HOW TO WRITE A SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATION Karl-Heinz Schwalbe You just sit down and start writing?

PAGE 2 WHY DO SCIENTISTS WRITE? Scientific research is not complete until the results have been published. Writing an accurate, understandable paper is therefore as important as the research itself.  To make a permanent, publicly accessible record of your findings  To convince your funding body to sink even more money into your research  Ego: Your work is your epitaph  Your supervisor forces you  No PhD without publication (the thesis is one…)

PAGE 3 STRUCTURE OF A PAPER Scientific writing has to be simple, clear, and to the point. No jargon or flowery literary embellishments, no exaggeration. It may follow the structure:  Title: Why should somebody read the paper?  Introduction: What did you do? Why did you do it?  Materials/Methods: How did you do it?  Results: What did you find?  Discussion: What does it all mean?  Conclusions: What did we learn?

PAGE 4 TITLE The title should be descriptive of the paper. Avoid complete phrases Avoid acronyms, in particular those invented by the author Avoid mathematical symbols Avoid the term „novel“. Your work is supposed to be novel anyway.

PAGE 5 ABSTRACT Typically, the abstract should be no more than 250 words. The abstract should be a single paragraph. The abstract should be written in the past tense (you have already done the experiments!) The abstract should not cite references. The abstract should not use acronyms nor symbols. What the abstract should say……. 1.State the principal objectives and scope of the investigation. 2.Briefly describe the methods employed. 3.Summarise the main results. 4.State the principal conclusions.

KEYWORDS The keywords should cover the content of the paper. They provide the profile of your paper for data banks. Many journals provide a selection of keywords from which you are supposed to choose.

PAGE 7 INTRODUCTION This section provides the justification of the work done. Give brief overview on state of the art of your area. Cite the relevant literature. The final section should describe the gap in knowledge you have filled and how you have done it.

PAGE 8 MATERIALS / METHODS Write in the past tense. Include enough detail so that a competent worker can repeat the experiments or simulations. Details include materials, test pieces, methods employed, parameters varied….. This contributes to good scientific practice! ( And also: The reviewers have to be able to understand what you have done!) Do not include results in this section.

PAGE 9 MATERIALS / METHODS, cont. Nowadays, it is much appreciated when experimental and theoretical (analytical or numerical) work is combined: Theoretical work without validation by experiments is often of not much value. And also it is valuable to have experimental work backed up by theoretical models.

PAGE 10 RESULTS The best way to present results is showing them as clear diagrams, with explanations in the text. Be selective – you do not have to include every detail you have obtained. It is not advisable to present results in figures and tables. Reserve extensive interpretation of the results for the Discussion section. However, a brief (one or two sentences) discussion of an experimental result often serves as a nice transition to the next simulation, or experiment, and so gives the paper a “flow”.

RESULTS, cont. In papers on analytical work, please do not write endless formulas. If you have very long derivations it may make sense to shift some of the derivations into an appendix. Otherwise the reader may get lost. If you use numerous formulas and hence a large number of mathematical symbols, PLEASE PROVIDE A LIST OF SYMBOLS!!! Otherwise a reader – and the reviewer(!) - may give up. I use to return such papers without a list of symbols. RESULTS, cont.

RESULTS, Requires much skill, provides order and interpretation of the results. A mere reporting of experimental results without attempting to search for underlying mechanisms is of little value and will usually not accepted for publication. Put your results into perspective by comparing them with the state of the art described in the Introduction. Your results will thus contribute to the overall knowledge of your area. Whenever possible, schematic representations of the model(s) developed are a very versatile tool for conveying your message to the reader. DISCUSSION

A compilation of numerous diagrams and colour pictures does not make a scientific paper. Ordering the data and systematic presentation and interpretation of the results is an intellectual effort that has to be performed by the author and not by the reader. DISCUSSION, cont.

DISCUSSION Start with a few phrases to summarise the work done. List the main conclusions („lessons learned“). Perspectives for further work may be given. This section is frequently misunderstood to be a repetition of the Abstract. CONCLUSIONS

Put yourself into the position of the reader so that you can explain what you have done. Do not forget Acknowledgements. Internal quality control is very important. We have given you some guidance on how to organise your manuscript, but THE SCIENCE IS YOUR JOB! FINAL REMARKS