Writing The Abstract and Introduction Robert Hauptman

Writing the abstract and introduction Robert Hauptman (2005, 115) writes: “Perhaps the single most important
point is to have the desire to

discover something new and share it with readership”. It is time to begin the writing of a paper when you have something to say to your
colleagues in the scientific world (Klingner, Scanlon & Pressley 2005). You have an evidencebased new conclusion. The conclusion makes some
contribution to theory and it can be applied to develop practice. The new idea can be developed on data, which you have used earlier in another
paper to base the conclusion in another area. Usually the question is to be answered are you the single author of the paper or somebody is your
co-author. It is always easier to write in co-operation, the quality of the paper will be higher and you learn something from your co-authors
(Hauptman 2005; Murray 2005). It is useful to work in-groups and speak about the idea of a paper to colleagues and if they add something
essential to the framework of the paper, they have the right to be the co-authors. All the persons who have added creatively to the research or
writing are the authors. Further we will treat the traditions of scientific writing according to the usual structure of a research paper. The
structure is as follows: a) abstract, b) introduction, c) methods, d) results, e) discussion, f) conclusion, g) references, h) appendixes. The structure
has been developed for the papers describing empirical studies but it is used for other types of papers with some modifications as well. In the
papers about case studies, the discussion and the results parts may be joined. If the conclusion is short, then it can be given at the end of the
discussion without a special heading, etc. It is useful to start the writing from an outline of the paper (Lester 1990; Neman 1989). The outline
organizes any support you can give to your main new idea. The subheadings in your outline should describe their content as fully as possible –
then the outline is of real help in writing. I have put concrete ideas into my outlines and references to literature to rely on during writing. In my
outline, it is also given how many pages or characters can be devoted to every subheading in the paper. Composing a good outline constitutes
about 20% of the total writing time. It prevents many rewritings, additions or deletions after writing. The title of paper should clearly describe its
main idea. Besides this, ask yourself which words you will use in looking for this kind of information in databases and look if the words are in
your title. If not, consider rewriting of the title or include the important words into keywords. A theoretical concept may be more interesting in
the title than empirical bases. A good title is up to 12 words. Waste words (study on, a, the,…) should be excluded and verbs are not used. The
title does not contain abbreviations (Tirri 2002). The abstract reflects the main content of the paper. It usually includes the following
information: a) purpose of the paper, b) methodology of the research: subjects, instruments, procedure, c) findings and conclusion, d) the value
of the paper. The journal editors give the length of the abstract for their journal. Usually it is up to 100 – 250 words. In spite of the small volume,
the abstract must be understandable without the paper. The research is described in the past tense. Introduction is one of the most difficult
parts to write. It has several tasks: to develop the background of research, indicate the importance of the problem, and formulate the aim,
hypothesis, and rationale of the research. A weak review of the literature indicates that the author is not competent enough in the area and this
may be one of the reasons for the rejection of the manuscript. A good review of the literature demonstrates the logical continuity between
previous and present work. It discusses only this literature which is related to the problem. You cannot review all the papers available and give
an exhaustive historical review. It is useful to begin from a recent meta-analysis if available, to consider the latest publications in the area and
especially in the journal to which you intend to submit your paper. The editors and authors of the journal can be the reviewers of the manuscript
(Fradkov 2003). The review should be understandable to a relatively wide audience. Nonessential details, statements, and concepts intelligible
only to the specialists might be avoided. A simple statement of controversy is better than an extensive and inconclusive discussion. A good
review describes the problem and the solutions proposed by other researchers. It emphasizes the pertinent findings and possibly relevant
methodological issues (Publication manual … 2003). It is very important to formulate the aim of the paper. The aim points to the final conclusion
of the paper. The aim and the conclusion are the center of the manuscript where to concentrate all the material. The review of the literature
depends on the aim; the research methods depend on the aim, and the discussion. Without a clear aim there can be much information in the
paper but it is not understandable why all this material is given. At the same time, the word “aim” is sometimes omitted. For example, “The
paper examines…”. The aim can be divided into more concrete research questions. After the aim, restrictions of the research can be described.
Quantitative research is based on the theory about the phenomena investigated. The theory is described in the review of the literature and an
untested inference or an unsolved problem is defined. The theory enables the author to ground a hypothesis to solve the problem. Together
with the hypothesis, the explanation should be given why this hypothesis is raised. At he end of the introduction, there is sometimes a short
description of the rationale of the investigation described in the paper (Publication manual… 2003, 17).

Writing The Abstract and Introduction Robert Hauptman

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Writing The Abstract and Introduction Robert Hauptman

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Writing The Abstract and Introduction Robert Hauptman

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Writing the abstract and introduction Robert Hauptman (2005, 115) writes: “Perhaps the single most important

point is to have the desire to

You might also like