Key points to remember
- The submitted work should be in its final form.
- The paper should be written in the way it is granted in the guidelines with the use of the template.
- Please consider the gauge of judgment for evaluation of the final paper by the peer- reviewers.
The intention behind regulation of a research paper is to have a selective interpretation of your efforts made by the members of the community.
The journal is expected to have the following sections, and to be submitted in the indexed order, with each section beginning on a new page.
The introduction will be assembled using the reference material and will manifest the design procedures or the layout of fundamental that steer you to consider the work. The method and process segment will be created as and like you go proceed with the process of study. The result section is to be dedicated towards exhibiting the relevant statistics in closely occurring order and thus should be able to guide the reviewers towards the analogous scholarly paths on all accounts of the data and information that you followed to accomplish the study. The discussion section is supposed to present the insights of the statistics and projections towards the inference of the results. The referral of legitimate and good references throughout the study and paper would be an advantageous effort towards credibility and authenticity due to the representation of readiness preceding the work.
The research paper writing is a complex and challenging job, with the research work and concepts may not be at a similar difficulty level. However with practice, skillful preparedness, and organized record maintenance are the techniques towards accelerated and sustainable progression.
Definitive editorial column requirements for conformity of a manuscript will constantly take up from the points mention in these general guidelines. To compose an apparent paper Comply with the suggested page limits
Errors to be avoided
- Insert a title at the foot of the page with the successive matter on the following page.
- Segregating a table/chart or figure - hold all figure/table in one page.
- Submission of a manuscript with pages not in the proper order.
In all the sections of the manuscript
- Use the regular and standard writing style, which also includes articles ("a", "the," etc.)
- Keep the research subject of the paper in attention.
- Separate the significant points using paragraphs (exclusive of the abstract).
- Align the primary line of each section properly.
- Cite your points in appropriate order.
- Use present tense to account well approved.
- Use past tense to outline distinct conclusions.
- Avoid mundane wording, do not address the reviewer directly, and strictly avoid the use of slang language and superlatives.
- Avoid the use of unnecessary images - include only those figures/images, which are vital to presenting the results.
Choose a self-explanatory title. It should be crisp, devoid of any non-standard acronyms or abbreviations. It should not surpass two printed lines and include the name(s) and address (es) of all the authors involved in the study.
The abstract should not be more than two hundred words. It should clearly and concisely describe the primary findings detailed in the manuscript--must have exact statistics. Use of irregular acronyms or abbreviations should be shunned. Being logical in itself, with the citing of any references at this point. An abstract is a concise apparent paragraph summary of completed work or work in progress. It should help the reviewer to understand the intention behind the study, probable approach to the problem, applicable results, and powerful conclusions or new questions. The summary should be written only after the study has been completed, since without the work completed, how can it be summarised? Affluence of the jargons is very crucial in abridged copy.Moreover there should be use of comprehensive statements without any compromise on the readability of the abridged copy. You can keep it concise by composing sentences such that they mean more than sole explanation. The author can at this moment go directly to abridging the result. Conclude the study, with the following elements in any summary. Attempt to maintain the introductory two items to not more than one ruling each.
- Purpose behind the study - theory, main concern, reason.
- Primary aim.
- Accurate illustration of the research.
- Results, inclusive of straightforward data - if the results are quantitative in nature then account quantitative data; results of any numerical analysis should be reported.
- Notable outcomes or questions, which are records from the research(es).
- Single section, and concise.
- As a synopsis of the job is done, it is to be written in the past tense.
- A conceptual should be established itself, and not to be submitted as any other part of the paper such as a form or table.
- Focus on briefing the results - delimit secondary report to not more than a couple of decree, if absolutely needed.
- The account of the conceptual ought to be legitimate with what you recoreded in the manuscript.
- Correct spellings, crispness in phrases and sentences, and proper reporting of quantities (proper units, extensive statistics) are equivalently critical in an abstract as they would be in any other part of the research.
The introduction of the manuscript should be able to give an overall introduction of the paper. The reviewer should be put forward with ample amount of background information to be able to assimilate and gauge the objective of your study without having to acknowledge any further works. The foundation for the study should be provided. Illustrate the extremely essential references but avoid making the comprehensive evaluation of a topic, difficult. Put forward the problem apparently in the introduction. If the problem does not get recognized in a logical and reasonable way, the reviewer will have no attention in your result. Discuss the general details about the techniques used to explain the problem, if necessary, however do not bring up any details about the protocols here. Following style can establish a worthwhile introduction:
- Describe the significance of the research.
- Shield the model - The reason behind using the specific method or model. What is its coverage and advantage? Strong assertion on its suitability from an intellectual perspective along with mention rational reasons for utilizing it.
- Provide a justification. Position your exact theory(ies) or goal(s), and elaborate the logic that drove you to select them.
- Briefly explain the tentative purpose and how it adopted the stated objectives.
- Use past tense apart from when quoting the acknowledged facts.
- Keep it very well sorted; fabricate single primary point with each segment. To make four points recorded atop, you will need at least four passages.
- Present secondary information only if desired in a condition to hold up a scenario. The reviewer would not be interested in knowing your exhaustive knowledge about the topic.
- Put forward the theory/purpose accurately - avoid taking an extensive view.
- Mentioning again, pay attention to spelling, simplicity and accuracy of phrases and sentences.
Procedures (Methods and Materials)
With valuable skills present, this segment is supposedly easier than others. A nicely written procedure section makes it easy for a suited scientist to understand the results better. Cite definite information about your provisions. The provisions and directness of indicators can be prove to be vital information. Put forward the procedures in subsequent order but related procedures can be put together in a single segment. Be precise while referring the protocols. Attempt to put the least amount of information that would allow another skilled scientist to get a hold of your result but be careful that the important information is combined in. Use subheadings and synchronize it with the results section. When technique used is well detailed in another article, mention the specific item describing a way but draw the basic principle while stating the scenario. The goal is to illustrate all specific resources and extensive procedures, so that other person can utilize some or all the methods in one or more study or refer the scientific advantage of your work. It is not to be a bit by bit record of your entire work, nor is a methods section a set of orders.
- Describe text separately particularly when the study saves efforts this way.
- Adopt notable texts, and tools or provisions, which are not commonly established in laboratories.
- Do not take in commonly found.
- Information can be expressed in a part segment, otherwise they can be identified besides your measures.
- Address the approach (not details of every process that employed the identical methodology).
- Elaborate the method properly.
- To be concise, put forward the methods below the headings dedicated to particular proceedings or groups of measures.
- Simplify - Elaborate how processed were brought to completion and not how they were solely executed on a specific day.
- If acclaimed processes have been used, detail the process by name, if possible by reference.
- In a script, the use of third person, passive voice is recommended. Use of first person would take the reviewer’s attention on the person and not the work.
- Use the regular and standard style in this and in every other section of the paper. Evade similar lists, and use full sentences.
What to keep away from
- Methods and resources are not be considered as a set of information.
- Do not include any detailed information and backgrounds - instead use it in the discussion.
- Do not include information which is irrelevant to the third party.
The result section holds it’s importance to present the conclusion of your work. This section should be based on completely objective specifications of the results, and maintain all understandings for discussion.
The page length of this section is agreed by the total and type of information to be reported. Try and be relevant, use statistics and tables, if needed, to show the conclusions efficiently.
It should be taken care of that the material that would frequently be integrated in a study editorial from any unrefined data or further appendix matter that would be unavailable. Moreover, matter like this should not be submitted anyhow apart from when solicited by the instructor.
- Synopsize the conclusions drawn in text and present them, if fitting, use figures and tables.
- In manuscript, elaborate every consequences of your study, indicate the reader the notes that are most applicable.
- Pose a backdrop, for instance by elaborating the query that was approached by initiation and completion of an imperious study.
- Describe the results of control experiments and include notes, which are not handy in a recommended figure or table, if suited.
- Review your data, then create evaluated (transformed) data in a figure (graph), table, or in manuscript form.
What to stay away from
- Avoid discussing or inferring the conclusion or report the background information.
- Do not use unprocessed data or intermediate calculations in a research manuscript.
- Do not cite identical data more than one time.
- Manuscript should enhance the figures or tables used, and not replicate the similar information.
- Do not confuse between figures and tables.
- Use past tense while submitting your results, with the complete thing in a legitimate order.
- Put figures and tables, properly indexed and at the end of the report
- If you would like to, you can put figures and tables with the text of your results section.
Figures and tables
- If putting the figures and tables at the closure of the details, make sure that they are apparently prominent from any attached appendix materials, like as raw facts.
- Irrespective of the position, every single figure should be numbered in the proper order and completed with a subtitle.
- Irrespective of position, every table should be titled, numbered in a proper order and completed with a heading.
- Each figures and tables should be competently complete that it can established on its own, divide from text.
The Discussion is anticipated to be the most intricate section to be written and described. A number of papers submitted for journal are rejected based on issues with the Discussion. There is no absolute solution for how prolonged an argument can be. Establish your understanding of the result plainly to guide the reviewer about your conclusions, and thereafter wind up the paper with a summarizing the inference of the study. The intention here is to present a recognition of your results and forward all of your conclusions, with the use of facts from the research and broadly accepted information, if suited. The significance of the result must be evidently described.
Deduce your data in the discourse in sufficient insight. This would mean that on simplifying a noticeable fact you should describe operations that may account for the examination. If the results differ from the prospect, make it apparent why that may have taken place. If your results are consistent, then elaborate the theory that the proof backed. It is not enough to just put up that the data ratified with prospect, and let it tumble at that.
- Make a decision if every assertion is backed, forsaken, or if you cannot make a resolution with assertion. Do not merely deride a study or part of a study as "vague."
- Research papers would not be widely recognized if the work is flawed. Draw the resolution you can establish upon the results that you retain, and make sure that the study is a resolved work.
- You can come up with future instructions, for instance how the experiment might be embodied to carry out a new idea.
- Provide specifics on all of your assertions essentially attainable, direct attention on mechanisms.
- Produce a resolution if the approximate draft, adequately focused on the theory, and either or not it was accurately prescribed.
- Make efforts to put forward an alternative interpretation if realistic alternatives be present.
- A single research will not compete a comprehensive question, so keep the broad view in mind, where do you go next? The finest studies unravel further more new route of study. What questions still exist?
- Endorsement for exhaustive papers will extend accompanying proposition.
- When attributing to information, distinguish between data produced by your studies from ready for use information.
- Put the work done by particular person (including you) in past tense.
- Put the commonly recognized facts and main beliefs in present tense.