WRITING PROCESS

Components of a research paper

• Abstract (the architectural blueprint)
• Structure (the foundations)
• Introduction and Main body(the flight of steps and the landing in front of your main
door)
• Visuals (the light-providing windows),
• Conclusion (the handing out of the key to knowledge).
 Title: The face of your paper
first impression of how well your paper meets their needs and whether or not it is worth
reading
What makes your title unique is the way its keywords are assembled to
differentiate your work from the work of others.
 Techniques for Improving Titles

Placement of contribution upfront in a title

Addition of verbal forms
A phrase without a verb lacks energy. The gerundive and infinitive verbal forms add
energy to a title.
“Data learning: understanding biological data” Nonlinear finite element simulation to
elucidate the efficacy of slit arteriotomy for end-to-side arterial anastomosis in
microsurgery”
Adjectives and numbers to describe the strong point of a contribution
Besides specific keywords, adjectives and adverbs are often used to describe the key
aspect of a contribution—fast, highly efficient, or robust (avoid new or novel).
Since adjectives are subjective, replacing them with something more specific is always
better.A“20 Ghz thyristor” is clearer than a “fast thyristor”; and while in 20 years “fast”
will make a liar out of you, “20 Ghz” will not
• Clear and specific keywords
• “Transient model for kinetic analysis of electric stimulus responsive hydrogels”
(unclear)
• “Transient model for kinetic analysis of hydrogels responsive to electric stimulus”
(clear)

• Smart choice of keyword coverage

• keywords at more than one level
• If too specific, your title will only be found by a handful of
experts in your field; it will also discourage readers with a
sizeable knowledge gap.
• If too general, your title will not be found by experts.
• Catchy acronyms and titles
• Acronyms provide a shortcut to help other writers to refer to
your work succinctly.
• “VISOR: learning VIsual Schemas in neural networks forObject
• Recognition and scene analysis”
Purpose and Qualities of Titles

• It helps the reader decide whether the paper is worth reading further.
• It gives the reader a first idea of the contribution.
• It provides clues on the type of paper (review paper or introductory paper), its
specificity (narrow or broad), its theoretical level, and its nature (simulation or
experimental).
• It helps the reader assess the knowledge depth required to benefit from the
paper.
• Purpose of the title for the writer
• It allows the writer to place enough keywords for search engines to find the
title.
• It catches the attention of the reader.
• It states the contribution in a concise manner.
• It differentiates the title from other titles.
Qualities of a title

• A title is UNIQUE. It differentiates your title from all others

• Title: is LASTING.
• A title is CONCISE. Some keywords are overly detailed.
• A title is CLEAR.
• A title is EASY TO FIND. Its keywords are carefully chosen.
• A title is HONEST and REPRESENTATIVE of the contribution and the paper.
• It sets the expectations and answers them
Ways to Improve your title
• Some keywords carry the passion of the time. Encountering them in titles excites the
reader who is keen to keep up to date with the latest happenings in science.
• A shorter title is more attractive than a long one, and a general title is more attractive
than a specific one.
• Words that announce the unexpected, the surprising, or the refutation of something
well established all fuel the curiosity of the reader.
• Unusual words that belong to a different lexical field intrigue the reader.
• Questions are great, but are often reserved for the few who have reached
professorship or Nobel Prize status.
ABSTRACT: Heart of your paper
ABSTRACT: Heart of your paper

The Four Parts of an Abstract

• Part 1:What is the problem? What is the topic of this paper?
• Part 2: How is the problem solved (methodology)?
• Part 3: How well is the problem solved? the specific results?
• Part 4: So what? How useful is this to science or to the reader?

• Coherence Between Abstract and Title

• The first sentence of your abstract should contain at least one third of the words in your title
(these words are frequently found in the second part of your title, i.e. its context).
• Your title merely whets the appetite of your readers; they expect to know more about your title in
your abstract. You should satisfy their expectation and rapidly provide more precise details.
TYPES OF ABSTRACTS
• Critical Abstract

• A critical abstract provides, in addition to describing main findings and information, a

judgement or comment about the study’s validity, reliability, or completeness. The
researcher evaluates the paper and often compares it with other works on the same
subject. Critical abstracts are generally 400-500 words in length due to the additional
interpretive commentary. These types of abstracts are used infrequently.
• Descriptive Abstract

• A descriptive abstract indicates the type of information found in the work. It makes no
judgments about the work, nor does it provide results or conclusions of the research. It
does incorporate key words found in the text and may include the purpose, methods,
and scope of the research. Essentially, the descriptive abstract only describes the work
being abstracted. Some researchers consider it an outline of the work, rather
than a summary. Descriptive abstracts are usually very short, 100 words or less.
• Highlight Abstract
A highlight abstract is specifcally written to attract the reader’s attention to
the study. No pretence is made of there being either a balanced or complete
picture of the paper and, in fact, incomplete and leading remarks may be
used to spark the reader’s interest. In that a highlight abstract cannot stand
independent of its associated article, it is not a true abstract and, therefore,
rarely used in academic writing.
Informative Abstract

•
The majority of abstracts are informative. While they still do not
critique or evaluate a work, they do more than describe it. A good
informative abstract acts as a surrogate for the work itself.
• That is, the researcher presents and explains all the main
arguments and the important results and evidence in the paper.
An informative abstract includes the information that can be found in
a descriptive abstract [purpose, methods, scope] it but also includes
the results and conclusions of the research and the recommendations
of the author.
• The length varies according to discipline, but an informative abstract
is rarely more than 300 words in length.
The abstract SHOULD NOT
contain:
• Lengthy background information,
• References to other literature [say something like,
"current research shows that..." or "studies have
indicated..."],
• Using ellipticals [i.e., ending with "..."] or incomplete
sentences,
• Abbreviations, jargon, or terms that may be confusing
to the reader, and
• Any sort of image, illustration, figure, or table, or
references to them.
Techniques to gauge the quality of your
abstract.

• The part that represents your contribution should be the most

developed.
• Abstracts repeat their title words in full. (A possible exception to
this recommendation is when you use alternative keywords because
a particular concept is expressed by two equally probable words)
• You want your paper to be found/retrieved. You then use one
keyword in the title, and the other equally probable keyword in the
abstract.
• Abstracts expand the title in the first two or three sentences
because the reader expects it.
• Abstracts need to set the problem, but do not need to justify why it
is important (the introduction does that).
Writing Style

• Although it is the first section of your paper, the abstract, by

definition, should be written last since it will summarize the
contents of your entire paper.
• To begin composing your abstract, take whole sentences or key
phrases from each section and put them in a sequence that
summarizes the paper.
• Then revise or add connecting phrases or words to make it cohesive
and clear. Before handing in your final paper, check to make sure that
the information in the abstract completely agrees with what your have
written in the paper.
The Tense of Verbs in an
Abstract
• An abstract is about what you do NOW! Consequently, use
ONLY the PRESENT TENSE when writing the abstract.
• The present tense is vibrant, lively, engaging, leading,
contemporary, and fresh. The past tense is passé, déjà vu, gone,
stale, unexciting, and lagging
• Furthermore, the past tense can create ambiguity. For example,
the phrase was studied creates doubt: did the writer publish this
before?
 Purpose and Qualities of
Abstracts
• 1. It makes the title clear.
• 2. It provides details on the writer’s scientific contribution.
• 3. It helps the reader decide whether the article is worth
reading or not.
• 4. It helps the reader rapidly gather competitive intelligence.
• 5. It helps the reader assess the level of difficulty of the article
Qualities of an abstract

• An abstract is COMPLETE. It has four parts (what, how, results, impact).

• An abstract is TIED TO TITLE. All title words are found in the abstract.
• An abstract is CONCISE..
• An abstract is STAND-ALONE. It lives by itself in its own world: databases of
abstracts, journal
• abstracts.
• An abstract is REPRESENTATIVE of the contribution of the paper. It sets
expectations for
• the reader.
• Feasibility analysis has been performed to find the financially optimum green
building label for buildings in Thailand conforming to the Thailand’s green
building standard (Thai’s Rating of Energy and Environmental Sustainability
for New Construction and Major Renovation, TREES-NC). Three sample
buildings comprising an office building (4 floors, 1, m2), a school building (6
floors, 6, m2), and a hospital building (3 floors, 6, m2) were used in this
study. To achieve each level of the green label (i.e., certified, silver, gold, and
platinum), 4 groups of green measures according to the 8 topics in the
standard were assumed to be implemented to earn credits in the following
order: measures with no investment & provide benefits, measures with no
investment & no benefits, measures with investment & provide benefits, and
measures with investment & no benefits. The EnergyPlus software was used
to evaluate the energy savings from the measures in the Energy and
Atmosphere topic. It was found that both silver and gold labels were
financially feasible. At those levels, energy and water savings were within a
range of % and %, respectively. The investment would be % higher than that
of the baseline building. The payback period was found to be within a range
of years which was the shortest compared with the other labels. The net
present value (NPV) and the internal rate of return (IRR) were found to be
within a range of 108, ,486, Baht and %, respectively, which were the highest
compared with the other labels.Published in a recent conference in Thailand
• We show how to earn a green building label for buildings conforming to the
Thai green building standard (Thai Rating of Energy and Environmental
Sustainability for New Construction and Major Renovation, TREES-NC)
economically. Three buildings - an office (4 floors, 1,300 m2), a school (6
floors, 6,540 m2) and a hospital (3 floors, 6,890 m2) - were studied. To
achieve certified, silver, gold, and platinum levels, 4 groups of measures in 8
standard topics earned credits in the order: measures with no investment but
benefits, measures with no investment and no benefits, measures with
investment and benefits, and measures with investment and no benefits.
‘EnergyPlus’ software evaluated energy savings from the measures in the
Energy and Atmosphere topic. Both silver and gold labels were found to be
financially feasible. At those levels, energy savings were 30-39% and water
savings 22-66% with only 2-4% added cost. The payback periods of years.
The net present value (NPV) was between 100,000 and 9 million Baht and the
internal rate of return (IRR) in the range %.
Headings/Subheadings: The
Skeleton of Your Paper
Purpose and Qualities of Structures
Purpose of the structure for the reader

• It makes navigation easy by providing direct access to parts of the paper.

• It helps the reader locate the section of the paper related to the author’s
contribution.
• It allows the reader to quickly grasp the main story of the paper by making a logical
story out of the succession of headings and subheadings.
• It sets reading time expectations through the length and detail
• level of each section.
Qualities of a structure

• A structure is INFORMATIVE. No empty signposts are found outside of the expected

standard headings. The contribution is clearly identified in the nonstandard headings.
• A structure is TIED TO TITLE AND ABSTRACT.
• Keywords from the title and abstract are found in the structure. They support the
contribution.
• A structure is LOGICAL. Between headings, and within each heading, the reader sees
the logic of the order chosen by the writer.
• A structure is CONSISTENT at the syntax level. Each parent heading has more than
one child subheading. Syntax is parallel.
• A structure is CONCISE. Neither overly detailed nor too condensed, the structure
helps the reader discover the essential.
Introduction: The Entry
Introduction
• Now that you know the main question, include it in your introduction as soon as
you can.
• It helps reviewers and readers understand the problem in a clear, attention-
grabbing, and succinct way. It even helps you to remain focused. Naturally, the
main question triggers many others.
• The introduction is the place to write about your reasoning in story form. Because
this story is about you, make it lively, engaging, and personal. Use pronouns such as
we or our.
• The Introduction Is Engaging and Motivating
• The introduction engages and motivates readers to read the rest of your paper. After
reading it, they must be “fired up”, wanting to know more.
INTRODUCTION
• The introduction serves the purpose of leading the reader
from a general subject area to a particular field of
research.
• It establishes the context of the research being conducted by
summarizing current understanding and background
information about the topic, stating the purpose of the work in
the form of the hypothesis, question, or research problem.
• It briefly explains your rationale, methodological approach,
highlighting the potential outcomes your study can reveal, and
describing the remaining structure of the paper.
• Think of the introduction as a mental road map that must answer for the
reader these four questions:
• What was I studying?
• Why was this topic important to investigate?
• What did we know about this topic before I did this study?
• How will this study advance our knowledge?
• A well-written introduction is important because, quite simply, you never get
a second chance to make a good first impression.
• The opening paragraph of your paper will provide your readers with their
initial impressions about the logic of your argument, your writing style,
the overall quality of your research, and, ultimately, the validity of
your findings and conclusions.
• A vague, disorganized, or error-filled introduction will create a
negative impression, whereas, a concise, engaging, and well-written
introduction will start your readers off thinking highly of your analytical
skills, your writing style, and your research approach.
I. Structure and Approach

• The introduction is the broad beginning of the paper that answers three
important questions for the reader:
1.What is this?
2.Why am I reading it?
3.What do you want me to think about / consider doing / react to?
These are general phases associated with writing an
introduction:

1.Establish an area to research by:

1. Highlighting the importance of the topic, and/or
2. Making general statements about the topic, and/or
3. Presenting an overview on current research on the subject.
2.Identify a research niche by:
1. Opposing an existing assumption, and/or
2. Revealing a gap in existing research, and/or
3. Formulating a research question or problem, and/or
4. Continuing a disciplinary tradition.
3.Place your research within the research niche by:
1. Stating the intent of your study,
2. Outlining the key characteristics of your study,
3. Describing important results, and
4. Giving a brief overview of the structure of the paper.
II. Delimitations of the Study

• Examples of delimitating choices would be:

• The key aims and objectives of your study,
• The research questions that you address,
• The variables of interest [i.e., the various factors and features of the
phenomenon being studied],
• The method(s) of investigation, and
• Any relevant alternative theoretical frameworks that could have been adopted.
• Review each of these decisions. You need to not only clearly establish
what you intend to accomplish, but to also include a declaration of
what the study does not intend to cover. In the latter case, your
exclusionary decisions should be based upon criteria stated as, "not
interesting"; "not directly relevant"; “too problematic because..."; "not
feasible," and the like. Make this reasoning explicit!
III. The Narrative Flow
• Your introduction should clearly identify the subject area of interest..
• Establish context by providing a brief and balanced review of the pertinent
published literature that is available on the subject.
• key is to summarize for the reader what is known about the specific research
problem before you did your analysis. This part of your introduction should not
represent a comprehensive literature review but consists of a general review of the
important, foundational research literature (with citations) that lays a foundation for
understanding key elements of the research problem. See the drop-down tab for
"Background Information" for types of contexts.
• Clearly state the hypothesis that you investigated. When you are first learning
to write in this format it is okay, and actually preferable, to use a past statement
like, "The purpose of this study was to...." or "We investigated three possible
mechanisms to explain the...."
• Why did you choose this kind of research study or design? Provide a clear
statement of the rationale for your approach to the problem studied. This will
usually follow your statement of purpose in the last paragraph of the introduction.
IV. Engaging the Reader

• The overarching goal of your introduction is to make your readers want to

read your paper. The introduction should grab your reader's attention.
Strategies for doing this can be to:
1.Open with a compelling story,
2.Include a strong quotation or a vivid, perhaps unexpected anecdote,
3.Pose a provocative or thought-provoking question,
4.Describe a puzzling scenario or incongruity, or
5.Cite a stirring example or case study that illustrates why the research problem is
important.
• An introduction is COMPLETE. All “why’s”
• have their “because”. The key references are
• mentioned.
• An introduction is CONCISE. No considerable
• or vacuous beginnings, no table of content paragraphs, no excessive details
• Qualities of an introduction
• An introduction is MINDFUL.
• An introduction is STORY-LIKE. It has a plot that answers
all the “why” questions of the reader one by one. It uses the active voice and includes
the writer (“we”). Verbs are conjugated using various tenses: present, past, future.
• An introduction isAUTHORITATIVE. References are
accurate and numerous, comparisons are factual (not
judgmental), related works are closely related, and
imprecise words are absent.
LITERATURE REVIEW
• Literature review may consist of simple summary of
key sources
• it usually has an organizational pattern and
combines both summary and synthesis, often
within specific conceptual categories.
• A summary is a recap of the important information of
the source
• A synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of
that information in a way that informs how you are
planning to investigate a research problem.
The analytical features of a literature review might:

• Give a new interpretation of old material or

combine new with old interpretations,
• Trace the intellectual progression of the field,
including major debates,
• Depending on the situation, evaluate the sources
• Usually in the conclusion of a literature review, identify
where gaps exist in how a problem has been
researched to date.
The purpose of a literature
review is to:
• Place each work in the context of its contribution to the
understanding of the research problem being studied,
• Describe the relationship of each work to the others under
consideration,
• Identify new ways to interpret, and shed light on any gaps in
previous research,
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous
studies,
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort,
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research, and
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature.
Argumentative Review
•
This form examines literature selectively in order to
support or refute an argument, deeply imbedded
assumption, or philosophical problem already
established in the literature.
• The purpose is to develop a body of literature that
establishes a contrarian viewpoint. Given the value-
laden nature of some social science research
argumentative approaches to analyzing the literature
can be a legitimate and important form of discourse.
Historical Review

• Historical reviews are focused on examining research

throughout a period of time, often starting with the
first time an issue, concept, theory, phenomena
emerged in the literature, then tracing its evolution
within the scholarship of a discipline.
• The purpose is to place research in a historical
context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art
developments and to identify the likely directions for
future research.
Methodological Review

A review does not always focus on what someone said [content], but how they said
it [method of analysis].
This approach provides a framework of understanding at different levels (i.e. those
of theory, substantive fields, research approaches and data collection and
analysis techniques), enables researchers to draw on a wide variety of knowledge
ranging from the conceptual level to practical documents for use in, quantitative
and qualitative integration, sampling, interviewing, data collection and data
analysis, and helps highlight many ethical issues which we should be aware of and
consider as we go through our study.
Theoretical Review
•
The purpose of this form is to concretely examine the corpus of theory that has
accumulated in regard to an issue, concept, theory, phenomena.
• The theoretical literature review helps establish what theories already exist, the
relationships between them, to what degree the existing theories have been
investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested.
• Used to help establish a lack of appropriate theories or reveal that current theories
are inadequate for explaining new or emerging research problems. The unit of
analysis can focus on a theoretical concept or a whole theory or framework.
Integrative Review

• Considered a form of research that reviews,

critiques, and synthesizes representative
literature on a topic in an integrated way such
that new frameworks and perspectives on the
topic are generated.
• The body of literature includes all studies that
address related or identical hypotheses. A well-done
integrative review meets the same standards as
primary research in regard to clarity, rigor, and
replication.
 Thinking About Your Literature
Review
• The structure of a literature review should include the
following:
• An overview of the subject, issue or theory under consideration, along
with the objectives of the literature review,
• Division of works under review into themes or categories (e.g. works
that support of a particular position, those against, and those offering
alternative approaches entirely),
• An explanation of how each work is similar to and how it varies from
the others,
• Conclusions as to which pieces are best considered in their argument,
are most convincing of their opinions, and make the greatest
contribution to the understanding and development of their area of
research
The critical evaluation of each work should consider:

• Provenance -- what are the author's credentials? Are the

author's arguments supported by evidence (e.g. primary
historical material, case studies, narratives, statistics, recent
scientific findings)?
• Objectivity -- is the author's perspective even-handed or
prejudicial? Is contrary data considered or is certain pertinent
information ignored to prove the author's point?
• Persuasiveness -- which of the author's theses are most/least
convincing?
• Value -- are the author's arguments and conclusions
convincing? Does the work ultimately contribute in any
significant way to an understanding of the subject?
II. Development of the
Literature Review
1.Problem formulation -- which topic or field is being
examined and what are its component issues?
2.Literature search -- finding materials relevant to the
subject being explored.
3.Data evaluation -- determining which literature makes a
significant contribution to the understanding of the
topic.
4.Analysis and interpretation -- discussing the findings
and conclusions of pertinent literature.
Consider the following issues
before writing the literature
review:
Clarify :
If your assignment is not very specific about what form your literature
review should take, seek clarification by asking these questions:
1.Roughly how many sources should I include?
2.What types of sources should I review (books, journal articles,
websites)?
3.Should I summarize, synthesize, or critique your sources by discussing
a common theme or issue?
4.Should I evaluate the sources?
5.Should I provide subheadings and other background information, such
as definitions and/or a history?
• Find Models
Use the exercise of reviewing the literature to examine how authors in
your discipline or area of interest have composed their literature reviews.
Read them to get a sense of the types of themes you might want to look
for in your own research or ways to organize your final review.

Narrow the Topic

The narrower your topic, the easier it will be to limit the number of sources
you need to read in order to obtain a good survey of relevant resources.
• A good strategy is to begin by searching the catalog for books about the
topic and review their contents for chapters that focus on more specific
issues.
• You can also review the subject indexes of books to find references to
specific issues that can serve as the focus of your research
• Consider Whether Your Sources are Current
Some disciplines require that you use information that is
as current as possible.
• However, when writing a review in the social sciences, a
survey of the history of the literature may be what is
needed because what is important is how perspectives
have changed over the years or within a certain time
period.
• Try sorting through some other current bibliographies or
literature reviews in the field to get a sense of what your
discipline expects.
Ways to Organize Your
Literature Review
• Chronological of Events
If your review follows the chronological method, you could write about the
materials according to when they were published.
• This approach should only be followed if a clear path of research building on
previous research can be identified and that these trends follow a clear
chronological order of development.
• For example, a literature review that focuses on continuing research about
the emergence of economic powers after the world war.

By Publication
Order your sources by publication chronology, then, only if the order
demonstrates a more important trend. For instance, you could order a review
of literature on environmental studies of brown fields if the progression
revealed, for example, a change in the soil collection practices of the
researchers who wrote and/or conducted the studies.
• Thematic (“conceptual categories”)
Thematic reviews of literature are organized around a topic or issue, rather
than the progression of time.
• .The difference between a "chronological" and a "thematic" approach is what
is emphasized the most: the role of the Internet in presidential politics. Note
however that more authentic thematic reviews tend to break away from
chronological order. A review organized in this manner would shift between
time periods within each section according to the point made.

Methodological
A methodological approach focuses on the methods utilized by the
researcher. The review might focus on the fundraising impact of the Internet
on a particular political party. A methodological scope will influence either the
types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are
discussed.
Writing Your Literature Review
• Once you've settled on how to organize your literature review,
you're ready to write each section. When writing your review, keep
in mind these issues.
• UseEvidence
A literature review in this sense is just like any other academic
research paper. Your interpretation of the available sources must be
backed up with evidence to show that what you are saying is valid.

BeSelective
Select only the most important points in each source to highlight in
the review. The type of information you choose to mention should
relate directly to the research problem, whether it is thematic,
methodological, or chronological.
• Use Quotes Sparingly
Some short quotes are okay if you want to emphasize a point, or if what the author
said just cannot be rewritten in your own words. Sometimes you may need to quote
certain terms that were coined by the author, not common knowledge, or taken
directly from the study. Do not use extensive quotes as a substitute your own summary
and interpretation of the literature.

Summarize and Synthesize

Remember to summarize and synthesize your sources within each paragraph as well
as throughout the review. Recapitulate important features of a research study, but then
synthesize it by rephrasing the study's significance and relating it to their own work.

Keep Your Own Voice

While the literature review presents others' ideas, your voice (the writer's) should
remain front and center. For example, weave references to other sources into what you
are writing but maintain your own voice by starting and ending the paragraph with
your own ideas and wording.
V. Common Mistakes to Avoid
• These are the most common mistakes made in reviewing social science
research literature.
• Sources in your literature review do not clearly relate to the research problem;
• You do not take sufficient time to define and identify the most relevent sources to
use in the literature review related to the research problem;
• Relies exclusively on secondary analytical sources rather than including relevant
primary research studies or data;
• Uncritically accepts another researcher's findings and interpretations as valid,
rather than examining critically all aspects of the research design and analysis;
• Does not describe the search procedures that were used in the literature review;
• Reports isolated statistical results rather than synthesizing them in chi-squared or
meta-analytic methods; and,
• Only includes research that validates assumptions and does not consider contrary
findings and alternative interpretations found in the literature.
Ask yourself questions like
these:
1.What is the specific thesis, problem, or research question that my literature review helps to define?
2.What type of literature review am I conducting? Am I looking at issues of theory? methodology?
policy? quantitative research (e.g. on the effectiveness of a new procedure)? qualitative research (e.g.,
studies of loneliness among migrant workers)?
3.What is the scope of my literature review? What types of publications am I using (e.g., journals, books,
government documents, popular media)? What discipline am I working in (e.g., nursing psychology,
sociology, medicine)?
4.How good was my information seeking? Has my search been wide enough to ensure I’ve found all
the relevant material? Has it been narrow enough to exclude irrelevant material? Is the number of
sources I’ve used appropriate for the length of my paper?
5.Have I critically analysed the literature I use? Do I follow through a set of concepts and questions,
comparing items to each other in the ways they deal with them? Instead of just listing and summarizing
items, do I assess them, discussing strengths and weaknesses?
6.Have I cited and discussed studies contrary to my perspective?
7.Will the reader find my literature review relevant, appropriate, and useful?
Ask yourself questions like these about each book or article
you include:

1.Has the author formulated a problem/issue?

2.Is it clearly defined? Is its significance (scope, severity, relevance) clearly
established?
3.Could the problem have been approached more effectively from another
perspective?
4.What is the author’s research orientation (e.g., interpretive, critical science,
combination)?
5.What is the author’s theoretical framework (e.g., psychological,
developmental, feminist)?
6.What is the relationship between the theoretical and research perspectives?
7.Has the author evaluated the literature relevant to the problem/issue? Does
the author include literature taking positions she or he does not agree with?
1.In a research study, how good are the basic components of the study design (e.g.,
population, intervention, outcome)? How accurate and valid are the measurements? Is
the analysis of the data accurate and relevant to the research question? Are the
conclusions validly based upon the data and analysis?
2.In material written for a popular readership, does the author use appeals to emotion, one-
sided examples, or rhetorically-charged language and tone? Is there an objective basis to
the reasoning, or is the author merely “proving” what he or she already believes?
3.How does the author structure the argument? Can you “deconstruct” the flow of the
argument to see whether or where it breaks down logically (e.g., in establishing cause-
effect relationships)?
4.In what ways does this book or article contribute to our understanding of the problem
under study, and in what ways is it useful for practice? What are the strengths and
limitations?
5.How does this book or article relate to the specific thesis or question I am developing?
PLAGIRISM
• When plagiarism occurs, it is often due to a less than perfect methodology to collect
and annotate the background material. Keeping relevant documentation about the
information source when capturing
• Information electronically is simply good practice In short, the only way to avoid
plagiarising is to completely rewrite without looking at the original document, or to
restructure ideas and add value by reordering them according to a different point of
view:
• The lure and anonymity of the web may be so tempting that sentences, even visuals,
get copied here and there. However, free or open access does not imply free right of
use for everyone. Sometimes,
• data, text corpora, photos, and video frames may be available onlin to allow
researchers to benchmark their algorithms; but unless permission to reproduce is
granted by the owners of the benchmark,
• copying these in their original form is not legal, even in situations where you copy
only part of the data or image.
• Abstract skimming, or dotting your paper with references of articles you have not
read, will hurt you in many ways.
• Errors will creep into your paper. Because they find your domain knowledge too
superficial, reviewers
• will be tempted to lower the value of your contribution. Your research will not be
clearly positioned on the research landscape.
• Your story will lack detail and, therefore, interest.
• The reader will doubt your expertise because your words lack assurance. Readers are
usually quick to detect authors who write with authority from the level of details and
precision in their paper. Remember the devastating effect of doubt.
The Trap of Judgmental Adjectives

• Adjectives such as poor, good, fast, faster, not reliable, primitive, naïve, or limited can
do a lot of damage.
• They make your work look good at the expense of others who came before you. These
very people may one day read what you havewritten about them, and will
understandably be upset.

• Does this mean that all adjectives are bad? No, they are just dangerous. Every
adjective is a claim; and in science, claims have to be substantiated. How would you
explain and justify the adjective poor if it refers to the performance of a system?
• Here are four ways to avoid direct judgment:
• 1. State that your work agrees (disagrees) with another paper’s conclusions,
• or state that your results are coherent with (different
• from) those found in another paper.
• 2. Use facts and numbers (quantitative instead of qualitative
• comparisons).
• 3. Define your uniqueness, your difference (nothing is comparable
• to what you do).
• 4. Quote another paper that independently supports your views.