Information adapted from: Elsevier. (n.d.). [Brochure]. Author. Retrieved March 20, 2017, from https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/91173/Brochure_UPP_April2015.pdf
A great title makes the audience want to read your article; a poor title can
Identify the article’s main issue
Begin with the article’s subject matter
Are accurate, unambiguous, specific and (when possible) complete
Are as short as possible
Should be an extensive overview of what has been found by other authors concerning relevant information that affects what you studied for your experiment
Present findings objectively
Any information that is not “common knowledge” or generated by your experiments, must be recognized with a citation
1. Only list people who made an intellectual contribution to the research
The abstract should be 200 words or less
Should be detailed enough that others can exactly replicate your research, and assess whether the methods justify the conclusions
Use past tense
Don’t use first person
Explain how you studied the problem
If new methods are used, these need to be explained in detail
Identify the procedures you followed
Identify the equipment and materials you used, and specify their source
State the frequency of observations of observations and what types of data was recorded
Give precise measurements
State strengths and weaknesses when applicable
Explain criteria for picking your participants
Keywords are important words that capture the research effectively.
Begins the body of the text
Should provide context and background to your topic. This is NOT a history lesson
The problem being investigated
State the questions you’re answering and explain any findings of others that you’re challenging or furthering
Its contextual background
Describe the meaning of your results, especially in the context of what was already known about the subject
Can present general and specific conclusions, but don’t summarize your article
Should link back to the intro
Referring to your questions or hypotheses, and cover how the results relate to your expectations and cited sources
Do the results support or contradict existing theories?
Explain why if contradictory
What possible factors may have contributed to the discrepancy in the expected results?
Are there any limitations?
Can these be generalized to other settings (environmental)?
Yes or no? Are there any limitations?
You can also suggest further experiments, uses and extensions