VISIT WEBSITE >>>>> http://gg.gg/y83ws?3217661 <<<<<<
Open Access dissemination of scientific information has been gaining momentum globally as this method enhances the author's visibility, by getting cited frequently. Scholarly Open Access Journals are boon to the promotion of scientific research of any discipline. Science Journals, also called scholarly Academic Journals, are a forum for the scientists, researchers and academicians where they can take their original research work and discuss it critically. All the scholarly publications follow peer review process in selecting research publications where the scholars and experts in the field evaluate the research work presented and certify whether it is written as per the research norms.
Researchers, academicians and experts of a particular discipline contribute their works for the Scholarly Journals. All the articles published in the academic science journals are scholarly journals articles written following a specific style. They are written following a well established research methodology and research framework. Academic journals also encourage original work. Often, the discussion section includes several possible explanations or interpretations of the data; the authors may then describe why they support one particular interpretation over the others.
This is not just a process of hedging their bets — this how scientists say to their peers that they have done their homework and that there is more than one possible explanation. In the woodpecker article, for example, the authors go to great lengths to describe why they believe the bird they saw is an ivory-billed woodpecker rather than a variant of the more common pileated woodpecker, knowing that this is a likely potential rebuttal to their initial findings.
A final component of the conclusions involves placing the current work back into a larger context by discussing the implications of the work.
The authors of the woodpecker article do so by discussing the nature of the woodpecker habitat and how it might be better preserved. In many articles, the results and discussion sections are combined, but regardless, the data are initially presented without interpretation. References: Scientific progress requires building on existing knowledge, and previous findings are recognized by directly citing them in any new work.
The citations are collected in one list, commonly called "References," although the precise format for each journal varies considerably. The reference list may seem like something you don't actually read, but in fact it can provide a wealth of information about whether the authors are citing the most recent work in their field or whether they are biased in their citations towards certain institutions or authors.
In addition, the reference section provides readers of the article with more information about the particular research topic discussed. The reference list for the woodpecker article includes a wide variety of sources that includes books, other journal articles, and personal accounts of bird sightings.
Supporting material: Increasingly, journals make supporting material that does not fit into the article itself — like extensive data tables, detailed descriptions of methods, figures, and animations — available online. In this case, the video footage shot by the authors is available online, along with several other resources.
The format of a scientific article may seem overly structured compared to many other things you read, but it serves a purpose by providing an archive of scientific research in the primary literature that we can build on. Though isolated examples of that archive go as far back as BCE see the Babylonian tablets in our Description in Scientific Research module , the first consistently published scientific journal was the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London , edited by Henry Oldenburg for the Royal Society beginning in see our Scientific Institutions and Societies module.
These early scientific writings include all of the components listed above, but the writing style is surprisingly different than a modern journal article. I shall without further ceremony acquaint you, that in the beginning of the Year I procured me a Triangular glass-Prisme, to try therewith the celebrated Phenomena of Colours.
And in order thereto having darkened my chamber, and made a small hole in my window-shuts, to let in a convenient quantity of the Suns light, I placed my Prisme at his entrance, that it might be thereby refracted to the opposite wall. It was at first a very pleasing divertissement, to view the vivid and intense colours produced thereby; but after a while applying my self to consider them more circumspectly, I became surprised to see them in an oblong form; which, according to the received laws of Refraction, I expected should have been circular.
Newton, Newton describes his materials and methods in the first few sentences " Today, however, Newton 's statement that the "colours" produced were a "very pleasing divertissement" would be out of place in a scientific article Figure 4.
Much more typically, modern scientific articles are written in an objective tone, typically without statements of personal opinion to avoid any appearance of bias in the interpretation of their results. Unfortunately, this tone often results in overuse of the passive voice, with statements like "a Triangular glass-Prisme was procured" instead of the wording Newton chose: "I procured me a Triangular glass-Prisme.
The tone can sometimes be misleading if the study involves many authors, making it unclear who did what work. The best scientific writers are able to both present their work in an objective tone and make their own contributions clear.
The scholarly vocabulary in scientific articles can be another obstacle to reading the primary literature. Materials and Methods sections often are highly technical in nature and can be confusing if you are not intimately familiar with the type of research being conducted. There is a reason for all of this vocabulary, however: An explicit, technical description of materials and methods provides a means for other scientists to evaluate the quality of the data presented and can often provide insight to scientists on how to replicate or extend the research described.
The tone and specialized vocabulary of the modern scientific article can make it hard to read, but understanding the purpose and requirements for each section can help you decipher the primary literature. Learning to read scientific articles is a skill, and like any other skill, it requires practice and experience to master.
It is not, however, an impossible task. Strange as it seems, the most efficient way to tackle a new article may be through a piecemeal approach, reading some but not all the sections and not necessarily in their order of appearance. Steps of Scientific Publishing Publishing a scientific journal article in the sciences entails the following steps: This guide provides resources to help you with each step of publishing your journal article.
Options for Publishing in the Sciences Researchers in the sciences are expanding their publishing venues from traditional journals, books, and conference proceedings to many other venues including webpages, social media, data publication, etc. Benson; Susan C. Silver ISBN: Scientific Publishing by Hans E. Geurts; Eberhard R. When using direct quotations, provide not only the number of the citation, but the page where the quote was found.
All citations should appear in text as a superscripted number followed by punctuation. It is the authors' responsibility to fully ensure all references are cited in completed form, in an accurate location. Please carefully follow the instructions for citations and check that all references in your reference list are cited in the paper and that all citations in the paper appear correctly in the reference list.
Sometimes written as an afterthought, the abstract is of extreme importance as in many instances this section is what is initially previewed by readership to determine if the remainder of the article is worth reading.
This is the authors opportunity to draw the reader into the study and entice them to read the rest of the article. The abstract is a summary of the article or study written in 3 rd person allowing the readers to get a quick glance of what the contents of the article include.
Writing an abstract is rather challenging as being brief, accurate and concise are requisite. The headings and structure for an abstract are usually provided in the instructions for authors.
In some instances, the abstract may change slightly pending content revisions required during the peer review process. Therefore it often works well to complete this portion of the manuscript last. Remember the abstract should be able to stand alone and should be as succinct as possible. The introduction is one of the more difficult portions of the manuscript to write. Past studies are used to set the stage or provide the reader with information regarding the necessity of the represented project.
For an introduction to work properly, the reader must feel that the research question is clear, concise, and worthy of study. Don't reach or include too broad of a literature review. For example, do not include extraneous information about performance or prevention if your research does not actually address those things. The literature review of a scientific paper is not an exhaustive review of all available knowledge in a given field of study.
That type of thorough review should be left to review articles or textbook chapters. Throughout the introduction and later in the discussion! Conclude your introduction with a solid statement of your purpose s and your hypothesis es , as appropriate.
The purpose and objectives should clearly relate to the information gap associated with the given manuscript topic discussed earlier in the introduction section.
The methods section should clearly describe the specific design of the study and provide clear and concise description of the procedures that were performed. The purpose of sufficient detail in the methods section is so that an appropriately trained person would be able to replicate your experiments. To assist in writing and manuscript preparation there are several checklists or guidelines that are available on the IJSPT website.
Initially a brief paragraph should explain the overall procedures and study design. Within this first paragraph there is generally a description of inclusion and exclusion criteria which help the reader understand the population used. Paragraphs that follow should describe in more detail the procedures followed for the study. A clear description of how data was gathered is also helpful. For example were data gathered prospectively or retrospectively?
Who if anyone was blinded, and where and when was the actual data collected? Although it is a good idea for the authors to have justification and a rationale for their procedures, these should be saved for inclusion into the discussion section, not to be discussed in the methods section. However, occasionally studies supporting components of the methods section such as reliability of tests, or validation of outcome measures may be included in the methods section.
The final portion of the methods section will include the statistical methods used to analyze the data. In most journals the results section is separate from the discussion section.
It is important that you clearly distinguish your results from your discussion. The results section should describe the results only. The discussion section should put those results into a broader context. Again, be thoughtful about content and structure. Think carefully about where content is placed in the overall structure of your paper.
It is not appropriate to bring up additional results, not discussed in the results section, in the discussion. Thus, the discussion should not simply be a repeat of the results section. Carefully discuss where your information is similar or different from other published evidence and why this might be so.
What was different in methods or analysis, what was similar? As previously stated, stick to your topic at hand, and do not overstretch your discussion!
Comments