Writing the details of a research paper tutor does not teach the detail when the reviewer picked up the article, the overall impression played a big role. The reviewer's psychological stereotype is to judge "too" or "but", there is no third option. If his impression is "but", he is repeatedly looking for excuses. So if you want to pass, first of all write well, so that the reviewer to pick the wrong. And how to write well? Many details are not taught by mentors. Perception is very important! The previous Master tutor's technical English writing level is very good, sometimes she modifies other people's article, will revise the article the idea and the article the wording to impart to me. Later to read the doctor, the teacher's writing level is even better, although he did not guide the rules and regulations, but from the repeated changes in the text of the Red pen, I also realized a lot. Now I'm going to share some of the details I've learned that others seldom teach.
1) Generally do not describe the twists and turns of discovering scientific facts in writing. It can be written that we are inspired by someone else's work to discover our things, but do not say: "We first called a student to do, did not do it." Then we personally improved the method, and finally made it out. "Do not say:" In order to determine this substance, we have consulted a large number of books, has never been reported. So we went to the library to find other documents, found the attribution. "Do not imply that there is no credit or elbow grease", but to go straight to the subject.
This point may be obvious, but it is not. In reading the article often can see such an inappropriate statement. I used to go to the doctor's first report, the last film was the cover of a pile of magazines. I said to the audience, in order to do this annual review report, in order to do my research, I read the 300 articles of these magazines. After the meeting, the teacher said to me: "Do not let others see your sweat, to use scientific results to attract others." Even if you go around a big bend to get the final result, you have to say it easily and make others feel you are smart. ”
According to what to Write a successful thesis (WILEY-VCH) a book p. 98, "Experimental work was by definition a journey to the unknown, fraught with detours and dead ends, but all such obsta Cles is basically irrelevant from a scientific standpoint. Look upon your dissertation--as you would all other the Report--not as a memoir documenting and explaining your every Activity, but instead as a proclamation of a set of new insights. How do you achieved your results could perhaps play some role in your mentor ' s appraisal of your efforts, but otherwise it would Be-of interest only to the extent, certain intimate details may critical from a methodological standpoint. "
2) use less clichés. Many of the online materials of the so-called writing tips provide some syntax, but in fact many are clichés, without providing any information that can be highly streamlined. Here is a piece of the manuscript I wrote to an article on the review: "[7] Another reason on what this paper is long and somewhat distracting is so you frequently use words s Uch as "It's found that" (see page 2), "It's worth noting that ..." (see page 7), "It was observed ..." (see page 8), "It was observed ..." (see page 9), "It was noted ..." (P.), "We observed that ..." (Of course, it's you-who make the observation!), "It is noticed that" (p.), "It is interesting to see that ...", "it was observed that ... "," it is concluded that "(p. 17)," It is found that "."
Sometimes it helps to use the cliché instead. Here is a snippet of my comments to another article: "[ten] throughout the text, for two or three times (e.g., line one of P.), the authors always wrote" I T is not surprising ... ". The intention of the authors is to justify their data and to say that their data is "normal". However, if the authors always say "It isn't surprising", why should the reader care unsurprising results? Isn ' t it better to use "it's justified that ..." or "it's reasonable that ..."? "
To prove that what I said is justified, I give a successful to Write a thesis (WILEY-VCH) p. Avoid sentences that is unnecessarily complex and entangled, or run on interminably. Problems of the latter sort often has their origin in ' that ' constructions:
Example 4-8: It's Well established ... (of course!)
One can assume that ... (presumably!)
From this result it follows ... (= Thus, hence, therefore)
We must not take it for granted ... (= unlikely)
Note that the examples above is followed in parentheses by a word or words with the potential to head the offending Sente nCE off in a more promising direction. Sometimes a single well-chosen word was able to replace an entire phrase, simultaneously eliminating the need for at least One punctuation mark. Equally important, a remodeling in this sense often permits the true message of the sentence-migrate from an awkward su Bordinate clause to the main clause, where it belongs. "
3) Writing articles can not be used to ask reviewers to play the fashionable language, can not boast exaggerated influence. For example, some people say that their experimental design is "beautiful", the experimental results are "amazing", "remarkable", his catalyst is "super stable", his film is "Super Thin", in the introduction part of his topic is "public attention to the North Star", so the inevitable strokes. Very simple, what is the definition of "super stable"? The most stable is the conversion rate has been 100% unchanged, then "super stable" to what extent? What do you mean, "super thin"? The thinnest is the size of an atom, can "super thin" be smaller than an atom?
Some people write the article introduction exaggerated energy crisis, make readers sac kings, although the hat hit, and finally narrowed to a meaningless topic. So, the reviewer will ask: Can your catalyst solve the energy crisis with your results? Can your catalyst be industrialized?
Communicating science:a Practical guide book P. "Hype tends to creep in naturally under the pen. A good characterization of hype is overindulgence in adjectives. Just like overindulging in sweets leads to obesity, accumulating adjectives bloats a text, makes it bottom-heavy and turns it into failure. "P. A", "I am not telling-shy from waving your flag. Advertising is definitely involved in the writing of a introduction, but the softest of touches are needed. One-upmanship can be very distructive. "
The Elements of Styles (illustrated edition) of the book p. 106, "do not overstate. When you overstate, readers'll be instantly on guard, and everything that have preceded your overstatement as well as Eve Rything that follows it'll be suspect in their minds because they has lost confidence in your judgment or your poise. Overstatement is one of the common faults. A single overstatement, wherever or however it occurs, diminishes the whole, and a single carefree superlative have the POW Er to destroy, for readers, the objective of your enthusiasm. "
4) Encourage proper use of the active tone. Many teachers used to say that writing scientific papers should be used in a passive tone. In fact, everyone to read Chemical Communications magazine, every article read, found that most of the three pages of the article has at least several active sentences, and some more than 10 active sentences. What situation uses the passive sentence, what condition uses the active sentence? The answer is to use passive sentences in most cases, especially to describe experimental methods. But in some cases with the active sentence has the finishing touch effect. READ carefully the chemical Communications magazine, found the common active sentence is "herein, we report ...", "we propose that:", "to further check/demonstrate this HYP Othesis, we designed further experiment by ... "," We believe that ... "," to see whether ... are due to ..., we did further exp Eriments ... ". There are several types of active sentences, the first of which is what we find in the introduction, the second is what we think, what we propose, and the third is that we do further experiments to prove something. With these active sentences, the article is more in spirits.
In order to illustrate what I said is reasonable, I give a successful to Write a thesis (WILEY-VCH) book p. Panax Notoginseng, "We urge you in general, as often as can, to incorporate lively verbs into your writing. Trt to take as much advantages as can of sentence structures rooted in the active voice, which are the most welcoming E Nvironment for ' words of action '. Few World dispute the assertion, however, then passive constructions rarely contribute in a positive a-to descriptive PR OSE. "
P. A, "It has become increasingly common in published scientific works to encounter examples of first-person verb forms, Which unquestionably add life to their surroundings. Note that this development carries an important inplication, however:the authors responsible is suggesting in a subtle w Ay that the parties involved in conducting a scholarly investigation could themselves play a more than passive role:
Examples 10-7 ... This being the case and we elected to ...
... We therefore separated (introduced, heated).
... In the hope of conferring antimalarial activity on pharmaceutical precursors, we prepared ... "
5) Note the length and structure of the paragraph, pay attention to transforms, smooth flowing, send and receive freely! Read the original section of the line printing, if a paragraph occupy a page, it is too long. Generally 6-15 lines are normal range. How to Write a successful science thesis (WILEY-VCH) a book p. Paragraphs should probably not exceed about a third of a page equivalent to perhaps four to eight Sentenc Es. Paragraphs make an important contribution to the intellectual structure of a document, quite apart from the fact that they Break up an otherwise ' endless stream of text ', which was unsightly and inflicts too much organizational burden on the REA Der. "
"Structuring a document as a series of coherent paragraphs forces the author to sort out and present he or her thoughts I n A logical fashion. That's to say, a proper paragraph was dedicated to exploring a single subject or thought, which in principle could easily Be articulated in a brief descriptive title. "
"The first sentence in every paragraph warrants special attention. One of its principle functions are to let the reader know what's the ensuing discussion is on, for which reason it's ofte N referred to as the "topic sentence". The corresponding topic is then pursued in sentences that immediately follow with the final sentence in the paragraph so Crafted that if supplies a bridge to the next paragraph. "
6) The article should be written to the flowers, but also pay attention to the end of the section. That is, the article in the end, can not be a halt, but to clarify the significance of this article, the contribution to this field, the limitations of this article and how to do next. In this way, I read it with a sense of intent. How to Write a successful science thesis (WILEY-VCH) a book p. 102, "Near the end of your discussion-want to being bold and suggest interesting avenues for future Exploration:promi Sing approaches to resolving remaining uncertainties, ideas for broadening the scope of a methodology you have developed, or ways of possibly refining your results. If So, being sure the suggestions you make is concrete. "
Write so many "secret", think scientific writing is really subtle. Here, take an example: recently read an article Qiwen. This article is about ultra-high vacuum surface chemistry, only one picture, one, incredibly can in Germany applied chemistry will.
Hydrocarbon Chain growth on V (+) Single-crystal surfaces via Vinyl intermediates (P 6583-6585)
Min Shen, Francisco Zaera
Published Online:jul 2:14am
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/anie.200802338
Read this article, can't help simply astounding. Not to mention specific academic content and new discoveries. The writing technique of this article is very ingenious, and has resorted to the "killer". The average person writes this kind of article, all in the report data, this peak in this position, that peak in that position. And this article, throughout the veins unobstructed, one go, such as flowing. It's very logical. In the philosophy of science, there is a kind of scientific discovery method called: put forward hypothesis ==〉 do experiment prove ==〉 get evidence ==〉 produce new question ==〉 to do new control experiment, diagnose experiment to eliminate question ==〉 optimization hypothesis. This kind of speculative process can be seen in this article. The new experiments are all centered around the question, and then it proves that a hypothesis or a hypothesis is ruled out. When describing these new experiments, a few words explain the problem.
This article is simple and easy to understand. The first link between this work and the industry's enduring f-t synthesis. In the middle of it, it is very rare to describe the peak position and peak shape of the graph, but to qualitatively say what is discovered and what mechanism is inferred. Very inspiring!
Writing a research paper tutor does not impart details
