Rule 1: Use the title to highlight the question or central idea that the reader can remember
The title is the first element of the paper because the reader is the first to see the title of the paper. The purpose of your paper itself is not to pile up all the data and other results like a report, but to extract important conclusions from complex data.
If you have more problems involved, you need to analyze a lot of information to see which aspect is more important, and see if you can condense a "single problem" title with multiple aspects. Readers have a hard time remembering multiple things, but perhaps one piece of information.
Rule 2: Treat your readers like ordinary people who don't understand your job
Don't think that readers are like you are the top experts on your paper, but think of them as naïve readers. Try to write as if you were talking to someone else: look at your face and speak with a clear attitude so that you can say it directly and clearly.
Use plain language to draw readers' attention to your question, further allowing them to understand your conclusions at a small cost. For example, give a clear definition of some difficult technical terms so that the reader can understand their meaning. Try not to use abbreviations and acronyms to avoid the reader turning ahead to recognize their meaning.
There are some core pieces that must be memorized by the reader in order to read the rest of the paper and ultimately remember your major contributions. People are better at remembering the beginning and the end than the middle. So, in every section or paragraph, put the most important things at the beginning or the end.
Rule 3: Background-Content-Conclusion (C-C-C) Rule
The contextual structure of the paper, the description of each section and paragraph, can there be some unified logical order to arrange the content? The third rule is aimed at such a logical order. The description is simply divided into three parts: beginning, middle and end, requiring a clear and recognizable beginning, a meaningful main part, and an ending. Rule 3 requires that these three parts be the background or context, content and conclusion, referred to as the C-C-C structure, where the three Cs, in order, refer to The Text, Content and Consensus, that is, the background, content and conclusion. The background or context is explained at the beginning, the main content is introduced in the middle, and the story is pushed forward step by step to the end of the conclusion.
Explaining the background or reason at the beginning allows the reader to understand "Why tell me this?". Conclude with a conclusion that doesn't leave the reader wondering," so that so what?" The content put in the middle allows the reader to see that your argument will have a basis from background to conclusion.
This "background-first" model differs from a "content-first" structure, where the "content-first" structure may cause the reader to miss the "why tell me this?" For these reasons, C-C-C is advocated as the "default" structure for scientific papers.
The macroscopic structure of the paper, which contains the introduction, results, and discussion, is an explicit C-C-C structure. The introduction sets the background, the result is the content, and the discussion leads to the conclusion. For each paragraph in the paper, when using the C-C-C structure, the first sentence of the paragraph is required to be used to explain the background, the introduction of the middle part is for the reader to think, and the conclusion is used at the end for the reader to remember.
Rule 4: State your results bluntly
In layman's terms, it is to express the result directly. Academic papers are not novels and essays, and they cannot be written in a tortuous and moving style.
First, you need to avoid going around. Only the central idea of the paper should be mentioned multiple times, and topics other than the central idea should appear in only one place to minimize the number of topic changes. Related sentences or paragraphs should be strung together and not interrupted by an introduction to unrelated content. For example, two reasons for explaining one thing should appear one after the other, not separated.
Second, for some content that has a parallel status, the parallel law is used to introduce. Specifically, if you have several parallel status items that need to be introduced, divide them into equal status paragraphs and introduce these parallel content one by one with the same tone and style. Parallel structures make text easier to read because the reader is familiar with this structure.
For example, if we have three separate causes to explain why we prefer one interpretation of the outcome, then use the same syntax to express these three independent reasons. This way, once the reader is familiar with the structure, they can focus on the content.
There is nothing wrong with using the same word multiple times in a sentence or paragraph to express the same meaning. If you try to use a different word, the reader will feel that the second word has a slightly different meaning.
Rule 5: Tell a complete story in the summary
For most readers, the abstract is the only part they will read. This means that the abstract must effectively convey the full message of the paper. To achieve this, the C-C-C structure of the abstract is highly regulated.
According to the C-C-C structure, the abstract begins with the background. The first sentence guides the reader by introducing the broader field of study in which a particular study is located. Then, by accounting for the current research gap and the importance of filling this gap, that is, the link between the specific research gap and the broad research background at the beginning of the paper, the scope of the study is narrowed down until it is finally reduced to the problem studied in the article. In this way, the reader's eyes are focused on the content of the paper.
This is followed by an introduction to the methodology (new methods, new approaches) and an overview of the findings.
Finally, the conclusion section explains the results obtained to answer the questions asked at the end of the background section. Sometimes, it is also necessary to indicate how this conclusion contributes to advancing the field of research (e.g., "broader significance").
This canonical structure can help you avoid some of the common mistakes in the abstract of discussing the results before the reader understands the problem. Good abstracts often need to be refined multiple times to ensure that the results fill in the gaps in the field of research like a key fit lock. This wide-narrow-wide structure allows you to reach a wider audience (through breadth) while maintaining the credibility of your results (based on limited or narrow results).
Rule 6: Explain the importance of the paper in the introduction
This importance is usually accomplished through a set of paragraphs that gradually become more specific, which end with a clear exposition of what is missing in the literature, followed by a paragraph summarizing how the essay fills that gap. Paragraph after paragraph of advanced statements arouses the reader's expectations of the content of the paper.
The structure of each paragraph of the introduction (with the exception of the last paragraph) is intended to lead to the final field of study gaps. Each paragraph first directs the reader to the subject (one or two contextual sentences), then explains the "known" in the relevant literature (content), and then reaches the key "unknown" (conclusion). Along the way, there are often clues that tell you the secrets behind the research gaps; these lines index out unverified hypotheses or undeveloped thesis methods, and give readers hope that the problem can be solved. The introduction should not contain a broader literature review that goes beyond the motivation of the paper. This whitespace-focused structure makes it easy for experienced readers to assess the potential importance of the paper, they only need to assess the importance of the research gaps described in the article.
Rule 7: The order in which the results are presented with graphs follows the logic that supports the central argument
The results part needs to convince the reader that the main conclusion is underpinned by data and logic. Each scientific argument has its own unique logical structure, which determines the order in which its elements are presented. Graphics often have an important place in the presentation of results, drawing is an art in itself, and Tufte's book is still the gold standard for learning this skill. Sketch out the logical structure of how the graph underpins your results and transform them into a series of declarative statements that become subheadings of each section in the results section.
There are paragraphs in which the results are formally introduced, and each paragraph begins with a sentence or two to explain what questions the paragraph is going to answer, such as: "To verify that there was no prior work...", "How reproducible is our method?", or "What results did we test next?" ”
The middle part of each paragraph gives the data graphics and logic related to the question, and the paragraph ends with the sentence that answers the question. Each paragraph convinces the reader of the answer given by the last sentence. This makes it easy for the reader to find a paragraph that draws dubious conclusions and check the logic of that paragraph. The result of each paragraph is a logical statement, and the later paragraphs in the article rely on the logical conclusions of the preceding paragraphs, just like the theorems established in the mathematical literature.
Rule 8: Highlight gaps filled and the limitations and implications of this study when discussing the results
The discussion section explains how the work of the article fills the gaps in the research areas proposed in the introduction by summarizing the results, discussing the limitations, etc., and provides warnings about some interpretations. It is also necessary to describe whether the dissertation research provides new opportunities to promote the development of the field.
In the first paragraph of the discussion section, the key findings of the outcome section need to be summarized in particular. Some readers skip some important parts of the results section, so this paragraph at least gives them an idea of the gist of the section.
For example, the first paragraph could summarize the results and focus on their significance. Paragraphs 2 to 4 may address potential gaps, noting that other literature addresses these gaps, or that these deficiencies could be remedied through future studies. The fifth paragraph ends with a description of how the article moves the field forward. Gradually, the reader learns to put the conclusions of the article into the correct context.
Rule 9: Allocate writing time where it is important, such as titles, abstracts, charts, and outlines
Gradually accumulating documents while researching is useful for eventually obtaining an outline of a thesis. You should allocate your time according to the importance of each section. Far more people read the titles, abstracts, and charts than the rest of the paper, and the method section was the least read. This needs to be balanced accordingly.
Time spent on each section can be effectively allocated by pre-planning. This requires a pre-written outline, which can pre-write an informal sentence for each planned paragraph, which may become the title of each section or subsection. Because the article has an overall outline, each paragraph should have a clear role in advancing the content. This role is best carefully crafted during the outline phase to reduce time wasted on paragraphs that ultimately don't fit the overall content.
Make an estimate of your essay writing time, multiplying that amount by three is the time you really need. Writing without revision at once is demanding, and it's easy to underestimate the time it takes to write. It's more realistic to exaggerate your initial estimates threefold.
Rule 10: Establish feedback mechanisms in delete, reuse, and loop iterations
Writing can be seen as an optimization problem, improving your story, outline, and all sentences simultaneously in the process of optimization. Sometimes I write something well, but I find that I don't write well. It takes a lot of time to change it, so it is better to delete it and rewrite it. This is what we often call a blank piece of paper that is easy to write.
Writing a good paper requires feedback from many parties. The first step is to find someone to try it out. Trial readings can also provide valuable information, and very specific feedback often points to logical inadequacies in paragraphs. Accepting this feedback in a positive way is crucial because opinions from others are crucial, so a helpful group of classmates is the foundation on which you can write a good essay.
How to verify that you meet the 10 rules
Here are some indications of whether you have violated these 10 rules. Finding these violations of good writing helps to improve the quality of the paper at all levels.
Rule 1: Does the paper focus on a central idea? Signs of violation: You and the reader can't give a one-sentence summary of the paper.
Rule 2: Is it possible to write a thesis to naïve people? Signs of violation: Readers "can't grasp" the main points of the article.
Rule 3: Does the C-C-C logical structure of context-content-conclusion followed? Signs of violation: Readers have questions about something and what it means.
Rule 4: Is the logical flow optimized? Signs of violation: The reader is tripped by a small paragraph of text.
Rule 5: Does the abstract summarize the paper compactly? Signs of violation: Readers can't give an "elevator room speech" to your article after reading your abstract.
Rule 6: Can you tell from the introduction that the article is important? Signs of violation: Readers aren't too interested in your article.
Rule 7: Do the results justify the conclusion? Signs of violation: Readers don't agree with your summary.
Rule 8: Are there critical paragraphs in the discussion, do they describe the implications for future research? Signs of violation: The reader will have in mind some criticisms, questions that you did not answer.
Rule 9: Do you allocate your time properly? Signs of violation: Despite your efforts to write, it's hard for the reader to understand your core conclusions.
Rule 10: Have you iterated on your paper repeatedly? Signs of violation: The person who tried to read it objected to the conclusion of the article.
This article is reproduced from: Academic Growth Academy
![The exploration and innovation of the three artists[fig]]()