Structure of a typical journal style paper - not all sections may be needed
Title and Abstract
Both the title and abstract should both capture the essence of the study.Introduction / Literature (positioning)
Give a brief introduction to the literature and positioning for the study.Research Design / Methods / Context
An outline of the general research approach, how you obtain your data, research method(s) protocol/recipe etc.Data / Findings
Tell the story, provide the evidence, findings, account or narrative.Analysis / Discussion
This is where draw out the significance of what you have discovered. You employ arguments, apply models or produce your own interpretation of the data, in order to better understand the evidence.Conclusions
Conclusions summarise the findings concisely, perhaps half a page. Offers an overall synthesis distilling your analysis and its relevance to theory and the literature.Bibliography/References
The bibliography/reference section is crucial to get right as it is the index to prior research and literature that you have referred to previously.Appendices (if needed)
Use appendices to provide additional detail if necessary. Usually data samples, or intermediate representations, for example a sample of the data analysis process, coding frames, stages in the coding and summary or intermediate categories from data.
Some questions to ask yourself when reviewing your own paper
- For the research design did you identify one or more research methods to use?
- For each method did you reference literature/source material inspiring the method?
- Have you described your protocol/method instructions used to apply the method?
- For the data/findings section, have you show that you applied the methods and gathered evidence/data/findings?
- Is evidence of actual data presented (selected extracts, images etc)? Whole data sets can be included in the appendix and/or your research repository (fancy name for folders).
- Is the discussion structured as a discussion (claim, critique, thesis, antithesis, synthesis)?
- (can use objective voice)
- An opening statement to remind us of the context?
- Claims from the literature of the gap or for/against different understandings?
- Commentary on the evidence gathered, offering an interpretation of that evidence?
- Relating the interpretation back to prior literature?
- Comment on gaps, problems, shortcomings?
- Does it avoid straying into the final conclusions?
- Does the conclusions section actually state conclusions?
- (can use objective voice)
- Sets out the claims that are supported (and not supported) by the evidence?
- Mention made of possible future research addressing shortcomings, gaps, problems, criticisms?
- The abstract is short and succinct (1/4 to 1/2 page) and sets the scope for the entire paper.
- After reading the title and authors names the abstract is the single strongest hook you have to encourage someone to actually read more of your paper.
- It uses clear simple language explaining the gap/relevance/need for the study - usually couched in questions.
- The last paragraph will often declare the most significant conclusion(s) of the paper - although your reader will have to go deeper to discover the why.
- You wouldn't normally use citations in the abstract.
