Tatjana SchefflerThe single most important thing I want students to learn about academic writing is that your paper is not a mystery novel! Please state your results right there in the introduction! 🕵️♀️ #amGrading #academicWriting #academicChatter #ice515
Jerry D. Harris 🦕👣@tschfflr As a long-time teacher of scientific writing, I respectfully disagree. The Results section of an IMRaD paper exists for the results. The purpose of the Introduction is to provide the background necessary for readers to understand where the hypothesis came from, which provides a framework for understanding the results. The only place where the results & introductory stuff belong together is the abstract. An Introduction is not a second abstract (nor should be a Conclusions section).
Oliver Brendel@olibrendel @dinogami Nature & Science require results before methods 🤷♀️
But also, the intro should contain some indication of where it’s going (surely not all results, but at least some pointers, not just a completely open question). A scientific paper is an argument, and I must say an argument of what. I absolutely require this even in experimental studies, which I supervise a lot. In addition, I was speaking about student papers (term papers , BA/BSc theses). They often don’t have an abstract.
But also, the intro should contain some indication of where it’s going (surely not all results, but at least some pointers, not just a completely open question). A scientific paper is an argument, and I must say an argument of what. I absolutely require this even in experimental studies, which I supervise a lot. In addition, I was speaking about student papers (term papers , BA/BSc theses). They often don’t have an abstract.
@tschfflr @olibrendel Indeed, a few journals have messed about with the IMRaD format by moving (and subordinating) the Methods section to the end of a paper, which puts the Results immediately after the Introduction. And, of course, good writing will have a smooth transition from the end of the Introduction into the following Results section, but I still see no need to put results in the Introduction, especially in such a "misplaced-Methods-section journal" case...they'd just be redundant.