Writing
a research paper is not common practice. Generally it is written by the
scientist and educationist. Now a day it is started gaining its space among the
faculty member in college and university level. They write a research paper to
get better position or to sustain in the education sector. In some of the
universities made it compulsory to write a research paper to complete the Ph.D
degree.
Writing
research papers does not come naturally to most of us. It required some
experience and guidance. A good research paper addresses a specific research
question. The research question (study objective or main research hypothesis) is
the soul of the research paper and central organizing principle of the paper.
In
research paper only one research question should be addressed, however more
than one related questions are allowed.If a project allows you to explore several distinct research questions,
write several papers. For instance, want to research on the scope of financial
inclusion in agriculture sector. This is
a separate topic from the scope of financial inclusion in textile sector.
What
is a good research question?
A
good research question contains (i) specificity; (ii) originality or novelty;
and (iii) general relevance to a broad community.
Structure of the paper
Once
the research question is clearly defined, writing the paper becomes
considerably easier. The paper raised the question and it answered itself in
scientifically. The structure of the research paper should be in a proper
manner. The typical research paper structure contains the following broad
topics:
(i)
Introduction,
(ii)
Methods / Methodology,
(iii)
Results, and
(iv)
Discussion (sometimes abbreviated as IMRAD).
Each
section addresses a different objective. The author states:
(i)
In the introductory part, the problem they intend to address (i.e. research
question;
(ii)In
the methodology part, what they did to answer the question;
(iii)
In the result part, what they observed; and
(iv)
In the discussion part, what they think the results mean.
In
turn, each basic section deals several topics, and may be divided into
subsections as shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Glimpse for
writing a research paper
|
Introduction
|
|
State why the
problem you are stating is important
|
|
State what is
lacking in the current knowledge
|
|
State the
objective of your study or research question
|
|
Method
|
|
Describe the
content and setting of the study
|
|
Specify the study
design
|
|
Describe the
‘population’ (patient, doctors, hospitals, etc.)
|
|
Describe the
sampling strategy
|
|
Describe the
intervention (if applicable)
|
|
Identify the main
study variables
|
|
Describe the data
collection instruments and procedures
|
|
Outline analysis
methods
|
|
Results
|
|
Report on data
collection and recruitment (response rate etc.)
|
|
Describe the
participants (demographic, clinical condition, etc.)
|
|
Discussion
|
|
State the main
finding of the study
|
|
Discuss the main
results with reference to previous results
|
|
Analyse the
strength and limitations of the study
|
|
Offer perspectives
of the future work
|
In
the Introduction, the authors should explain the rationale and background to
the study. What is the research question? and why is it important to ask it?
While it is neither necessary nor desirable to provide a full-blown review of
the literature as a prelude to the study. It is helpful to place the study
within some larger field of enquiry. The research question should always be
spelled out and not merely left for the reader to guess.
The
methods section should provide the readers with sufficient detail about the
study methods to be able to reproduce the study if so desired. Thus, this
section should be specific, concrete, technical, and fairly detailed. The study
setting, the sampling strategy used, instruments, data collection methods, and
analysis strategies should be described. In the case of qualitative research
studies, it is also useful to tell the reader which research tradition the
study utilizes and to link the choice of methodological strategies with the
research goals.
The
Results section is typically fairly straightforward and factual. All results
that relate to the research question should be given in detail, including
simple counts and percentages. Resist the temptation to demonstrate analytic
ability and the richness of the dataset by providing numerous tables of
non-essential results.
The
Discussion section allows the most freedom. This is why the Discussion is the
most difficult to write, and is often the weakest part of a paper. Structured
Discussion sections have been proposed by some journal editors. While strict
adherence to such rules may not be necessary, following a plan such as that
proposed in Table 1 may help the novice writer stay on track.
References,
should be used wisely. Key assertions should be referenced, as well as the
methods and instruments used. However, unless the paper is a comprehensive
review of a topic, there is no need to be exhaustive. Also, references to
unpublished work, to documents in the grey literature (technical reports), or
to any source that the reader will have difficulty finding or understanding
should be avoided.
Having
the structure of the paper in place is a good start. However, there are many
details that have to be attended to while writing. An obvious recommendation is
to read, and follow, the instructions to authors published by the journal
(typically found on the journal’s website). Another concerns non-native writers
of English: do have a native speaker edit the manuscript. A paper, usually goes
through several drafts before it is submitted. When revising a paper, it is
useful to keep an eye out for the most common mistakes are shown in Table 2. If
you avoid all those, your paper should be in good shape.
Table 2 :Common
mistakes seen in manuscripts submitted to this journal
|
The stated aim of the paper is tautological (e.g. ‘The aim of this
paper is to describe what we did’) or vague (e.g. ‘We explored issues related
to X’)
|
|
The structure of the paper is chaotic (e.g. methods are described in
the Results section)
|
|
The manuscripts does not follow the journal’s instructions for authors
|
|
The paper must not exceeds the maximum number of words allowed
|
|
The Introduction is an extensive review of the literature
|
|
Methods, interventions and instruments are not described in sufficient
detail
|
|
Results are reported selectively (e.g. percentages without
frequencies, P-values without measures of effect)
|
|
The same results appear both in a table and in the text
|
|
Detailed tables are provided for results that do not relate to the
main research question
|
|
In the Introduction and Discussion, key arguments are not backed up by
appropriate references
|
|
References are out of date or cannot be accessed by most readers
|
|
The Discussion does not provide an answer to the research question
|
|
The Discussion overstates the implications of the results and does not
acknowledge the limitations of the study
|
|
The paper is written in poor English
|
Bibliography
·
Huth EJ. How to
Write and Publish Papers in the Medical Sciences, 2nd edition. Baltimore, MD:
Williams & Wilkins, 1990.
·
Browner WS.
Publishing and Presenting Clinical Research. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott,
Williams & Wilkins, 1999.
·
Devers KJ, Frankel
RM. Getting qualitative research published. Educ Health 2001; 14: 109–117.
·
Docherty M, Smith
R. The case for structuring the discussion of scientific papers. Br Med
J 1999; 318: 1224–1225.
Article by
Dr. R. Bhaskaran
Dr. Afzalur Rahman
Naserul Haque
