that you have created the first draft, your attitude toward your writing should have improved. Moreover, you should feel more confident that you are able to accomplish your project and submit your paper within a reasonable timeframe. You also have worked out your writing schedule and followed it precisely. Do not stop ― you are only at the midpoint from your destination. Just as the best and most precious diamond is no more than an unattractive stone recognized only by trained professionals, your ideas and your results may go unnoticed if they are not polished and brushed. Despite your attempts to present your ideas in a logical and comprehensive way, first drafts are frequently a mess. Use the advice of Paul Silvia: “Your first drafts should sound like they were hastily translated from Icelandic by a non-native speaker” [ 2 ]. The degree of your success will depend on how you are able to revise and edit your paper.

The revision can be done at the macrostructure and the microstructure levels [ 13 ]. The macrostructure revision includes the revision of the organization, content, and flow. The microstructure level includes individual words, sentence structure, grammar, punctuation, and spelling.

The best way to approach the macrostructure revision is through the outline of the ideas in your paper. The last time you updated your outline was before writing the Introduction and the Discussion. Now that you have the beginning and the conclusion, you can take a bird’s-eye view of the whole paper. The outline will allow you to see if the ideas of your paper are coherently structured, if your results are logically built, and if the discussion is linked to the research question in the Introduction. You will be able to see if something is missing in any of the sections or if you need to rearrange your information to make your point.

The next step is to revise each of the sections starting from the beginning. Ideally, you should limit yourself to working on small sections of about five pages at a time [ 14 ]. After these short sections, your eyes get used to your writing and your efficiency in spotting problems decreases. When reading for content and organization, you should control your urge to edit your paper for sentence structure and grammar and focus only on the flow of your ideas and logic of your presentation. Experienced researchers tend to make almost three times the number of changes to meaning than novice writers [ 15 , 16 ]. Revising is a difficult but useful skill, which academic writers obtain with years of practice.

In contrast to the macrostructure revision, which is a linear process and is done usually through a detailed outline and by sections, microstructure revision is a non-linear process. While the goal of the macrostructure revision is to analyze your ideas and their logic, the goal of the microstructure editing is to scrutinize the form of your ideas: your paragraphs, sentences, and words. You do not need and are not recommended to follow the order of the paper to perform this type of revision. You can start from the end or from different sections. You can even revise by reading sentences backward, sentence by sentence and word by word.

One of the microstructure revision strategies frequently used during writing center consultations is to read the paper aloud [ 17 ]. You may read aloud to yourself, to a tape recorder, or to a colleague or friend. When reading and listening to your paper, you are more likely to notice the places where the fluency is disrupted and where you stumble because of a very long and unclear sentence or a wrong connector.

Another revision strategy is to learn your common errors and to do a targeted search for them [ 13 ]. All writers have a set of problems that are specific to them, i.e., their writing idiosyncrasies. Remembering these problems is as important for an academic writer as remembering your friends’ birthdays. Create a list of these idiosyncrasies and run a search for these problems using your word processor. If your problem is demonstrative pronouns without summary words, then search for “this/these/those” in your text and check if you used the word appropriately. If you have a problem with intensifiers, then search for “really” or “very” and delete them from the text. The same targeted search can be done to eliminate wordiness. Searching for “there is/are” or “and” can help you avoid the bulky sentences.

The final strategy is working with a hard copy and a pencil. Print a double space copy with font size 14 and re-read your paper in several steps. Try reading your paper line by line with the rest of the text covered with a piece of paper. When you are forced to see only a small portion of your writing, you are less likely to get distracted and are more likely to notice problems. You will end up spotting more unnecessary words, wrongly worded phrases, or unparallel constructions.

After you apply all these strategies, you are ready to share your writing with your friends, colleagues, and a writing advisor in the writing center. Get as much feedback as you can, especially from non-specialists in your field. Patiently listen to what others say to you ― you are not expected to defend your writing or explain what you wanted to say. You may decide what you want to change and how after you receive the feedback and sort it in your head. Even though some researchers make the revision an endless process and can hardly stop after a 14th draft; having from five to seven drafts of your paper is a norm in the sciences. If you can’t stop revising, then set a deadline for yourself and stick to it. Deadlines always help.

Rule 7: Revise your paper at the macrostructure and the microstructure level using different strategies and techniques. Receive feedback and revise again.

5. it is time to submit.

It is late at night again. You are still in your lab finishing revisions and getting ready to submit your paper. You feel happy ― you have finally finished a year’s worth of work. You will submit your paper tomorrow, and regardless of the outcome, you know that you can do it. If one journal does not take your paper, you will take advantage of the feedback and resubmit again. You will have a publication, and this is the most important achievement.

What is even more important is that you have your scheduled writing time that you are going to keep for your future publications, for reading and taking notes, for writing grants, and for reviewing papers. You are not going to lose stamina this time, and you will become a productive scientist. But for now, let’s celebrate the end of the paper.

• Hayes JR. In: The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Differences, and Applications. Levy CM, Ransdell SE, editors. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1996. A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing; pp. 1–28. [ Google Scholar ]
• Silvia PJ. How to Write a Lot. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Whitesides GM. Whitesides’ Group: Writing a Paper. Adv Mater. 2004; 16 (15):1375–1377. [ Google Scholar ]
• Soto D, Funes MJ, Guzmán-García A, Warbrick T, Rotshtein T, Humphreys GW. Pleasant music overcomes the loss of awareness in patients with visual neglect. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009; 106 (14):6011–6016. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hofmann AH. Scientific Writing and Communication. Papers, Proposals, and Presentations. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zeiger M. Essentials of Writing Biomedical Research Papers. 2nd edition. San Francisco, CA: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.; 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Martínez I. Native and non-native writers’ use of first person pronouns in the different sections of biology research articles in English. Journal of Second Language Writing. 2005; 14 (3):174–190. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rodman L. The Active Voice In Scientific Articles: Frequency And Discourse Functions. Journal Of Technical Writing And Communication. 1994; 24 (3):309–331. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tarone LE, Dwyer S, Gillette S, Icke V. On the use of the passive in two astrophysics journal papers with extensions to other languages and other fields. English for Specific Purposes. 1998; 17 :113–132. [ Google Scholar ]
• Penrose AM, Katz SB. Writing in the sciences: Exploring conventions of scientific discourse. New York: St. Martin’s Press; 1998. [ Google Scholar ]
• Swales JM, Feak CB. Academic Writing for Graduate Students. 2nd edition. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 2004. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hess DR. How to Write an Effective Discussion. Respiratory Care. 2004; 29 (10):1238–1241. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Belcher WL. Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks: a guide to academic publishing success. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Single PB. Demystifying Dissertation Writing: A Streamlined Process of Choice of Topic to Final Text. Virginia: Stylus Publishing LLC; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Faigley L, Witte SP. Analyzing revision. Composition and Communication. 1981; 32 :400–414. [ Google Scholar ]
• Flower LS, Hayes JR, Carey L, Schriver KS, Stratman J. Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision. College Composition and Communication. 1986; 37 (1):16–55. [ Google Scholar ]
• Young BR. In: A Tutor’s Guide: Helping Writers One to One. Rafoth B, editor. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers; 2005. Can You Proofread This? pp. 140–158. [ Google Scholar ]

• Get Help Here >

• 214-333-5320
• Dallas Baptist University

Welcome to the Research Planning Guide

Step 11: write the first draft.

• Step 1: Understand the Assignment
• Step 2: Choose your Topic
• Step 3: Gain Working Knowledge
• Step 4: Create the Research Question
• Step 5: Devise a Preliminary Outline
• How to Search the Catalog
• Types of Searches
• Articles from our Databases
• Search Terms
• Step 9: Read and Take Notes
• Step 10: Get Organized / Finalize Outline
• Step 12: Revise, Rewrite, and Proofread
• Citation Help
• Step 14: Evaluate the Process & Yourself

Important Links

• LibGuides Home
• Library Home
• Research Planner Home

You chose a topic, crafted a research question, and formulated an outline.  You searched for books, journal articles, and internet sources on your topic.  You scanned those sources and read the pertinent sections, and consequently, you learned a lot more about your topic than you ever thought possible!  You took notes while you read, and now you've organized those notes to reflect your outline, which you may have adjusted based on what you found out about your topic.  Now it's FINALLY time to start writing!  

Unfortunately, this is where many students FREEZE UP.  Staring at a blank sheet of paper, or a blank screen, you may not know how to get started.  Here are some suggestions to help you "thaw" out:

• You don't have to start at the beginning.  Instead, start writing about the part of your topic that you find most interesting.  Figure out where this information should appear in your outline, then figure out what else you need to write to get you there.  
• Decide which sources you need to refer to, and which sources you should quote directly.  Use only the quotes that you can't live without (more about quoting, below).
• Jot your main ideas down on paper before you start typing.  Some people think better with pen or pencil in hand.  You can type it all up nicely later.  
• Remember—this is only your first draft.  It doesn't have to be perfect; it doesn't even have to be good.  But once you have something written down, you have a starting point—something you can work with and improve upon. 
• Use your outline as your blueprint. If you start writing about something that doesn't fit your outline, ask yourself: is this important?  is it on topic?  Your outline should help you avoid getting side-tracked. 

Using Quotations

Now that you've read and understood all the fantastic resources you found, you may be tempted to quote them all as proof of the hard work you did.  But ask yourself:   Whose paper is this?  Your readers don't want to know what other people said—they want to know what YOU think about your topic; they want to know what YOU have to say.  Here are some general guidelines for using quotes in a standard research paper:

• DON'T use a quote to introduce a topic or idea.  The quote should be used to support your ideas and viewpoints about the topic.   Present your ideas first , then use a quote from an expert to back you up.
• DON'T use a quote when you can state the idea or data using your own words.  Use a quote only when the author has said something catchy or memorable, or something that explains the idea so well that no other words are needed.
• DON'T use a quote that is over 5 lines long unless it is indispensable in making your point. If you do have to use a long quote, it should be set apart from the rest of your text, as a "block quote" with margins that differ from the rest of the text (Consult the appropriate style manual to be sure).
• DO enclose the quote in quotation marks and follow the quote with a parenthetical reference.  Be sure the parenthetical reference matches the entry in your bibliography or "Works Cited" list.  

For more information about parenthetical references, bibliographies, and other topics related to citation and plagiarism, see our Citation and Plagiarism Guide or consult the DBU Writing Center's excellent resources .  

Using Academic English

In most cases, professors will want you to use a type of clear, no-nonsense language, known as "Academic English." Academic English is the standard form of written communication for reports, research papers, and other assignments. It's not flowery or filled with big, important-sounding words.  The point of using Academic English is to get your point across efficiently and elegantly.  

Here are some great websites that can help you master the basics of Academic English:

• Academic Phrasebank - this is an excellent source for instances when you need a new or more compelling way to present your case.  The Academic Phrasebank offers suggested phrases for you to use to make your points, and it covers a wide variety of common problems you might encounter while writing.  
• Using English for Academic Purposes  and  Academic Writing, from the Purdue OWL   - these two websites present more comprehensive information on the topic, as well as explaining how to handle different types of circumstances and assignments.
• What is Academic English? - a basic introduction to the conventions of Academic English.
• << Previous: Step 10: Get Organized / Finalize Outline
• Next: Step 12: Revise, Rewrite, and Proofread >>

"For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future." - Jeremiah 29:11

Vision Statement Building a great Christian university that is pleasing to God by producing Christ-centered servant leaders who are transforming the world.

• University Directory
• Parking Information
• © 2014 Dallas Baptist University  
• Legal Notice  
• Last Updated: Nov 2, 2023 8:50 AM
• URL: https://libguides.dbu.edu/planner

• U.S. Locations
• UMGC Europe
• Learn Online
• Find Answers
• 855-655-8682
• Current Students

Online Guide to Writing and Research

The research process, explore more of umgc.

• Online Guide to Writing

The Research Assignment Introduction

When tasked with writing a research paper, you are able to “dig in” to a topic, idea, theme, or question in greater detail.  In your academic career, you will be assigned several assignments that require you to “research” something and then write about it. Sometimes you can choose a topic and sometimes a topic is assigned to you.  

Either way, look at this assignment as an opportunity to learn more about something and to add your voice to the discourse community about said topic. Your professor is assigning you the task to give you a chance to learn more about something and then share that newfound knowledge with the professor and your academic peers.  In this way, you contribute meaningfully to the existing scholarship in that subject area. You are then creating a research space for yourself and for other researchers who may follow you.  

Mailing Address: 3501 University Blvd. East, Adelphi, MD 20783 This work is licensed under a  Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License . © 2022 UMGC. All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity of information located at external sites.

Table of Contents: Online Guide to Writing

Chapter 1: College Writing

How Does College Writing Differ from Workplace Writing?

What Is College Writing?

Why So Much Emphasis on Writing?

Chapter 2: The Writing Process

Doing Exploratory Research

Getting from Notes to Your Draft

Introduction

Prewriting - Techniques to Get Started - Mining Your Intuition

Prewriting: Targeting Your Audience

Prewriting: Techniques to Get Started

Prewriting: Understanding Your Assignment

Rewriting: Being Your Own Critic

Rewriting: Creating a Revision Strategy

Rewriting: Getting Feedback

Rewriting: The Final Draft

Techniques to Get Started - Outlining

Techniques to Get Started - Using Systematic Techniques

Thesis Statement and Controlling Idea

Writing: Getting from Notes to Your Draft - Freewriting

Writing: Getting from Notes to Your Draft - Summarizing Your Ideas

Writing: Outlining What You Will Write

Chapter 3: Thinking Strategies

A Word About Style, Voice, and Tone

A Word About Style, Voice, and Tone: Style Through Vocabulary and Diction

Critical Strategies and Writing

Critical Strategies and Writing: Analysis

Critical Strategies and Writing: Evaluation

Critical Strategies and Writing: Persuasion

Critical Strategies and Writing: Synthesis

Developing a Paper Using Strategies

Kinds of Assignments You Will Write

Patterns for Presenting Information

Patterns for Presenting Information: Critiques

Patterns for Presenting Information: Discussing Raw Data

Patterns for Presenting Information: General-to-Specific Pattern

Patterns for Presenting Information: Problem-Cause-Solution Pattern

Patterns for Presenting Information: Specific-to-General Pattern

Patterns for Presenting Information: Summaries and Abstracts

Supporting with Research and Examples

Writing Essay Examinations

Writing Essay Examinations: Make Your Answer Relevant and Complete

Writing Essay Examinations: Organize Thinking Before Writing

Writing Essay Examinations: Read and Understand the Question

Chapter 4: The Research Process

Planning and Writing a Research Paper

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Ask a Research Question

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Cite Sources

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Collect Evidence

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Decide Your Point of View, or Role, for Your Research

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Draw Conclusions

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Find a Topic and Get an Overview

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Manage Your Resources

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Outline

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Survey the Literature

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Work Your Sources into Your Research Writing

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found? - Human Resources

Research Resources: What Are Research Resources?

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found?

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found? - Electronic Resources

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found? - Print Resources

Structuring the Research Paper: Formal Research Structure

Structuring the Research Paper: Informal Research Structure

The Nature of Research

The Research Assignment: How Should Research Sources Be Evaluated?

The Research Assignment: When Is Research Needed?

The Research Assignment: Why Perform Research?

Chapter 5: Academic Integrity

Academic Integrity

Giving Credit to Sources

Giving Credit to Sources: Copyright Laws

Giving Credit to Sources: Documentation

Giving Credit to Sources: Style Guides

Integrating Sources

Practicing Academic Integrity

Practicing Academic Integrity: Keeping Accurate Records

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material - Paraphrasing Your Source

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material - Quoting Your Source

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material - Summarizing Your Sources

Types of Documentation

Types of Documentation: Bibliographies and Source Lists

Types of Documentation: Citing World Wide Web Sources

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - APA Style

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - CSE/CBE Style

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - Chicago Style

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - MLA Style

Types of Documentation: Note Citations

Chapter 6: Using Library Resources

Finding Library Resources

Chapter 7: Assessing Your Writing

How Is Writing Graded?

How Is Writing Graded?: A General Assessment Tool

The Draft Stage

The Draft Stage: The First Draft

The Draft Stage: The Revision Process and the Final Draft

The Draft Stage: Using Feedback

The Research Stage

Using Assessment to Improve Your Writing

Chapter 8: Other Frequently Assigned Papers

Reviews and Reaction Papers: Article and Book Reviews

Reviews and Reaction Papers: Reaction Papers

Writing Arguments

Writing Arguments: Adapting the Argument Structure

Writing Arguments: Purposes of Argument

Writing Arguments: References to Consult for Writing Arguments

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Anticipate Active Opposition

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Determine Your Organization

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Develop Your Argument

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Introduce Your Argument

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - State Your Thesis or Proposition

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Write Your Conclusion

Writing Arguments: Types of Argument

Appendix A: Books to Help Improve Your Writing

Dictionaries

General Style Manuals

Researching on the Internet

Special Style Manuals

Writing Handbooks

Appendix B: Collaborative Writing and Peer Reviewing

Collaborative Writing: Assignments to Accompany the Group Project

Collaborative Writing: Informal Progress Report

Collaborative Writing: Issues to Resolve

Collaborative Writing: Methodology

Collaborative Writing: Peer Evaluation

Collaborative Writing: Tasks of Collaborative Writing Group Members

Collaborative Writing: Writing Plan

General Introduction

Peer Reviewing

Appendix C: Developing an Improvement Plan

Working with Your Instructor’s Comments and Grades

Appendix D: Writing Plan and Project Schedule

Devising a Writing Project Plan and Schedule

Reviewing Your Plan with Others

By using our website you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more about how we use cookies by reading our  Privacy Policy .

Research Paper Planner: Guide

• 1: Understand Your Assignment
• 2: Select & Focus Your Topic
• 3: Explore a Research Question
• 4: Design Your Research Strategy
• 5: Finding Sources
• 6: Read, Note, and Compare Sources
• 7: Write Thesis Statement
• 8: Writing the First Draft
• 9: Evaluate Your First Draft
• 10: Revise & Rewrite
• 11: Put Your Paper in Final Form

Armstrong Browning Library

The Hankamer Treasure Room in Baylor's Armstrong Browning Library (ABL).  The ABL was recently named one of the 25 most beautiful academic libraries in the world.

9: How to Evaluate Your First Draft

How do you know if you are stating a personal opinion?  If you've adequately supported your facts?  Have you adequately represented all sides in an argument?  These resources will help you determine if you have or haven't done so and whether you need to conduct additional research.

• Critical Reading: Fact or Opinion? You can determine if you need to do additional research by asking if you have done a good job of supporting your facts. This handout helps you identify key words that signal you are expressing an opinion rather than stating a fact. Thanks to the Center for Academic Success at the University of Alabama.
• Why Write Several Drafts? This site has very useful points about supporting evidence and opposing viewpoints in essays, as well as good distinctions between proofreading and editing your work.

Using Citation Management Software

Zotero and Refworks are powerful tools that not only help you organize the information you gather, but also help you format the citations in your papers correctly. They support a wide variety of citation formats (MLA, APA, Turabian, etc.). Ask a librarian about how to get started using Zotero or Refworks.

• More Zotero Information
• More Refworks Information
• << Previous: 8: Writing the First Draft
• Next: 10: Revise & Rewrite >>
• Last Updated: Jan 16, 2024 10:55 AM
• URL: https://libguides.baylor.edu/planner

University Libraries

One Bear Place #97148 Waco, TX 76798-7148

(254) 710-6702

   Ask a Question

Copyright © Baylor® University . All rights reserved.

Report It | Title IX | Mental Health Resources | Anonymous Reporting | Legal Disclosures

Resources: Discussions and Assignments

Module 7 assignment: first draft.

The final product of this assignment will be a thesis-driven, persuasive research essay that addresses the research question you established in the Topic Proposal.

Think of your audience for the Research Paper as a well-informed member of an academic discourse community who may not be familiar with your specific topic. Remember what you learned about perspective and bias to construct your identity as the writer in relation to your imagined readers.

• Apply strategies for brainstorming and drafting a researched argument
• Locate, organize, and structure the key points in your argument
• Develop, warrant, and support a logical argumentative thesis statement
• Recognize, differentiate, and apply components and structures of a research paper
• Revise for content, rhetorical context, structure, and style
• Accept, interpret, and apply peer feedback in the revision process
• Apply strategies for proofreading at the sentence-level
• Research Question
• Topic relevance
• Scope of Sources
• Gaps and Limitations in existing research
• Begin drafting the research paper. Use your annotated bibliography and synthesis assignments as “raw material” to build upon.
• Once you have a completed first draft, participate in a peer-review session or schedule an appointment with the writing center. Take notes during your peer review or consultation so you’ll know how to start revising your paper.
• Revise your research paper, focusing on content, rhetorical context, structure and style.
• Proofread your final draft, focusing on sentence-level errors, citation consistency, and overall document format.

Format and Source Requirements

The Research Paper should follow MLA or APA style for document format, citations, and references. It should include a title page, an abstract, and a references page (as well as any relevant appendices).

You must cite (directly or in paraphrase) at least 6 of the 8 sources you collected for the Annotated Bibliography. Though you may use other sources, consult your instructor if you want to use fewer than 6 of your original sources.

The body of the research essay should be 7-8 pages (1750 to 2000 words) not counting the title page, abstract, references page, and appendices.

• First Draft. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

7.3 – Developing a Final Draft of a Research Paper

Learning objectives.

• Revise your paper to improve organization and cohesion.
• Determine an appropriate style and tone for your paper.
• Revise to ensure that your tone is consistent.
• Edit your paper to ensure that language, citations, and formatting are correct.

Given all the time and effort you have put into your research project, you will want to make sure that your final draft represents your best work. This requires taking the time to revise and edit your paper carefully.

You may feel like you need a break from your paper before you revise and edit it. That is understandable—but leave yourself with enough time to complete this important stage of the writing process. In this section, you will learn the following specific strategies that are useful for revising and editing a research paper:

• How to evaluate and improve the overall organization and cohesion
• How to maintain an appropriate style and tone
• How to use checklists to identify and correct any errors in language, citations, and formatting

Revising Your Paper: Organization and Cohesion

When writing a research paper, it is easy to become overly focused on editorial details, such as the proper format for bibliographical entries. These details do matter. However, before you begin to address them, it is important to spend time reviewing and revising the content of the paper.

A good research paper is both organized and cohesive. Organization means that your argument flows logically from one point to the next. Cohesion means that the elements of your paper work together smoothly and naturally. In a cohesive research paper, information from research is seamlessly integrated with the writer’s ideas.

Revise to Improve Organization

When you revise to improve organization, you look at the flow of ideas throughout the essay as a whole and within individual paragraphs. You check to see that your essay moves logically from the introduction to the body paragraphs to the conclusion, and that each section reinforces your thesis. Use Checklist 12.1 to help you.

Revising for Organization – Checklist

At the essay level.

• Does my introduction proceed clearly from the opening to the thesis?
• Does each body paragraph have a clear main idea that relates to the thesis?
• Do the main ideas in the body paragraphs flow in a logical order? Is each paragraph connected to the one before it?
• Do I need to add or revise topic sentences or transitions to make the overall flow of ideas clearer?
• Does my conclusion summarize my main ideas and revisit my thesis?

At the paragraph level

• Does the topic sentence clearly state the main idea?
• Do the details in the paragraph relate to the main idea?
• Do I need to recast any sentences or add transitions to improve the flow of sentences?

If you’re not sure, continue to revise your work or contact your Professor for help.

Jorge reread his draft paragraph by paragraph. As he read, he highlighted the main idea of each paragraph so he could see whether his ideas proceeded in a logical order. For the most part, the flow of ideas was clear. However, he did notice that one paragraph did not have a clear main idea. It interrupted the flow of the writing. During revision, Jorge added a topic sentence that clearly connected the paragraph to the one that had preceded it. He also added transitions to improve the flow of ideas from sentence to sentence.

Read the following paragraphs twice, the first time without Jorge’s changes, and the second time with them.

Jorge’s draft paragraph

Insert “Over the past decade, increasing numbers of Americans have jumped on the low-carbohydrate bandwagon.” after sentence 4. Revise & combine sentences 7 and 8 to read: “Proponents of low-carb diets say they are not only the most effective way to lose weight, but also they yield health benefits such as lower blood pressure and improved cholesterol levels. Start sentence 8 with “Meanwhile,”.

Follow these steps to begin revising your paper’s overall organization.

• Print out a hard copy of your paper.
• Read your paper paragraph by paragraph. Highlight your thesis and the topic sentence of each paragraph.
• Using the thesis and topic sentences as starting points, outline the ideas you presented—just as you would do if you were outlining a chapter in a textbook. Do not look at the outline you created during prewriting. You may write in the margins of your draft or create a formal outline on a separate sheet of paper.
• Next, reread your paper more slowly, looking for how ideas flow from sentence to sentence. Identify places where adding a transition or recasting a sentence would make the ideas flow more logically.
• Review the topics on your outline. Is there a logical flow of ideas? Identify any places where you may need to reorganize ideas.
• Begin to revise your paper to improve organization. Start with any major issues, such as needing to move an entire paragraph. Then proceed to minor revisions, such as adding a transitional phrase or tweaking a topic sentence so it connects ideas more clearly.

Collaboration

Please share your paper with a classmate. Repeat the six steps and take notes on a separate piece of paper. Share and compare notes.

Writers choose transitions carefully to show the relationships between ideas—for instance, to make a comparison or elaborate on a point with examples. Make sure your transitions suit your purpose and avoid overusing the same ones. For an extensive list of transitions, see Chapter 3 “The Writing Process: How Do I Begin?” , Section 3.4 “Revising and Editing” .

Revise to Improve Cohesion

When you revise to improve cohesion, you analyze how the parts of your paper work together. You look for anything that seems awkward or out of place. Revision may involve deleting unnecessary material or rewriting parts of the paper so that the out-of-place material fits in smoothly.

In a research paper, problems with cohesion usually occur when a writer has trouble integrating source material. If facts or quotations have been awkwardly dropped into a paragraph, they distract or confuse the reader instead of working to support the writer’s point. Overusing paraphrased and quoted material has the same effect. Use the Checklist below to review your essay for cohesion.

Revising for Cohesion: Checklist

• Does the opening of the paper clearly connect to the broader topic and thesis? Make sure entertaining quotes or anecdotes serve a purpose.
• Have I included support from research for each main point in the body of my paper?
• Have I included introductory material before any quotations? Quotations should never stand alone in a paragraph.
• Does paraphrased and quoted material clearly serve to develop my own points?
• Do I need to add to or revise parts of the paper to help the reader understand how certain information from a source is relevant?
• Are there any places where I have overused material from sources?
• Does my conclusion make sense based on the rest of the paper? Make sure any new questions or suggestions in the conclusion are clearly linked to earlier material.

As Jorge reread his draft, he looked to see how the different pieces fit together to prove his thesis. He realized that some of his supporting information needed to be integrated more carefully and decided to omit some details entirely. Read the following paragraph, first without Jorge’s revisions and then with them.

Jorge’s paragraph with source integration & revisions

One likely reason for these lackluster long-term results is that a low-carbohydrate diet – like any restrictive diet – is difficult to adhere to for any extended period. Most people enjoy foods that are high in carbohydrates, and no one wants to be the person who always turns down that slice of pizza or birthday cake. In commenting on the Gardner study, experts at Harvard School of Public Health (2010) noted that women in all four diet groups had difficulty following the plan. Because it is hard for dieters to stick to a low-carbohydrate eating plan, the initial success of these diets is short-lived (Heinz, 2009). Medical professionals caution that low-carbohydrate diets are difficult for many people to follow consistently and that, in to maintain a healthy weight, dieters should try to develop nutrition and exercise habits they can incorporate into their lives in the long term (Mayo Clinic, 2008). Registered dietician D. Kwon (personal communication, August 10, 2010) comments, “For some people, (low-carbohydrate diets) are great, but for most, any sensible eating and exercise plan would work just as well” (Kwon, 2010) .

Summary of revisions: Remove 2nd sentence “Most people enjoy…”. Add signal phrase with personal communication citation to last sentence. Delete the parenthetical citation from end of paragraph.

Jorge decided that his comment about pizza and birthday cake came across as subjective and was not necessary to make his point, so he deleted it. He also realized that the quotation at the end of the paragraph was awkward and ineffective. How would his readers know who Kwon was or why her opinion should be taken seriously? Adding an introductory phrase helped Jorge integrate this quotation smoothly and establish the credibility of his source.

Follow these steps to begin revising your paper to improve cohesion.

• Read the body paragraphs of your paper first. Each time you come to a place that cites information from sources, ask yourself what purpose this information serves. Check that it helps support a point and that it is clearly related to the other sentences in the paragraph.
• Identify unnecessary information from sources that you can delete.
• Identify places where you need to revise your writing so that readers understand the significance of the details cited from sources.
• Skim the body paragraphs once more, looking for any paragraphs that seem packed with citations. Review these paragraphs carefully for cohesion.
• Review your introduction and conclusion. Make sure the information presented works with ideas in the body of the paper.
• Revise the places you identified in your paper to improve cohesion.

Please exchange papers with a classmate. Complete step four. On a separate piece of paper, note any areas that would benefit from clarification. Return and compare notes.

Writing at Work

Using a consistent style and tone.

Once you are certain that the content of your paper fulfills your purpose, you can begin revising to improve style and tone . Together, your style and tone create the voice of your paper, or how you come across to readers. Style refers to the way you use language as a writer—the sentence structures you use and the word choices you make. Tone is the attitude toward your subject and audience that you convey through your word choice.

Determining an Appropriate Style and Tone

Although accepted writing styles will vary within different disciplines, the underlying goal is the same—to come across to your readers as a knowledgeable, authoritative guide. Writing about research is like being a tour guide who walks readers through a topic. A stuffy, overly formal tour guide can make readers feel put off or intimidated. Too much informality or humor can make readers wonder whether the tour guide really knows what he or she is talking about. Extreme or emotionally charged language comes across as unbalanced.

To help prevent being overly formal or informal, determine an appropriate style and tone at the beginning of the research process. Consider your topic and audience because these can help dictate style and tone. For example, a paper on new breakthroughs in cancer research should be more formal than a paper on ways to get a good night’s sleep.

A strong research paper comes across as straightforward, appropriately academic, and serious. It is generally best to avoid writing in the first person, as this can make your paper seem overly subjective and opinion based. Use Checklist 12.3 on style to review your paper for other issues that affect style and tone. You can check for consistency at the end of the writing process. Checking for consistency is discussed later in this section.

Revising for Style: Checklist

• My paper avoids excessive wordiness.
• My sentences are varied in length and structure.
• I have avoided using first-person pronouns such as I and we .
• I have used the active voice whenever possible.
• I have defined specialized terms that might be unfamiliar to readers.
• I have used clear, straightforward language whenever possible and avoided unnecessary jargon.
• My paper states my point of view using a balanced tone—neither too indecisive nor too forceful.

Word Choice

Note that word choice is an especially important aspect of style. In addition to checking the points noted on Checklist 12.3, review your paper to make sure your language is precise, conveys no unintended connotations, and is free of biases. Here are some of the points to check for:

• Vague or imprecise terms
• Repetition of the same phrases (“Smith states…, Jones states…”) to introduce quoted and paraphrased material
• Exclusive use of masculine pronouns or awkward use of he or she
• Use of language with negative connotations, such as haughty or ridiculous
• Use of outdated or offensive terms to refer to specific ethnic, racial, or religious groups

Using plural nouns and pronouns or recasting a sentence can help you keep your language gender neutral while avoiding awkwardness. Consider the following examples.

• Gender-biased: When a writer cites a source in the body of his paper, he must list it on his references page.
• Awkward: When a writer cites a source in the body of his or her paper, he or she must list it on his or her references page.
• Improved: Writers must list any sources cited in the body of a paper on the references page.

Keeping Your Style Consistent

As you revise your paper, make sure your style is consistent throughout. Look for instances where a word, phrase, or sentence just does not seem to fit with the rest of the writing. It is best to reread for style after you have completed the other revisions so that you are not distracted by any larger content issues. Revising strategies you can use include the following:

• Read your paper aloud. Sometimes your ears catch inconsistencies that your eyes miss.
• Share your paper with another reader whom you trust to give you honest feedback. It is often difficult to evaluate one’s own style objectively—especially in the final phase of a challenging writing project. Another reader may be more likely to notice instances of wordiness, confusing language, or other issues that affect style and tone.
• Line-edit your paper slowly, sentence by sentence. You may even wish to use a sheet of paper to cover everything on the page except the paragraph you are editing—that forces you to read slowly and carefully. Mark any areas where you notice problems in style or tone, and then take time to rework those sections.

On reviewing his paper, Jorge found that he had generally used an appropriately academic style and tone. However, he noticed one glaring exception—his first paragraph. He realized there were places where his overly informal writing could come across as unserious or, worse, disparaging. Revising his word choice and omitting a humorous aside helped Jorge maintain a consistent tone. Read his revisions.

Jorge’s first paragraph with academic style revisions

I. Introduction

Picture this: You’re standing in the aisle of your local grocery store when you see a chubby guy an overweight man nearby staring at several brands of ketchup on display. After deliberating for a moment, he reaches for the bottle with the words “Low-Carb!” displayed prominently on the label. (You can’t help but notice that the low-carb ketchup is higher priced.) Is he making a smart choice that will help him lose weight and enjoy better health – or is he just buying into the latest diet fad?

Summary of revisions: replace “a chubby guy” in sentence 1 with “an overweight man”. Remove 3rd sentence.

Using the Style Checklist, line-edit your paper. You may use either of these techniques:

• Print out a hard copy of your paper, or work with your printout. Read it line by line. Check for the issues noted on the Style Checklist, as well as any other aspects of your writing style you have previously identified as areas for improvement. Mark any areas where you notice problems in style or tone, and then take time to rework those sections.
• If you prefer to work with an electronic document, use the menu options in your word-processing program to enlarge the text to 150 or 200 percent of the original size. Make sure the type is large enough that you can focus on only one paragraph at a time. Read the paper line by line as described in step 1. Highlight any areas where you notice problems in style or tone, and then take time to rework those sections.

Please exchange papers with a classmate. On a separate piece of paper, note places where the essay does not seem to flow or you have questions about what was written. Return the essay and compare notes.

Editing Your Paper

After revising your paper to address problems in content or style, you will complete one final editorial review. Perhaps you already have caught and corrected minor mistakes during previous revisions. Nevertheless, give your draft a final edit to make sure it is error-free. Your final edit should focus on two broad areas:

• Errors in grammar, mechanics, usage, and spelling
• Errors in citing and formatting sources

Correcting Errors

Given how much work you have put into your research paper, you will want to check for any errors that could distract or confuse your readers. Using the spell-checking feature in your word-processing program can be helpful—but this should not replace a full, careful review of your document. Be sure to check for any errors that may have come up frequently for you in the past. Use Checklist 12.4 to help you as you edit:

Grammar, Mechanics, Punctuation, Usage, and Spelling Checklist

• My paper is free of grammatical errors, such as errors in subject-verb agreement and sentence fragments. (For additional guidance on grammar, see  “Writing Basics: What Makes a Good Sentence?”. )
• My paper is free of errors in punctuation and mechanics, such as misplaced commas or incorrectly formatted source titles. (For additional guidance on punctuation and mechanics, see “Punctuation” .)
• My paper is free of common usage errors, such as alot and alright . (For additional guidance on correct usage, see “Working with Words: Which Word Is Right?” .)
• My paper is free of spelling errors. I have proofread my paper for spelling in addition to using the spell-checking feature in my word-processing program.
• I have checked my paper for any editing errors that I know I tend to make frequently.

Checking Citations and Formatting

When editing a research paper, it is also important to check that you have cited sources properly and formatted your document according to the specified guidelines. There are two reasons for this. First and foremost, citing sources correctly ensures that you have given proper credit to other people for ideas and information that helped you in your work. Second, using correct formatting establishes your paper as one student’s contribution to the work developed by and for a larger academic community. Increasingly, American Psychological Association (APA) style guidelines are the standard for many academic fields. Modern Language Association (MLA) is also a standard style in many fields. Use Checklist 12.5 to help you check citations and formatting.

Citations and Formatting Checklist

• Within the body of my paper, each fact or idea taken from a source is credited to the correct source.
• Each in-text citation includes the source author’s name (or, where applicable, the organization name or source title) and year of publication. I have used the correct format of in-text and parenthetical citations.
• Each source cited in the body of my paper has a corresponding entry in the references section of my paper.
• My references section includes a heading and double-spaced, alphabetized entries.
• Each entry in my references section is indented on the second line and all subsequent lines.
• Each entry in my references section includes all the necessary information for that source type, in the correct sequence and format.
• My paper includes a title page.
• The margins of my paper are set at one inch. Text is double spaced and set in a standard 12-point font.

For detailed guidelines on APA  citation and formatting, see Chapter 8 – APA Style Citations – Tutorial

During the process of revising and editing, Jorge made changes in the content and style of his paper. He also gave the paper a final review to check for overall correctness and, particularly, correct APA citations and formatting. Read the final draft of his paper.

Read Jorge’s final essay

Note: HTML/plain text & Pressbooks do not always display page layout or APA formatting such as page numbers, spacing, margins or indentation accurately. Please review APA formatting rules to ensure you meet APA guidelines with your own work. The text version is included here in HTML format for ease of reading/use. You may also want to View Jorge’s paper in PDF format .

Beyond the Hype: Evaluating Low-Carb Diets

Jorge Ramirez

       Picture this: You’re standing in the aisle of your local grocery store when you see an overweight man nearby staring at several brands of ketchup on display. After deliberating for a moment, he reaches for the bottle with the words “Low-Carb!” displayed prominently on the label. Is he making a smart choice that will help him lose weight and enjoy better health—or is he just buying into the latest diet fad?

       Over the past decade, increasing numbers of Americans have jumped on the low-carb bandwagon. As of 2004, researchers estimated that approximately 40 million Americans, or about one-fifth of the population, were attempting to restrict their intake of food high in carbohydrates (Sanders & Katz, 2004). Proponents of low-carb diets say they not only are the most effective way to lose weight but also yield health benefits such as lower blood pressure and improved cholesterol levels. Meanwhile, some doctors claim that low-carb diets are overrated and caution that their long-term effects are unknown. Although following a low-carbohydrate diet can benefit some people, these diets are not necessarily that best option for everyone who wants to lose weight or improve their health.

Purported Benefits of Low-Carbohydrate Diets

      To make sense of the popular enthusiasm for low-carbohydrate diets, it is important to understand proponents’ claims about how they work. Any eating plan includes a balance of the three macronutrients—proteins, fats, and carbohydrates—each of which is essential for human health. Different foods provide these macronutrients in different proportions; a steak is primarily a source of protein, and a plate of pasta is primarily a source of carbohydrates. No one recommends eliminating any of these three macronutrient groups entirely.

       However, experts disagree on what protein: fats: carbohydrate ratio is best for optimum health and for maintaining a healthy weight. Since the 1970s, the USDA has recommended that the greatest proportion of one’s daily calories should come from carbohydrates—breads, pastas, and cereals—with moderate consumption of proteins and minimal consumption of fats. High-carbohydrate foods form the base of the “food pyramid” familiar to nutrition students.

       Those who subscribe to the low-carb philosophy, however, argue that this approach is flawed. They argue that excess weight stems from disordered metabolism, which in turn can be traced to overconsumption of foods high in carbohydrates—especially refined carbohydrates like white flour and sugar (Atkins, 2002; Agatson, 2003). The body quickly absorbs sugars from these foods, increasing the level of glucose in the blood. This triggers the release of insulin, delivering energy-providing glucose to cells and storing some of the excess as glycogen. Unfortunately, the liver turns the rest of this excess glucose into fat. Thus, adherents of the low-carb approach often classify foods according to their glycemic index (GI)—a measurement of how quickly a given food raises blood glucose levels when consumed. Foods high in refined carbohydrates—sugar, potatoes, white breads, and pasta, for instance—have a high glycemic index.

       Dieters who focus solely on reducing fat intake may fail to realize that consuming refined carbohydrates contributes to weight problems. Atkins (2002) notes that low-fat diets recommended to many who wish to lose weight are, by definition, usually high in carbohydrates, and thus unlikely to succeed.

       Even worse, consuming high-carbohydrate foods regularly can, over time, wreak havoc with the body’s systems for regulating blood sugar levels and insulin production. In some individuals, frequent spikes in blood sugar and insulin levels cause the body to become insulin-resistant—less able to use glucose for energy and more likely to convert it to fat (Atkins, 2002). This in turn helps to explain the link between obesity and Type 2 diabetes. In contrast, reducing carbohydrate intake purportedly helps the body use food more efficiently for energy. Additional benefits associated with these diets include reduced risk of cardiovascular disease (Atkins, 2002), lowered blood pressure (Bell, 2006; Atkins, 2002), and reduced risk of developing certain cancers (Atkins, 2002).

       Given the experts’ conflicting recommendations, it is no wonder that patients are confused about how to eat for optimum health. Some may assume that even moderate carbohydrate consumption should be avoided (Harvard School of Public Health, 2010). Others may use the low-carb approach to justify consuming large amounts of foods high in saturated fats—eggs, steak, bacon, and so forth. Meanwhile, low-carb diet plans and products have become a multibillion-dollar industry (Hirsch, 2004). Does this approach live up to its adherents’ promises?

Research on Low-Carbohydrate Diets and Weight Loss

       A number of clinical studies have found that low-carbohydrate diet plans are indeed highly effective for weight loss. Gardner et al. (2007) compared outcomes among overweight and obese women who followed one of four popular diet plans: Atkins, The Zone, LEARN, or Ornish. After 12 months, the group that had followed the low-carb Atkins plan had lost significantly more weight than those in the other three groups. McMillan-Price et al. (2006) compared results among overweight and obese young adults who followed one of four plans, all of which were low in fat but had varying proportions of proteins and carbohydrates. They found that, over a 12-week period, the most significantly body-fat loss occurred on plans that were high in protein and/or low in “high glycemic index” foods. More recently, the American Heart Association (2010) reported on an Israeli study that found that subjects who followed a low-carbohydrate, high-protein diet lost more weight than those who followed a low-fat plan or a Mediterranean plan based on vegetables, grains, and minimal consumption of meats and healthy fats.2 Other researchers have also found that low-carbohydrates diets resulted in increased weight loss (Ebbeling et al., 2007; Bell, 2006; HealthDay, 2010).

       Although these results are promising, they may be short-lived. Dieters who succeed in losing weight often struggle to keep the weight off—and unfortunately, low-carb diets are no exception to the rule. HealthDay (2010) cites a study recently published in the Annals of Internal Medicine that compared obese subjects who followed a low-carbohydrate diet and a low-fat diet. The former group lost more weight steadily—and both groups had difficulty keeping weight off. Similarly, Swiss researchers found that, although low-carb dieters initially lost more weight than those who followed other plans, the differences tended to even out over time (Bell, 2006). This suggests that low-carb diets may be no more effective than other diets for maintaining a healthy weight in the long term.

       One likely reason is that a low-carbohydrate diet—like any restrictive diet—is difficult to adhere to for any extended period. In commenting on the Gardner study, experts at the Harvard School of Public Health (2010) noted that women in all four diet groups had difficulty following the plan. Medical professionals caution that low-carbohydrate diets are difficult for many people to follow consistently and that, to maintain a healthy weight, dieters should try to develop nutrition and exercise habits they can incorporate in their lives in the long term (Mayo Clinic, 2010). Registered dietician D. Kwon (personal communication, August 10, 2010) comments, “For some people, [low-carbohydrate diets] are great, but for most, any sensible eating and exercise plan would work just as well”.

Other Long-Term Health Outcomes

       Regardless of whether low-carb diets are most effective for weight loss, their potential benefits for weight loss must be weighed against other long-term health outcomes such as hypertension, the risk of heart disease, and cholesterol levels. Research findings in these areas are mixed. For this reason, people considering following a low-carbohydrate diet to lose weight should be advised of the potential risks in doing so.

       Research on how low-carbohydrate diets affect cholesterol levels in inconclusive. Some researchers have found that low-carbohydrate diets raise levels of HDL, or “good” cholesterol (Ebbeling et al., 2007; Seppa, 2008). Unfortunately, they may also raise levels of LDL, or “bad” cholesterol, which is associated with heart disease (Ebbeling et al., 2007; Reuters Health, 2010). A particular concern is that as dieters on a low-carbohydrate plan increase their intake of meats and dairy products—foods that are high in protein and fat—they are also likely to consume increased amounts of saturated fats, resulting in clogged arteries and again increasing the risk of heart disease. Studies of humans (Bradley et al., 2009) and mice (Foo et al., 2009) have identified possible risks to cardiovascular health associated with low-carb diets. The American Heart Association (2010) and the Harvard School of Public Health (2010) caution that doctors cannot yet assess how following a low-carbohydrate diet affects patients’ health over a long-term period.

       Some studies (Bell, 2006) have found that following a low-carb diet helped lower patients’ blood pressure. Again, however, excessive consumption of foods high in saturated fats may, over time, lead to the development of clogged arteries and increase risk of hypertension. Choosing lean meats over those high in fat and supplementing the diet with high-fiber, low-glycemic-index carbohydrates, such as leafy green vegetables, is a healthier plan for dieters to follow.

       Perhaps most surprisingly, low-carbohydrate diets are not necessarily advantageous for patients with Type 2 diabetes. Bradley et al. (2009) found that patients who followed a low-carb or a low-fat diet had comparable outcomes for both weight loss and insulin resistance. The National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (2010) advises diabetics to monitor blood sugar levels carefully and to consult with their health care provider to develop a plan for healthy eating. Nevertheless, the nutritional guidelines it provides as a dietary starting point closely follow the USDA food pyramid.

       Low-carb diets have garnered a great deal of positive attention, and it isn’t entirely undeserved. These diets do lead to rapid weight loss, and they often result in greater weight loss over a period of months than other diet plans. Significantly overweight or obese people may find low-carb eating plans the most effective for losing weight and reducing the risks associated with carrying excess body fat. However, because these diets are difficult for some people to adhere to and because their potential long-term health effects are still being debated, they are not necessarily the ideal choice for anyone who wants to lose weight. A moderately overweight person who wants to lose only a few pounds is best advised to choose whatever plan will help him stay active and consume fewer calories consistently—whether or not it involves eating low-carb ketchup.

Agatson, A. (2003). The South Beach Diet . St. Martin’s Griffin.

The American Heart Association. (2010). American Heart Association comments on weight loss study comparing low carbohydrate/high protein, Mediterranean style and low fat diets . http://americanheart.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=473

Atkins, R. C. (2002). Dr. Atkins’ diet revolution . M. Evans and Company.

Bell, J. R. (2006). Low-carb beats low-fat diet for early losses by not long term. OBGYN News , 41 (12), 32. doi:10.1016/S0029-7437(06)71905-X

Bradley, U., Spence, M., Courtney, C. H., McKinley, M. C., Ennis, C. N., McCance, D. R., McEneny, J., Bell, P. M., Young, I. S., & Hunter, S. J. (2009). Low-fat versus low-carbohydrate weight reduction diets: effects on weight loss, insulin resistance, and cardiovascular risk: A randomized control trial [Abstract]. Diabetes , 58 (12), 2741–2748. http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/content/early/2009/08/23/db09-0098.abstract

Ebbeling, C. B., Leidig, M. M., Feldman, H. A., Lovesky, M. M., & Ludwig, D. S. (2007). Effects of a low-glycemic load vs low-fat diet in obese young adults: A randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association , 297 (19), 2092–2102. http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/297/19/2092?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=ebbeling&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

Foo, S. Y., Heller, E. R., Wykrzykowska, J., Sullivan, C. J., Manning-Tobin, J. J., Moore, K. J….Rosenzweigac, A. (2009). Vascular effects of a low-carbohydrate high-protein diet. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of America , 106 (36), 15418–15423. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0907995106

Gardner, C. D., Kiazand, A., Alhassan, S., Kim, S., Stafford, R. S., Balise, R. R., Kraemer, H. C., & King, A. C. (2007). Comparison of the Atkins, Zone, Ornish, and LEARN Diets for change in weight and related risk factors among overweight premenopausal women. Journal of the American Medical Association , 297 (9), 969–977. http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/297/9/969#AUTHINFO

Harvard School of Public Health (2010). Carbohydrates: Good carbs guide the way. The Nutrition Source .  http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/carbohydrates-full-story/index.html#good-carbs-not-no-carbs

HealthDay. (2010). Low-fat diets beat low-carb regiment long term . http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_95861.html

Hirsch, J. (2004). The low-carb evolution: Be reactive with low-carb products but proactive with nutrition. Nutraceuticals World . http://www.nutraceuticalsworld.com/contents/view/13321

Mayo Clinic. (2010). Healthy lifestyle: Weight loss . https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/weight-loss/in-depth/weight-loss/art-20048466?p=1

McMillan-Price, J., Petocz, P., Atkinson, F., O’Neill, K., Samman, S., Steinbeck, K., Caterson, I., & Brand-Miller, J. (2006, July). Comparison of 4 diets of varying glycemic load on weight loss and cardiovascular risk reduction in overweight and obese young adults: A randomized controlled trial. Archives of Internal Medicine , 166 (14), 1466–1475. http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/166/14/1466

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. (2010). National Diabetes Information Clearinghouse: What I need to know about eating and diabetes . http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/eating_ez/index.htm

Reuters Health. (2010). Low-carb diet can increase bad cholesterol levels . http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_95708.html

Seppa, N. (2008). Go against the grains, diet study suggests: Low-carb beats low-fat in weight loss, cholesterol. Science News , 174 (4), 25. http://www.sciencenews.org/view/issue/id/34757

Source: PDF/text version of the final research essay from “Developing Your Final Draft” In English Composition 2 by Lumen Learning is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 . / has been Adapted by Emily Cramer & Amanda Quibell / Created PDF/accessible format, APA style updated to 7th edition and corrections made so that in-text and reference entries match.

Key Takeaways

• Organization in a research paper means that the argument proceeds logically from the introduction to the body to the conclusion. It flows logically from one point to the next. When revising a research paper, evaluate the organization of the paper as a whole and the organization of individual paragraphs.
• In a cohesive research paper, the elements of the paper work together smoothly and naturally. When revising a research paper, evaluate its cohesion. In particular, check that information from research is smoothly integrated with your ideas with appropriate in-text citations.
• An effective research paper uses a style and tone that are appropriately academic and serious. When revising a research paper, check that the style and tone are consistent throughout.
• Editing a research paper involves checking for errors in grammar, mechanics, punctuation, usage, spelling, citations, and formatting.

Attribution & References

• Except where otherwise noted, this chapter is adapted from ” 12.2 Developing a Final Draft of a Research Paper ” In Writing for Success by University of Minnesota licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0 . Edits made for accessibility and visual images, updates to APA citation & references.
• Final Essay screenshots & PDF/text version of the final research essay from “Developing Your Final Draft” In English Composition 2 by Lumen Learning is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA . / Adapted by Emily Cramer & Amanda Quibell / Created accessible PDF format, APA style updated to 7th edition and corrections made so that in-text and reference entries match.

7.3 - Developing a Final Draft of a Research Paper Copyright © 2022 by Jen Booth, Emily Cramer & Amanda Quibell, Georgian College is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

12.2 Developing a Final Draft of a Research Paper

Learning objectives.

• Revise your paper to improve organization and cohesion.
• Determine an appropriate style and tone for your paper.
• Revise to ensure that your tone is consistent.
• Edit your paper to ensure that language, citations, and formatting are correct.

Given all the time and effort you have put into your research project, you will want to make sure that your final draft represents your best work. This requires taking the time to revise and edit your paper carefully.

You may feel like you need a break from your paper before you revise and edit it. That is understandable—but leave yourself with enough time to complete this important stage of the writing process. In this section, you will learn the following specific strategies that are useful for revising and editing a research paper:

• How to evaluate and improve the overall organization and cohesion
• How to maintain an appropriate style and tone
• How to use checklists to identify and correct any errors in language, citations, and formatting

Revising Your Paper: Organization and Cohesion

When writing a research paper, it is easy to become overly focused on editorial details, such as the proper format for bibliographical entries. These details do matter. However, before you begin to address them, it is important to spend time reviewing and revising the content of the paper.

A good research paper is both organized and cohesive. Organization means that your argument flows logically from one point to the next. Cohesion means that the elements of your paper work together smoothly and naturally. In a cohesive research paper, information from research is seamlessly integrated with the writer’s ideas.

Revise to Improve Organization

When you revise to improve organization, you look at the flow of ideas throughout the essay as a whole and within individual paragraphs. You check to see that your essay moves logically from the introduction to the body paragraphs to the conclusion, and that each section reinforces your thesis. Use Checklist 12.1 to help you.

Checklist 12.1

Revision: Organization

At the essay level

• Does my introduction proceed clearly from the opening to the thesis?
• Does each body paragraph have a clear main idea that relates to the thesis?
• Do the main ideas in the body paragraphs flow in a logical order? Is each paragraph connected to the one before it?
• Do I need to add or revise topic sentences or transitions to make the overall flow of ideas clearer?
• Does my conclusion summarize my main ideas and revisit my thesis?

At the paragraph level

• Does the topic sentence clearly state the main idea?
• Do the details in the paragraph relate to the main idea?
• Do I need to recast any sentences or add transitions to improve the flow of sentences?

Jorge reread his draft paragraph by paragraph. As he read, he highlighted the main idea of each paragraph so he could see whether his ideas proceeded in a logical order. For the most part, the flow of ideas was clear. However, he did notice that one paragraph did not have a clear main idea. It interrupted the flow of the writing. During revision, Jorge added a topic sentence that clearly connected the paragraph to the one that had preceded it. He also added transitions to improve the flow of ideas from sentence to sentence.

Read the following paragraphs twice, the first time without Jorge’s changes, and the second time with them.

Follow these steps to begin revising your paper’s overall organization.

• Print out a hard copy of your paper.
• Read your paper paragraph by paragraph. Highlight your thesis and the topic sentence of each paragraph.
• Using the thesis and topic sentences as starting points, outline the ideas you presented—just as you would do if you were outlining a chapter in a textbook. Do not look at the outline you created during prewriting. You may write in the margins of your draft or create a formal outline on a separate sheet of paper.
• Next, reread your paper more slowly, looking for how ideas flow from sentence to sentence. Identify places where adding a transition or recasting a sentence would make the ideas flow more logically.
• Review the topics on your outline. Is there a logical flow of ideas? Identify any places where you may need to reorganize ideas.
• Begin to revise your paper to improve organization. Start with any major issues, such as needing to move an entire paragraph. Then proceed to minor revisions, such as adding a transitional phrase or tweaking a topic sentence so it connects ideas more clearly.

Collaboration

Please share your paper with a classmate. Repeat the six steps and take notes on a separate piece of paper. Share and compare notes.

Writers choose transitions carefully to show the relationships between ideas—for instance, to make a comparison or elaborate on a point with examples. Make sure your transitions suit your purpose and avoid overusing the same ones. For an extensive list of transitions, see Chapter 8 “The Writing Process: How Do I Begin?” , Section 8.4 “Revising and Editing” .

Revise to Improve Cohesion

When you revise to improve cohesion, you analyze how the parts of your paper work together. You look for anything that seems awkward or out of place. Revision may involve deleting unnecessary material or rewriting parts of the paper so that the out-of-place material fits in smoothly.

In a research paper, problems with cohesion usually occur when a writer has trouble integrating source material. If facts or quotations have been awkwardly dropped into a paragraph, they distract or confuse the reader instead of working to support the writer’s point. Overusing paraphrased and quoted material has the same effect. Use Checklist 12.2 to review your essay for cohesion.

Checklist 12.2

Revision: Cohesion

• Does the opening of the paper clearly connect to the broader topic and thesis? Make sure entertaining quotes or anecdotes serve a purpose.
• Have I included support from research for each main point in the body of my paper?
• Have I included introductory material before any quotations? Quotations should never stand alone in a paragraph.
• Does paraphrased and quoted material clearly serve to develop my own points?
• Do I need to add to or revise parts of the paper to help the reader understand how certain information from a source is relevant?
• Are there any places where I have overused material from sources?
• Does my conclusion make sense based on the rest of the paper? Make sure any new questions or suggestions in the conclusion are clearly linked to earlier material.

As Jorge reread his draft, he looked to see how the different pieces fit together to prove his thesis. He realized that some of his supporting information needed to be integrated more carefully and decided to omit some details entirely. Read the following paragraph, first without Jorge’s revisions and then with them.

Jorge decided that his comment about pizza and birthday cake came across as subjective and was not necessary to make his point, so he deleted it. He also realized that the quotation at the end of the paragraph was awkward and ineffective. How would his readers know who Kwon was or why her opinion should be taken seriously? Adding an introductory phrase helped Jorge integrate this quotation smoothly and establish the credibility of his source.

Follow these steps to begin revising your paper to improve cohesion.

• Print out a hard copy of your paper, or work with your printout from Note 12.33 “Exercise 1” .
• Read the body paragraphs of your paper first. Each time you come to a place that cites information from sources, ask yourself what purpose this information serves. Check that it helps support a point and that it is clearly related to the other sentences in the paragraph.
• Identify unnecessary information from sources that you can delete.
• Identify places where you need to revise your writing so that readers understand the significance of the details cited from sources.
• Skim the body paragraphs once more, looking for any paragraphs that seem packed with citations. Review these paragraphs carefully for cohesion.
• Review your introduction and conclusion. Make sure the information presented works with ideas in the body of the paper.
• Revise the places you identified in your paper to improve cohesion.

Please exchange papers with a classmate. Complete step four. On a separate piece of paper, note any areas that would benefit from clarification. Return and compare notes.

Writing at Work

Understanding cohesion can also benefit you in the workplace, especially when you have to write and deliver a presentation. Speakers sometimes rely on cute graphics or funny quotations to hold their audience’s attention. If you choose to use these elements, make sure they work well with the substantive content of your presentation. For example, if you are asked to give a financial presentation, and the financial report shows that the company lost money, funny illustrations would not be relevant or appropriate for the presentation.

Using a Consistent Style and Tone

Once you are certain that the content of your paper fulfills your purpose, you can begin revising to improve style and tone . Together, your style and tone create the voice of your paper, or how you come across to readers. Style refers to the way you use language as a writer—the sentence structures you use and the word choices you make. Tone is the attitude toward your subject and audience that you convey through your word choice.

Determining an Appropriate Style and Tone

Although accepted writing styles will vary within different disciplines, the underlying goal is the same—to come across to your readers as a knowledgeable, authoritative guide. Writing about research is like being a tour guide who walks readers through a topic. A stuffy, overly formal tour guide can make readers feel put off or intimidated. Too much informality or humor can make readers wonder whether the tour guide really knows what he or she is talking about. Extreme or emotionally charged language comes across as unbalanced.

To help prevent being overly formal or informal, determine an appropriate style and tone at the beginning of the research process. Consider your topic and audience because these can help dictate style and tone. For example, a paper on new breakthroughs in cancer research should be more formal than a paper on ways to get a good night’s sleep.

A strong research paper comes across as straightforward, appropriately academic, and serious. It is generally best to avoid writing in the first person, as this can make your paper seem overly subjective and opinion based. Use Checklist 12.3 on style to review your paper for other issues that affect style and tone. You can check for consistency at the end of the writing process. Checking for consistency is discussed later in this section.

Checklist 12.3

• My paper avoids excessive wordiness.
• My sentences are varied in length and structure.
• I have avoided using first-person pronouns such as I and we .
• I have used the active voice whenever possible.
• I have defined specialized terms that might be unfamiliar to readers.
• I have used clear, straightforward language whenever possible and avoided unnecessary jargon.
• My paper states my point of view using a balanced tone—neither too indecisive nor too forceful.

Word Choice

Note that word choice is an especially important aspect of style. In addition to checking the points noted on Checklist 12.3, review your paper to make sure your language is precise, conveys no unintended connotations, and is free of biases. Here are some of the points to check for:

• Vague or imprecise terms
• Repetition of the same phrases (“Smith states…, Jones states…”) to introduce quoted and paraphrased material (For a full list of strong verbs to use with in-text citations, see Chapter 13 “APA and MLA Documentation and Formatting” .)
• Exclusive use of masculine pronouns or awkward use of he or she
• Use of language with negative connotations, such as haughty or ridiculous
• Use of outdated or offensive terms to refer to specific ethnic, racial, or religious groups

Using plural nouns and pronouns or recasting a sentence can help you keep your language gender neutral while avoiding awkwardness. Consider the following examples.

• Gender-biased: When a writer cites a source in the body of his paper, he must list it on his references page.
• Awkward: When a writer cites a source in the body of his or her paper, he or she must list it on his or her references page.
• Improved: Writers must list any sources cited in the body of a paper on the references page.

Keeping Your Style Consistent

As you revise your paper, make sure your style is consistent throughout. Look for instances where a word, phrase, or sentence just does not seem to fit with the rest of the writing. It is best to reread for style after you have completed the other revisions so that you are not distracted by any larger content issues. Revising strategies you can use include the following:

• Read your paper aloud. Sometimes your ears catch inconsistencies that your eyes miss.
• Share your paper with another reader whom you trust to give you honest feedback. It is often difficult to evaluate one’s own style objectively—especially in the final phase of a challenging writing project. Another reader may be more likely to notice instances of wordiness, confusing language, or other issues that affect style and tone.
• Line-edit your paper slowly, sentence by sentence. You may even wish to use a sheet of paper to cover everything on the page except the paragraph you are editing—that forces you to read slowly and carefully. Mark any areas where you notice problems in style or tone, and then take time to rework those sections.

On reviewing his paper, Jorge found that he had generally used an appropriately academic style and tone. However, he noticed one glaring exception—his first paragraph. He realized there were places where his overly informal writing could come across as unserious or, worse, disparaging. Revising his word choice and omitting a humorous aside helped Jorge maintain a consistent tone. Read his revisions.

Using Checklist 12.3, line-edit your paper. You may use either of these techniques:

• Print out a hard copy of your paper, or work with your printout from Note 12.33 “Exercise 1” . Read it line by line. Check for the issues noted on Checklist 12.3, as well as any other aspects of your writing style you have previously identified as areas for improvement. Mark any areas where you notice problems in style or tone, and then take time to rework those sections.
• If you prefer to work with an electronic document, use the menu options in your word-processing program to enlarge the text to 150 or 200 percent of the original size. Make sure the type is large enough that you can focus on only one paragraph at a time. Read the paper line by line as described in step 1. Highlight any areas where you notice problems in style or tone, and then take time to rework those sections.

Please exchange papers with a classmate. On a separate piece of paper, note places where the essay does not seem to flow or you have questions about what was written. Return the essay and compare notes.

Editing Your Paper

After revising your paper to address problems in content or style, you will complete one final editorial review. Perhaps you already have caught and corrected minor mistakes during previous revisions. Nevertheless, give your draft a final edit to make sure it is error-free. Your final edit should focus on two broad areas:

• Errors in grammar, mechanics, usage, and spelling
• Errors in citing and formatting sources

For in-depth information on these two topics, see Chapter 2 “Writing Basics: What Makes a Good Sentence?” and Chapter 13 “APA and MLA Documentation and Formatting” .

Correcting Errors

Given how much work you have put into your research paper, you will want to check for any errors that could distract or confuse your readers. Using the spell-checking feature in your word-processing program can be helpful—but this should not replace a full, careful review of your document. Be sure to check for any errors that may have come up frequently for you in the past. Use Checklist 12.4 to help you as you edit:

Checklist 12.4

Grammar, Mechanics, Punctuation, Usage, and Spelling

• My paper is free of grammatical errors, such as errors in subject-verb agreement and sentence fragments. (For additional guidance on grammar, see Chapter 2 “Writing Basics: What Makes a Good Sentence?” .)
• My paper is free of errors in punctuation and mechanics, such as misplaced commas or incorrectly formatted source titles. (For additional guidance on punctuation and mechanics, see Chapter 3 “Punctuation” .)
• My paper is free of common usage errors, such as alot and alright . (For additional guidance on correct usage, see Chapter 4 “Working with Words: Which Word Is Right?” .)
• My paper is free of spelling errors. I have proofread my paper for spelling in addition to using the spell-checking feature in my word-processing program.
• I have checked my paper for any editing errors that I know I tend to make frequently.

Checking Citations and Formatting

When editing a research paper, it is also important to check that you have cited sources properly and formatted your document according to the specified guidelines. There are two reasons for this. First and foremost, citing sources correctly ensures that you have given proper credit to other people for ideas and information that helped you in your work. Second, using correct formatting establishes your paper as one student’s contribution to the work developed by and for a larger academic community. Increasingly, American Psychological Association (APA) style guidelines are the standard for many academic fields. Modern Language Association (MLA) is also a standard style in many fields. Use Checklist 12.5 to help you check citations and formatting.

Checklist 12.5

Citations and Formatting

• Within the body of my paper, each fact or idea taken from a source is credited to the correct source.
• Each in-text citation includes the source author’s name (or, where applicable, the organization name or source title) and year of publication. I have used the correct format of in-text and parenthetical citations.
• Each source cited in the body of my paper has a corresponding entry in the references section of my paper.
• My references section includes a heading and double-spaced, alphabetized entries.
• Each entry in my references section is indented on the second line and all subsequent lines.
• Each entry in my references section includes all the necessary information for that source type, in the correct sequence and format.
• My paper includes a title page.
• My paper includes a running head.
• The margins of my paper are set at one inch. Text is double spaced and set in a standard 12-point font.

For detailed guidelines on APA and MLA citation and formatting, see Chapter 13 “APA and MLA Documentation and Formatting” .

Following APA or MLA citation and formatting guidelines may require time and effort. However, it is good practice for learning how to follow accepted conventions in any professional field. Many large corporations create a style manual with guidelines for editing and formatting documents produced by that corporation. Employees follow the style manual when creating internal documents and documents for publication.

During the process of revising and editing, Jorge made changes in the content and style of his paper. He also gave the paper a final review to check for overall correctness and, particularly, correct APA or MLA citations and formatting. Read the final draft of his paper.

Key Takeaways

• Organization in a research paper means that the argument proceeds logically from the introduction to the body to the conclusion. It flows logically from one point to the next. When revising a research paper, evaluate the organization of the paper as a whole and the organization of individual paragraphs.
• In a cohesive research paper, the elements of the paper work together smoothly and naturally. When revising a research paper, evaluate its cohesion. In particular, check that information from research is smoothly integrated with your ideas.
• An effective research paper uses a style and tone that are appropriately academic and serious. When revising a research paper, check that the style and tone are consistent throughout.
• Editing a research paper involves checking for errors in grammar, mechanics, punctuation, usage, spelling, citations, and formatting.

Writing for Success Copyright © 2015 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.