1

The Research Report

"One's science may be superb, but if one's writing does not deliver coherence and structure to match,

then the message can too often be killed by the medium. Poor writing will prevent -- or in the best-case

scenario, delay -- the recognition of good science." - foreword, The Little Book of Scientific Writing

What do you expect when read a scientific article? You want to know “what happened?” and "why

should I care?”. These are the two main questions that any research report has to answer. Historically,

scientists themselves created a standardized format through which to answer these questions -- the

“research report” -- and while each discipline has a slightly different take on how to write one, all

science publication reporting research outcomes is composed of 4 basic parts, each answering some part

of “what happened” and “why should I care”.

What happened: 1) Methods; 2) Results

Why should I care: 1) Introduction; 2) Discussion

The four sections (aka, IMRD) also capture an idealized

version of the "scientific method" – thus, the IMRD format

creates a reading experience that maximizes

comprehension because each section represents some step

of the scientific method (understood in the broadest sense:

ask some question test question answer question

ask more questions). It does not represent the researcher’s

experience while creating science, which is often a more

chaotic process than implied by the form/content of a research publication. Keep in mind they are not

the same thing! Still, when you know the structure/function of each IMRD section, both reading and

writing science are simplified, and the goal of communicating your

research is fulfilled.

Does writing a research report matter?

Yes, for two reasons. First, you cannot get out of graduate school without

communicating your results in a discipline-appropriate format. For grad

students in any branch of the sciences, that means a research report of

some sort forms the thesis or dissertation. Second, if you intend to remain

a researcher, especially in an academic context, then very recent research

suggests that publishing early predicts productivity throughout the

researcher’s career. It doesn’t matter where you publish nearly as much

as it matters that you publish. Quantity counts.

2

Note: Contrary to what I did during the workshop, the IMRD parts will be presented in order they

appear in a paper.

Introductions Introductions to research reports have two purposes: Inform the Reader & Persuade the Reader.

This is accomplished in 5 steps that set the research context, provide general significance, review the

necessary literature, locate a motivating gap, and present the research question.

The 5 Steps to an Effective Introduction 1. Establish the Topic -- what is the paper about?

2. Provide Significance -- why does the topic matter? (practical, clinical, or research)

3. Review the Relevant Literature -- what key ideas, concepts, definitions must the reader know to

understand the paper AND be convinced that the research is warranted? (leads to gap)

4. Point out the Gap/Motivation -- what missing information (in the published literature) motivates

the paper?

5. Reveal the Research Question -- what question does this paper answer?

Comments on Literature Review The literature review (lit review) in a research report is not exhaustive -- it is highly focused with the

specific goal of leading to the gap. The length of the lit review is usually in direct proportion to the

complexity of the research question and outcome as they are represented in the published literature.

Thus, if you are writing about a single relationship ("X' affects "Y"), then the lit review is often quite

brief because only a single pair of terms needs explaining. The lit review is longer when more

variables/relationships are involved, when some of the constituents are not well known, or something

controversial or unexpected is being tested.

3

Examples

4

5

Methods Most scientists readily admit that after reading the abstract, they skip forward to the Methods and

Results sections. They want the data and how it was attained. While the Introduction and Discussion

sections are the most readable parts of the paper, the Methods and Results are "science" itself. Writing

needs to be accurate, sufficient, and largely free of interpretation. Methods and Results also tend to be

the easiest parts to write!

Method sections vary quite a bit between disciplines, and even between sub-disciplines in the same

field. Still, there are three types of information conveyed.

1. Participants/Subjects/Sample -- who participated or what material was participated upon; in current

parlance, human beings are called "participants" and animals are "subjects", though the more general

"sample" can be used for both. (Other biological or non-biological components may be called

"materials" or simply listed by their names, e.g. "serotonin compound, PAT", and not occur in a separate

section).

NOTE: In the social and behavioral sciences, the final experimental population descriptors are listed in

the Methods section. If multiple groups, create a flow chart designating the process of assigning groups.

2. Materials and Instruments -- the instruments, machines, or materials used to complete the research --

be as specific possible. If new materials were developed, include thorough description and add an

appendix with instrument, if possible (ex: surveys, stimuli).When possible, provides names and numbers

of all equipment, software, etc used.

3. Procedure -- explains how data was collected and how it was analyzed, including specific names of

tests, procedures, and statistical tests.

6

Results Results sections can be the most frustrating for novices to read and most interesting to experts. Consider

both of these audiences when constructing the results. Balancing the needs of both expert and non-expert

readers will increase the impact of your research. Results to include in the report are:

Positive/Negative Results

• results that answer the research question

(most important)

– Stuff that worked

– Stuff that didn’t work

• data you can use to outline important

trends

• results that you intend to address in the

discussion section

Figures

• Tables for summarizing many data

points

• Figures for comparing limited set of data

points

• Figures that show easily what is difficult

to follow when described only in words

Clear, redundant labeling of figures can be useful. Figure legends should be stand-alone guides, but

relate solely to the figure. The text cannot merely refer readers to a table or figure for information –

some content statement must be included to provide context/motivation for the figure.

7

Stylistically, results can be organized in a variety of ways, most commonly from strongest to weakest or

according to subheadings. If there is only a single protocol on a non-human subjects with no control

group, there may be no need for subdivisions in the results section.

If there are multiple trials or multiple groups, then subheadings should be used to label what is being

discussed. The organization of results most commonly "matches" the research question -- groups or

trials should be indicated in the last paragraph of the introduction and evident in the results section.

8

Discussions Functionally, the purpose of a Discussion section is to explicitly demonstrate how the new information

generated by the study fits into what is already known. This is how the new data you've created is

"situated" in the field -- by your careful placement of what is new against that which is established.

Results can take the form of data, hypotheses, models, definitions, formulas, etc.

The Discussion section is carefully orchestrated -- no wild speculation is allowed. Instead, a

conversation is crafted between the new information and others' results, data, models, hypotheses,

etc. Four relational moves can be made: claim, corroborate, clarify, or conflict.

Claim -- add new information to what is already known

o We have found for the first time...

Corroborate -- support what is already known

o Similar to X, we also found...

Clarify -- refine what is already known

o While X found Y, we found Y+1

Conflict -- counter or contradict what is already known

o Contrary to X, we found....

Steps to Crafting a Discussion Section

1. Briefly restate RQ and main result/s.

2. Situate current research findings through "dialogue" model -- speculate on outcome.

3. Discuss relevant limitations.

4. Provide suggestions for future research or application.

The Discussion section can be crafted using the four steps in a linear fashion -- all of the outcomes

discussed (1 major outcome per paragraph), then all of the limitations, then all of the recommendations

for future research. Alternatively, steps 2-4 can be discussed together, with each paragraph including the

outcome, discussion, limitation, and future recommendations.

9

10

Front and End Matter

Abstracts and Titles

Titles like “Studies of X and Y...” or “Characterization of A and B” make my eyes glaze over. They tell

you nothing and don't offer much hope for the rest of the paper. The title should highlight the main point

of the paper. The abstract should frame the question(s) to be addressed and why they are important,

how you have solved the problems and how the results can be placed in the wider context of the field.

11

The experimental details should be left for the body of the paper (unless you are describing a new

technique). End your abstract with the broader implications of the work. (Scientific Writing 101)

Titles and abstracts perform a couple of key functions: they inform the reader about the research; they

help database managers get your stuff in the right spot. Titles and abstracts should answer the science

reader's main questions: what is this paper about? why should I care? Think of them as marketing tools,

as additions to your article, but not substitutions -- and, provide the kind of information that helps a

reader make an informed decision about investing time reading your work.

Writing Titles It would be great if all titles could be fun, but the fact is, few titles can be both fun and informative.

Instead, the best titles solve the reader's problem of deciding whether to read the abstract/article by

including the most important information up front. What is the most important information? For the

most part, it is the OUTCOME of the research -- that is, the most important result. The most successful

titles from the reader's point of view make explicit assertions about the outcome -- acceptable titles often

signal only the topic and leave the reader wondering what happened and whether it is worth reading

further.

The two titles below are ranked from most to least successful. The first makes a concise assertion (is a

whole sentence) about the outcome while the second names the method design and research subjects

only. When readers are looking for articles, they want not only the research subject, but also an idea of

the outcome. Titles that do not provide an outcome statement imply messy results about which no clear

statement can be made. If you have a clear outcome, name that in the title of your report.

Writing Abstracts

Abstracts come in two flavors: unstructured and structured. Both contain the same information in the

same order, but the structured one adds subheadings to organize the reading experience. Parts included

in the abstract are (in this order!): Topic, RQ, Method, Results, Contribution. Journals will mandate

which form as well as maximum number of words. Journals focusing on clinically-relevant work often

prefer longer, more detailed abstracts -- usually structured -- with the explicit justification that busy

physicians need to make informed decisions quickly and effectively, assigning the goal of decision-

making tool to abstracts. This makes the impact of the abstract greater than a mere filtering device and

increases the ethical responsibility of the writer to provide sufficient and accurate information. (In

particular, do not overstate results and interpretation.)

12

Supplemental Information Here is what the American Psychological Association has to say about supplemental information (SI). It

is typical of what is provided in the "Guide for Authors" information regarding supplemental

information.

Some journals also specify that while the SI is peer-reviewed, it is not edited, so will be submitted in

exactly the form provided by the authors.

The corresponding author is the investigator to whom inquiries will be sent -- not all journals require a

corresponding author to be designated. Some journals mandate that the PI is listed as one of the authors

(regardless of direct involvement in the study) and is the corresponding author.

13

A bit of extra on writing…

Science Style Readers read. Writers write. The text is the ground for their relationship.

It can be a battleground or it can be a garden. The principles listed below

are best-practice strategies for writing, engaging scientific prose that

increases the likelihood that readers will understand (even enjoy!) your

work. Some of these strategies focus on creating good sentences; others

on creating clear paragraphs (clear connections between sentences).

These writing strategies are cognitive in nature --

deduced rom the perspective of reader cognition

and language structure. While this approach may seem weird at first, you'll find

the ideas transfer nicely to other languages, even those with syntactic structures

quite different from American English.

The writing principles are extracted from Gopen and Swan's 7 principles of

effective writing. Linguistically, the 7 principles fall into two groups -- those

that address clear sentences and those that address clear text. Use the principles

to guide revision, not drafting! Having all of this in your head before you write

would induce writer's block before you'd finished 2 sentences.

Principles for Constructing Clear Sentences 1. Follow a grammatical subject with its verb, as soon as possible.

2. Make the action of every clause or sentence clear in its verb.

Clear, informative sentences are dominated by verbs -- the relationship of the verb to its object, the

relationship of the verb to the subject, the use of verbs instead of unnecessary nouns phrases. Ultimately,

sentences are subsumed by paragraphs, but there are still some sound techniques at the sentence level

that can make your writing easier to understand.

14

Use appositive constructions for definitions, not explanations

Use the least number of words necessary to make the meaning clear

Original Example (Appositive)

In stroke, which is a rapid loss of brain function due to the disturbance in blood supply caused by

ischemia, blockage or hemorrhage of blood to the brain, inflammation is not only defensive against

offending factors but if persistent, inflammation can lead to the loss of cellular and organ function.

Ideas in this sentence:

Stroke is a rapid loss of brain function due to disturbance in blood supply

Ischemia is a blockage or hemorrhage of blood to the brain

The disturbance" in the blood supply is [or is called?] ischemia

Stroke [missing action -- verb -- maybe leads to? or result in? or causes?] inflammation

Inflammation can be both defensive against offending factors [which are?]

Inflammation can lead to loss of cellular and organ function

It's difficult to advise a revision until it is clear which ideas the writer needs to include. Is the sentence

about stroke, ischemia, inflammation, all of them, or a subset? If all, then using more than one sentence

will work much better than creating two embedded explanations in a single sentence. The writer will

have to clarify what the cause-effect relationships are and write those using verbs the make the

relationships clear. Primarily, the writer must decide what the main message is and cut out of the

sentence information that is not needed.

Possible revision:

Inflammation is the body's response to ischemia, a blockage or hemorrhage of blood to the brain.

Inflammation defends against {need this info}, but if persistent, can lead to the loss of organ and

cellular function.

Principles for Constructing Clear Paragraphs 3. Place in the position of importance (stress position) the “new information” you want the reader

to emphasize in his or her mind.

4. Place the person or thing whose story is being told at the beginning of a sentence in the topic

position.

5. Place appropriate “old information” (material discussed earlier) in the topic position to provide

linkage with what has gone before and context for what is to come later.

6. Provide context for your reader before asking him or her to consider anything new.

7. Match the emphasis conveyed by the substance with the emphasis anticipated by the reader

from the structure.

15

You'll see immediately that there are many more principles suggested for composing clear, logical

paragraphs. Paragraphs are ground zero for comprehension: this is the level at which reader's

understanding most frequently breaks down, leading either to misunderstanding or blatant non-

understanding. Frequently, readers experience the communication breakdown as a personal failing --

they believe it's their own fault for not understanding what looks to be straightforward text. Then, they

get angry because the writing has made them feel stupid -- or they assume that your work is simply too

advanced for them to follow. Both cases kill the writer's citation count, and that is bad for a scientist's

career.

We could spend weeks studying how these principles work. If you only remember a single concept, it

would be to connect new information to existing information -- that is, introduce the reader to a

"new" piece of information only after providing context the reader already knows. This context is

sometimes general knowledge (such as is the case with the first sentence of a new section), but more

often is established by previous sentences in the paragraph. The first corallary to this recommendation is

that most of the time (around 80%), the "existing" information is indicated in the grammatical

subject of the sentence; thus, the "new" information is in the object position. Let's look at one

example that illustrates the most critical principles, #s 3-5.

Original

In experimental models of ICH, increased neuronal loss has been correlated with the development of a

localized collection of blood outside the blood vessels, called a hematoma [mss1] (Fernandes et al., 2000). Intracerebral hemorrhage is a subtype of intracranial hemorrhage in which blood leaks within

the brain tissue itself. Following ICH, hematomas consists of red blood cells form; these consist of

mainly hemoglobin, a complex metalloprotein containing four heme molecules whose iron atoms

temporarily bind oxygen molecules.

My comment

[mss1]In this position, semantic “stress” has been placed on hematoma. The reader expects that next

sentence to have hematoma as the subject, which doesn’t happen. It does happen in the sentence

following, though – Please flip the order of the first two sentences. Then, you’ve begun with the most

general statement, narrowed to experimental models, then to hematomas.

Revised

Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a subtype of intracranial hemorrhage in which blood leaks within

the brain tissue itself. In experimental models of ICH, increased neuronal loss has been correlated with

the development of a localized collection of blood outside the blood vessels, called a

hematoma (Fernandes et al., 2000). Following ICH, hematomas composed of red blood cells form;

these consist of mainly hemoglobin, a complex metalloprotein containing four heme molecules whose

iron atoms temporarily bind oxygen molecules.

16

Managing the Writing Process Planning your writing -- seems like such an obvious step! Here is where experienced writers often

distinguish themselves. For most clinical practitioners, it is difficult to block out huge tracts of writing

time (this is a luxury of graduate life that is under-appreciated). The solution for many is to block out

small tracts of time devoted to writing. This works very well and if done with consistency and

discipline, is an excellent way to manage productivity.

There is a catch, though -- smaller blocks of time necessitate better pre-planning. It is really not

possible to sit down for a 30 minute writing session, start with sentence one, and just go from there.

"Writing" here means ANY of the tasks involved with producing a finished draft ready for publication.

Fortunately, medical/scientific papers have specific parts and those parts have parts, too. Nor are those

parts hampered by reams of necessary logical relationships -- there are just a few:

1) you cannot write the literature review until you've gathered and read sources;

2) you cannot write the discussion section until you've gotten results;

3) you cannot revise until you've written something.

This means that you can assign very particular tasks to a writing session. And that is what you should

do. How might you do this? Each person will have to figure out what works for them, but ultimately,

what works needs to help you manage the task overall and a writing session's task in particular. Obvious

tools are lists and concept maps. You can write these by hand or use a computer. If you use a computer,

consider using a web-based writing tool like Google Docs so that you can access your work from

anywhere you have an internet connection. G-docs is not the only one -- also try zoho writer, pirate pad,

think free -- MS Office also has online web apps. If using concept maps, try Text2Mindmap

or wisdomap or freemind-- personally, I prefer web-based programs like Wisdomap because all the

information is stored online (freemind is a very popular product, but is a download). There are many

mapping programs and if this form works for you, explore them! Or, just draw by hand. Finally, there

are inexpensive productivity programs such as Scrivener and ConnectedText and WorkFlowy. The key

here is that you should use the technology you have time for now. Learning new technology is

something that also has to be scheduled in!

The map below shows one version of the steps involved in drafting the Introduction of a research report.

There are many steps to writing the Introduction -- many of them can be done in 15 minutes. If you can

plan longer sessions, then do so. The driving force behind scheduling writing is to make this task part of

your work day and NOT how you spend your weekend. This will mean carrying a USB stick or netbook

or tablet with you. At the very least, you should have a notebook on which to hand-write for transfer to a

computer later. If you write for just 15 minutes a day, every day, you could likely publish 2-4 articles a

year.

17

When planning a writing session...

1. Block out the time you have to spend writing -- as little as 15 minutes can work

1. Up Time -- work time that is scheduled for a necessary/mandated activity; committed

time

2. Down Time -- discretionary work time -- time when you have some control over what

you can do, ex: eat, respond to email, make appointments, schedule meetings, go for

short walk -- this is the time when you should schedule writing! One block per day is a

good goal.

3. Off Time -- time that is away from work, when you should be doing non-work activities

like sleeping, playing, gardening, exercising, socializing

2. Put the session in your calendar as an appointment -- and treat it like an appointment! Close

your door, put up a sign, turn off email notifications and ignore the phone.

3. Write out the specific task for that writing session -- be clear about goal and what you want to

do -- remember that this is a recursive process!

4. Work for the allotted time, then stop.

5. Make it Social! Start a writing group – commit to weekly writing goals, report them to each

other, cheer each other on. You can even use social media such as a private Facebook or Twitter

group to report electronically. If you spend an hour a week for journal club meetings, you can

certainly find 10 minutes to brag on your writing progress!

Link to Soc Behav Research Report Workshop Handout

Fun book to help you generate writing: How to Write A Lot