Writing Research Papers Wang Huaping

Paper Writing Opens the way to dialogue with others: reality check, critique and collaboration. Writing the paper is how you develop the idea in the first place- detailing the idea to experiments, designs, modelling, results, discussions, comparisons etc. Just an idea is not enough to write a paper. Develop the idea into a concept. Implementation and experimentation are needed. Conduct analysis – modeling, algorithms, solution techniques.

Questions When to write? When you found some new methods and took it to completion. Or you finished your experiments and it promises some useful/ improved results and compares well or better than existing methods. How to write? In stages, top down approach What should it contain? Which journal to send the paper? Look at different journals and identify one that fits your work.

Structure Title Abstract Introduction Literature review My idea The details - design, analysis, experiments, algorithms Comparisons and results Discussions Conclusions and further work

Title Should reflect correctly and succinctly the contents of a paper. Should be based on the contributions and area. Should not be general, vague, broad. Descriptive: “A Tool for Measuring Interaction Speeds on Small Devices Under Varying Lighting Conditions” Snappy: “Interaction Speeds on Small Devices” With hook: “Floosy: Twofold Increase in PDA Reading Speeds”

Abstract 1. State the problem 2. Say why it’s an interesting problem 3. Say what your solution achieves 4. Say what follows from your solution and analysis/ comparisons 5. Say very little background/motivation 6. Include the main numbers/results

Introduction Introduction Introductory paragraphs Statement of the problem Purpose Significance of the study Research questions and/or hypotheses Background Literature review Definition of terms

Introduction 1. What is the problem? Describe the importance (significance) of the study - why was this worth doing in the first place? Provide a broad context. 2. Why is it interesting and important? Recall the worthwhileness principle 3. Why is it hard? (e.g., why do naive approaches fail?) Give a review of existing solutions and their shortage.

Introduction 4. Why hasn’t it been solved before? (Or, what’s wrong with previous proposed solutions? How does yours differ?) Defend the model - why did you use this particular concept or system? What are its advantages? You might comment on its suitability from a theoretical point of view as well as indicate practical reasons for using it. 5. What are the key components of your approach and results? Include any specific limitations. Very briefly describe the experimental design and how it accomplished the stated objectives. Provide a rationale. State your specific hypothesis(es) or objective(s), and describe the reasoning that led you to select them.

Example Intro: Cursor Trails 1. People lose sight of cursor 2. Efficiency cost; confusion 3. Large cursors are found, but disrupt work 4. Problem worse on new large displays 5. Cursor leaves visual echo while moved Significant gain in re-acquisition performance. What? Why bad? Why hard? Why now? How solved?

Intro Pitfalls Don’t start with Adam and Eve No cliché in first sentence: V1: “With the explosion of the Web...” V2: “Forty-five million news pages are read online every weekday.” Don’t rile the reviewer Be interesting

Introductions are the hardest to write: inverted triangle model: funnel Your study should be totally motivated from your introduction Avoid using the expression, "Research has found" or "studies have shown" (if you delete this, the sentence sounds much better) Intro Pitfalls

Literature Review Write the list of contributions first Short enough (Do mention most significant in Intro) Group similar approaches: “Several approaches animate the cursor continuously or on demand [5,6,7,8,9]. Others do away with cursors and magnify selected targets [10,11,12].” Good related work section contrasts with your work. Often: no space.

My Idea Never say, "No one has ever looked at this, so I did... Never say, "this is interesting“ Never talk at the level of methods in your introduction (e.g., variables, measures, factors) Do not write papers for academics/peers.- it is a difficult process – how much to introduce the topic- to what depth?

Details Concentrate single-mindedly on a narrative that Describes the problem, and why it is interesting Describes your idea Defends your idea, showing how it solves the problem, and filling out the details Guide reader smoothly across thoughts. Organize around figures Introduce a running example

Idea First In a paper you MUST provide the details, but FIRST convey the idea Introduce the problem, and your idea, using EXAMPLES, and only then present the general case The body of the paper provides evidence to support each claim Evidence can be: analysis and comparisons, theorems, experiments and measurements, case studies

Example Experimental Section “We compared cursor trails against blinkers...” “In a within-participants design we had participants...” “On a 2560× ” display participants acquired...” “Ten women and twelve men ranging in age from...” Goal What? Equipment Participants

Results Summarize your findings in text and illustrate them, if appropriate, with figures and tables. In text, describe each of your results, pointing the reader to observations that are most relevant. Provide a context, such as by describing the question that was addressed by making a particular observation. Describe results of control experiments and include observations that are not presented in a formal figure or table, if appropriate. Analyse your data, then prepare the analysed (converted) data in the form of a figure (graph), table, or in text form.

Results Never include raw data or intermediate calculations in a research paper. Do not present the same data more than once. Text should complement any figures or tables, not repeat the same information. Please do not confuse figures with tables - there is a difference.

Discussions Decide if each hypothesis is supported, rejected, or if you cannot make a decision with confidence. Do not simply dismiss a study or part of a study as "inconclusive." Research papers are not accepted if the work is incomplete. Draw what conclusions you can based upon the results that you have, and treat the study as a finished work. You may suggest future directions, such as how the experiment might be modified to accomplish another objective. Explain all of your observations as much as possible, focusing on mechanisms.

Discussions Decide if the experimental design adequately addressed the hypothesis, and whether or not it was properly controlled. Try to offer alternative explanations if reasonable alternatives exist. One experiment will not answer an overall question, so keeping the big picture in mind, where do you go next? The best studies open up new avenues of research. What questions remain? Recommendations for specific papers will provide additional suggestions.

References List all literature cited in your paper, in alphabetical order, by first author. In a proper research paper, only primary literature is used (original research articles authored by the original investigators). Be cautious about using web sites as references - anyone can put just about anything on a web site, and you have no sure way of knowing if it is truth or fiction. If you are citing an on line journal, use the journal citation (name, volume, year, page numbers)

References You are allowed to quote from the things you have read, but there are definite rules for doing this:  The quotations should be short (usually 5 lines or less) and few. My own suggestion is to have no more than one short quotation per page of your essay.  Quotations must have quotation marks (“ ”) around them or be put in an indented block (for longer quotations) to make it clear that they are quotations.

References  All quotations must have a note (footnote, endnote, or short note) attached to them so that it’s very clear what source you are quoting. Every item quoted must also be in your bibliography.  You cannot just quote long paragraphs without using quotation marks and then adding a citation, footnote or endnote indicating what source you used.

Checklist 1. Did I begin each paragraph with a proper topic sentence? 2. Have I supported my arguments with documented proof or examples? 3. Any run-on or unfinished sentences? 4. Any unnecessary or repetitious words? 5. Varying lengths of sentences? 6. Does one paragraph or idea flow smoothly into the next? 7. Any spelling or grammatical errors? 8. Quotes accurate in source, spelling, and punctuation? 9. Are all my citations accurate and in correct format? 10. Did I leave a sense of completion for my reader(s) at the end of the paper?

Style Indent the first line of each paragraph Present your points in logical order Use present tense to report well accepted facts - for example, 'the grass is green' Use past tense to describe specific results - for example, 'When weed killer was applied, the grass was brown' Use past tense except when referring to established facts. After all, the paper will be submitted after all of the work is completed. Avoid informal wording, don't address the reader directly, and don't use jargon, slang terms, or superlatives Avoid use of superfluous pictures - include only those figures necessary to presenting results

Mistakes to Avoid Placing a heading at the bottom of a page with the following text on the next page (insert a page break!) Dividing a table or figure - confine each figure/table to a single page Submitting a paper with pages out of order

Mistakes to Avoid It isn't necessary to tell fellow scientists that your study is pertinent to the field of biochemistry. Your readers can figure out to what field(s) your work applies. You need not define terms that are well known to the intended readership. For example, do you really think it is necessary to define systolic blood pressure if your readership consists of physicians or cardiovascular physiologists?

Mistakes to Avoid Superlatives include adjectives such as "huge," "incredible," "wonderful," "exciting," etc. Your definition of incredible might be different from that of someone else - perhaps a five fold increase is incredible to you, but not for the next person. It is much better to use an objective expression, such as "Oxygen consumption was five fold greater in the presence of uncoupler, which is a greater change than we saw with the addition of any other reagent."

Observations It is a fallacy that you should leave some obvious things wrong or incomplete in the paper so as to give the reviewer/reader something to criticize Most people accept or reject a paper in the first 5 pages and then look for evidence in a confirmatory manner Use active voice! Edit! Edit! Edit! (e.g., cut all phrases such as, "in order to"; cut all boilerplate sentences (e.g., "in today's society")

Plagiarism Plagiarism (use of others words, ideas, images, etc. without citation) is not to be tolerated and can be easily avoided by adequately referencing any and all information you use from other sources. In the strictest sense, plagiarism is representation of the work of others as being your work. Paraphrasing other's words too closely may be construed as plagiarism in some circumstances