how to write a scholarly journal article

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Prev Chronic Dis

Successful Scientific Writing and Publishing: A Step-by-Step Approach

John k. iskander.

1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia

Sara Beth Wolicki

2 Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health, Washington, District of Columbia

Rebecca T. Leeb

Paul z. siegel.

Scientific writing and publication are essential to advancing knowledge and practice in public health, but prospective authors face substantial challenges. Authors can overcome barriers, such as lack of understanding about scientific writing and the publishing process, with training and resources. The objective of this article is to provide guidance and practical recommendations to help both inexperienced and experienced authors working in public health settings to more efficiently publish the results of their work in the peer-reviewed literature. We include an overview of basic scientific writing principles, a detailed description of the sections of an original research article, and practical recommendations for selecting a journal and responding to peer review comments. The overall approach and strategies presented are intended to contribute to individual career development while also increasing the external validity of published literature and promoting quality public health science.

Introduction

Publishing in the peer-reviewed literature is essential to advancing science and its translation to practice in public health ( 1 , 2 ). The public health workforce is diverse and practices in a variety of settings ( 3 ). For some public health professionals, writing and publishing the results of their work is a requirement. Others, such as program managers, policy makers, or health educators, may see publishing as being outside the scope of their responsibilities ( 4 ).

Disseminating new knowledge via writing and publishing is vital both to authors and to the field of public health ( 5 ). On an individual level, publishing is associated with professional development and career advancement ( 6 ). Publications share new research, results, and methods in a trusted format and advance scientific knowledge and practice ( 1 , 7 ). As more public health professionals are empowered to publish, the science and practice of public health will advance ( 1 ).

Unfortunately, prospective authors face barriers to publishing their work, including navigating the process of scientific writing and publishing, which can be time-consuming and cumbersome. Often, public health professionals lack both training opportunities and understanding of the process ( 8 ). To address these barriers and encourage public health professionals to publish their findings, the senior author (P.Z.S.) and others developed Successful Scientific Writing (SSW), a course about scientific writing and publishing. Over the past 30 years, this course has been taught to thousands of public health professionals, as well as hundreds of students at multiple graduate schools of public health. An unpublished longitudinal survey of course participants indicated that two-thirds agreed that SSW had helped them to publish a scientific manuscript or have a conference abstract accepted. The course content has been translated into this manuscript. The objective of this article is to provide prospective authors with the tools needed to write original research articles of high quality that have a good chance of being published.

Basic Recommendations for Scientific Writing

Prospective authors need to know and tailor their writing to the audience. When writing for scientific journals, 4 fundamental recommendations are: clearly stating the usefulness of the study, formulating a key message, limiting unnecessary words, and using strategic sentence structure.

To demonstrate usefulness, focus on how the study addresses a meaningful gap in current knowledge or understanding. What critical piece of information does the study provide that will help solve an important public health problem? For example, if a particular group of people is at higher risk for a specific condition, but the magnitude of that risk is unknown, a study to quantify the risk could be important for measuring the population’s burden of disease.

Scientific articles should have a clear and concise take-home message. Typically, this is expressed in 1 to 2 sentences that summarize the main point of the paper. This message can be used to focus the presentation of background information, results, and discussion of findings. As an early step in the drafting of an article, we recommend writing out the take-home message and sharing it with co-authors for their review and comment. Authors who know their key point are better able to keep their writing within the scope of the article and present information more succinctly. Once an initial draft of the manuscript is complete, the take-home message can be used to review the content and remove needless words, sentences, or paragraphs.

Concise writing improves the clarity of an article. Including additional words or clauses can divert from the main message and confuse the reader. Additionally, journal articles are typically limited by word count. The most important words and phrases to eliminate are those that do not add meaning, or are duplicative. Often, cutting adjectives or parenthetical statements results in a more concise paper that is also easier to read.

Sentence structure strongly influences the readability and comprehension of journal articles. Twenty to 25 words is a reasonable range for maximum sentence length. Limit the number of clauses per sentence, and place the most important or relevant clause at the end of the sentence ( 9 ). Consider the sentences:

• By using these tips and tricks, an author may write and publish an additional 2 articles a year.
• An author may write and publish an additional 2 articles a year by using these tips and tricks.

The focus of the first sentence is on the impact of using the tips and tricks, that is, 2 more articles published per year. In contrast, the second sentence focuses on the tips and tricks themselves.

Authors should use the active voice whenever possible. Consider the following example:

• Active voice: Authors who use the active voice write more clearly.
• Passive voice: Clarity of writing is promoted by the use of the active voice.

The active voice specifies who is doing the action described in the sentence. Using the active voice improves clarity and understanding, and generally uses fewer words. Scientific writing includes both active and passive voice, but authors should be intentional with their use of either one.

Sections of an Original Research Article

Original research articles make up most of the peer-reviewed literature ( 10 ), follow a standardized format, and are the focus of this article. The 4 main sections are the introduction, methods, results, and discussion, sometimes referred to by the initialism, IMRAD. These 4 sections are referred to as the body of an article. Two additional components of all peer-reviewed articles are the title and the abstract. Each section’s purpose and key components, along with specific recommendations for writing each section, are listed below.

Title. The purpose of a title is twofold: to provide an accurate and informative summary and to attract the target audience. Both prospective readers and database search engines use the title to screen articles for relevance ( 2 ). All titles should clearly state the topic being studied. The topic includes the who, what, when, and where of the study. Along with the topic, select 1 or 2 of the following items to include within the title: methods, results, conclusions, or named data set or study. The items chosen should emphasize what is new and useful about the study. Some sources recommend limiting the title to less than 150 characters ( 2 ). Articles with shorter titles are more frequently cited than articles with longer titles ( 11 ). Several title options are possible for the same study ( Figure ).

Two examples of title options for a single study.

Abstract . The abstract serves 2 key functions. Journals may screen articles for potential publication by using the abstract alone ( 12 ), and readers may use the abstract to decide whether to read further. Therefore, it is critical to produce an accurate and clear abstract that highlights the major purpose of the study, basic procedures, main findings, and principal conclusions ( 12 ). Most abstracts have a word limit and can be either structured following IMRAD, or unstructured. The abstract needs to stand alone from the article and tell the most important parts of the scientific story up front.

Introduction . The purpose of the introduction is to explain how the study sought to create knowledge that is new and useful. The introduction section may often require only 3 paragraphs. First, describe the scope, nature, or magnitude of the problem being addressed. Next, clearly articulate why better understanding this problem is useful, including what is currently known and the limitations of relevant previous studies. Finally, explain what the present study adds to the knowledge base. Explicitly state whether data were collected in a unique way or obtained from a previously unstudied data set or population. Presenting both the usefulness and novelty of the approach taken will prepare the reader for the remaining sections of the article.

Methods . The methods section provides the information necessary to allow others, given the same data, to recreate the analysis. It describes exactly how data relevant to the study purpose were collected, organized, and analyzed. The methods section describes the process of conducting the study — from how the sample was selected to which statistical methods were used to analyze the data. Authors should clearly name, define, and describe each study variable. Some journals allow detailed methods to be included in an appendix or supplementary document. If the analysis involves a commonly used public health data set, such as the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System ( 13 ), general aspects of the data set can be provided to readers by using references. Because what was done is typically more important than who did it, use of the passive voice is often appropriate when describing methods. For example, “The study was a group randomized, controlled trial. A coin was tossed to select an intervention group and a control group.”

Results . The results section describes the main outcomes of the study or analysis but does not interpret the findings or place them in the context of previous research. It is important that the results be logically organized. Suggested organization strategies include presenting results pertaining to the entire population first, and then subgroup analyses, or presenting results according to increasing complexity of analysis, starting with demographic results before proceeding to univariate and multivariate analyses. Authors wishing to draw special attention to novel or unexpected results can present them first.

One strategy for writing the results section is to start by first drafting the figures and tables. Figures, which typically show trends or relationships, and tables, which show specific data points, should each support a main outcome of the study. Identify the figures and tables that best describe the findings and relate to the study’s purpose, and then develop 1 to 2 sentences summarizing each one. Data not relevant to the study purpose may be excluded, summarized briefly in the text, or included in supplemental data sets. When finalizing figures, ensure that axes are labeled and that readers can understand figures without having to refer to accompanying text.

Discussion . In the discussion section, authors interpret the results of their study within the context of both the related literature and the specific scientific gap the study was intended to fill. The discussion does not introduce results that were not presented in the results section. One way authors can focus their discussion is to limit this section to 4 paragraphs: start by reinforcing the study’s take-home message(s), contextualize key results within the relevant literature, state the study limitations, and lastly, make recommendations for further research or policy and practice changes. Authors can support assertions made in the discussion with either their own findings or by referencing related research. By interpreting their own study results and comparing them to others in the literature, authors can emphasize findings that are unique, useful, and relevant. Present study limitations clearly and without apology. Finally, state the implications of the study and provide recommendations or next steps, for example, further research into remaining gaps or changes to practice or policy. Statements or recommendations regarding policy may use the passive voice, especially in instances where the action to be taken is more important than who will implement the action.

Beginning the Writing Process

The process of writing a scientific article occurs before, during, and after conducting the study or analyses. Conducting a literature review is crucial to confirm the existence of the evidence gap that the planned analysis seeks to fill. Because literature searches are often part of applying for research funding or developing a study protocol, the citations used in the grant application or study proposal can also be used in subsequent manuscripts. Full-text databases such as PubMed Central ( 14 ), NIH RePORT ( 15 ), and CDC Stacks ( 16 ) can be useful when performing literature reviews. Authors should familiarize themselves with databases that are accessible through their institution and any assistance that may be available from reference librarians or interlibrary loan systems. Using citation management software is one way to establish and maintain a working reference list. Authors should clearly understand the distinction between primary and secondary references, and ensure that they are knowledgeable about the content of any primary or secondary reference that they cite.

Review of the literature may continue while organizing the material and writing begins. One way to organize material is to create an outline for the paper. Another way is to begin drafting small sections of the article such as the introduction. Starting a preliminary draft forces authors to establish the scope of their analysis and clearly articulate what is new and novel about the study. Furthermore, using information from the study protocol or proposal allows authors to draft the methods and part of the results sections while the study is in progress. Planning potential data comparisons or drafting “table shells” will help to ensure that the study team has collected all the necessary data. Drafting these preliminary sections early during the writing process and seeking feedback from co-authors and colleagues may help authors avoid potential pitfalls, including misunderstandings about study objectives.

The next step is to conduct the study or analyses and use the resulting data to fill in the draft table shells. The initial results will most likely require secondary analyses, that is, exploring the data in ways in addition to those originally planned. Authors should ensure that they regularly update their methods section to describe all changes to data analysis.

After completing table shells, authors should summarize the key finding of each table or figure in a sentence or two. Presenting preliminary results at meetings, conferences, and internal seminars is an established way to solicit feedback. Authors should pay close attention to questions asked by the audience, treating them as an informal opportunity for peer review. On the basis of the questions and feedback received, authors can incorporate revisions and improvements into subsequent drafts of the manuscript.

The relevant literature should be revisited periodically while writing to ensure knowledge of the most recent publications about the manuscript topic. Authors should focus on content and key message during the process of writing the first draft and should not spend too much time on issues of grammar or style. Drafts, or portions of drafts, should be shared frequently with trusted colleagues. Their recommendations should be reviewed and incorporated when they will improve the manuscript’s overall clarity.

For most authors, revising drafts of the manuscript will be the most time-consuming task involved in writing a paper. By regularly checking in with coauthors and colleagues, authors can adopt a systematic approach to rewriting. When the author has completed a draft of the manuscript, he or she should revisit the key take-home message to ensure that it still matches the final data and analysis. At this point, final comments and approval of the manuscript by coauthors can be sought.

Authors should then seek to identify journals most likely to be interested in considering the study for publication. Initial questions to consider when selecting a journal include:

• Which audience is most interested in the paper’s message?
• Would clinicians, public health practitioners, policy makers, scientists, or a broader audience find this useful in their field or practice?
• Do colleagues have prior experience submitting a manuscript to this journal?
• Is the journal indexed and peer-reviewed?
• Is the journal subscription or open-access and are there any processing fees?
• How competitive is the journal?

Authors should seek to balance the desire to be published in a top-tier journal (eg, Journal of the American Medical Association, BMJ, or Lancet) against the statistical likelihood of rejection. Submitting the paper initially to a journal more focused on the paper’s target audience may result in a greater chance of acceptance, as well as more timely dissemination of findings that can be translated into practice. Most of the 50 to 75 manuscripts published each week by authors from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are published in specialty and subspecialty journals, rather than in top-tier journals ( 17 ).

The target journal’s website will include author guidelines, which will contain specific information about format requirements (eg, font, line spacing, section order, reference style and limit, table and figure formatting), authorship criteria, article types, and word limits for articles and abstracts.

We recommend returning to the previously drafted abstract and ensuring that it complies with the journal’s format and word limit. Authors should also verify that any changes made to the methods or results sections during the article’s drafting are reflected in the final version of the abstract. The abstract should not be written hurriedly just before submitting the manuscript; it is often apparent to editors and reviewers when this has happened. A cover letter to accompany the submission should be drafted; new and useful findings and the key message should be included.

Before submitting the manuscript and cover letter, authors should perform a final check to ensure that their paper complies with all journal requirements. Journals may elect to reject certain submissions on the basis of review of the abstract, or may send them to peer reviewers (typically 2 or 3) for consultation. Occasionally, on the basis of peer reviews, the journal will request only minor changes before accepting the paper for publication. Much more frequently, authors will receive a request to revise and resubmit their manuscript, taking into account peer review comments. Authors should recognize that while revise-and-resubmit requests may state that the manuscript is not acceptable in its current form, this does not constitute a rejection of the article. Authors have several options in responding to peer review comments:

• Performing additional analyses and updating the article appropriately
• Declining to perform additional analyses, but providing an explanation (eg, because the requested analysis goes beyond the scope of the article)
• Providing updated references
• Acknowledging reviewer comments that are simply comments without making changes

In addition to submitting a revised manuscript, authors should include a cover letter in which they list peer reviewer comments, along with the revisions they have made to the manuscript and their reply to the comment. The tone of such letters should be thankful and polite, but authors should make clear areas of disagreement with peer reviewers, and explain why they disagree. During the peer review process, authors should continue to consult with colleagues, especially ones who have more experience with the specific journal or with the peer review process.

There is no secret to successful scientific writing and publishing. By adopting a systematic approach and by regularly seeking feedback from trusted colleagues throughout the study, writing, and article submission process, authors can increase their likelihood of not only publishing original research articles of high quality but also becoming more scientifically productive overall.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge PCD ’s former Associate Editor, Richard A. Goodman, MD, MPH, who, while serving as Editor in Chief of CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Series, initiated a curriculum on scientific writing for training CDC’s Epidemic Intelligence Service Officers and other CDC public health professionals, and with whom the senior author of this article (P.Z.S.) collaborated in expanding training methods and contents, some of which are contained in this article. The authors acknowledge Juan Carlos Zevallos, MD, for his thoughtful critique and careful editing of previous Successful Scientific Writing materials. We also thank Shira Eisenberg for editorial assistance with the manuscript. This publication was supported by the Cooperative Agreement no. 1U360E000002 from CDC and the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. The findings and conclusions of this article do not necessarily represent the official views of CDC or the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. Names of journals and citation databases are provided for identification purposes only and do not constitute any endorsement by CDC.

The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions.

Suggested citation for this article: Iskander JK, Wolicki SB, Leeb RT, Siegel PZ. Successful Scientific Writing and Publishing: A Step-by-Step Approach. Prev Chronic Dis 2018;15:180085. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd15.180085 .

How to Write a Scholarly Article for Publication (15 Tips)

When researchers and scientists begin graduate school, few know that they will actually be writing much of the time. Because the focus in graduate school is on obtaining data and results, it is no surprise that most scientists aren't taught how to write well .

However, professional researchers write scholarly articles for publication, grant proposals, abstracts for conferences, theses or dissertations (if they get a Master’s or a PhD degree), books, conference presentations , and maybe even an acceptance speech for a Nobel Prize . Even if you think you know everything there is to know about writing in science, we encourage you to keep reading.

This is because there are some great research studies out there that unfortunately have been written very poorly in peer reviewed academic journals, even by good and experienced scientists. This may have nothing to do with a researcher not being a native English speaker. Rather, it may have everything to do with knowing (or not knowing) how to write a scholarly article .

And, even if you know how to write, maybe our tips will give you new insights or a better way of thinking about writing journal articles. After all, we all want to be more efficient researchers.

But first, what is a scholarly article?

A scholarly article is written on a specific topic of original research for a specific audience (other researchers in that field). Generally, a scholarly article is published in a peer reviewed journal. It typically details an original study and the results obtained. It should provide insights into the relevance of the study to the field of study. Alternative names for a scholarly article are a scientific manuscript, a journal article, an academic article, a scientific paper, a scholarly journal article, or an academic journal article. You can search for scholarly articles via the widely used Google Scholar or via other paid services, such as Web of Science .

How to write a scholarly article for publication (15 Tips):

1. make a template for all future manuscripts., 2. learn what to include and what not to include in each section., 3. don’t repeat yourself even if it is written in a different way., 4. start with the methods section., 5. write the other sections in this order: introduction, results and discussion, conclusions, and then the abstract., 6. gather your bibliography before you write the introduction and results and discussion sections., 7. make your figures and tables first. then, discuss them in order in your results and discussion section., 8. understand that the most successful and well-cited peer reviewed articles not only have great results but also explain the value of their results., 9. write the conclusions when you are fresh., 10. write the abstract last. but, first learn what should not be in an abstract., 11. think carefully about your title., 12. write the shorter sections when you need a break from working on the other longer sections., 13. reread the entire manuscript when you have written all sections. add or fill in any gaps you left. make sure it flows well., 14. if you write in your native language (not english), use simple, short sentences that will be easy to translate into english., 15. get a good translator if you did not write the original manuscript in english. then, have the paper proofread or edited by a professional editor or at least a colleague..

Ok, so that’s the list. Now, let's delve into the details of each of these tips.

1. Make a template for all your future manuscripts.

For example, write down the major sections in papers from journals in the field where you want to publish your research. You can also search online for the manuscript template of the journal where you want to submit your scientific paper. By making a template, you will always have somewhere to start when you begin writing a new article. This can be especially helpful if each of your papers is in the same field and on the same subject.

Become familiar with how to write an abstract , how to write an introduction, how to list your experimental (or computational) methods and your reagents and materials, how to explain your results, and how to make your conclusion section different from your abstract.

Knowing the ins and outs of these sections is crucial.

If you have read many peer reviewed articles, you may already have a good idea of what each of these sections typically includes. Also, you may have already developed you own opinions on what to include in each section. But, keep reading. We will provide some new tips on some of these sections for your manuscript. We also have other articles in our blog on some of these topics that may interest you.

3. Don’t repeat yourself even if it is rewritten in a different way.

So many researchers make this mistake. For example, the same exact sentence is often in both the abstract and in the methods or the conclusion section of their article. This may be the result of writing the abstract last and taking a few sentences from each section of the paper. This is understandable. But, your reader doesn't want to see the same sentence twice (or even the same information twice). They are busy scientists like you.

So, be concise and change up your wording enough so it doesn't sound like you are repeating yourself. Science Magazine even explicitly states in its manuscript template to “avoid repeating the conclusions at the end.” This will prevent potential issues with journal editors and peer reviewers .

4. Start with the Experimental section or Materials and Methods section.

This section of a scientific manuscript is the easiest to write. Write down what you did in your experiment, and the details will naturally come up that you need to fill in.

Before you know it, you will likely have one page of your paper written, which is a great starting point. This will give you momentum for writing the other sections.

Once complete, you should have a very good handle on what you did in your study. You should then be able to write the other sections with a clearer understanding of your experiments.

For most fields of study, these are the major sections that you need to include when you write an academic article. The introduction is the second easiest to write, followed by the results and discussion.

Sometimes, you should split up the results and discussion into two sections. But, this depends upon the journal's requirements and/or your personal style.

Leave the conclusions, abstract, and title for last. This way you have time to think about your study's broader impact and its relevance to your field of study.

6. Do your literature search and gather your bibliography before you write the Introduction and Results and Discussion sections.

This will provide you with previous studies to compare your work with in your results and discussion section. It will also help you introduce your study in your introduction.

You will be able to see what researchers in your field think are important details to include in their introductions. For example, if your study is on electron transfer mechanisms and all other studies explain the definition of electron transfer in their introductions, you may want to consider writing something similar as well. In case you were wondering, here’s how Wikipedia defines electron transfer:

But, be careful not to plagiarize other studies (this is a big no-no!). Add in some useful background information that prior similar papers have left out. You will want to add value to the body of literature on your topic, not rehash what others have already stated.

These are a few examples of how to write your introduction based on information in prior published papers.

There may be many other connections and gaps in your field of study. You should mention them in your introduction once you read and gather the appropriate bibliography.

If you want to know why you need to cite sources, we have a popular article on the importance of referencing .

Make your figures and tables first before you start writing about your data/results. Then, organize their order. Once you know what their order should be in your scholarly article, you have an outline for your results section.

Then, start with Figure 1. Describe it and tell what the takeaway message is and what result it shows. If you have organized your figures in the proper order, your discussion about Figure 1 will naturally lead to Figure 2 (or to Table 1). If it doesn't naturally progress, change the figure order if needed. Then, continue writing about them in order.

This method should make it easy to write about all your data and results. When appropriate, mix in comparisons of your data with prior studies’ results. You should start to see the bigger picture of why your results matter.

Don’t worry that you are going through an ‘analysis’ phase of your results while writing your scientific manuscript. This is normal.

Sometimes, it isn't until you write down your results and analyze them in relation to other studies that you begin to see the bigger picture. It's hard to do that sometimes when you only have figures and tables in front of you.

Writing the paper can actually help define the value of your study.

8. Understand that the most successful and well-cited peer reviewed articles (and most highly cited authors ) not only have great results but also explain the value of their results.

You need not be boastful, but you should clearly state the relevance of your results.

These types of sentences are critical. With these sentences, you should tell the reader why they should care.

How does your study fill a void?

How is it useful to future studies and innovations?

Are your methods new and extremely useful?

Answering these questions can differentiate a great article in Nature from a mediocre paper in a low-tier journal. Mediocre articles give their results and state that the results are important. But, they do not explain why they are important. Great papers explain the relevance well and give details on why.

Receive Free Grammar and Publishing Tips via Email

The conclusion section can be tough. It can be easy to perform a study but hard to make conclusions or discuss why the results happened.

And, let's face it, you are tired of this project by now and just want to move on to the next exciting study. Writing is often the most dreaded part of science for most researchers.

Yet, it is the main way that you tell other researchers and colleagues about your original studies and results.

So, make writing the conclusion section easier by being kind to yourself when you get to this point. Look back at the other sections you have already written. Now, marvel at your progress (even if you have written many papers before, it's always an accomplishment!).

OK, now take the day off (or better yet, work on some other project), and come back to the conclusion section tomorrow. Then, get up early, have a nice breakfast, and sit down to work. Ready. Set. Write.

Write what you think was most important about your study and results.

Why does this research even matter?

What is the link between your study and prior similar studies?

What, if anything, was groundbreaking about your results?

Answer at least some of these questions in your conclusions. Then, you are on your way to writing why the study is relevant.

Put the pieces together.

Make a conjecture about what mechanisms are at work (this may be best laid out in your results and discussion section if it requires major discussion).

Make estimations.

Make projections, and talk about what is still lacking that requires future study.

You may even gain new ideas for future studies, future grant proposals, or your dissertation (if you are a student). Then, reread it to make sure you included all your “conclusions."

The abstract is not just sentences taken from the main manuscript.

The abstract is not a literature review. It should not only provide background information without mentioning the results of your study.

The abstract is not a mini-methods section. You should not include every detail about how you performed your study.

The abstract should generally have this outline:

1 sentence on background,

1 sentence on the purpose and what you studied generally ,

1-2 sentences on your methods,

1-2 sentences on your results,

1 conclusion sentence, and

1 outlook sentence.

Of course, you may need to adjust these numbers depending upon your specific study. You can find some rules for writing a good abstract in our past article on this topic.

The title of your scholarly article is what readers will see first. If it's not compelling and concise but informative, readers won’t continue reading the paper or even the abstract.

This means you could miss out on a citation. So, think long and hard about what words to include in the title of your scholarly article.

This includes thinking about what keywords should be in your title .

Keywords are the words that researchers may use to search for your topic.

Write the Acknowledgements, Supporting Information , and list of keywords when you need a break.

For example, if you are writing the conclusions but are having trouble making a connection with prior studies, stop!

Instead, spend some time on the shorter sections so that you continue your momentum with writing. This will give your brain a break for a while from the main task. You will have a sense of accomplishment as you continue to make progress and will not get discouraged.

As an example, often determining who to acknowledge is easier than writing your conclusions.

But, don't use this advice as an excuse to not get back to the main task of writing the main sections of the paper. To keep this from being too much of a distraction, set a timer for 30 minutes. During this time, you can relax a little and work on minor sections of the article.

Then, get back to work on the bigger sections after the time is up. You may even find that you can actually come up with a good idea or a good phrase to include in one of your main article sections while taking this “break”. Your brain may keep working on the task even when you stop actively working on it, and it's pretty cool when this happens.

You should be able to see what sections are choppy. Look for sections that don’t have a good logical flow. Try to do this all in one sitting or at least all in one day when you can give your article your full focus. Then, work on the problem areas one by one .

Many researchers from non-English speaking countries have been taught to write beautiful, long sentences that are reminiscent of poetry.

These are great oftentimes in the native language and for the native audience of other researchers. However, the problem is that the long, beautiful sentences do not translate well into English.

If translated literally into English, the long sentences often sound fluffy and include too many unnecessary phrases. This makes the actual point of the sentence difficult to determine.

English-speaking researchers, editors, and peer reviewers will unfortunately look at your paper as being too wordy. This is because researchers in English-speaking countries are taught to write concisely.

To avoid this, if you write in your native language, try to use short, active sentences that will be easy to translate. For most languages, this means that your subject and verb should be at the beginning of the sentence and easy to pick out.

Avoid adding in unnecessary phrases. We have an article on some phrases to avoid in scientific writing that you may want to review.

For example, avoid ‘in other words’ and choose ‘thus’ instead. This is a simple example, but the point is that you want to be short and to the point without fluff.

Conciseness is key to a well-written scientific paper in English.

We aren’t saying this because translating and English editing is our business. We say this because we believe that every scholarly article aimed at publication will benefit from editing.

Also, English is the major language of science .

So, if you want your research article to be read internationally, it should be published in an English-language journal and be written in English.

If you cannot write it in English, you need a good translator who will translate it from your native language into English. It should then be edited by a native English speaker who preferably has expertise in your field of study.

You may have noticed a general theme of this article - your paper should show its relevance to your field of study.

If you explain the importance of your study, your paper will be heavily cited. Your colleagues may then acknowledge you as an expert in your field.

Writing is a fluid art that should be adjusted and tweaked to meet the needs of your target audience. We hope these 15 tips help you on your scholarly article-writing journey and help you publish your research in a top journal !

Do you use these methods or different methods when writing your scholarly articles?

We would love to hear your ideas and comments and discuss them in future articles.

Contact us and start a conversation!

Comments or Suggestions?

Complete our Blog Feedback Survey and Receive 10% Off Your First Editing or Translation Order!

About the Authors:

This article was collectively written by a dedicated group of our in-house PhD editors and writers who have decades of scientific publishing and research experience.

Connect With Us

Dissertation Editing and Proofreading Services Discount (New for 2018)

May 3, 2017.

For March through May 2018 ONLY, our professional dissertation editing se...

Thesis Editing and Proofreading Services Discount (New for 2018)

For March through May 2018 ONLY, our thesis editing service is discounted...

Neurology includes Falcon Scientific Editing in Professional Editing Help List

March 14, 2017.

Neurology Journal now includes Falcon Scientific Editing in its Professio...

Useful Links

Academic Editing | Thesis Editing | Editing Certificate | Resources

Oxford University Press's Academic Insights for the Thinking World

How to write a journal article

Oxford Academic journals

Find out more about publishing partnerships with Oxford Academic.

• By Rose Wolfe-Emery
• July 21 st 2023

Academics normally learn how to write while on the job,  sugge s ts  Michael Hochberg. This usually starts with “the dissertation and interactions with their supervisor. Skills are honed and new ones acquired with each successive manuscript.” Writing continues to improve throughout a career, but that thought might bring little solace if you are staring at a blank document and wondering where to start. 

In this blog post, we share tips from editors and outline some ideas to bear in mind when drafting a journal article. Whether you are writing a journal article to share your research, contribute to your field, or progress your career, a well-written and structured article will increase the likelihood of acceptance and of your article making an impact after publication.

Four tips for writing well

Stuart West and Lindsay Turnbull  suggest  four general principles to bear in mind when writing journal articles:

• Keep it simple:  “Simple, clear writing is fundamental to this task. Instead of trying to sound […] clever, you should be clear and concise.”
• Assume nothing:  “When writing a paper, it’s best to assume that your reader is [subject] literate, but has very little expert knowledge. Your paper is more likely to fail because you assumed too much, than because you dumbed it down too much.”
• Keep to essentials:  “If you focus on the main message, and remove all distractions, then the reader will come away with the message that you want them to have.”
• Tell your story : “Good […] writing tells a story. It tells the reader why the topic you have chosen is important, what you found out, and why that matters. For the story to flow smoothly, the different parts need to link clearly to each other. In creative writing this is called ‘narrative flow’.”

“A paper is well-written if a reader who is not involved in the work can understand every single sentence in the paper,”  argues  Nancy Dixon. But understanding is the bare minimum that you should aim for—ideally, you want to  engage  your audience, so they keep reading. 

As  West and Turnbull say , frankly: “Your potential reader is someone time-limited, stressed, and easily bored. They have a million other things to do and will take any excuse to give up on reading your paper.”

A complete guide to preparing a journal article for submission

Consider your research topic.

Before you begin to draft your article, consider the following questions:

• What key message(s) do you want to convey?
• Can you identify a significant advance that will arise from your article?
• How could your argument, results, or findings change the way that people think or advance understanding in the field?

As  Nancy Dixon  says: “[A journal] editor wants to publish papers that interest and excite the journal’s readers, that are important to advancing knowledge in the field and that spark new ideas for work in the field.”

Think about the journal that you want to submit to

Research the journals in your field and create a shortlist of “target” journals  before  writing your article, so that you can adapt your writing to the journal’s audience and style. Journals sometimes have an official style guide but reading published articles can also help you to familiarise yourself with the format and tone of articles in your target journals. Journals often publish articles of varying lengths and structures, so consider what article type would best suit your argument or results. 

Check your target journals’ editorial policies and ethical requirements. As a minimum, all reputable journals require submissions to be original and previously unpublished. The  ThinkCheckSubmit  checklist can help you to assess whether a journal is suitable for your research.

Now that you’ve decided on your research topic and chosen the journal you plan on submitting to, what do you need to consider when drafting each section of your article?

Create an outline

Firstly, it’s worth creating an outline for your journal article, broken down by section. Seth J. Schwartz  explains  this as follows:

Writing an outline is like creating a map before you set out on a road trip. You know which roads to take, and where to turn or get off the highway. You can even decide on places to stop during your trip. When you create a map like this, the trip is planned and you don’t have to worry whether you are going in the correct direction. It has already been mapped out for you.

The typical structure of a journal article

• Make it concise, accurate, and catchy
• Avoid including abbreviations or formulae
• Choose 5-7 keywords that you’d like your journal article to appear in the search results for
• Summarize the findings of your journal article in a succinct, “punchy”, and relevant way
• Keep it brief (200 words for the letter, and 250 words for the main journal)
• Do not include references

Introduction

• Introduce your argument or outline the problem
• Describe your approach
• Identify existing solutions and limitations, or provide the existing context for your discussion
• Define abbreviations

Methods 

For STEM and some social sciences articles

• Describe how the work was done and include plenty of detail to allow for reproduction
• Identify equipment and software programs

Results 

For STEM and some social science articles

• Decide on the data to present and how to present it (clearly and concisely)
• Summarise the key results of the article
• Do not repeat results or introduce new discussion points

 Acknowledgements

• Include funding, contributors who are not listed as authors, facilities and equipment, referees (if they’ve been helpful; even though anonymous)
• Do not include non-research contributors (parents, friends, or pets!)
• Cite articles that have been influential in your research—these should be well-balanced and relevant
• Follow your chosen journal’s reference style, such as Harvard or Chicago
• List all citations in the text alphabetically at end of the article

Sharing data

Many journals now encourage authors to make all data on which the conclusions of their article rely available to readers. This data can be presented in the main manuscript, in additional supporting files, or placed in a public repository.

Journals also tend to support the Force 11 Data Citation Principles that require all publicly available datasets be fully referenced in the reference list with an accession number or unique identifier such as a digital object identifier (DOI).

Permissions

Permission to reproduce copyright material, for online publication without a time limit, must also be cleared and, if necessary, paid for by the author. Evidence in writing that such permissions have been secured from the rights-holder are usually required to be made available to the editors.

Learning from experience

Publishing a journal article is very competitive, so don’t lose hope if your article isn’t accepted to your first-choice journal the first-time round. If your article makes it to the peer-review stage, be sure to take note of what the reviewers have said, as their comments can be very helpful. As well as continuing to write, there are other things you can do to improve your writing skills, including peer review and editing.

Christopher, Marek, and Zebel note  that “there is no secret formula for success”, arguing that: 

The lack of a specific recipe for acceptances reflects, in part, the variety of factors that may influence publication decisions, such as the perceived novelty of the manuscript topic, how the manuscript topic relates to other manuscripts submitted at a similar time, and the targeted journal. Thus, beyond actively pursuing options for any one particular manuscript, begin or continue work on others. In fact, one approach to boosting writing productivity is to have a variety of ongoing projects at different stages of completion. After all, considering that “100 percent of the shots you do not take will not go in,” you can increase your chances of publication by taking multiple shots.

Rose Wolfe-Emery , Marketing Executive, Oxford University Press

• Editor's Picks
• Publishing 101
• Series & Columns

Our Privacy Policy sets out how Oxford University Press handles your personal information, and your rights to object to your personal information being used for marketing to you or being processed as part of our business activities.

We will only use your personal information to register you for OUPblog articles.

Or subscribe to articles in the subject area by email or RSS

Related posts:

Recent Comments

There are currently no comments.

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Writing for an academic journal: 10 tips

1) Have a strategy, make a plan

Why do you want to write for journals? What is your purpose? Are you writing for research assessment? Or to make a difference? Are you writing to have an impact factor or to have an impact? Do you want to develop a profile in a specific area? Will this determine which journals you write for? Have you taken their impact factors into account?

Have you researched other researchers in your field – where have they published recently? Which group or conversation can you see yourself joining? Some people write the paper first and then look for a 'home' for it, but since everything in your article – content, focus, structure, style – will be shaped for a specific journal, save yourself time by deciding on your target journal and work out how to write in a way that suits that journal.

Having a writing strategy means making sure you have both external drivers – such as scoring points in research assessment or climbing the promotion ladder – and internal drivers – which means working out why writing for academic journals matters to you. This will help you maintain the motivation you'll need to write and publish over the long term. Since the time between submission and publication can be up to two years (though in some fields it's much less) you need to be clear about your motivation.

2) Analyse writing in journals in your field

Take a couple of journals in your field that you will target now or soon. Scan all the abstracts over the past few issues. Analyse them: look closely at all first and last sentences. The first sentence (usually) gives the rationale for the research, and the last asserts a 'contribution to knowledge'. But the word 'contribution' may not be there – it's associated with the doctorate. So which words are used? What constitutes new knowledge in this journal at this time? How can you construct a similar form of contribution from the work you did? What two sentences will you write to start and end your abstract for that journal?

Scan other sections of the articles: how are they structured? What are the components of the argument? Highlight all the topic sentences – the first sentences of every paragraph – to show the stages in the argument. Can you see an emerging taxonomy of writing genres in this journal? Can you define the different types of paper, different structures and decide which one will work best in your paper? Select two types of paper: one that's the type of paper you can use as a model for yours, and one that you can cite in your paper, thereby joining the research conversation that is ongoing in that journal.

3) Do an outline and just write

Which type of writer are you: do you always do an outline before you write, or do you just dive in and start writing? Or do you do a bit of both? Both outlining and just writing are useful, and it is therefore a good idea to use both. However, make your outline very detailed: outline the main sections and calibrate these with your target journal.

What types of headings are normally used there? How long are the sections usually? Set word limits for your sections, sub-sections and, if need be, for sub-sub-sections. This involves deciding about content that you want to include, so it may take time, and feedback would help at this stage.

When you sit down to write, what exactly are you doing:using writing to develop your ideas or writing to document your work? Are you using your outline as an agenda for writing sections of your article? Define your writing task by thinking about verbs – they define purpose: to summarise, overview, critique, define, introduce, conclude etc.

4) Get feedback from start to finish

Even at the earliest stages, discuss your idea for a paper with four or five people, get feedback on your draft abstract. It will only take them a couple of minutes to read it and respond. Do multiple revisions before you submit your article to the journal.

5) Set specific writing goals and sub-goals

Making your writing goals specific means defining the content, verb and word length for the section. This means not having a writing goal like, 'I plan to have this article written by the end of the year' but 'My next writing goal is to summarise and critique twelve articles for the literature review section in 800 words on Tuesday between 9am and 10.30'. Some people see this as too mechanical for academic writing, but it is a way of forcing yourself to make decisions about content, sequence and proportion for your article.

6) Write with others

While most people see writing as a solitary activity, communal writing – writing with others who are writing – can help to develop confidence, fluency and focus. It can help you develop the discipline of regular writing. Doing your academic writing in groups or at writing retreats are ways of working on your own writing, but – if you unplug from email, internet and all other devices – also developing the concentration needed for regular, high-level academic writing.

At some point – ideally at regular intervals – you can get a lot more done if you just focus on writing. If this seems like common sense, it isn't common practice. Most people do several things at once, but this won't always work for regular journal article writing. At some point, it pays to privilege writing over all other tasks, for a defined period, such as 90 minutes, which is long enough to get something done on your paper, but not so long that it's impossible to find the time.

7) Do a warm up before you write

While you are deciding what you want to write about, an initial warm up that works is to write for five minutes, in sentences, in answer to the question: 'What writing for publication have you done [or the closest thing to it], and what do you want to do in the long, medium and short term?'

Once you have started writing your article, use a variation on this question as a warm up – what writing for this project have you done, and what do you want to do in the long, medium and short term? Top tip: end each session of writing with a 'writing instruction' for yourself to use in your next session, for example, 'on Monday from 9 to 10am, I will draft the conclusion section in 500 words'.

As discussed, if there are no numbers, there are no goals. Goals that work need to be specific, and you need to monitor the extent to which you achieve them. This is how you learn to set realistic targets.

8) Analyse reviewers' feedback on your submission

What exactly are they asking you to do? Work out whether they want you to add or cut something. How much? Where? Write out a list of revision actions. When you resubmit your article include this in your report to the journal, specifying how you have responded to the reviewers' feedback. If your article was rejected, it is still useful to analyse feedback, work out why and revise it for somewhere else.

Most feedback will help you improve your paper and, perhaps, your journal article writing, but sometimes it may seem overheated, personalised or even vindictive. Some of it may even seem unprofessional. Discuss reviewers' feedback – see what others think of it. You may find that other people – even eminent researchers – still get rejections and negative reviews; any non-rejection is a cause for celebration. Revise and resubmit as soon as you can.

9) Be persistent, thick-skinned and resilient

These are qualities that you may develop over time – or you may already have them. It may be easier to develop them in discussion with others who are writing for journals.

10) Take care of yourself

Writing for academic journals is highly competitive. It can be extremely stressful. Even making time to write can be stressful. And there are health risks in sitting for long periods, so try not to sit writing for more than an hour at a time. Finally, be sure to celebrate thoroughly when your article is accepted. Remind yourself that writing for academic journals is what you want to do – that your writing will make a difference in some way.

These points are taken from the 3rd edition of Writing for Academic Journals .

Rowena Murray is professor in education and director of research at the University of the West of Scotland – follow it on Twitter @UniWestScotland

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional . Looking for your next university role? Browse Guardian jobs for thousands of the latest academic, administrative and research posts

• Universities
• Professional development
• Higher education
• Arts and humanities

Comments (…)

Most viewed.

• SHSU Library
• Research Guides
• Scholarly Communication

Scholarly Authoring & Presenting Guide

• How to Write a Scholarly Article
• How to Write a Research Proposal
• How to Present: Posters & Papers
• Dissertation to Publication
• Getting "Unstuck" In Your Writing
• Who Counts as an Author?
• Inclusive Citation
• Are You Citing Retracted Papers?
• Style Guides & Citation Managers
• Maintaining Your Research Pipeline
• Upcoming Training & Events
• Request a Consultation
• BACK to Scholarly Communication Main Guide

Help Writing Articles - Piece by Piece

• Before You Write
• Guides to Scholarly Writing
• Literature Review
• Methodology
• Lay Summary
• Manuscript Review Tools

• Tips for Communicating With, [About], and For LGBTQI+ Communities "When communicating with, about, or for LGBTQI+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or questioning, intersex, and other) communities, it is important to consider the unique needs and barriers these populations encounter."
• Writing Respectfully: Person-First and Identity-First Langauge "Focus on what will create the most respect in your situation and with your audience."

Inclusive Language in Science The recorded presentation below by the Technical Editor for Style at The BMJ " explored the role of inclusive language in science, including how thoughtful and deliberate choices in wording can help to promote diversity, reduce bias, and ensure that individuals are valued and respected. Relevant challenges in science editing and publishing were discussed and practical tips and resources were provided to help empower participants to have conversations and make decisions about potentially sensitive topics."

• Elsevier Researcher Academy Online lectures and interactive tutorials on many topics, including how to write great papers, preparing your manuscript, the journal publishing cycle, Impact Factor & other bibliometrics, publishing ethics and peer review, and even how to get your research noticed more often.
• How To... Guides (from Emerald Publishing) Topics such as how to write a lit review, how to proofread, how to write an abstract, and more.
• Author Guides (from Taylor & Francis Publishing) From Preparation (choosing a journal, publishing ethics, etc.) and Submission (checklist, cover letter, etc.) to Review, Production, Publication, and Beyond Publication.
• TooWrite Abstracts A method and tool for writing abstracts. Sign up for free.
• How to Write the Background of Your Study

Infographic from Editage! - 6 Differences between a study background and literature review

• How to Write the Conclusion of a Research Paper

  A lay summary explains your research for a general audience.

• R Pubsure Pubsure reviews your uploaded manuscript and identifies language issues, reference problems, and more. Although a paid version is available with more bells and whistles, even the free version can be a great tool to help polish a manuscript before submission.
• Paperpal Free AI tool checks grammar and language in academic writing. A plugin for Microsoft Word is also available.
• << Previous: Dissertation to Publication
• Next: Getting "Unstuck" In Your Writing >>
• Last Updated: Mar 15, 2024 5:40 PM
• URL: https://shsulibraryguides.org/authoring

Newton Gresham Library | (936) 294-1614 | (866) NGL-INFO | Ask a Question | Share a Suggestion Sam Houston State University | Huntsville, Texas 77341 | (936) 294-1111 | (866) BEARKAT © Copyright Sam Houston State University | All rights reserved. | A Member of The Texas State University System

Writing a Research Paper for an Academic Journal: A Five-step Recipe for Perfection

The answer to writing the perfect research paper is as simple as following a step-by-step recipe. Here we bring to you a recipe for effortlessly planning, writing, and publishing your paper as a peer reviewed journal article.

Updated on March 15, 2022

As a young researcher, getting your paper published as a journal article is a huge milestone; but producing it may seem like climbing a mountain compared to, perhaps, the theses, essays, or conference papers you have produced in the past.

You may feel overwhelmed with the thought of carrying innumerable equipment and may feel incapable of completing the task. But, in reality, the answer to writing the perfect research paper is as simple as following a recipe with step-by-step instructions.

In this blog, I aim to bring to you the recipe for effortlessly planning, writing, and publishing your paper as a peer reviewed journal article. I will give you the essential information, key points, and resources to keep in mind before you begin the writing process for your research papers.

Secret ingredient 1: Make notes before you begin the writing process

Because I want you to benefit from this article on a personal level, I am going to give away my secret ingredient for producing a good research paper right at the beginning. The one thing that helps me write literally anything is — cue the drum rolls — making notes.

Yes, making notes is the best way to remember and store all that information, which is definitely going to help you throughout the process of writing your paper. So, please pick up a pen and start making notes for writing your research paper.

Step 1. Choose the right research topic

Although it is important to be passionate and curious about your research article topic, it is not enough. Sometimes the sheer excitement of having an idea may take away your ability to focus on and question the novelty, credibility, and potential impact of your research topic.

On the contrary, the first thing that you should do when you write a journal paper is question the novelty, credibility, and potential impact of your research question.

It is also important to remember that your research, along with the aforementioned points, must be original and relevant: It must benefit and interest the scientific community.

All you have to do is perform a thorough literature search in your research field and have a look at what is currently going on in the field of your topic of interest. This step in academic writing is not as daunting as it may seem and, in fact, is quite beneficial for the following reasons:

• You can determine what is already known about the research topic and the gaps that exist.
• You can determine the credibility and novelty of your research question by comparing it with previously published papers.
• If your research question has already been studied or answered before your first draft, you first save a substantial amount of time by avoiding rejections from journals at a much later stage; and second, you can study and aim to bridge the gaps of previous studies, perhaps, by using a different methodology or a bigger sample size.

So, carefully read as much as you can about what has already been published in your field of research; and when you are doing so, make sure that you make lots of relevant notes as you go along in the process. Remember, your study does not necessarily have to be groundbreaking, but it should definitely extend previous knowledge or refute existing statements on the topic.

Secret ingredient 2: Use a thematic approach while drafting your manuscript

For instance, if you are writing about the association between the level of breast cancer awareness and socioeconomic status, open a new Word or Notes file and create subheadings such as “breast cancer awareness in low- and middle-income countries,” “reasons for lack of awareness,” or “ways to increase awareness.”

Under these subheadings, make notes of the information that you think may be suitable to be included in your paper as you carry out your literature review. Ensure that you make a draft reference list so that you don't miss out on the references.

Step 2: Know your audience

Finding your research topic is not synonymous with communicating it, it is merely a step, albeit an important one; however, there are other crucial steps that follow. One of which is identifying your target audience.

Now that you know what your topic of interest is, you need to ask yourself “Who am I trying to benefit with my research?” A general mistake is assuming that your reader knows everything about your research topic. Drafting a peer reviewed journal article often means that your work may reach a wide and varied audience.

Therefore, it is a good idea to ponder over who you want to reach and why, rather than simply delivering chunks of information, facts, and statistics. Along with considering the above factors, evaluate your reader's level of education, expertise, and scientific field as this may help you design and write your manuscript, tailoring it specifically for your target audience.

Here are a few points that you must consider after you have identified your target audience:

• Shortlist a few target journals: The aims and scope of the journal usually mention their audience. This may help you know your readers and visualize them as you write your manuscript. This will further help you include just the right amount of background and details.
• View your manuscript from the reader's perspective: Try to think about what they might already know or what they would like more details on.
• Include the appropriate amount of jargon: Ensure that your article text is familiar to your target audience and use the correct terminology to make your content more relatable for readers - and journal editors as your paper goes through the peer review process.
• Keep your readers engaged: Write with an aim to fill a knowledge gap or add purpose and value to your reader's intellect. Your manuscript does not necessarily have to be complex, write with a simple yet profound tone, layer (or sub-divide) simple points and build complexity as you go along, rather than stating dry facts.
• Be specific: It is easy to get carried away and forget the essence of your study. Make sure that you stick to your topic and be as specific as you can to your research topic and audience.

Secret ingredient 3: Clearly define your key terms and key concepts

Do not assume that your audience will know your research topic as well as you do, provide compelling details where it is due. This can be tricky. Using the example from “Secret ingredient 2,” you may not need to define breast cancer while writing about breast cancer awareness. However, while talking about the benefits of awareness, such as early presentation of the disease, it is important to explain these benefits, for instance, in terms of superior survival rates.

Step 3: Structure your research paper with care

After determining the topic of your research and your target audience, your overflowing ideas and information need to be structured in a format generally accepted by journals.

Most academic journals conventionally accept original research articles in the following format: Abstract, followed by the Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion sections, also known as the IMRaD, which is a brilliant way of structuring a research paper outline in a simplified and layered format. In brief, these sections comprise the following information:

In closed-access journals, readers have access to the abstract/summary for them to decide if they wish to purchase the research paper. It's an extremely important representative of the entire manuscript.

All information provided in the abstract must be present in the manuscript, it should include a stand-alone summary of the research, the main findings, the abbreviations should be defined separately in this section, and this section should be clear, decluttered, and concise.

Introduction

This section should begin with a background of the study topic, i.e., what is already known, moving on to the knowledge gaps that exist, and finally, end with how the present study aims to fill these gaps, or any hypotheses that the authors may have proposed.

This section describes, with compelling details, the procedures that were followed to answer the research question.

The ultimate factor to consider while producing the methods section is reproducibility; this section should be detailed enough for other researchers to reproduce your study and validate your results. It should include ethical information (ethical board approval, informed consent, etc.) and must be written in the past tense.

This section typically presents the findings of the study, with no explanations or interpretations. Here, the findings are simply stated alongside figures or tables mentioned in the text in the correct sequential order. Because you are describing what you found, this section is also written in the past tense.

Discussion and conclusion

This section begins with a summary of your findings and is meant for you to interpret your results, compare them with previously published papers, and elaborate on whether your findings are comparable or contradictory to previous literature.

This section also contains the strengths and limitations of your study, and the latter can be used to suggest future research. End this section with a conclusion paragraph, briefly summarizing and highlighting the main findings and novelty of your study.

Step 4: Cite credible research sources

Now that you know who and what you are writing for, it's time to begin the writing process for your research paper. Another crucial factor that determines the quality of your manuscript is the detailed information within. The introduction and discussion sections, which make a massive portion of the manuscript, majorly rely on external sources of information that have already been published.

Therefore, it is absolutely indispensable to extract and cite these statements from appropriate, credible, recent, and relevant literature to support your claims. Here are a few pointers to consider while choosing the right sources:

Cite academic journals

These are the best sources to refer to while writing your research paper, because most articles submitted to top journals are rejected, resulting in high-quality articles being filtered-out. In particular, peer reviewed articles are of the highest quality because they undergo a rigorous process of editorial review, along with revisions until they are judged to be satisfactory.

But not just any book, ideally, the credibility of a book can be judged by whether it is published by an academic publisher, is written by multiple authors who are experts in the field of interest, and is carefully reviewed by multiple editors. It can be beneficial to review the background of the author(s) and check their previous publications.

Cite an official online source

Although it may be difficult to judge the trustworthiness of web content, a few factors may help determine its accuracy. These include demographic data obtained from government websites (.gov), educational resources (.edu), websites that cite other pertinent and trustworthy sources, content meant for education and not product promotion, unbiased sources, or sources with backlinks that are up to date. It is best to avoid referring to online sources such as blogs and Wikipedia.

Do not cite the following sources

While citing sources, you should steer clear from encyclopedias, citing review articles instead of directly citing the original work, referring to sources that you have not read, citing research papers solely from one country (be extensively diverse), anything that is not backed up by evidence, and material with considerable grammatical errors.

Although these sources are generally most appropriate and valid, it is your job to critically read and carefully evaluate all sources prior to citing them.

Step 5: Pick the correct journal

Selecting the correct journal is one of the most crucial steps toward getting published, as it not only determines the weightage of your research but also of your career as a researcher. The journals in which you choose to publish your research are part of your portfolio; it directly or indirectly determines many factors, such as funding, professional advancement, and future collaborations.

The best thing you can do for your work is to pick a peer-reviewed journal. Not only will your paper be polished to the highest quality for editors, but you will also be able to address certain gaps that you may have missed out.

Besides, it always helps to have another perspective, and what better than to have it from an experienced peer?

A common mistake that researchers tend to make is leave the task of choosing the target journal after they have written their paper.

Now, I understand that due to certain factors, it can be challenging to decide what journal you want to publish in before you start drafting your paper, therefore, the best time to make this decision is while you are working on writing your manuscript. Having a target journal in mind while writing your paper has a great deal of benefits.

• As the most basic benefit, you can know beforehand if your study meets the aims and scope of your desired journal. It will ensure you're not wasting valuable time for editors or yourself.
• While drafting your manuscript, you could keep in mind the requirements of your target journal, such as the word limit for the main article text and abstract, the maximum number of figures or tables that are allowed, or perhaps, the maximum number of references that you may include.
• Also, if you choose to submit to an open-access journal, you have ample amount of time to figure out the funding.
• Another major benefit is that, as mentioned in the previous section, the aims and scope of the journal will give you a fair idea on your target audience and will help you draft your manuscript appropriately.

It is definitely easier to know that your target journal requires the text to be within 3,500 words than spending weeks writing a manuscript that is around, say, 5,000 words, and then spending a substantial amount of time decluttering. Now, while not all journals have very specific requirements, it always helps to short-list a few journals, if not concretely choose one to publish your paper in.

AJE also offers journal recommendation services if you need professional help with finding a target journal.

Secret ingredient 4: Follow the journal guidelines

Perfectly written manuscripts may get rejected by the journal on account of not adhering to their formatting requirements. You can find the author guidelines/instructions on the home page of every journal. Ensure that as you write your manuscript, you follow the journal guidelines such as the word limit, British or American English, formatting references, line spacing, line/page numbering, and so on.

Our ultimate aim is to instill confidence in young researchers like you and help you become independent as you write and communicate your research. With the help of these easy steps and secret ingredients, you are now ready to prepare your flavorful manuscript and serve your research to editors and ultimately the journal readers with a side of impact and a dash of success.

Lubaina Koti, BS

Scientific Writer

See our "Privacy Policy"

Generate accurate Chicago citations for free

• Knowledge Base
• Chicago Style
• Citing a Journal Article in Chicago Style | Format & Examples

Citing a Journal Article in Chicago Style | Format & Examples

Published on May 3, 2022 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on December 5, 2022.

Chicago Reference Generator

To cite an online journal article in Chicago notes and bibliography style, list the author’s name, the title of the article, the journal name, volume, issue, and publication date, the page range on which the article appears, and a DOI or URL.

For an article accessed in print, follow the same format and simply omit the DOI or URL. Pay attention to the punctuation (e.g., commas , quotation marks , parentheses ) in your citations and notes.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Citing an article from a database, journal articles with multiple authors, citing journal articles in chicago author-date style, finding source information for a journal article, frequently asked questions about chicago style citations.

Online articles, including those accessed through databases (e.g., Project MUSE or JSTOR), should generally be cited with a DOI , a link designed to permanently and reliably link to the article. In this case, there’s no need to include the database name.

If no DOI is available, you may include a stable URL or permalink. However, don’t use the URL from your browser’s address bar, as this is usually specific to your login session.

If no DOI or stable URL is available, list the name of the database at the end of your citation instead.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Journal articles often have multiple authors. Author names should be listed in the order they appear at the head of the article (not in alphabetical order).

In your notes, list up to three authors in full. When there are four or more authors, list only the first, followed by “ et al. ” (Latin for “and others”).

In your Chicago style bibliography , list up to 10 authors in full.

If there are 11 or more authors, list the first seven in the bibliography, followed by “et al.”

In Chicago author-date style , an in-text citation consists of the author’s last name, the year of publication, and a page number.

Each Chicago in-text citation must correspond to an entry in your reference list . This is almost identical to a bibliography entry, except the year comes after the author’s name, and only the month appears in brackets.

Author-date journal citation examples

• Online article
• Article from database
• Print article

The information you need for your citations is usually listed above the article in the database where you found it. The image below shows where to find the relevant information on Project MUSE, for example.

With this information, we can construct our bibliography entry.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

The DOI is usually clearly visible when you open a journal article on an academic database. It is often listed near the publication date, and includes “doi.org” or “DOI:”. If the database has a “cite this article” button, this should also produce a citation with the DOI included.

If you can’t find the DOI, you can search on Crossref using information like the author, the article title, and the journal name.

In Chicago notes and bibliography style , the usual standard is to use a full note for the first citation of each source, and short notes for any subsequent citations of the same source.

However, your institution’s guidelines may differ from the standard rule. In some fields, you’re required to use a full note every time, whereas in some other fields you can use short notes every time, as long as all sources are listed in your bibliography . If you’re not sure, check with your instructor.

Page numbers should be included in your Chicago in-text citations when:

• You’re quoting from the text.
• You’re paraphrasing a particular passage.
• You’re referring to information from a specific section.

When you’re referring to the overall argument or general content of a source, it’s unnecessary to include page numbers.

When a source has four or more authors , your in-text citation or Chicago footnote should give only the first author’s name followed by “ et al. ” (Latin for “and others”). This makes your citations more concise.

In your bibliography or reference list , when a source has more than 10 authors, list the first seven followed by “et al.” Otherwise, list every author.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2022, December 05). Citing a Journal Article in Chicago Style | Format & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 8, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/chicago-style/journal-articles/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, chicago style footnotes | citation format & examples, creating a chicago style bibliography | format & examples, citing a newspaper article in chicago style | format & examples, unlimited academic ai-proofreading.

✔ Document error-free in 5minutes ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

Definition and Introduction

Journal article analysis assignments require you to summarize and critically assess the quality of an empirical research study published in a scholarly [a.k.a., academic, peer-reviewed] journal. The article may be assigned by the professor, chosen from course readings listed in the syllabus, or you must locate an article on your own, usually with the requirement that you search using a reputable library database, such as, JSTOR or ProQuest . The article chosen is expected to relate to the overall discipline of the course, specific course content, or key concepts discussed in class. In some cases, the purpose of the assignment is to analyze an article that is part of the literature review for a future research project.

Analysis of an article can be assigned to students individually or as part of a small group project. The final product is usually in the form of a short paper [typically 1- 6 double-spaced pages] that addresses key questions the professor uses to guide your analysis or that assesses specific parts of a scholarly research study [e.g., the research problem, methodology, discussion, conclusions or findings]. The analysis paper may be shared on a digital course management platform and/or presented to the class for the purpose of promoting a wider discussion about the topic of the study. Although assigned in any level of undergraduate and graduate coursework in the social and behavioral sciences, professors frequently include this assignment in upper division courses to help students learn how to effectively identify, read, and analyze empirical research within their major.

Franco, Josue. “Introducing the Analysis of Journal Articles.” Prepared for presentation at the American Political Science Association’s 2020 Teaching and Learning Conference, February 7-9, 2020, Albuquerque, New Mexico; Sego, Sandra A. and Anne E. Stuart. "Learning to Read Empirical Articles in General Psychology." Teaching of Psychology 43 (2016): 38-42; Kershaw, Trina C., Jordan P. Lippman, and Jennifer Fugate. "Practice Makes Proficient: Teaching Undergraduate Students to Understand Published Research." Instructional Science 46 (2018): 921-946; Woodward-Kron, Robyn. "Critical Analysis and the Journal Article Review Assignment." Prospect 18 (August 2003): 20-36; MacMillan, Margy and Allison MacKenzie. "Strategies for Integrating Information Literacy and Academic Literacy: Helping Undergraduate Students make the most of Scholarly Articles." Library Management 33 (2012): 525-535.

Benefits of Journal Article Analysis Assignments

Analyzing and synthesizing a scholarly journal article is intended to help students obtain the reading and critical thinking skills needed to develop and write their own research papers. This assignment also supports workplace skills where you could be asked to summarize a report or other type of document and report it, for example, during a staff meeting or for a presentation.

There are two broadly defined ways that analyzing a scholarly journal article supports student learning:

Improve Reading Skills

Conducting research requires an ability to review, evaluate, and synthesize prior research studies. Reading prior research requires an understanding of the academic writing style , the type of epistemological beliefs or practices underpinning the research design, and the specific vocabulary and technical terminology [i.e., jargon] used within a discipline. Reading scholarly articles is important because academic writing is unfamiliar to most students; they have had limited exposure to using peer-reviewed journal articles prior to entering college or students have yet to gain exposure to the specific academic writing style of their disciplinary major. Learning how to read scholarly articles also requires careful and deliberate concentration on how authors use specific language and phrasing to convey their research, the problem it addresses, its relationship to prior research, its significance, its limitations, and how authors connect methods of data gathering to the results so as to develop recommended solutions derived from the overall research process.

Improve Comprehension Skills

In addition to knowing how to read scholarly journals articles, students must learn how to effectively interpret what the scholar(s) are trying to convey. Academic writing can be dense, multi-layered, and non-linear in how information is presented. In addition, scholarly articles contain footnotes or endnotes, references to sources, multiple appendices, and, in some cases, non-textual elements [e.g., graphs, charts] that can break-up the reader’s experience with the narrative flow of the study. Analyzing articles helps students practice comprehending these elements of writing, critiquing the arguments being made, reflecting upon the significance of the research, and how it relates to building new knowledge and understanding or applying new approaches to practice. Comprehending scholarly writing also involves thinking critically about where you fit within the overall dialogue among scholars concerning the research problem, finding possible gaps in the research that require further analysis, or identifying where the author(s) has failed to examine fully any specific elements of the study.

In addition, journal article analysis assignments are used by professors to strengthen discipline-specific information literacy skills, either alone or in relation to other tasks, such as, giving a class presentation or participating in a group project. These benefits can include the ability to:

• Effectively paraphrase text, which leads to a more thorough understanding of the overall study;
• Identify and describe strengths and weaknesses of the study and their implications;
• Relate the article to other course readings and in relation to particular research concepts or ideas discussed during class;
• Think critically about the research and summarize complex ideas contained within;
• Plan, organize, and write an effective inquiry-based paper that investigates a research study, evaluates evidence, expounds on the author’s main ideas, and presents an argument concerning the significance and impact of the research in a clear and concise manner;
• Model the type of source summary and critique you should do for any college-level research paper; and,
• Increase interest and engagement with the research problem of the study as well as with the discipline.

Kershaw, Trina C., Jennifer Fugate, and Aminda J. O'Hare. "Teaching Undergraduates to Understand Published Research through Structured Practice in Identifying Key Research Concepts." Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology . Advance online publication, 2020; Franco, Josue. “Introducing the Analysis of Journal Articles.” Prepared for presentation at the American Political Science Association’s 2020 Teaching and Learning Conference, February 7-9, 2020, Albuquerque, New Mexico; Sego, Sandra A. and Anne E. Stuart. "Learning to Read Empirical Articles in General Psychology." Teaching of Psychology 43 (2016): 38-42; Woodward-Kron, Robyn. "Critical Analysis and the Journal Article Review Assignment." Prospect 18 (August 2003): 20-36; MacMillan, Margy and Allison MacKenzie. "Strategies for Integrating Information Literacy and Academic Literacy: Helping Undergraduate Students make the most of Scholarly Articles." Library Management 33 (2012): 525-535; Kershaw, Trina C., Jordan P. Lippman, and Jennifer Fugate. "Practice Makes Proficient: Teaching Undergraduate Students to Understand Published Research." Instructional Science 46 (2018): 921-946.

Structure and Organization

A journal article analysis paper should be written in paragraph format and include an instruction to the study, your analysis of the research, and a conclusion that provides an overall assessment of the author's work, along with an explanation of what you believe is the study's overall impact and significance. Unless the purpose of the assignment is to examine foundational studies published many years ago, you should select articles that have been published relatively recently [e.g., within the past few years].

Since the research has been completed, reference to the study in your paper should be written in the past tense, with your analysis stated in the present tense [e.g., “The author portrayed access to health care services in rural areas as primarily a problem of having reliable transportation. However, I believe the author is overgeneralizing this issue because...”].

Introduction Section

The first section of a journal analysis paper should describe the topic of the article and highlight the author’s main points. This includes describing the research problem and theoretical framework, the rationale for the research, the methods of data gathering and analysis, the key findings, and the author’s final conclusions and recommendations. The narrative should focus on the act of describing rather than analyzing. Think of the introduction as a more comprehensive and detailed descriptive abstract of the study.

Possible questions to help guide your writing of the introduction section may include:

• Who are the authors and what credentials do they hold that contributes to the validity of the study?
• What was the research problem being investigated?
• What type of research design was used to investigate the research problem?
• What theoretical idea(s) and/or research questions were used to address the problem?
• What was the source of the data or information used as evidence for analysis?
• What methods were applied to investigate this evidence?
• What were the author's overall conclusions and key findings?

Critical Analysis Section

The second section of a journal analysis paper should describe the strengths and weaknesses of the study and analyze its significance and impact. This section is where you shift the narrative from describing to analyzing. Think critically about the research in relation to other course readings, what has been discussed in class, or based on your own life experiences. If you are struggling to identify any weaknesses, explain why you believe this to be true. However, no study is perfect, regardless of how laudable its design may be. Given this, think about the repercussions of the choices made by the author(s) and how you might have conducted the study differently. Examples can include contemplating the choice of what sources were included or excluded in support of examining the research problem, the choice of the method used to analyze the data, or the choice to highlight specific recommended courses of action and/or implications for practice over others. Another strategy is to place yourself within the research study itself by thinking reflectively about what may be missing if you had been a participant in the study or if the recommended courses of action specifically targeted you or your community.

Possible questions to help guide your writing of the analysis section may include:

Introduction

• Did the author clearly state the problem being investigated?
• What was your reaction to and perspective on the research problem?
• Was the study’s objective clearly stated? Did the author clearly explain why the study was necessary?
• How well did the introduction frame the scope of the study?
• Did the introduction conclude with a clear purpose statement?

Literature Review

• Did the literature review lay a foundation for understanding the significance of the research problem?
• Did the literature review provide enough background information to understand the problem in relation to relevant contexts [e.g., historical, economic, social, cultural, etc.].
• Did literature review effectively place the study within the domain of prior research? Is anything missing?
• Was the literature review organized by conceptual categories or did the author simply list and describe sources?
• Did the author accurately explain how the data or information were collected?
• Was the data used sufficient in supporting the study of the research problem?
• Was there another methodological approach that could have been more illuminating?
• Give your overall evaluation of the methods used in this article. How much trust would you put in generating relevant findings?

Results and Discussion

• Were the results clearly presented?
• Did you feel that the results support the theoretical and interpretive claims of the author? Why?
• What did the author(s) do especially well in describing or analyzing their results?
• Was the author's evaluation of the findings clearly stated?
• How well did the discussion of the results relate to what is already known about the research problem?
• Was the discussion of the results free of repetition and redundancies?
• What interpretations did the authors make that you think are in incomplete, unwarranted, or overstated?
• Did the conclusion effectively capture the main points of study?
• Did the conclusion address the research questions posed? Do they seem reasonable?
• Were the author’s conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented?
• Has the author explained how the research added new knowledge or understanding?

Overall Writing Style

• If the article included tables, figures, or other non-textual elements, did they contribute to understanding the study?
• Were ideas developed and related in a logical sequence?
• Were transitions between sections of the article smooth and easy to follow?

Overall Evaluation Section

The final section of a journal analysis paper should bring your thoughts together into a coherent assessment of the value of the research study . This section is where the narrative flow transitions from analyzing specific elements of the article to critically evaluating the overall study. Explain what you view as the significance of the research in relation to the overall course content and any relevant discussions that occurred during class. Think about how the article contributes to understanding the overall research problem, how it fits within existing literature on the topic, how it relates to the course, and what it means to you as a student researcher. In some cases, your professor will also ask you to describe your experiences writing the journal article analysis paper as part of a reflective learning exercise.

Possible questions to help guide your writing of the conclusion and evaluation section may include:

• Was the structure of the article clear and well organized?
• Was the topic of current or enduring interest to you?
• What were the main weaknesses of the article? [this does not refer to limitations stated by the author, but what you believe are potential flaws]
• Was any of the information in the article unclear or ambiguous?
• What did you learn from the research? If nothing stood out to you, explain why.
• Assess the originality of the research. Did you believe it contributed new understanding of the research problem?
• Were you persuaded by the author’s arguments?
• If the author made any final recommendations, will they be impactful if applied to practice?
• In what ways could future research build off of this study?
• What implications does the study have for daily life?
• Was the use of non-textual elements, footnotes or endnotes, and/or appendices helpful in understanding the research?
• What lingering questions do you have after analyzing the article?

NOTE: Avoid using quotes. One of the main purposes of writing an article analysis paper is to learn how to effectively paraphrase and use your own words to summarize a scholarly research study and to explain what the research means to you. Using and citing a direct quote from the article should only be done to help emphasize a key point or to underscore an important concept or idea.

Business: The Article Analysis . Fred Meijer Center for Writing, Grand Valley State University; Bachiochi, Peter et al. "Using Empirical Article Analysis to Assess Research Methods Courses." Teaching of Psychology 38 (2011): 5-9; Brosowsky, Nicholaus P. et al. “Teaching Undergraduate Students to Read Empirical Articles: An Evaluation and Revision of the QALMRI Method.” PsyArXi Preprints , 2020; Holster, Kristin. “Article Evaluation Assignment”. TRAILS: Teaching Resources and Innovations Library for Sociology . Washington DC: American Sociological Association, 2016; Kershaw, Trina C., Jennifer Fugate, and Aminda J. O'Hare. "Teaching Undergraduates to Understand Published Research through Structured Practice in Identifying Key Research Concepts." Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology . Advance online publication, 2020; Franco, Josue. “Introducing the Analysis of Journal Articles.” Prepared for presentation at the American Political Science Association’s 2020 Teaching and Learning Conference, February 7-9, 2020, Albuquerque, New Mexico; Reviewer's Guide . SAGE Reviewer Gateway, SAGE Journals; Sego, Sandra A. and Anne E. Stuart. "Learning to Read Empirical Articles in General Psychology." Teaching of Psychology 43 (2016): 38-42; Kershaw, Trina C., Jordan P. Lippman, and Jennifer Fugate. "Practice Makes Proficient: Teaching Undergraduate Students to Understand Published Research." Instructional Science 46 (2018): 921-946; Gyuris, Emma, and Laura Castell. "To Tell Them or Show Them? How to Improve Science Students’ Skills of Critical Reading." International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education 21 (2013): 70-80; Woodward-Kron, Robyn. "Critical Analysis and the Journal Article Review Assignment." Prospect 18 (August 2003): 20-36; MacMillan, Margy and Allison MacKenzie. "Strategies for Integrating Information Literacy and Academic Literacy: Helping Undergraduate Students Make the Most of Scholarly Articles." Library Management 33 (2012): 525-535.

Writing Tip

Not All Scholarly Journal Articles Can Be Critically Analyzed

There are a variety of articles published in scholarly journals that do not fit within the guidelines of an article analysis assignment. This is because the work cannot be empirically examined or it does not generate new knowledge in a way which can be critically analyzed.

If you are required to locate a research study on your own, avoid selecting these types of journal articles:

• Theoretical essays which discuss concepts, assumptions, and propositions, but report no empirical research;
• Statistical or methodological papers that may analyze data, but the bulk of the work is devoted to refining a new measurement, statistical technique, or modeling procedure;
• Articles that review, analyze, critique, and synthesize prior research, but do not report any original research;
• Brief essays devoted to research methods and findings;
• Articles written by scholars in popular magazines or industry trade journals;
• Pre-print articles that have been posted online, but may undergo further editing and revision by the journal's editorial staff before final publication; and
• Academic commentary that discusses research trends or emerging concepts and ideas, but does not contain citations to sources.

Journal Analysis Assignment - Myers . Writing@CSU, Colorado State University; Franco, Josue. “Introducing the Analysis of Journal Articles.” Prepared for presentation at the American Political Science Association’s 2020 Teaching and Learning Conference, February 7-9, 2020, Albuquerque, New Mexico; Woodward-Kron, Robyn. "Critical Analysis and the Journal Article Review Assignment." Prospect 18 (August 2003): 20-36.

• << Previous: Annotated Bibliography
• Next: Giving an Oral Presentation >>
• Last Updated: Mar 6, 2024 1:00 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

Tips on How to Write an Academic Journal Article

Writing an academic journal article requires techniques that will best describe your objectives and also get the audience of your readers. however, these following tips will help you in achieving your aim;, get a good knowledge of your target journal : different journals have different interests in an academic article requirement. hence, before you make a submission, it is well-advised that you read through your targeted journal’s submission guidelines. this will help you know their requirements., be aware of your audience : the main aim of every article is to make an impact. however, once you have selected your preferred journal, it is also important that you consider your audience/reader. take a look at the past copies of the journal and have an idea of what the journal produces., avoid vagueness : clarity is very important in writing an academic journal article. most research works are good in points but they are not understandable by the readers. when writing, you must keep your reader in mind, this will guide you on how to write it including languages, topics and subtopics., read your work : proper editing will help you to look over any forms of error which may hinder the publication of your paper. if possible, print it out and read it on the paper form before final submission., get a reading peer : sometimes when reading your work, your eyes will skim through your grammatical errors because your mind already knows what next and it automatically fits it into the sentence however it is omitted in the text. having a reading peer who will read through your work will help you to figure out common errors which may hinder the publication of your journal., make your references relevant : the main aim of your paper is to educate your reader. therefore, it is very important for your work to be made up of up-to-date information and references. be cautious of your references, let it be relevant to whatever your area of specialization you are writing on., make a draft with the sections of your journal, to avoid mistakes which may hinder the acceptance of your academic article, consider creating a draft of your work before you start writing. include the sections as to be sure of all the planned sections enlisted and also this will be able to serve as your outline when you start building out the document itself. your sections can go as thus;, introduction, research question, theoretical framework, literature review, research methodology, data collection procedures, data analysis techniques, conclusions, implications for further research, however, you might need to include other sections but it is important to check the journal’s published requirements., finalize your manuscript : after drafting your work and finalizing it. further, proofread and edit the document, check the content for any typographical and grammatical errors. and also, verify that the document is consistent with requirements., was this post helpful, useful links.

• Authors Hub
• Publishing Process
• Open Research
• Why Publish With Us
• Submission Guidelines
• Preparing Manuscript
• Peer Review Policy
• Publishing Ethics
• Sharing your Research
• Editorial Board
• Publication Fee

Evaluation of a research training workshop for academic staff in tertiary institutions: A Kirkpatrick model approach

• Caroline Ochuko Alordiah + −

Quality research has a positive impact on the development of a country. Literature has shown that there is a limited quantity of quality African research articles in reputable journals. Training and workshops have consistently been shown to have a positive impact on the productivity of academic staff and researchers. If academic staff are trained in writing and publishing research articles, it will go a long way to improve the contribution of African research to reputable journals. Hence, the focus of this study is to evaluate the workshop conducted on writing and publishing academic papers in highly reputable journals for academic staff in tertiary institutions. The study’s population consists of academic staff in tertiary institutions in Delta State, Nigeria. The sample comprised 59 academic staff who participated voluntarily in the workshop. Through a pre-questionnaire, a post-questionnaire, a participant satisfaction level questionnaire, and interviews, the four stages of the Kirkpatrick Model were used to assess the effectiveness of the workshop.

High levels of participant satisfaction and notable advancements in academic writing, publication, and research exposure were observed as a result of the workshop. As they established online research profiles, identified predatory journals, and improved paper preparation, participants actively were able to apply their newly gained abilities. A 12-month post-workshop evaluation found remarkable results, including 18 participants publishing articles in journals with a Scopus index and many more creating profiles on Google Scholar, ResearchGate, and Academic.edu. The study highlights the significance of customised workshops in advancing research abilities and academic recognition by demonstrating a favourable association between customised workshops and increased research capabilities. Future evaluations can use the evaluation model as a useful framework, allowing for well-informed judgments about institutional and educational improvements.

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 5.4.2024 in Vol 26 (2024)

Evaluation of Large Language Model Performance and Reliability for Citations and References in Scholarly Writing: Cross-Disciplinary Study

Authors of this article:

Original Paper

• Joseph Mugaanyi 1 * , MBBS, MD   ; 
• Liuying Cai 2 * , MPhil   ; 
• Sumei Cheng 2 , PhD   ; 
• Caide Lu 1 , MD, PhD   ; 
• Jing Huang 1 , MD, PhD  

1 Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Ningbo Medical Center Lihuili Hospital, Health Science Center, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China

2 Institute of Philosophy, Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, Shanghai, China

*these authors contributed equally

Corresponding Author:

Jing Huang, MD, PhD

Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Ningbo Medical Center Lihuili Hospital

Health Science Center

Ningbo University

No 1111 Jiangnan Road

Ningbo, 315000

Phone: 86 13819803591

Email: [email protected]

Background: Large language models (LLMs) have gained prominence since the release of ChatGPT in late 2022.

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of citations and references generated by ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) in two distinct academic domains: the natural sciences and humanities.

Methods: Two researchers independently prompted ChatGPT to write an introduction section for a manuscript and include citations; they then evaluated the accuracy of the citations and Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs). Results were compared between the two disciplines.

Results: Ten topics were included, including 5 in the natural sciences and 5 in the humanities. A total of 102 citations were generated, with 55 in the natural sciences and 47 in the humanities. Among these, 40 citations (72.7%) in the natural sciences and 36 citations (76.6%) in the humanities were confirmed to exist ( P =.42). There were significant disparities found in DOI presence in the natural sciences (39/55, 70.9%) and the humanities (18/47, 38.3%), along with significant differences in accuracy between the two disciplines (18/55, 32.7% vs 4/47, 8.5%). DOI hallucination was more prevalent in the humanities (42/55, 89.4%). The Levenshtein distance was significantly higher in the humanities than in the natural sciences, reflecting the lower DOI accuracy.

Conclusions: ChatGPT’s performance in generating citations and references varies across disciplines. Differences in DOI standards and disciplinary nuances contribute to performance variations. Researchers should consider the strengths and limitations of artificial intelligence writing tools with respect to citation accuracy. The use of domain-specific models may enhance accuracy.

Introduction

In the ever-evolving landscape of scholarly research and academic discourse, the role of technology in aiding and enhancing the research process has grown exponentially. One of the most notable advancements in this regard is the emergence of large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-3.5, which have demonstrated impressive capabilities in generating written content across various domains, including academic writing. These LLMs, powered by vast corpora of text data and sophisticated machine-learning algorithms, have offered researchers and writers a new tool for assistance in crafting scholarly documents [ 1 - 3 ]. LLMs were initially designed and developed to primarily assist in natural language writing. However, since the release of ChatGPT in late 2022, the tool has been adopted in a wide range of scenarios, including customer care, expert systems, as well as literature searches and academic writing. Researchers have already used LLMs to write their academic papers, as demonstrated by Kishony and Ifargan [ 4 ]. While the potential of these tools is evident, it is essential to critically assess their performance, especially in the intricate domains of citations and references, which are the foundation of academic discourse and credibility.

Citations and references serve as the backbone of scholarly communication, providing the necessary context, evidence, and credit to prior works, thus fostering intellectual dialogue and ensuring the integrity of the research process. Accuracy in generating citations and the inclusion of Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) [ 5 ] are paramount, as they directly influence the traceability and accessibility of cited works. Despite the promise of LLMs, concerns have emerged regarding the reliability and precision of their generated citations and references, raising questions about their suitability as academic writing assistants. Studies on the viability of LLMs as writing assistants in scholarly writing [ 6 - 8 ] underscore the significance of this body of research within the broader academic landscape. Although prior works are quite informative [ 9 - 12 ], there is a lack of an interdisciplinary perspective on citations and references generated by LLMs, which is vital for understanding how LLMs perform across different disciplines.

An increasing number of academics and researchers, especially in countries where English is not a first language (eg, China), are relying on ChatGPT to translate their work into English, research the existing published literature, and even generate citations and references to published literature. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate LLM performance in generating citations and references across two distinct domains, the natural sciences and humanities, by assessing both the presence and accuracy of citations, the existence and accuracy of DOIs, and the potential for hallucination. We aim to provide valuable insights into the strengths and limitations of LLMs in supporting academic writing in diverse research contexts.

The outcomes of this study will contribute to a nuanced understanding of the capabilities and limitations of LLMs as academic writing assistants. Moreover, our findings may inform best practices for researchers and writers who employ these tools in their work, fostering transparency and accuracy in scholarly communication.

LLM Concepts

An LLM is a catch-all term for a machine-learning model designed and trained to understand and generate natural language. LLMs are considered “large” language models due to the sheer number of parameters in the model. A parameter in machine learning is a numerical variable or weight that is optimized through training to map a relationship between the input and the output. LLMs have millions to billions of parameters.

Current LLMs are mostly based on the transformer architecture ( Figure 1 ). However, before transformers were introduced in 2017 [ 13 ], recurrent neural nets (RNNs) were mostly used for natural language processing. One key limitation of RNNs was the length of text they could handle. In 2015, Bahdanau et al [ 14 ] proposed accounting for attention to improve RNN performance with long text. Drawing inspiration for the RNN’s encoder-decoder design, the transformer consists of an encoder and a decoder; however, unlike the RNN, the transformer does not perform sequential data processing and each layer can address all other layers. This allows the transformer model to handle different parts of the input as it processes each part at different stages. This is the mechanism that allows for self-attention in the transformer model.

The way attention works in a transformer model is by computing attention weights for each token, and then the relevance of the token is determined based on the weights. This allows the model to track and assign hierarchical values to each token. Fundamentally, this is similar to how humans process language by extracting the key details out of a chunk of text. This architecture is the linchpin for the majority of LLMs, including the GPT model [ 15 ] that is the basis of OpenAI’s ChatGPT or the bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT) algorithm [ 16 ]. These are broadly categorized into encoder-style and decoder-style transformers, with the former mostly applying to predictive tasks and the latter applying to generative tasks.

Irrespective of the architecture, as an encoder-style or decoder-style transformer, the model is trained on a vast volume of data. The objective is to train a model capable of applying the knowledge gained from the training data to unseen data or situations. This is referred to as generalization. If the model is capable of precise recall of data it has previously been exposed to, this would be memorization and overfitting is said to have occurred. However, this does not mean that memorization is in itself a negative feature. Indeed, there are situations where memorization is preferable to generation such as in the task of information cataloging.

LLMs in Academia

LLMs can handle tasks such as text classification, translation, summarization, and text generation. Since the advent of the internet, and with it the publication of scientific information online, the amount of global academic output exploded, with more than 5 million articles published in 2022 ( Table 1 ). Given the pressure in academia to keep up with developments in one’s field, it is increasingly becoming more difficult to track, prioritize, and keep up with scientific information. It is against this backdrop that LLMs offer an opportunity. Perhaps the most obvious use case is in literature reviews and summarization, reference lookup, and data generation.

However, there are still several questions that need to be answered. First, machine-learning models are inherently probabilistic, meaning that they are not deterministic. Therefore, for the same user input, the model may give different results due to the variability baked into the model. While this can be a valuable trait for creative endeavors, in academic and scientific works, there is a need for reproducibility and reliability, and it remains unclear how well this can be achieved. Second, LLMs are constrained to the information they are trained on. This can be affected by selection bias, the quality of data used, artifacts resulting from data cleaning, and other factors. In essence, we rely on trusting the trainer to provide accurate and unbiased training data to the models.

There is potential for LLMs to be useful tools for delivering academic and scientific information to various audiences, including—but not limited to—students and other academics. However, for this use case, a degree of memorization of the underlying content is necessary. Where information is unviable, it would be better to state so rather than to interpolate. In the current iteration of LLMs, since the training is geared toward generalization and the models are probabilistic, they tend to interpolate and fill in the missing information with synthetic text. There is still a need to explore this process deeper to find solutions.

Data Collection and Validation

Topics were selected and categorized as either natural sciences or humanities. Topics were included if they were: (1) clinical or biomedical–related research in the natural sciences category and philosophy/psychology-related research in the humanities category, and (2) published in English. Topics were excluded if they were: (1) not in English, (2) related to a highly specialized or niche field, and (3) sensitive or controversial in nature. Two researchers independently prompted ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) to write sections of a manuscript while adhering to the American Psychological Association style [ 17 ] for citations and including the DOI of each reference. Citations and references generated by ChatGPT were collected for subsequent analysis. The researchers then independently validated the references by conducting searches on Google Scholar, PubMed, and Google Search for each cited reference. The primary objective was to confirm the existence and accuracy of the cited literature. DOI existence and validation were confirmed using the DOI Foundation website [ 18 ]. DOIs that did not exist or were matched to a different source were considered hallucinations [ 19 ]. Data collected by both researchers were aggregated and compared. Independent validation was performed to ensure agreement between the two researchers regarding the existence, validity, and accuracy of the citations and DOIs. Any disagreements or discrepancies were resolved through discussion and consensus.

In this study, hallucination refers to instances where ChatGPT 3.5 generates DOIs and/or citations that do not correspond to actual, valid DOIs/citations for scholarly references. In these instances, the model may produce DOIs and/or citations that seem authentic but are in fact incorrect or nonexistent. The Levenshtein distance, also known as the edit distance, is a measure of the similarity between two strings by calculating the minimum number of single-character edits (insertions, deletions, or substitutions) required to transform one string into the other. In other words, this metric quantifies the “distance” between two strings in terms of the minimum number of operations needed to make them identical. We used the Levenshtein distance to compare the DOI generated by ChatGPT with the correct DOI. This comparison helps to measure how closely the artificial intelligence (AI)–generated DOI aligns with the expected DOI for a given citation. By calculating the Levenshtein distance, we can quantify the differences between the AI-generated DOI and the correct DOI. Larger Levenshtein distance values suggest greater dissimilarity, indicating potential inaccuracies in the AI-generated DOI.

Statistical Analysis

Data analysis was conducted using SPSS 26 and Python. The Levenshtein distance [ 20 ] between the generated DOI and the actual DOI was calculated using the thefuzz package in Python to quantitatively assess the DOI accuracy. Continuous variables are reported as mean (SD) and categorical variables are presented as absolute numbers and percentages. An independent-sample t test was used to compare continuous variables, whereas the Fisher exact test was used for comparisons of categorical variables. A P value <.05 was considered statistically significant in all tests.

Ethical Considerations

This study was exempt from ethical review since no animal or human participants were involved.

Included Topics and Citations

Ten manuscript topics were selected and included in the study, with 5 in the natural sciences group and 5 in the humanities group. ChatGPT 3.5 was prompted to write an introduction section for each topic between July 10 and August 15, 2023. A total of 102 citations were generated by ChatGPT. Of these, 55 were in the natural sciences group and 47 in the humanities group. The existence, validity, and relevance of citations were examined irrespective of the corresponding DOIs. The results are summarized in Table 2 . A list of the included topics and a sample of prompts to ChatGPT are provided in Multimedia Appendix 1 .

a Categorical variables were compared using the Fisher exact test; the continuous variable (Levenshtein distance) was compared using the independent-sample t test.

b DOI: Digital Object Identifier.

Citation Existence and Accuracy

Of the 102 generated citations, 76 (74.5%) were found to be real and exist in the published literature, with 72.7% and 76.6% of the citations verified in the natural and humanities group, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups ( P =.42), indicating that the validity of the citations was relatively consistent between the two domains. Similarly, when assessing the accuracy of the citations, no significant difference was observed ( Table 2 ).

Citation Relevance

The relevance of citations generated by ChatGPT was evaluated by assessing whether they were appropriate and contextually meaningful within the research topics. Our analysis indicated that 70.9% and 74.5% of citations in the natural sciences and humanities categories were deemed relevant, respectively ( Table 2 ). The difference was not statistically significant ( P =.43), suggesting that ChatGPT demonstrated a similar ability to generate contextually relevant citations in both domains.

DOI Existence, Accuracy, and Hallucination

Our analysis revealed significant differences between the two domains with respect to DOIs. In the natural sciences, 70.9% of the included DOIs were real, whereas in the humanities, only 38.3% of the DOIs generated were real ( P =.001; Table 2 ). Similarly, the level of DOI accuracy was significantly higher for the natural sciences than for the humanities ( P =.003). Moreover, the occurrence of DOI hallucination, where ChatGPT generates DOIs that do not correspond with the existing literature, was more prevalent in the humanities than in the natural sciences ( P =.001). The mean Levenshtein distance, which measures the deviation between the generated DOI and the actual DOI, was significantly higher in the natural sciences group than in the humanities ( P =.009; Table 2 ).

Principal Findings

The results of this study shed light on the performance of ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) as an academic writing assistant in generating citations and references in natural sciences and humanities topics. Our findings reveal notable differences in the accuracy and reliability of the citations and references generated by ChatGPT when applied to natural sciences and humanities topics. Hallucination in the context of LLMs such as ChatGPT refers to a phenomenon where the model generates content that is incorrect, fabricated, or not grounded in reality. Hallucination occurs when the model produces information that appears plausible or contextually relevant but lacks accuracy or fidelity to real-world knowledge.

The most striking observation was the significant disparity in the existence and accuracy of the DOIs between the two domains. In natural sciences topics, DOIs were real in 70.9% of the generated citations, representing a significantly higher rate compared to the low rate of 38.3% real DOIs in the humanities topics. The discrepancies in the DOI existence and accuracy in the two domains may be attributed to the differential adoption and availability of DOIs across academic disciplines, where the natural sciences literature has often been more proactive in adopting the DOI system of referencing and linking to scholarly works than the humanities. It is a general practice that journals publishing on the natural sciences frequently mandate DOI inclusion, whereas publishers in the humanities have been slower to adopt such standards [ 21 , 22 ]. Consequently, the performance of the ChatGPT LLM in generating accurate DOIs appears to reflect these disciplinary disparities.

LLMs may generate fictional “facts” presented as true “real-world facts,” which is referred to as hallucination [ 19 , 23 ]. In this study, we considered hallucination to have occurred if the DOI of the generated citation was not real or was real but was linked to a different source. DOI hallucination was more frequent in the humanities (89.4%) than in the natural sciences (61.8%). This finding may be explained by the broader and less structured nature of the humanities literature. There is also a high tendency to provide citations from books and other media that do not use DOIs in the humanities. Therefore, researchers in the humanities should not consider DOIs generated by ChatGPT. Even when ChatGPT generates DOIs for humanities citations, they are more likely to deviate from the correct DOI, potentially leading to the inability to access the cited sources and use the DOIs in citation management tools such as EndNote.

In contrast to the disparities observed in DOI-related metrics, our study found a remarkable consistency in the existence, validity, and relevance of the generated citations in the natural sciences and humanities, with real citations found 72.7% and 76.6% of the time and accurate citations confirmed in 67.3% and 61.7% of cases, respectively. This suggests that the citations generated by ChatGPT can be expected to be reliable approximately 60% of the time.

The divergent performance of ChatGPT between the natural sciences and humanities underscores the importance of considering disciplinary nuances when implementing AI-driven writing assistants in academic contexts. Researchers and writers in both domains should be aware of the strengths and limitations of such tools, particularly in relation to citation practices and DOI accuracy. Future research could delve deeper into the factors influencing DOI accuracy and explore strategies for improving DOI generation by LLMs in the humanities literature. Additionally, the development of domain-specific AI writing models may offer tailored solutions to enhance citation and reference accuracy in various academic disciplines.

In this study, we focused only on the potential use of LLMs in citations and references in scholarly writing; however, the scope to which these models are going to be adopted in academic works is much broader. We believe that these models will be improved over time and that they are here to stay. As such, our argument in this paper is not that LLMs should not be used in scholarly writing, but rather that in their iteration, we ought to be aware of their limitations, primarily concerning the reliability of not only the text they generate but also how they interpret that text.

Although the transformer models that are the foundation of LLMs are very capable of handling a significant amount of information, they still do have context-window limitations. The context window is the textual range or span of the input that the LLM can evaluate to generate a response at any given moment. As an example, GPT-3 has a context window of 2000 tokens, whereas GPT-4’s context window is 32,000 tokens. As such, since the size of the context window impacts model performance (larger is better), GPT-4 outperforms GPT-3 (at the cost of more computation and memory). In scientific knowledge, context is key. Removing a word from the context may greatly affect the information being conveyed. Therefore, we believe that the future of LLMs in academia will rely on fine-tuning the LLMs to capitalize on memorization where necessary, reproducibility and stability of the models, as well as access to the latest information rather than only the training data.

Limitations

There were several limitations to this study. The study included a limited number of topics (10 in total), which can only offer insight but cannot possibly cover the full spectrum of complexity and diversity within the two disciplines. Only ChatGPT 3.5 was prompted since it is the most widely used LLM for this purpose and has a free tier that the majority of users rely on. Newer models, including GPT-4, Claude+, and Google’s Gemini, may give significantly different results. Our study focused on the accuracy of citations and DOIs without an exploration of potential user feedback or subjective assessment of the overall quality and coherence of the generated content. These limitations can be addressed in future research.

In conclusion, our study provides valuable insights into the performance of ChatGPT in generating citations and references across interdisciplinary domains. These findings contribute to the ongoing discourse on the use of LLMs in scholarly writing, emphasizing the need for nuanced consideration of discipline-specific challenges and the importance of robust validation processes to ensure the accuracy and reliability of generated content.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Municipal Key Technical Research and Development Program of Ningbo (2023Z160).

Data Availability

The data sets generated during and/or analyzed during this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

List of included topics and ChatGPT 3.5 prompt structure.

• Golan R, Reddy R, Muthigi A, Ramasamy R. Artificial intelligence in academic writing: a paradigm-shifting technological advance. Nat Rev Urol. Jun 2023;20(6):327-328. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Checco A, Bracciale L, Loreti P, Pinfield S, Bianchi G. AI-assisted peer review. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. Jan 25, 2021;8(1):25. [ CrossRef ]
• Hutson M. Could AI help you to write your next paper? Nature. Nov 31, 2022;611(7934):192-193. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Conroy G. Scientists used ChatGPT to generate an entire paper from scratch - but is it any good? Nature. Jul 2023;619(7970):443-444. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Paskin N. Digital object identifier (DOI®) system. In: Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences. Milton Park. Taylor and Francis; 2010;1586-1592.
• Hosseini M, Horbach SPJM. Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review. Res Integr Peer Rev. May 18, 2023;8(1):4. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Santra PP, Majhi D. Scholarly communication and machine-generated text: is it finally AI vs AI in plagiarism detection? J Inf Knowl. Jul 01, 2023;60(3):175-183. [ CrossRef ]
• Esplugas M. The use of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance academic communication, education and research: a balanced approach. J Hand Surg Eur Vol. Sep 07, 2023;48(8):819-822. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Kumar AHS. Analysis of ChatGPT tool to assess the potential of its utility for academic writing in biomedical domain. BEMS Reports. Jan 05, 2023;9(1):24-30. [ CrossRef ]
• Marchandot B, Matsushita K, Carmona A, Trimaille A, Morel O. ChatGPT: the next frontier in academic writing for cardiologists or a pandora's box of ethical dilemmas. Eur Heart J Open. Mar 2023;3(2):oead007. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Zheng H, Zhan H. ChatGPT in scientific writing: a cautionary tale. Am J Med. Aug 2023;136(8):725-726. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Alkaissi H, McFarlane S. Artificial hallucinations in ChatGPT: implications in scientific writing. Cureus. Feb 2023;15(2):e35179. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez A, et al. Attention is all you need. arXiv. [ FREE Full text ]
• Bahdanau D, Cho K, Bengio Y. Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. arXiv. [ FREE Full text ]
• Radford A, Narasimhan K, Salimans T, Sutskever I. Improving language understanding by generative pre-training. OpenAI. 2018. URL: https://openai.com/research/language-unsupervised [accessed 2024-04-01]
• Devlin J, Chang M, Lee K, Toutanova K. Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv. Preprint posted online on October 11, 2018. [ CrossRef ]
• Degelman D, Harris M. APA style essentials. Vanguard University. 2000. URL: https://www.vanguard.edu/uploaded/research/apa_style_guide/apastyleessentials.pdf [accessed 2024-04-01]
• DOI Foundation. URL: https://doi.org/ [accessed 2024-04-01]
• Salvagno M, Taccone FS, Gerli AG. Artificial intelligence hallucinations. Crit Care. May 10, 2023;27(1):180. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Yujian L, Bo L. A normalized Levenshtein distance metric. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Machine Intell. Jun 2007;29(6):1091-1095. [ CrossRef ]
• Eve MP. Open Access and the Humanities. Cambridge, UK. Cambridge University Press; 2014.
• Narayan B, Luca E, Tiffen B, England A, Booth M, Boateng H. Scholarly communication practices in humanities and social sciences: a study of researchers' attitudes and awareness of open access. Open Inf Sci. 2018;2(1):168-180. [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang Y, Li Y, Cui L, Cai D, Liu L, Fu T, et al. Siren's song in the AI ocean: a survey on hallucination in large language models. arXiv. [ FREE Full text ]

Abbreviations

Edited by A Mavragani; submitted 19.09.23; peer-reviewed by Y Bu, W Li, I Liu, A Mihalache; comments to author 08.12.23; revised version received 14.12.23; accepted 12.03.24; published 05.04.24.

©Joseph Mugaanyi, Liuying Cai, Sumei Cheng, Caide Lu, Jing Huang. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 05.04.2024.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.