research paper in published

PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
EDIT Edit this Article
EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
Browse Articles
Learn Something New
Quizzes Hot
This Or That Game
Train Your Brain
Explore More
Support wikiHow
About wikiHow
Log in / Sign up
Education and Communications
College University and Postgraduate
Academic Writing
Research Papers

How to Write and Publish Your Research in a Journal

Last Updated: May 26, 2024 Fact Checked

Choosing a Journal

Writing the research paper, editing & revising your paper, submitting your paper, navigating the peer review process, research paper help.

This article was co-authored by Matthew Snipp, PhD and by wikiHow staff writer, Cheyenne Main . C. Matthew Snipp is the Burnet C. and Mildred Finley Wohlford Professor of Humanities and Sciences in the Department of Sociology at Stanford University. He is also the Director for the Institute for Research in the Social Science’s Secure Data Center. He has been a Research Fellow at the U.S. Bureau of the Census and a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences. He has published 3 books and over 70 articles and book chapters on demography, economic development, poverty and unemployment. He is also currently serving on the National Institute of Child Health and Development’s Population Science Subcommittee. He holds a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Wisconsin—Madison. There are 13 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 700,953 times.

Publishing a research paper in a peer-reviewed journal allows you to network with other scholars, get your name and work into circulation, and further refine your ideas and research. Before submitting your paper, make sure it reflects all the work you’ve done and have several people read over it and make comments. Keep reading to learn how you can choose a journal, prepare your work for publication, submit it, and revise it after you get a response back.

Things You Should Know

Create a list of journals you’d like to publish your work in and choose one that best aligns with your topic and your desired audience.
Prepare your manuscript using the journal’s requirements and ask at least 2 professors or supervisors to review your paper.
Write a cover letter that “sells” your manuscript, says how your research adds to your field and explains why you chose the specific journal you’re submitting to.

Step 1 Create a list of journals you’d like to publish your work in.

Ask your professors or supervisors for well-respected journals that they’ve had good experiences publishing with and that they read regularly.
Many journals also only accept specific formats, so by choosing a journal before you start, you can write your article to their specifications and increase your chances of being accepted.
If you’ve already written a paper you’d like to publish, consider whether your research directly relates to a hot topic or area of research in the journals you’re looking into.

Step 2 Look at each journal’s audience, exposure, policies, and procedures.

Review the journal’s peer review policies and submission process to see if you’re comfortable creating or adjusting your work according to their standards.
Open-access journals can increase your readership because anyone can access them.

Step 1 Craft an effective introduction with a thesis statement.

Scientific research papers: Instead of a “thesis,” you might write a “research objective” instead. This is where you state the purpose of your research.
“This paper explores how George Washington’s experiences as a young officer may have shaped his views during difficult circumstances as a commanding officer.”
“This paper contends that George Washington’s experiences as a young officer on the 1750s Pennsylvania frontier directly impacted his relationship with his Continental Army troops during the harsh winter at Valley Forge.”

Step 2 Write the literature review and the body of your paper.

Scientific research papers: Include a “materials and methods” section with the step-by-step process you followed and the materials you used. [5] X Research source
Read other research papers in your field to see how they’re written. Their format, writing style, subject matter, and vocabulary can help guide your own paper. [6] X Research source

Step 3 Write your conclusion that ties back to your thesis or research objective.

If you’re writing about George Washington’s experiences as a young officer, you might emphasize how this research changes our perspective of the first president of the U.S.
Link this section to your thesis or research objective.
If you’re writing a paper about ADHD, you might discuss other applications for your research.

Step 4 Write an abstract that describes what your paper is about.

Scientific research papers: You might include your research and/or analytical methods, your main findings or results, and the significance or implications of your research.
Try to get as many people as you can to read over your abstract and provide feedback before you submit your paper to a journal.

Step 1 Prepare your manuscript according to the journal’s requirements.

They might also provide templates to help you structure your manuscript according to their specific guidelines. [11] X Research source

Step 2 Ask 2 colleagues to review your paper and revise it with their notes.

Not all journal reviewers will be experts on your specific topic, so a non-expert “outsider’s perspective” can be valuable.

Step 1 Check your sources for plagiarism and identify 5 to 6 keywords.

If you have a paper on the purification of wastewater with fungi, you might use both the words “fungi” and “mushrooms.”
Use software like iThenticate, Turnitin, or PlagScan to check for similarities between the submitted article and published material available online. [15] X Research source

Step 2 Write a cover letter explaining why you chose their journal.

Header: Address the editor who will be reviewing your manuscript by their name, include the date of submission, and the journal you are submitting to.
First paragraph: Include the title of your manuscript, the type of paper it is (like review, research, or case study), and the research question you wanted to answer and why.
Second paragraph: Explain what was done in your research, your main findings, and why they are significant to your field.
Third paragraph: Explain why the journal’s readers would be interested in your work and why your results are important to your field.
Conclusion: State the author(s) and any journal requirements that your work complies with (like ethical standards”).
“We confirm that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal.”
“All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to [insert the name of the target journal].”

Step 3 Submit your article according to the journal’s submission guidelines.

Submit your article to only one journal at a time.
When submitting online, use your university email account. This connects you with a scholarly institution, which can add credibility to your work.

Step 1 Try not to panic when you get the journal’s initial response.

Accept: Only minor adjustments are needed, based on the provided feedback by the reviewers. A first submission will rarely be accepted without any changes needed.
Revise and Resubmit: Changes are needed before publication can be considered, but the journal is still very interested in your work.
Reject and Resubmit: Extensive revisions are needed. Your work may not be acceptable for this journal, but they might also accept it if significant changes are made.
Reject: The paper isn’t and won’t be suitable for this publication, but that doesn’t mean it might not work for another journal.

Step 2 Revise your paper based on the reviewers’ feedback.

Try organizing the reviewer comments by how easy it is to address them. That way, you can break your revisions down into more manageable parts.
If you disagree with a comment made by a reviewer, try to provide an evidence-based explanation when you resubmit your paper.

Step 3 Resubmit to the same journal or choose another from your list.

If you’re resubmitting your paper to the same journal, include a point-by-point response paper that talks about how you addressed all of the reviewers’ comments in your revision. [22] X Research source
If you’re not sure which journal to submit to next, you might be able to ask the journal editor which publications they recommend.

Expert Q&A

About This Article

To publish a research paper, ask a colleague or professor to review your paper and give you feedback. Once you've revised your work, familiarize yourself with different academic journals so that you can choose the publication that best suits your paper. Make sure to look at the "Author's Guide" so you can format your paper according to the guidelines for that publication. Then, submit your paper and don't get discouraged if it is not accepted right away. You may need to revise your paper and try again. To learn about the different responses you might get from journals, see our reviewer's explanation below. Did this summary help you? Yes No

Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

RAMDEV GOHIL

Oct 16, 2017

Did this article help you?

David Okandeji

Oct 23, 2019

Revati Joshi

Feb 13, 2017

Shahzad Khan

Jul 1, 2017

Apr 7, 2017

Featured Articles

Watch Articles

Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Do Not Sell or Share My Info
Not Selling Info

Don’t miss out! Sign up for

wikiHow’s newsletter

Home → Get Published → How to Publish a Research Paper: A Step-by-Step Guide

How to Publish a Research Paper: A Step-by-Step Guide

Jordan Kruszynski

January 4, 2024

You’re in academia.

You’re going steady.

Your research is going well and you begin to wonder: ‘ How exactly do I get a research paper published?’

If this is the question on your lips, then this step-by-step guide is the one for you. We’ll be walking you through the whole process of how to publish a research paper.

Publishing a research paper is a significant milestone for researchers and academics, as it allows you to share your findings, contribute to your field of study, and start to gain serious recognition within the wider academic community. So, want to know how to publish a research paper? By following our guide, you’ll get a firm grasp of the steps involved in this process, giving you the best chance of successfully navigating the publishing process and getting your work out there.

Understanding the Publishing Process

To begin, it’s crucial to understand that getting a research paper published is a multi-step process. From beginning to end, it could take as little as 2 months before you see your paper nestled in the pages of your chosen journal. On the other hand, it could take as long as a year .

Below, we set out the steps before going into more detail on each one. Getting a feel for these steps will help you to visualise what lies ahead, and prepare yourself for each of them in turn. It’s important to remember that you won’t actually have control over every step – in fact, some of them will be decided by people you’ll probably never meet. However, knowing which parts of the process are yours to decide will allow you to adjust your approach and attitude accordingly.

Each of the following stages will play a vital role in the eventual publication of your paper:

Preparing Your Research Paper
Finding the Right Journal
Crafting a Strong Manuscript
Navigating the Peer-Review Process
Submitting Your Paper
Dealing with Rejections and Revising Your Paper

Step 1: Preparing Your Research Paper

It all starts here. The quality and content of your research paper is of fundamental importance if you want to get it published. This step will be different for every researcher depending on the nature of your research, but if you haven’t yet settled on a topic, then consider the following advice:

Choose an interesting and relevant topic that aligns with current trends in your field. If your research touches on the passions and concerns of your academic peers or wider society, it may be more likely to capture attention and get published successfully.
Conduct a comprehensive literature review (link to lit. review article once it’s published) to identify the state of existing research and any knowledge gaps within it. Aiming to fill a clear gap in the knowledge of your field is a great way to increase the practicality of your research and improve its chances of getting published.
Structure your paper in a clear and organised manner, including all the necessary sections such as title, abstract, introduction (link to the ‘how to write a research paper intro’ article once it’s published) , methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion.
Adhere to the formatting guidelines provided by your target journal to ensure that your paper is accepted as viable for publishing. More on this in the next section…

Step 2: Finding the Right Journal

Understanding how to publish a research paper involves selecting the appropriate journal for your work. This step is critical for successful publication, and you should take several factors into account when deciding which journal to apply for:

Conduct thorough research to identify journals that specialise in your field of study and have published similar research. Naturally, if you submit a piece of research in molecular genetics to a journal that specialises in geology, you won’t be likely to get very far.
Consider factors such as the journal’s scope, impact factor, and target audience. Today there is a wide array of journals to choose from, including traditional and respected print journals, as well as numerous online, open-access endeavours. Some, like Nature , even straddle both worlds.
Review the submission guidelines provided by the journal and ensure your paper meets all the formatting requirements and word limits. This step is key. Nature, for example, offers a highly informative series of pages that tells you everything you need to know in order to satisfy their formatting guidelines (plus more on the whole submission process).
Note that these guidelines can differ dramatically from journal to journal, and details really do matter. You might submit an outstanding piece of research, but if it includes, for example, images in the wrong size or format, this could mean a lengthy delay to getting it published. If you get everything right first time, you’ll save yourself a lot of time and trouble, as well as strengthen your publishing chances in the first place.

Step 3: Crafting a Strong Manuscript

Crafting a strong manuscript is crucial to impress journal editors and reviewers. Look at your paper as a complete package, and ensure that all the sections tie together to deliver your findings with clarity and precision.

Begin by creating a clear and concise title that accurately reflects the content of your paper.
Compose an informative abstract that summarises the purpose, methodology, results, and significance of your study.
Craft an engaging introduction (link to the research paper introduction article) that draws your reader in.
Develop a well-structured methodology section, presenting your results effectively using tables and figures.
Write a compelling discussion and conclusion that emphasise the significance of your findings.

Step 4: Navigating the Peer-Review Process

Once you submit your research paper to a journal, it undergoes a rigorous peer-review process to ensure its quality and validity. In peer-review, experts in your field assess your research and provide feedback and suggestions for improvement, ultimately determining whether your paper is eligible for publishing or not. You are likely to encounter several models of peer-review, based on which party – author, reviewer, or both – remains anonymous throughout the process.

When your paper undergoes the peer-review process, be prepared for constructive criticism and address the comments you receive from your reviewer thoughtfully, providing clear and concise responses to their concerns or suggestions. These could make all the difference when it comes to making your next submission.

The peer-review process can seem like a closed book at times. Check out our discussion of the issue with philosopher and academic Amna Whiston in The Research Beat podcast!

Step 5: Submitting Your Paper

As we’ve already pointed out, one of the key elements in how to publish a research paper is ensuring that you meticulously follow the journal’s submission guidelines. Strive to comply with all formatting requirements, including citation styles, font, margins, and reference structure.

Before the final submission, thoroughly proofread your paper for errors, including grammar, spelling, and any inconsistencies in your data or analysis. At this stage, consider seeking feedback from colleagues or mentors to further improve the quality of your paper.

Step 6: Dealing with Rejections and Revising Your Paper

Rejection is a common part of the publishing process, but it shouldn’t discourage you. Analyse reviewer comments objectively and focus on the constructive feedback provided. Make necessary revisions and improvements to your paper to address the concerns raised by reviewers. If needed, consider submitting your paper to a different journal that is a better fit for your research.

For more tips on how to publish your paper out there, check out this thread by Dr. Asad Naveed ( @dr_asadnaveed ) – and if you need a refresher on the basics of how to publish under the Open Access model, watch this 5-minute video from Audemic Academy !

Final Thoughts

Successfully understanding how to publish a research paper requires dedication, attention to detail, and a systematic approach. By following the advice in our guide, you can increase your chances of navigating the publishing process effectively and achieving your goal of publication.

Remember, the journey may involve revisions, peer feedback, and potential rejections, but each step is an opportunity for growth and improvement. Stay persistent, maintain a positive mindset, and continue to refine your research paper until it reaches the standards of your target journal. Your contribution to your wider discipline through published research will not only advance your career, but also add to the growing body of collective knowledge in your field. Embrace the challenges and rewards that come with the publication process, and may your research paper make a significant impact in your area of study!

Looking for inspiration for your next big paper? Head to Audemic , where you can organise and listen to all the best and latest research in your field!

Keep striving, researchers! ✨

Behind the Scenes: What Does a Research Assistant Do?

Have you ever wondered what goes on behind the scenes in a research lab? Does it involve acting out the whims of

How to Write a Research Paper Introduction: Hook, Line, and Sinker

Want to know how to write a research paper introduction that dazzles? Struggling to hook your reader in with your opening sentences?

Blog Podcast

Subscribe to our newsletter!

Discover more from Audemic: Access any academic research via audio

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

PLOS Biology
PLOS Climate
PLOS Complex Systems
PLOS Computational Biology
PLOS Digital Health
PLOS Genetics
PLOS Global Public Health
PLOS Medicine
PLOS Mental Health
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
PLOS Pathogens
PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
PLOS Collections

Understanding the Publishing Process

What’s happening with my paper? The publication process explained

The path to publication can be unsettling when you’re unsure what’s happening with your paper. Learn about staple journal workflows to see the detailed steps required for ensuring a rigorous and ethical publication.

Your team has prepared the paper, written a cover letter and completed the submission form. From here, it can sometimes feel like a waiting game while the journal has your paper. It can be unclear exactly who is currently handling your paper as most individuals are only involved in a few steps of the overall process. Journals are responsible for overseeing the peer review, publication and archival process: editors, reviewers, technical editors, production staff and other internal staff all have their roles in ensuring submissions meet rigorous scientific and ethical reporting standards.

Read on for an inside look at how a conventional peer-reviewed journal helps authors transform their initial submission to a certified publication.

Note that the description below is based on the process at PLOS journals. It is likely that at other journals, various roles (e.g. technical editor) may in fact also be played by the editor, and some journals may not have journal staff at all, with all roles played by volunteer academics. As such, please consider the processes and waypoints, rather than who performs them, as the key information.

Internal Checks on New Submissions

Estimated time: 10 days.

When a journal first receives your submission, there are typically two separate checks to confirm that the paper is appropriate and ready for peer review:

Technical check. Performed by a technical editor to ensure that the submission has been properly completed and is ready for further assessment. Blurry figures, missing ethical statements, and incomplete author affiliations are common issues that are addressed at this initial stage. Typically, there are three technical checks: upon initial submission, alongside the first decision letter, and upon acceptance.
Editorial screening . Once a paper passes the first check, an editor with subject expertise assesses the paper and determines whether it is within the journal’s scope and if it could potentially meet the required publication criteria. While there may be requests for further information and minor edits from the author as needed, the paper will either be desk rejected by the editor or allowed to proceed to peer review.

Both editors at this point will additionally make notes for items to be followed-up on at later stages. The publication process involves finding a careful balance for when each check occurs. Early checks need to be thorough so that editors with relevant expertise can focus on the scientific content and more advanced reporting standards, but no one wants to be asked to reformat references only to have their paper desk rejected a few days later.

Peer Review

Estimated time: 1 month.

Depending on the journal’s editorial structure, the editor who performed the initial assessment may also oversee peer review or another editor with more specific expertise may be assigned. Regardless of the journal’s specific process, the various roles and responsibilities during peer review include:

When you have questions or are unsure who your manuscripts is currently with, reach out to the journal staff for help (eg. [email protected]). They will be your lifeline, connecting you to all the other contributors working to assess the manuscript.

Whether an editor needs a reminder that all reviews are complete or a reviewer has asked for an extension, the journal acts as a central hub of communication for those involved with the publication process. As editors and reviewers are used to hearing from journal staff about their duties, any messages you send to the journal can be forwarded to them with proper context and instructions on how to proceed appropriately. Additionally, journal staff will be able to inform you of any delays, such as reviewer availability during summer and holiday periods.

Revision Decision

Estimated time: 1 day.

Editors evaluate peer reviewer feedback and their own expert assessment of the manuscript to reach a decision. After your editor submits a decision on your manuscript, the journal may review it before formally processing the decision and sending it on to you.

A technical editor may scan the manuscript and the review comments to ensure that journal standards have been followed. At this stage, the technical editor will also add requests to ensure the paper, if published, will adhere to journal requirements for data sharing, copyright, ethical reporting and the like.

Performing the second technical check at this stage and adding the journal requirements to the decision letter ultimately saves time by allowing authors to resolve the journal’s queries while making revisions based on comments from the reviewers.

Revised Submission Received

Estimated time: 3 days.

Upon receiving your revised submission, a technical editor will assess the revisions to confirm that the requests from the journal have been properly addressed. Before the paper is returned to the editor for their consideration, the journal needs to be confident that the paper won’t have any issues related to the metadata and reporting standards that could prevent publication. The editor may contact you to resolve any serious issues, though minor items can wait until the paper is accepted.

Subsequent Peer Review

Estimated time: 2 weeks, highly variable.

When your resubmitted paper has passed the required checks, it’ll be assigned back to the same editor who handled it during the first round of peer review. At this point, your paper has gone through two sets of journal checks and one round of peer review. If all has gone well so far, the paper should feel quite solid both in terms of scientific content and proper reporting standards.

When the editor receives your revised paper, they are asked to check if all reviewer comments have been adequately addressed and if the paper now adheres to the journal’s publication criteria. Depending on the situation, some editors may feel confident making this decision based on their own expertise while others may re-invite the previous reviewers for their opinions.

Individual responsibilities are the same as the initial round of peer review, but it is generally expected that later stages of peer review proceed quicker unless new concerns have been introduced as part of the revision.

Preliminary Acceptance

Estimated time: 1 week.

Your editor is satisfied with the scientific quality of your work and has chosen to accept it in principle. Before it can proceed to production and typesetting, the journal office will perform it’s third and final technical check, requesting any formatting changes or additional details that may be required.

When fulfilling these final journal requests, double check the final files to confirm all information is correct. If you need to make changes beyond those specifically required in the decision letter, inform the journal and explain why you made the unrequested changes. Any change that could affect the scientific meaning of the work will need to be approved by the handling editor. While including your rationale for the changes will help avoid delays, if there are extensive changes made at this point the paper may need to go through another round of formal review.

Formal Acceptance and Publication

Estimated time: 2 weeks.

After a technical editor has confirmed that all requests from the provisional acceptance letter have been addressed, you will receive your formal acceptance letter. This letter indicates that your paper is being passed from the Editorial department to the production department—that all information has been editorially approved. The scientific content has been approved through peer review, and the journal’s publication requirements have been met.

Congratulations to you and your co-authors! Your article will be available as soon as the journal transforms the submission into a typeset, consistently structured scientific manuscript, ready to be read and cited by your peers.

The contents of the Peer Review Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

The contents of the Writing Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

There’s a lot to consider when deciding where to submit your work. Learn how to choose a journal that will help your study reach its audience, while reflecting your values as a researcher…

How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal

Affiliations.

1 Department of Maternal and Child Health, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr, 27599, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
2 Department of Maternal and Child Health, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr, 27599, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. [email protected].
3 Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2029, USA. [email protected].
PMID: 32356250
PMCID: PMC8520870
DOI: 10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z

Communicating research findings is an essential step in the research process. Often, peer-reviewed journals are the forum for such communication, yet many researchers are never taught how to write a publishable scientific paper. In this article, we explain the basic structure of a scientific paper and describe the information that should be included in each section. We also identify common pitfalls for each section and recommend strategies to avoid them. Further, we give advice about target journal selection and authorship. In the online resource 1, we provide an example of a high-quality scientific paper, with annotations identifying the elements we describe in this article.

Keywords: Manuscripts; Publishing; Scientific writing.

Communication
Publishing*

Search Search
CN (Chinese)
DE (German)
ES (Spanish)
FR (Français)
JP (Japanese)
Open Research
Booksellers
Peer Reviewers
Springer Nature Group ↗

Publish an article

Roles and responsibilities
Signing your contract
Writing your manuscript
Submitting your manuscript
Producing your book
Promoting your book
Submit your book idea
Manuscript guidelines
Book author services
Publish a book
Publish conference proceedings

Join thousands of researchers worldwide that have published their work in one of our 3,000+ Springer Nature journals.

Step-by-step guide to article publishing

1. Prepare your article

Make sure you follow the submission guidelines for that journal. Search for a journal .
Get permission to use any images.
Check that your data is easy to reproduce.
State clearly if you're reusing any data that has been used elsewhere.
Follow our policies on plagiarism and ethics .
Use our services to get help with English translation, scientific assessment and formatting. Find out what support you can get .

2. Write a cover letter

Introduce your work in a 1-page letter, explaining the research you did, and why it's relevant.

3. Submit your manuscript

Go to the journal homepage to start the process
You can only submit 1 article at a time to each journal. Duplicate submissions will be rejected.

4. Technical check

We'll make sure that your article follows the journal guidelines for formatting, ethics, plagiarism, contributors, and permissions.

5. Editor and peer review

The journal editor will read your article and decide if it's ready for peer review.
Most articles will be reviewed by 2 or more experts in the field.
They may contact you with questions at this point.

6. Final decision

If your article is accepted, you'll need to sign a publishing agreement.
If your article is rejected, you can get help finding another journal from our transfer desk team .
If your article is open access, you'll need to pay a fee.
Fees for OA publishing differ across journals. See relevant journal page for more information.
You may be able to get help covering that cost. See information on funding .
We'll send you proofs to approve, then we'll publish your article.
Track your impact by logging in to your account

Get tips on preparing your manuscript using our submission checklist .

Each publication follows a slightly different process, so check the journal's guidelines for more details

Open access vs subscription publishing

Each of our journals has its own policies, options, and fees for publishing.

Over 600 of our journals are fully open access. Others use a hybrid model, with readers paying to access some articles.

Publishing your article open access has a number of benefits:

Free to access and download
Reaches a wider global audience
1.6x more citations
6x more downloads
4.9 average Altmetric attention (vs 2.1 subscription)

It's free to publish your article in a subscription journal, but there are fees for publishing open access articles. You'll need to check the open access fees for the journal you choose.

Learn more about open access

Get help with funding.

Many organisations require you to publish your research open access. It's worth checking with your supervisor and colleagues to understand your organisation's approach.

Many funders and institutions will cover your open access publishing fees. To find out if your fees are covered, take a look at our funding agreements .

We also offer discounts for researchers in some geographical regions. See regions with reduced fees

Learn more about funding

Choose a journal.

We have 3,000+ journals to choose from, covering a wide range of topics. The best way to find a relevant journal is to search by keyword.

Once you've chosen a journal, check the submission guidelines to see the open access fees.

Search all journals

Get support.

We offer editing, translation, data presentation and formatting services to help you at each step.

Author support for publishing

Knowledge resources for scientists, author tutorials.

If you have a question about a specific journal, check the submission guidelines. If you still need help, contact us .

Tools & Services
Account Development
Sales and account contacts
Professional
Press office
Locations & Contact

We are a world leading research, educational and professional publisher. Visit our main website for more information.

© 2024 Springer Nature
General terms and conditions
Your US State Privacy Rights
Your Privacy Choices / Manage Cookies
Accessibility
Legal notice
Help us to improve this site, send feedback.

How To Write A Research Paper

Step-By-Step Tutorial With Examples + FREE Template

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewer: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | March 2024

For many students, crafting a strong research paper from scratch can feel like a daunting task – and rightly so! In this post, we’ll unpack what a research paper is, what it needs to do , and how to write one – in three easy steps. 🙂

Overview: Writing A Research Paper

What (exactly) is a research paper.

How to write a research paper
Stage 1 : Topic & literature search
Stage 2 : Structure & outline
Stage 3 : Iterative writing
Key takeaways

Let’s start by asking the most important question, “ What is a research paper? ”.

Simply put, a research paper is a scholarly written work where the writer (that’s you!) answers a specific question (this is called a research question ) through evidence-based arguments . Evidence-based is the keyword here. In other words, a research paper is different from an essay or other writing assignments that draw from the writer’s personal opinions or experiences. With a research paper, it’s all about building your arguments based on evidence (we’ll talk more about that evidence a little later).

Now, it’s worth noting that there are many different types of research papers , including analytical papers (the type I just described), argumentative papers, and interpretative papers. Here, we’ll focus on analytical papers , as these are some of the most common – but if you’re keen to learn about other types of research papers, be sure to check out the rest of the blog .

With that basic foundation laid, let’s get down to business and look at how to write a research paper .

Overview: The 3-Stage Process

While there are, of course, many potential approaches you can take to write a research paper, there are typically three stages to the writing process. So, in this tutorial, we’ll present a straightforward three-step process that we use when working with students at Grad Coach.

These three steps are:

Finding a research topic and reviewing the existing literature
Developing a provisional structure and outline for your paper, and
Writing up your initial draft and then refining it iteratively

Let’s dig into each of these.

Need a helping hand?

Step 1: Find a topic and review the literature

As we mentioned earlier, in a research paper, you, as the researcher, will try to answer a question . More specifically, that’s called a research question , and it sets the direction of your entire paper. What’s important to understand though is that you’ll need to answer that research question with the help of high-quality sources – for example, journal articles, government reports, case studies, and so on. We’ll circle back to this in a minute.

The first stage of the research process is deciding on what your research question will be and then reviewing the existing literature (in other words, past studies and papers) to see what they say about that specific research question. In some cases, your professor may provide you with a predetermined research question (or set of questions). However, in many cases, you’ll need to find your own research question within a certain topic area.

Finding a strong research question hinges on identifying a meaningful research gap – in other words, an area that’s lacking in existing research. There’s a lot to unpack here, so if you wanna learn more, check out the plain-language explainer video below.

Once you’ve figured out which question (or questions) you’ll attempt to answer in your research paper, you’ll need to do a deep dive into the existing literature – this is called a “ literature search ”. Again, there are many ways to go about this, but your most likely starting point will be Google Scholar .

If you’re new to Google Scholar, think of it as Google for the academic world. You can start by simply entering a few different keywords that are relevant to your research question and it will then present a host of articles for you to review. What you want to pay close attention to here is the number of citations for each paper – the more citations a paper has, the more credible it is (generally speaking – there are some exceptions, of course).

Ideally, what you’re looking for are well-cited papers that are highly relevant to your topic. That said, keep in mind that citations are a cumulative metric , so older papers will often have more citations than newer papers – just because they’ve been around for longer. So, don’t fixate on this metric in isolation – relevance and recency are also very important.

Beyond Google Scholar, you’ll also definitely want to check out academic databases and aggregators such as Science Direct, PubMed, JStor and so on. These will often overlap with the results that you find in Google Scholar, but they can also reveal some hidden gems – so, be sure to check them out.

Once you’ve worked your way through all the literature, you’ll want to catalogue all this information in some sort of spreadsheet so that you can easily recall who said what, when and within what context. If you’d like, we’ve got a free literature spreadsheet that helps you do exactly that.

Don’t fixate on an article’s citation count in isolation - relevance (to your research question) and recency are also very important.

Step 2: Develop a structure and outline

With your research question pinned down and your literature digested and catalogued, it’s time to move on to planning your actual research paper .

It might sound obvious, but it’s really important to have some sort of rough outline in place before you start writing your paper. So often, we see students eagerly rushing into the writing phase, only to land up with a disjointed research paper that rambles on in multiple

Now, the secret here is to not get caught up in the fine details . Realistically, all you need at this stage is a bullet-point list that describes (in broad strokes) what you’ll discuss and in what order. It’s also useful to remember that you’re not glued to this outline – in all likelihood, you’ll chop and change some sections once you start writing, and that’s perfectly okay. What’s important is that you have some sort of roadmap in place from the start.

You need to have a rough outline in place before you start writing your paper - or you’ll end up with a disjointed research paper that rambles on.

At this stage you might be wondering, “ But how should I structure my research paper? ”. Well, there’s no one-size-fits-all solution here, but in general, a research paper will consist of a few relatively standardised components:

Introduction
Literature review
Methodology

Let’s take a look at each of these.

First up is the introduction section . As the name suggests, the purpose of the introduction is to set the scene for your research paper. There are usually (at least) four ingredients that go into this section – these are the background to the topic, the research problem and resultant research question , and the justification or rationale. If you’re interested, the video below unpacks the introduction section in more detail.

The next section of your research paper will typically be your literature review . Remember all that literature you worked through earlier? Well, this is where you’ll present your interpretation of all that content . You’ll do this by writing about recent trends, developments, and arguments within the literature – but more specifically, those that are relevant to your research question . The literature review can oftentimes seem a little daunting, even to seasoned researchers, so be sure to check out our extensive collection of literature review content here .

With the introduction and lit review out of the way, the next section of your paper is the research methodology . In a nutshell, the methodology section should describe to your reader what you did (beyond just reviewing the existing literature) to answer your research question. For example, what data did you collect, how did you collect that data, how did you analyse that data and so on? For each choice, you’ll also need to justify why you chose to do it that way, and what the strengths and weaknesses of your approach were.

Now, it’s worth mentioning that for some research papers, this aspect of the project may be a lot simpler . For example, you may only need to draw on secondary sources (in other words, existing data sets). In some cases, you may just be asked to draw your conclusions from the literature search itself (in other words, there may be no data analysis at all). But, if you are required to collect and analyse data, you’ll need to pay a lot of attention to the methodology section. The video below provides an example of what the methodology section might look like.

By this stage of your paper, you will have explained what your research question is, what the existing literature has to say about that question, and how you analysed additional data to try to answer your question. So, the natural next step is to present your analysis of that data . This section is usually called the “results” or “analysis” section and this is where you’ll showcase your findings.

Depending on your school’s requirements, you may need to present and interpret the data in one section – or you might split the presentation and the interpretation into two sections. In the latter case, your “results” section will just describe the data, and the “discussion” is where you’ll interpret that data and explicitly link your analysis back to your research question. If you’re not sure which approach to take, check in with your professor or take a look at past papers to see what the norms are for your programme.

Alright – once you’ve presented and discussed your results, it’s time to wrap it up . This usually takes the form of the “ conclusion ” section. In the conclusion, you’ll need to highlight the key takeaways from your study and close the loop by explicitly answering your research question. Again, the exact requirements here will vary depending on your programme (and you may not even need a conclusion section at all) – so be sure to check with your professor if you’re unsure.

Step 3: Write and refine

Finally, it’s time to get writing. All too often though, students hit a brick wall right about here… So, how do you avoid this happening to you?

Well, there’s a lot to be said when it comes to writing a research paper (or any sort of academic piece), but we’ll share three practical tips to help you get started.

First and foremost , it’s essential to approach your writing as an iterative process. In other words, you need to start with a really messy first draft and then polish it over multiple rounds of editing. Don’t waste your time trying to write a perfect research paper in one go. Instead, take the pressure off yourself by adopting an iterative approach.

Secondly , it’s important to always lean towards critical writing , rather than descriptive writing. What does this mean? Well, at the simplest level, descriptive writing focuses on the “ what ”, while critical writing digs into the “ so what ” – in other words, the implications . If you’re not familiar with these two types of writing, don’t worry! You can find a plain-language explanation here.

Last but not least, you’ll need to get your referencing right. Specifically, you’ll need to provide credible, correctly formatted citations for the statements you make. We see students making referencing mistakes all the time and it costs them dearly. The good news is that you can easily avoid this by using a simple reference manager . If you don’t have one, check out our video about Mendeley, an easy (and free) reference management tool that you can start using today.

Recap: Key Takeaways

We’ve covered a lot of ground here. To recap, the three steps to writing a high-quality research paper are:

To choose a research question and review the literature
To plan your paper structure and draft an outline
To take an iterative approach to writing, focusing on critical writing and strong referencing

Remember, this is just a b ig-picture overview of the research paper development process and there’s a lot more nuance to unpack. So, be sure to grab a copy of our free research paper template to learn more about how to write a research paper.

You Might Also Like:

Can you help me with a full paper template for this Abstract:

Background: Energy and sports drinks have gained popularity among diverse demographic groups, including adolescents, athletes, workers, and college students. While often used interchangeably, these beverages serve distinct purposes, with energy drinks aiming to boost energy and cognitive performance, and sports drinks designed to prevent dehydration and replenish electrolytes and carbohydrates lost during physical exertion.

Objective: To assess the nutritional quality of energy and sports drinks in Egypt.

Material and Methods: A cross-sectional study assessed the nutrient contents, including energy, sugar, electrolytes, vitamins, and caffeine, of sports and energy drinks available in major supermarkets in Cairo, Alexandria, and Giza, Egypt. Data collection involved photographing all relevant product labels and recording nutritional information. Descriptive statistics and appropriate statistical tests were employed to analyze and compare the nutritional values of energy and sports drinks.

Results: The study analyzed 38 sports drinks and 42 energy drinks. Sports drinks were significantly more expensive than energy drinks, with higher net content and elevated magnesium, potassium, and vitamin C. Energy drinks contained higher concentrations of caffeine, sugars, and vitamins B2, B3, and B6.

Conclusion: Significant nutritional differences exist between sports and energy drinks, reflecting their intended uses. However, these beverages’ high sugar content and calorie loads raise health concerns. Proper labeling, public awareness, and responsible marketing are essential to guide safe consumption practices in Egypt.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Print Friendly

You are using an outdated browser . Please upgrade your browser today !

How to Write and Publish a Research Paper in 7 Steps

What comes next after you're done with your research? Publishing the results in a journal of course! We tell you how to present your work in the best way possible.

This post is part of a series, which serves to provide hands-on information and resources for authors and editors.

Things have gotten busy in scholarly publishing: These days, a new article gets published in the 50,000 most important peer-reviewed journals every few seconds, while each one takes on average 40 minutes to read. Hundreds of thousands of papers reach the desks of editors and reviewers worldwide each year and 50% of all submissions end up rejected at some stage.

In a nutshell: there is a lot of competition, and the people who decide upon the fate of your manuscript are short on time and overworked. But there are ways to make their lives a little easier and improve your own chances of getting your work published!

Well, it may seem obvious, but before submitting an academic paper, always make sure that it is an excellent reflection of the research you have done and that you present it in the most professional way possible. Incomplete or poorly presented manuscripts can create a great deal of frustration and annoyance for editors who probably won’t even bother wasting the time of the reviewers!

This post will discuss 7 steps to the successful publication of your research paper:

Check whether your research is publication-ready
Choose an article type
Choose a journal
Construct your paper
Decide the order of authors
Check and double-check
Submit your paper

1. Check Whether Your Research Is Publication-Ready

Should you publish your research at all?

If your work holds academic value – of course – a well-written scholarly article could open doors to your research community. However, if you are not yet sure, whether your research is ready for publication, here are some key questions to ask yourself depending on your field of expertise:

Have you done or found something new and interesting? Something unique?
Is the work directly related to a current hot topic?
Have you checked the latest results or research in the field?
Have you provided solutions to any difficult problems?
Have the findings been verified?
Have the appropriate controls been performed if required?
Are your findings comprehensive?

If the answers to all relevant questions are “yes”, you need to prepare a good, strong manuscript. Remember, a research paper is only useful if it is clearly understood, reproducible and if it is read and used .

2. Choose An Article Type

The first step is to determine which type of paper is most appropriate for your work and what you want to achieve. The following list contains the most important, usually peer-reviewed article types in the natural sciences:

Full original research papers disseminate completed research findings. On average this type of paper is 8-10 pages long, contains five figures, and 25-30 references. Full original research papers are an important part of the process when developing your career.

Review papers present a critical synthesis of a specific research topic. These papers are usually much longer than original papers and will contain numerous references. More often than not, they will be commissioned by journal editors. Reviews present an excellent way to solidify your research career.

Letters, Rapid or Short Communications are often published for the quick and early communication of significant and original advances. They are much shorter than full articles and usually limited in length by the journal. Journals specifically dedicated to short communications or letters are also published in some fields. In these the authors can present short preliminary findings before developing a full-length paper.

3. Choose a Journal

Are you looking for the right place to publish your paper? Find out here whether a De Gruyter journal might be the right fit.

Submit to journals that you already read, that you have a good feel for. If you do so, you will have a better appreciation of both its culture and the requirements of the editors and reviewers.

Other factors to consider are:

The specific subject area
The aims and scope of the journal
The type of manuscript you have written
The significance of your work
The reputation of the journal
The reputation of the editors within the community
The editorial/review and production speeds of the journal
The community served by the journal
The coverage and distribution
The accessibility ( open access vs. closed access)

4. Construct Your Paper

Each element of a paper has its purpose, so you should make these sections easy to index and search.

Don’t forget that requirements can differ highly per publication, so always make sure to apply a journal’s specific instructions – or guide – for authors to your manuscript, even to the first draft (text layout, paper citation, nomenclature, figures and table, etc.) It will save you time, and the editor’s.

Also, even in these days of Internet-based publishing, space is still at a premium, so be as concise as possible. As a good journalist would say: “Never use three words when one will do!”

Let’s look at the typical structure of a full research paper, but bear in mind certain subject disciplines may have their own specific requirements so check the instructions for authors on the journal’s home page.

4.1 The Title

It’s important to use the title to tell the reader what your paper is all about! You want to attract their attention, a bit like a newspaper headline does. Be specific and to the point. Keep it informative and concise, and avoid jargon and abbreviations (unless they are universally recognized like DNA, for example).

4.2 The Abstract

This could be termed as the “advertisement” for your article. Make it interesting and easily understood without the reader having to read the whole article. Be accurate and specific, and keep it as brief and concise as possible. Some journals (particularly in the medical fields) will ask you to structure the abstract in distinct, labeled sections, which makes it even more accessible.

A clear abstract will influence whether or not your work is considered and whether an editor should invest more time on it or send it for review.

4.3 Keywords

Keywords are used by abstracting and indexing services, such as PubMed and Web of Science. They are the labels of your manuscript, which make it “searchable” online by other researchers.

Include words or phrases (usually 4-8) that are closely related to your topic but not “too niche” for anyone to find them. Make sure to only use established abbreviations. Think about what scientific terms and its variations your potential readers are likely to use and search for. You can also do a test run of your selected keywords in one of the common academic search engines. Do similar articles to your own appear? Yes? Then that’s a good sign.

4.4 Introduction

This first part of the main text should introduce the problem, as well as any existing solutions you are aware of and the main limitations. Also, state what you hope to achieve with your research.

Do not confuse the introduction with the results, discussion or conclusion.

4.5 Methods

Every research article should include a detailed Methods section (also referred to as “Materials and Methods”) to provide the reader with enough information to be able to judge whether the study is valid and reproducible.

Include detailed information so that a knowledgeable reader can reproduce the experiment. However, use references and supplementary materials to indicate previously published procedures.

4.6 Results

In this section, you will present the essential or primary results of your study. To display them in a comprehensible way, you should use subheadings as well as illustrations such as figures, graphs, tables and photos, as appropriate.

4.7 Discussion

Here you should tell your readers what the results mean .

Do state how the results relate to the study’s aims and hypotheses and how the findings relate to those of other studies. Explain all possible interpretations of your findings and the study’s limitations.

Do not make “grand statements” that are not supported by the data. Also, do not introduce any new results or terms. Moreover, do not ignore work that conflicts or disagrees with your findings. Instead …

Be brave! Address conflicting study results and convince the reader you are the one who is correct.

4.8 Conclusion

Your conclusion isn’t just a summary of what you’ve already written. It should take your paper one step further and answer any unresolved questions.

Sum up what you have shown in your study and indicate possible applications and extensions. The main question your conclusion should answer is: What do my results mean for the research field and my community?

4.9 Acknowledgments and Ethical Statements

It is extremely important to acknowledge anyone who has helped you with your paper, including researchers who supplied materials or reagents (e.g. vectors or antibodies); and anyone who helped with the writing or English, or offered critical comments about the content.

Learn more about academic integrity in our blog post “Scholarly Publication Ethics: 4 Common Mistakes You Want To Avoid” .

Remember to state why people have been acknowledged and ask their permission . Ensure that you acknowledge sources of funding, including any grant or reference numbers.

Furthermore, if you have worked with animals or humans, you need to include information about the ethical approval of your study and, if applicable, whether informed consent was given. Also, state whether you have any competing interests regarding the study (e.g. because of financial or personal relationships.)

4.10 References

The end is in sight, but don’t relax just yet!

De facto, there are often more mistakes in the references than in any other part of the manuscript. It is also one of the most annoying and time-consuming problems for editors.

Remember to cite the main scientific publications on which your work is based. But do not inflate the manuscript with too many references. Avoid excessive – and especially unnecessary – self-citations. Also, avoid excessive citations of publications from the same institute or region.

5. Decide the Order of Authors

In the sciences, the most common way to order the names of the authors is by relative contribution.

Generally, the first author conducts and/or supervises the data analysis and the proper presentation and interpretation of the results. They put the paper together and usually submit the paper to the journal.

Co-authors make intellectual contributions to the data analysis and contribute to data interpretation. They review each paper draft. All of them must be able to present the paper and its results, as well as to defend the implications and discuss study limitations.

Do not leave out authors who should be included or add “gift authors”, i.e. authors who did not contribute significantly.

6. Check and Double-Check

As a final step before submission, ask colleagues to read your work and be constructively critical .

Make sure that the paper is appropriate for the journal – take a last look at their aims and scope. Check if all of the requirements in the instructions for authors are met.

Ensure that the cited literature is balanced. Are the aims, purpose and significance of the results clear?

Conduct a final check for language, either by a native English speaker or an editing service.

7. Submit Your Paper

When you and your co-authors have double-, triple-, quadruple-checked the manuscript: submit it via e-mail or online submission system. Along with your manuscript, submit a cover letter, which highlights the reasons why your paper would appeal to the journal and which ensures that you have received approval of all authors for submission.

It is up to the editors and the peer-reviewers now to provide you with their (ideally constructive and helpful) comments and feedback. Time to take a breather!

If the paper gets rejected, do not despair – it happens to literally everybody. If the journal suggests major or minor revisions, take the chance to provide a thorough response and make improvements as you see fit. If the paper gets accepted, congrats!

It’s now time to get writing and share your hard work – good luck!

If you are interested, check out this related blog post

[Title Image by Nick Morrison via Unsplash]

David Sleeman

David Sleeman worked as Senior Journals Manager in the field of Physical Sciences at De Gruyter.

You might also be interested in

Academia & Publishing

Library Community Gives Back: 2023 Webinar Speakers’ Charity Picks

From error to excellence: embracing mistakes in library practice, the impact of transformative agreements on scholarly publishing, visit our shop.

De Gruyter publishes over 1,300 new book titles each year and more than 750 journals in the humanities, social sciences, medicine, mathematics, engineering, computer sciences, natural sciences, and law.

Pin It on Pinterest

SpringerLink shop

How to publish an article? – Step by step

If you plan to submit an article to one of our journals, or have any questions during the publication process, this helpdesk will guide you through manuscript submission, production and the services you can expect after your article’s publication.

1. Before you start

The following topics will be important during the early stages of writing your article.

Publishing Ethics
Open Access
Impact Factor
Rights, permissions and licensing
Copyright and plagiarism

2. Turning your manuscript into an article

Preparation, publication.

- Find the right journal for your manuscript

- The Springer Journal Selector

- Manuscript preparation (reference styles, artwork guidelines, etc.)

3. After publication

If your article has been published, the following topics are important for you:

Abstracting & Indexing
Online access to my article
Citation Alert
Book discounts
Marketing to worldwide audiences

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
J Med Libr Assoc
v.103(2); 2015 Apr

How to write an original research paper (and get it published)

The purpose of the Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA) is more than just archiving data from librarian research. Our goal is to present research findings to end users in the most useful way. The “Knowledge Transfer” model, in its simplest form, has three components: creating the knowledge (doing the research), translating and transferring it to the user, and incorporating the knowledge into use. The JMLA is in the middle part, transferring and translating to the user. We, the JMLA, must obtain the information and knowledge from researchers and then work with them to present it in the most useable form. That means the information must be in a standard acceptable format and be easily readable.

There is a standard, preferred way to write an original research paper. For format, we follow the IMRAD structure. The acronym, IMRAD, stands for I ntroduction, M ethods, R esults A nd D iscussion. IMRAD has dominated academic, scientific, and public health journals since the second half of the twentieth century. It is recommended in the “Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals” [ 1 ]. The IMRAD structure helps to eliminate unnecessary detail and allows relevant information to be presented clearly in a logical sequence [ 2 , 3 ].

Here are descriptions of the IMRAD sections, along with our comments and suggestions. If you use this guide for submission to another journal, be sure to check the publisher's prescribed formats.

The Introduction sets the stage for your presentation. It has three parts: what is known, what is unknown, and what your burning question, hypothesis, or aim is. Keep this section short, and write for a general audience (clear, concise, and as nontechnical as you can be). How would you explain to a distant colleague why and how you did the study? Take your readers through the three steps ending with your specific question. Emphasize how your study fills in the gaps (the unknown), and explicitly state your research question. Do not answer the research question. Remember to leave details, descriptions, speculations, and criticisms of other studies for the Discussion .

The Methods section gives a clear overview of what you did. Give enough information that your readers can evaluate the persuasiveness of your study. Describe the steps you took, as in a recipe, but be wary of too much detail. If you are doing qualitative research, explain how you picked your subjects to be representative.

You may want to break it into smaller sections with subheadings, for example, context: when, where, authority or approval, sample selection, data collection (how), follow-up, method of analysis. Cite a reference for commonly used methods or previously used methods rather than explaining all the details. Flow diagrams and tables can simplify explanations of methods.

You may use first person voice when describing your methods.

The Results section summarizes what the data show. Point out relationships, and describe trends. Avoid simply repeating the numbers that are already available in the tables and figures. Data should be restricted to tables as much as possible. Be the friendly narrator, and summarize the tables; do not write the data again in the text. For example, if you had a demographic table with a row of ages, and age was not significantly different among groups, your text could say, “The median age of all subjects was 47 years. There was no significant difference between groups (Table).” This is preferable to, “The mean age of group 1 was 48.6 (7.5) years and group 2 was 46.3 (5.8) years, a nonsignificant difference.”

Break the Results section into subsections, with headings if needed. Complement the information that is already in the tables and figures. And remember to repeat and highlight in the text only the most important numbers. Use the active voice in the Results section, and make it lively. Information about what you did belongs in the Methods section, not here. And reserve comments on the meaning of your results for the Discussion section.

Other tips to help you with the Results section:

▪ If you need to cite the number in the text (not just in the table), and the total in the group is less than 50, do not include percentage. Write “7 of 34,” not “7 (21%).”
▪ Do not forget, if you have multiple comparisons, you probably need adjustment. Ask your statistician if you are not sure.

The Discussion section gives you the most freedom. Most authors begin with a brief reiteration of what they did. Every author should restate the key findings and answer the question noted in the Introduction . Focus on what your data prove, not what you hoped they would prove. Start with “We found that…” (or something similar), and explain what the data mean. Anticipate your readers' questions, and explain why your results are of interest.

Then compare your results with other people's results. This is where that literature review you did comes in handy. Discuss how your findings support or challenge other studies.

You do not need every article from your literature review listed in your paper or reference list, unless you are writing a narrative review or systematic review. Your manuscript is not intended to be an exhaustive review of the topic. Do not provide a long review of the literature—discuss only previous work that is directly pertinent to your findings. Contrary to some beliefs, having a long list in the References section does not mean the paper is more scholarly; it does suggest the author is trying to look scholarly. (If your article is a systematic review, the citation list might be long.)

Do not overreach your results. Finding a perceived knowledge need, for example, does not necessarily mean that library colleges must immediately overhaul their curricula and that it will improve health care and save lives and money (unless your data show that, in which case give us a chance to publish it!). You can say “has the potential to,” though.

Always note limitations that matter, not generic limitations.

Point out unanswered questions and future directions. Give the big-picture implications of your findings, and tell your readers why they should care. End with the main findings of your study, and do not travel too far from your data. Remember to give a final take-home message along with implications.

Notice that this format does not include a separate Conclusion section. The conclusion is built into the Discussion . For example, here is the last paragraph of the Discussion section in a recent NEJM article:

In conclusion, our trial did not show the hypothesized benefit [of the intervention] in patients…who were at high risk for complications.

However, a separate Conclusion section is usually appropriate for abstracts. Systematic reviews should have an Interpretation section.

Other parts of your research paper independent of IMRAD include:

Tables and figures are the foundation for your story. They are the story. Editors, reviewers, and readers usually look at titles, abstracts, and tables and figures first. Figures and tables should stand alone and tell a complete story. Your readers should not need to refer back to the main text.

Abstracts can be free-form or structured with subheadings. Always follow the format indicated by the publisher; the JMLA uses structured abstracts for research articles. The main parts of an abstract may include introduction (background, question or hypothesis), methods, results, conclusions, and implications. So begin your abstract with the background of your study, followed by the question asked. Next, give a quick summary of the methods used in your study. Key results come next with limited raw data if any, followed by the conclusion, which answers the questions asked (the take-home message).

▪ Recommended order for writing a manuscript is first to start with your tables and figures. They tell your story. You can write your sections in any order. Many recommend writing your Result s, followed by Methods, Introduction, Discussion , and Abstract.
▪ We suggest authors read their manuscripts out loud to a group of librarians. Look for evidence of MEGO, “My Eyes Glaze Over” (attributed to Washington Post publisher Ben Bradlee and others). Modify as necessary.
▪ Every single paragraph should be lucid.
▪ Every paragraph should answer your readers' question, “Why are you telling me this?”

The JMLA welcomes all sizes of research manuscripts: definitive studies, preliminary studies, critical descriptive studies, and test-of-concept studies. We welcome brief reports and research letters. But the JMLA is more than a research journal. We also welcome case studies, commentaries, letters to the editor about articles, and subject reviews.

Home » Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Paper

Definition:

Research Paper is a written document that presents the author’s original research, analysis, and interpretation of a specific topic or issue.

It is typically based on Empirical Evidence, and may involve qualitative or quantitative research methods, or a combination of both. The purpose of a research paper is to contribute new knowledge or insights to a particular field of study, and to demonstrate the author’s understanding of the existing literature and theories related to the topic.

Structure of Research Paper

The structure of a research paper typically follows a standard format, consisting of several sections that convey specific information about the research study. The following is a detailed explanation of the structure of a research paper:

The title page contains the title of the paper, the name(s) of the author(s), and the affiliation(s) of the author(s). It also includes the date of submission and possibly, the name of the journal or conference where the paper is to be published.

The abstract is a brief summary of the research paper, typically ranging from 100 to 250 words. It should include the research question, the methods used, the key findings, and the implications of the results. The abstract should be written in a concise and clear manner to allow readers to quickly grasp the essence of the research.

Introduction

The introduction section of a research paper provides background information about the research problem, the research question, and the research objectives. It also outlines the significance of the research, the research gap that it aims to fill, and the approach taken to address the research question. Finally, the introduction section ends with a clear statement of the research hypothesis or research question.

Literature Review

The literature review section of a research paper provides an overview of the existing literature on the topic of study. It includes a critical analysis and synthesis of the literature, highlighting the key concepts, themes, and debates. The literature review should also demonstrate the research gap and how the current study seeks to address it.

The methods section of a research paper describes the research design, the sample selection, the data collection and analysis procedures, and the statistical methods used to analyze the data. This section should provide sufficient detail for other researchers to replicate the study.

The results section presents the findings of the research, using tables, graphs, and figures to illustrate the data. The findings should be presented in a clear and concise manner, with reference to the research question and hypothesis.

The discussion section of a research paper interprets the findings and discusses their implications for the research question, the literature review, and the field of study. It should also address the limitations of the study and suggest future research directions.

The conclusion section summarizes the main findings of the study, restates the research question and hypothesis, and provides a final reflection on the significance of the research.

The references section provides a list of all the sources cited in the paper, following a specific citation style such as APA, MLA or Chicago.

How to Write Research Paper

You can write Research Paper by the following guide:

Choose a Topic: The first step is to select a topic that interests you and is relevant to your field of study. Brainstorm ideas and narrow down to a research question that is specific and researchable.
Conduct a Literature Review: The literature review helps you identify the gap in the existing research and provides a basis for your research question. It also helps you to develop a theoretical framework and research hypothesis.
Develop a Thesis Statement : The thesis statement is the main argument of your research paper. It should be clear, concise and specific to your research question.
Plan your Research: Develop a research plan that outlines the methods, data sources, and data analysis procedures. This will help you to collect and analyze data effectively.
Collect and Analyze Data: Collect data using various methods such as surveys, interviews, observations, or experiments. Analyze data using statistical tools or other qualitative methods.
Organize your Paper : Organize your paper into sections such as Introduction, Literature Review, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion. Ensure that each section is coherent and follows a logical flow.
Write your Paper : Start by writing the introduction, followed by the literature review, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. Ensure that your writing is clear, concise, and follows the required formatting and citation styles.
Edit and Proofread your Paper: Review your paper for grammar and spelling errors, and ensure that it is well-structured and easy to read. Ask someone else to review your paper to get feedback and suggestions for improvement.
Cite your Sources: Ensure that you properly cite all sources used in your research paper. This is essential for giving credit to the original authors and avoiding plagiarism.

Research Paper Example

Note : The below example research paper is for illustrative purposes only and is not an actual research paper. Actual research papers may have different structures, contents, and formats depending on the field of study, research question, data collection and analysis methods, and other factors. Students should always consult with their professors or supervisors for specific guidelines and expectations for their research papers.

Research Paper Example sample for Students:

Title: The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health among Young Adults

Abstract: This study aims to investigate the impact of social media use on the mental health of young adults. A literature review was conducted to examine the existing research on the topic. A survey was then administered to 200 university students to collect data on their social media use, mental health status, and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. The results showed that social media use is positively associated with depression, anxiety, and stress. The study also found that social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) are significant predictors of mental health problems among young adults.

Introduction: Social media has become an integral part of modern life, particularly among young adults. While social media has many benefits, including increased communication and social connectivity, it has also been associated with negative outcomes, such as addiction, cyberbullying, and mental health problems. This study aims to investigate the impact of social media use on the mental health of young adults.

Literature Review: The literature review highlights the existing research on the impact of social media use on mental health. The review shows that social media use is associated with depression, anxiety, stress, and other mental health problems. The review also identifies the factors that contribute to the negative impact of social media, including social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO.

Methods : A survey was administered to 200 university students to collect data on their social media use, mental health status, and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. The survey included questions on social media use, mental health status (measured using the DASS-21), and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and regression analysis.

Results : The results showed that social media use is positively associated with depression, anxiety, and stress. The study also found that social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO are significant predictors of mental health problems among young adults.

Discussion : The study’s findings suggest that social media use has a negative impact on the mental health of young adults. The study highlights the need for interventions that address the factors contributing to the negative impact of social media, such as social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO.

Conclusion : In conclusion, social media use has a significant impact on the mental health of young adults. The study’s findings underscore the need for interventions that promote healthy social media use and address the negative outcomes associated with social media use. Future research can explore the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing the negative impact of social media on mental health. Additionally, longitudinal studies can investigate the long-term effects of social media use on mental health.

Limitations : The study has some limitations, including the use of self-report measures and a cross-sectional design. The use of self-report measures may result in biased responses, and a cross-sectional design limits the ability to establish causality.

Implications: The study’s findings have implications for mental health professionals, educators, and policymakers. Mental health professionals can use the findings to develop interventions that address the negative impact of social media use on mental health. Educators can incorporate social media literacy into their curriculum to promote healthy social media use among young adults. Policymakers can use the findings to develop policies that protect young adults from the negative outcomes associated with social media use.

References :

Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2019). Associations between screen time and lower psychological well-being among children and adolescents: Evidence from a population-based study. Preventive medicine reports, 15, 100918.
Primack, B. A., Shensa, A., Escobar-Viera, C. G., Barrett, E. L., Sidani, J. E., Colditz, J. B., … & James, A. E. (2017). Use of multiple social media platforms and symptoms of depression and anxiety: A nationally-representative study among US young adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 1-9.
Van der Meer, T. G., & Verhoeven, J. W. (2017). Social media and its impact on academic performance of students. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 16, 383-398.

Appendix : The survey used in this study is provided below.

Social Media and Mental Health Survey

How often do you use social media per day?
Less than 30 minutes
30 minutes to 1 hour
1 to 2 hours
2 to 4 hours
More than 4 hours
Which social media platforms do you use?
Others (Please specify)
How often do you experience the following on social media?
Social comparison (comparing yourself to others)
Cyberbullying
Fear of Missing Out (FOMO)
Have you ever experienced any of the following mental health problems in the past month?
Do you think social media use has a positive or negative impact on your mental health?
Very positive
Somewhat positive
Somewhat negative
Very negative
In your opinion, which factors contribute to the negative impact of social media on mental health?
Social comparison
In your opinion, what interventions could be effective in reducing the negative impact of social media on mental health?
Education on healthy social media use
Counseling for mental health problems caused by social media
Social media detox programs
Regulation of social media use

Thank you for your participation!

Applications of Research Paper

Research papers have several applications in various fields, including:

Advancing knowledge: Research papers contribute to the advancement of knowledge by generating new insights, theories, and findings that can inform future research and practice. They help to answer important questions, clarify existing knowledge, and identify areas that require further investigation.
Informing policy: Research papers can inform policy decisions by providing evidence-based recommendations for policymakers. They can help to identify gaps in current policies, evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, and inform the development of new policies and regulations.
Improving practice: Research papers can improve practice by providing evidence-based guidance for professionals in various fields, including medicine, education, business, and psychology. They can inform the development of best practices, guidelines, and standards of care that can improve outcomes for individuals and organizations.
Educating students : Research papers are often used as teaching tools in universities and colleges to educate students about research methods, data analysis, and academic writing. They help students to develop critical thinking skills, research skills, and communication skills that are essential for success in many careers.
Fostering collaboration: Research papers can foster collaboration among researchers, practitioners, and policymakers by providing a platform for sharing knowledge and ideas. They can facilitate interdisciplinary collaborations and partnerships that can lead to innovative solutions to complex problems.

When to Write Research Paper

Research papers are typically written when a person has completed a research project or when they have conducted a study and have obtained data or findings that they want to share with the academic or professional community. Research papers are usually written in academic settings, such as universities, but they can also be written in professional settings, such as research organizations, government agencies, or private companies.

Here are some common situations where a person might need to write a research paper:

For academic purposes: Students in universities and colleges are often required to write research papers as part of their coursework, particularly in the social sciences, natural sciences, and humanities. Writing research papers helps students to develop research skills, critical thinking skills, and academic writing skills.
For publication: Researchers often write research papers to publish their findings in academic journals or to present their work at academic conferences. Publishing research papers is an important way to disseminate research findings to the academic community and to establish oneself as an expert in a particular field.
To inform policy or practice : Researchers may write research papers to inform policy decisions or to improve practice in various fields. Research findings can be used to inform the development of policies, guidelines, and best practices that can improve outcomes for individuals and organizations.
To share new insights or ideas: Researchers may write research papers to share new insights or ideas with the academic or professional community. They may present new theories, propose new research methods, or challenge existing paradigms in their field.

Purpose of Research Paper

The purpose of a research paper is to present the results of a study or investigation in a clear, concise, and structured manner. Research papers are written to communicate new knowledge, ideas, or findings to a specific audience, such as researchers, scholars, practitioners, or policymakers. The primary purposes of a research paper are:

To contribute to the body of knowledge : Research papers aim to add new knowledge or insights to a particular field or discipline. They do this by reporting the results of empirical studies, reviewing and synthesizing existing literature, proposing new theories, or providing new perspectives on a topic.
To inform or persuade: Research papers are written to inform or persuade the reader about a particular issue, topic, or phenomenon. They present evidence and arguments to support their claims and seek to persuade the reader of the validity of their findings or recommendations.
To advance the field: Research papers seek to advance the field or discipline by identifying gaps in knowledge, proposing new research questions or approaches, or challenging existing assumptions or paradigms. They aim to contribute to ongoing debates and discussions within a field and to stimulate further research and inquiry.
To demonstrate research skills: Research papers demonstrate the author’s research skills, including their ability to design and conduct a study, collect and analyze data, and interpret and communicate findings. They also demonstrate the author’s ability to critically evaluate existing literature, synthesize information from multiple sources, and write in a clear and structured manner.

Characteristics of Research Paper

Research papers have several characteristics that distinguish them from other forms of academic or professional writing. Here are some common characteristics of research papers:

Evidence-based: Research papers are based on empirical evidence, which is collected through rigorous research methods such as experiments, surveys, observations, or interviews. They rely on objective data and facts to support their claims and conclusions.
Structured and organized: Research papers have a clear and logical structure, with sections such as introduction, literature review, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. They are organized in a way that helps the reader to follow the argument and understand the findings.
Formal and objective: Research papers are written in a formal and objective tone, with an emphasis on clarity, precision, and accuracy. They avoid subjective language or personal opinions and instead rely on objective data and analysis to support their arguments.
Citations and references: Research papers include citations and references to acknowledge the sources of information and ideas used in the paper. They use a specific citation style, such as APA, MLA, or Chicago, to ensure consistency and accuracy.
Peer-reviewed: Research papers are often peer-reviewed, which means they are evaluated by other experts in the field before they are published. Peer-review ensures that the research is of high quality, meets ethical standards, and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the field.
Objective and unbiased: Research papers strive to be objective and unbiased in their presentation of the findings. They avoid personal biases or preconceptions and instead rely on the data and analysis to draw conclusions.

Advantages of Research Paper

Research papers have many advantages, both for the individual researcher and for the broader academic and professional community. Here are some advantages of research papers:

Contribution to knowledge: Research papers contribute to the body of knowledge in a particular field or discipline. They add new information, insights, and perspectives to existing literature and help advance the understanding of a particular phenomenon or issue.
Opportunity for intellectual growth: Research papers provide an opportunity for intellectual growth for the researcher. They require critical thinking, problem-solving, and creativity, which can help develop the researcher’s skills and knowledge.
Career advancement: Research papers can help advance the researcher’s career by demonstrating their expertise and contributions to the field. They can also lead to new research opportunities, collaborations, and funding.
Academic recognition: Research papers can lead to academic recognition in the form of awards, grants, or invitations to speak at conferences or events. They can also contribute to the researcher’s reputation and standing in the field.
Impact on policy and practice: Research papers can have a significant impact on policy and practice. They can inform policy decisions, guide practice, and lead to changes in laws, regulations, or procedures.
Advancement of society: Research papers can contribute to the advancement of society by addressing important issues, identifying solutions to problems, and promoting social justice and equality.

Limitations of Research Paper

Research papers also have some limitations that should be considered when interpreting their findings or implications. Here are some common limitations of research papers:

Limited generalizability: Research findings may not be generalizable to other populations, settings, or contexts. Studies often use specific samples or conditions that may not reflect the broader population or real-world situations.
Potential for bias : Research papers may be biased due to factors such as sample selection, measurement errors, or researcher biases. It is important to evaluate the quality of the research design and methods used to ensure that the findings are valid and reliable.
Ethical concerns: Research papers may raise ethical concerns, such as the use of vulnerable populations or invasive procedures. Researchers must adhere to ethical guidelines and obtain informed consent from participants to ensure that the research is conducted in a responsible and respectful manner.
Limitations of methodology: Research papers may be limited by the methodology used to collect and analyze data. For example, certain research methods may not capture the complexity or nuance of a particular phenomenon, or may not be appropriate for certain research questions.
Publication bias: Research papers may be subject to publication bias, where positive or significant findings are more likely to be published than negative or non-significant findings. This can skew the overall findings of a particular area of research.
Time and resource constraints: Research papers may be limited by time and resource constraints, which can affect the quality and scope of the research. Researchers may not have access to certain data or resources, or may be unable to conduct long-term studies due to practical limitations.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

Research Contribution – Thesis Guide

How to Publish a Research Paper – Step by Step...

Limitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Problem – Examples, Types and Guide

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Future Research – Thesis Guide

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Research Paper

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

The Research Paper

There will come a time in most students' careers when they are assigned a research paper. Such an assignment often creates a great deal of unneeded anxiety in the student, which may result in procrastination and a feeling of confusion and inadequacy. This anxiety frequently stems from the fact that many students are unfamiliar and inexperienced with this genre of writing. Never fear—inexperience and unfamiliarity are situations you can change through practice! Writing a research paper is an essential aspect of academics and should not be avoided on account of one's anxiety. In fact, the process of writing a research paper can be one of the more rewarding experiences one may encounter in academics. What is more, many students will continue to do research throughout their careers, which is one of the reasons this topic is so important.

Becoming an experienced researcher and writer in any field or discipline takes a great deal of practice. There are few individuals for whom this process comes naturally. Remember, even the most seasoned academic veterans have had to learn how to write a research paper at some point in their career. Therefore, with diligence, organization, practice, a willingness to learn (and to make mistakes!), and, perhaps most important of all, patience, students will find that they can achieve great things through their research and writing.

The pages in this section cover the following topic areas related to the process of writing a research paper:

Genre - This section will provide an overview for understanding the difference between an analytical and argumentative research paper.
Choosing a Topic - This section will guide the student through the process of choosing topics, whether the topic be one that is assigned or one that the student chooses themselves.
Identifying an Audience - This section will help the student understand the often times confusing topic of audience by offering some basic guidelines for the process.
Where Do I Begin - This section concludes the handout by offering several links to resources at Purdue, and also provides an overview of the final stages of writing a research paper.

Changes in scientific publishing and possible impact on authors’ choice of journals

Lecture Text
Open access
Published: 29 May 2024
Volume 10 , article number 5 , ( 2024 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

Marco Seeber 1

212 Accesses

3 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Choosing the journal to which submit the results of a scientific work constitutes an important and challenging decision. It is especially crucial to correctly assess the reputation and prospects of the journal. This article describes and comments on the major changes that recently deeply modified the scientific publishing system and analyzes how they potentially undermine the reliability of the bibliometric indicators commonly used to assess a journal’s quality. In view of these elements, some key points are highlighted and discussed that can condition the choice of the journal. The article aims to be especially informative for future scientists navigating the complex world of the current scientific publishing system.

Editorial viewpoints of scientific publishing for early-career research scientists

Measuring the impact of scholarly journals in the humanities field, progressive and degenerative journals: on the growth and appraisal of knowledge in scholarly publishing.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

At some point in the development of a study, researchers need to decide to which journal they are going to submit the results of their work [ 1 ]. This is a delicate decision for junior scientists, although the recent, rapid evolution of the world of scientific publishing makes it difficult even for experienced researchers.

The choice of the journal serves two main purposes. The first one consists of the necessity to communicate the results to peers interested in the subject of the study. The second one aims at satisfying the need of a fair and adequate recognition for a scientific contribution.

The knowledge of the journal-based structure of scientific communication constitutes a basic compass for selecting the journal to which to submit a scientific contribution.

Horizontally, journals are diversified and specialized in specific disciplines, topics, and audiences. Vertically, journals are stratified in terms of prestige and reputation, which are supposed to be related to the novelty and validity of the research they publish [ 2 ]. In principle then, the authors of an article to be published should identify the journal based on these two dimensions, namely a journal read by scientists that can be interested in their results and with the best reputation possible.

What makes this seemingly simple decision actually complicated?

One problematic aspect is that the journal with the highest reputation may not be read by the audience that fits at best the subject of the research, or vice versa. For example, one may need to choose between a journal of medium reputation that very well meets the topic of the article and another one of better reputation, but less pertinent or more general in character. Moreover, reputation typically correlates with the rejection rate. A rejection implies revision, loss of time, and delayed publication; one should select a journal in which the article has realistic chances of being accepted, although assessing the chances of acceptance is not an easy matter.

However, the greatest challenge to choosing the appropriate journal derives from the recent evolution of the scientific publishing system. To make an accurate evaluation about the reputation of a journal and its future prospect, it is of pivotal importance to know and understand critically the basic economic mechanisms of the scientific publishing system. Major changes that unfolded in recent years not only disrupted the scientific publishing system, but also hampered the reliability and validity of the bibliometric indicators that are commonly used as proxies of journal’s reputation and quality. Their durability to future critical analysis is not so sure.

In this frame, it is relevant to consider the recent evolution of the scientific publishing market and to analyze a few data and trends, which are essential to help making an informed decision. Therefore, the next section will describe four major phases in scientific publishing business models and the relevant implications. The final section discusses criteria and good practices with respects to the choice of the journal, which is ultimately going to be a key decision for the long-term reputation of those who enter the scientific community.

Evolution in scientific publishing business models and relevant consequences

For more than a 200 years, scientific papers published in scientific journals have been a major avenue to make research results public [ 3 ]. In the more recent history of scientific publishing, we can identify four partially overlapping phases.

Print (until the mid-1990s)

In the “print phase” not only journals were printed, but all other main phases in the review and publication process were in a printed form [ 3 ]. This was a slow, costly, but also “thoughtful” process: given the burden of sending a printed article, authors tried to select the right journal with extreme care, editors selected the reviewers with similar attention, and the reviewers were strongly reluctant to refuse a review.

In this phase, the market of scientific publishing was fragmented: the largest for-profit publishers, known as the “big five,” Footnote 1 controlled about 20% of the market, and many small- and medium-size publishers were also present. The revenues of for-profit publishers derived from university and institutional libraries’ subscription fees for the right to access the journals’ content, according to the so-called subscription-based business model.

Digitalization and concentration (mid-1990s to mid-2000s)

Although many journals still propose a print version, digitalization and the internet made paper disappear in all the other phases of the review process and become less and less important even in the publication one. Digitalization and the internet progressively transformed scientific journals into digital goods, and digital goods have a cost of reproduction close to zero. This characteristic enabled larger publishers to offer many more journals to potential customers, e.g., university and institutional libraries, with any additional costs, outcompeting smaller scientific publishers and eventually acquiring them [ 4 ].

Figure 1 illustrates this cycle, a virtuous one for the largest for-profit publishers. As a result, a major wave of mergers and acquisitions has occurred since the mid-1990s, which in 10 years led to an oligopoly of the big five, controlling over 50% of the market [ 4 ].

Digitalization and the virtuous cycle for the largest for-profit publishers

Open access (mid-2000s–ongoing)

It is important to remark that the scientific publishing industry has one of the highest profit margins of any industry. In 2023, the profit margins of the largest scientific publishing companies were over 40%, which is more than the most profitable sector in the US economy, regional banking, with as a profit margin around 30% Footnote 2 [ 4 , 5 ].

Why is this sector so profitable? Consider a standard publishing company for magazines or newspapers that must pay the salary of the staff producing the articles and obtain revenues from readers in a competitive market and from advertisement. By comparison, scientific publishers do not pay the scientists writing the articles, acting also as editors and reviewers, while obtaining revenues from subscription fees and/or the authors’ publication fees (i.e., “APC” fee, see next). Profitability is also guaranteed by the fact that most journals often benefit from limited competition by occupying a specific niche and rank that provides a semi-monopolistic position. Figure 2 illustrates the business models in standard and scientific publishing.

Comparison of business models in standard and scientific publishing

The huge profits of the industry at the expense of the public purse provoked the outrage of librarians and academics since the late nineties [ 6 ]. Hence, while digitalization and the internet favored a virtuous cycle for the large publishers, they also enabled and encouraged the emergence of an open-science movement aiming at reducing barriers to knowledge through free access to scientific publications.

The growth of open access (OA) publishing has been staggering, and nowadays most articles are published as OA [ 7 ]. However, the label “open access” defines very different models. On the one hand, the open access movement pursued so-called green and diamond OA, which imply no fees for readers nor authors; on the other hand, the most successful models are by far gold and hybrid OA, which demand expensive fees paid by authors, according to the so-called author processing charge (APC) business model, sarcastically nicknamed the “author pays the cost” model. Figure 3 illustrates the different types of OA, according to four key traits, namely depending on the fact that (i) the content is free for authors and/or for readers, (ii) the articles undergo a peer review process, (ii) the authors retain the copyright, (iv) the authors do not retain the copyright.

Source: adapted from [ 8 ]

Open access model characteristics: one term for very different systems.

Even within the gold open access model we can identify different types of scientific publishers, as illustrated in Fig. 4 . Recently established scientific publishers most often obtain revenues exclusively through the gold OA model, including nonprofit publishers, such as the Public Library of Science, which edits PLOS One , and for-profit publishers such as MDPI and Frontiers. Instead, traditional publishers, including large for-profit publishers as well as nonprofit publishers owned by a learned society, Footnote 3 adopt the gold OA model as a complement to the subscription fees (so-called hybrid model), which may lead to the so-called double dipping problem, when the public purse must pay the publisher twice for the same article: via subscription and via open access fees.

Gold open access: for-profit and nonprofit publishers

Diversification (mid-2010s–ongoing)

More recently, several parallel processes have been observed.

A worrisome trend lies in the staggering growth of predatory journals and paper mills. Predatory journals follow the APC business model, requiring fees from authors, but do not conduct an adequate peer review or any peer review process at all [ 9 ]. The identification of predatory journals is not always straightforward, as they try to conceal their real nature behind a curtain of apparently legitimate practices [ 10 ], and they do that so effectively that even curated databases have been recently infiltrated [ 11 ].

Another threatening phenomenon consists of paper mills: companies that “fabricate” scientific articles and sell co-authorship once the articles have been accepted for publications [ 12 ]. A recent study examined the field of biomedicine and estimated that out of 1.3 million biomedical publications listed in Scimago in 2020, more than 300,000 were likely fake and that the percentage of fake articles from Russia, Turkey, China, Egypt, and India, was between 39% and 48% [ 13 ].

The most recent notable process in scientific publishing consists of Transformative Agreements (TA). In 2015, a white paper of the Max Planck Society argued that: “the money already invested in the research publishing system is sufficient to enable a transformation [to open access publishing] that will be sustainable for the future” [ 14 ]. Transformative agreements aim at tackling two main problems in scientific publishing—rising subscription fees to read the scholarly literature and rising APC fees to publish in the scholarly literature—by moving publishing away from subscription payments, toward fully open access publishing. TA is an umbrella term encompassing several kinds of contracts between institutional consortia and publishers that may include traditional subscription licenses and APC discounts or waivers covering a certain number of articles in hybrid or fully open journals. The major initial supporters of TA were the Max Planck Digital Library and cOAlition S , a consortium of national research agencies and funders from 12 European countries promoting OA publishing. The number of TAs has grown fast since the mid-2010s, especially in central and northern European countries, in part thanks to regulatory obligations to do so, such those enforced by cOAlition S . So far, however, there is little evidence that TAs are truly containing costs. A report to the US Congress critically assessed TA for accepting and strengthening the current costly and opaque market for journal subscriptions [ 15 ], and cOAlition S dropped the support to TA beyond 2024, concerned that sustained support would make this agreement a permanent fixture and risk of replicating the same trends that it was designed to alleviate. In addition, since much time and effort are needed for negotiation, many argued that TAs favor larger publishers, by pushing small publishers to partner with larger ones, and authors to publish on journals covered by these agreements.

Business models and their implications

At this point, it is important to highlight some key characteristics of the two main business models in the scientific publishing industry, and how these characteristics affect the behavior of authors, publishers, and journals’ editors.

In the traditional “subscription-based” business model, the revenues of the publishers derive from subscription fees paid by public librarie—typically university and institutional libraries. In this model the customer is the reader, and the reader’s goal is to access high-quality content. Therefore, if the publishers aim at increasing profits, they need to promote the quality of the journals. On their side, the editors of the journals are scientists, whose goal is to maximize their prestige and reputation, and they can achieve these goals by curating the quality of the content. In turn, this model creates an alignment of incentives towards quality and common interest in rigorous, selective peer review.

In the APC model, the revenues derive from authors who publish articles: in a way, the customer is the author itself. The authors’ goal is to publish, and the publishers’ profits depend on the volume of articles published: they both have a common interest in publishing articles in large numbers and in shortest times.

The different goals and interests for authors, editors, and publishers in the two business models is reflected in the journals’ acceptance rate, the turnaround time, i.e., the time elapsed from the submission of an article to its acceptance, special issues policies, and the journals’ growth rates. For example, the acceptance rate of journals owned from MDPI, the largest APC for-profit publisher, is two to three times higher than the acceptance rate of traditional publishers [ 16 ]. There are huge differences also regarding the turnaround time. Peer review is a time-consuming process, and the turnaround time in 2022 was estimated between 134 and 198 days on average for journals from the major traditional publishers and nonprofit OA publishers, which all experienced longer and longer turnaround times in recent years—among others, because of the increasing challenges in finding reviewers [ 17 ]. The picture is very different for journals owned by APC for-profit publishers, which display increasingly faster turnaround time, as evaluated for MDPI (37 days), Frontiers (72 days), and Hindawi (83 days) [ 16 ].

A major difference is also observed in the proportion of articles published via standard or special issues. Peer review in special issues can adhere to strict standards, and involve independent reviewers selected by the journal editors. In other cases, the peer review is managed by the guest editors, namely the scientists that promote the Special Issue, invite contributors, and very often publish themselves one or more articles in the Special Issue. In this latter situation, the special issues have pros and cons. On the one hand, from the journals’ point of view they kill two birds with one stone: they attract new submissions and reduce the costs by delegating the management of the peer review process to the guest editors. On the other hand, because of some intrinsic endogamy in the process, the peer review is often not so independent and rigorous as it is for standard submissions, thus entailing the risk of accepting below-average contributions. The extent of the use of special issues differs deeply among publishers, and in a way consistent with the respective goals. Special issue articles represent only a tiny fraction, namely below 5%, of the publications for traditional and nonprofit OA publishers’ journals. On the contrary, special issue publications represent the vast majority for the major for-profit APC publishers, in the order of 70–80% [ 16 ]. For example, in 2023, the International Journal of Molecular Sciences and Sustainability, i.e., the two largest MDPI journals, published each more than 3000 special issues, which means more than 9 per day. Footnote 4 Because of similar practices and traits, it is a debated question whether MDPI can be even considered as a predatory publisher [ 18 ].

Perhaps, the most remarkable difference between the two categories of journals consists in the different growth rates displayed in recent years, namely in the exponential growth of APC publishers compared with stable or slow growing trends for the other publishers. For example, MDPI grew from 17,000 publications in 2015 to 263,000 publications in 2022, becoming the second largest for-profit publisher in the world, surpassing Springer and second only to Elsevier. Such staggering growth is best illustrated by the complete reshuffling of the largest scientific journals that occurred in few years.

Figure 5 compares the 15 largest scientific journals by number of articles publishers in a year, respectively in 2010 and in 2022. In 2010, two of them (gray histograms in the figure) were nonprofit OA journals, including PLOS One , the most prolific journal, with 6700 articles published that year; the other 13 journals were subscription-based journals, 11 of which were owned by a learned society (striped histograms), and two by a for-profit publisher (black histograms). In 2022, all the 15 largest journals published more articles than the largest journal in 2010. All but three were gold open access journals controlled by for-profit publishers, of which ten were from fast growing APC publishers: MPDI (eight) and Frontiers (two).

Largest journals by number of articles published in 2010 and 2022—Source: Scopus-Scimago. Gray: nonprofit OA; striped: learned society, nonprofit, subscription/hybrid; black: for-profit subscription/hybrid; white: for-profit APC

A similar reshuffling has been observed also in the specific field of chemistry Footnote 5 : in 2010, all the journals were controlled by publishers following a subscription-based business model, ten of them being owned by learned societies, including the largest one—Acta Crystallographica Section E, with 4000 articles—and five being from for-profit subscription-based publishers. In 2022, only three journals are controlled by learned societies, and 12 from for-profit publishers; the three largest journals Footnote 6 were all controlled by MDPI, and published, respectively, 16,000 10,000 and 9000 articles.

There is, of course, a tension between the goals of an APC for-profit publisher, whose profit depends on the quantity of articles published, and the scientific editors, who aim at improving their own reputation via quality and selectivity. Moreover, while the subscription-based business model guarantees a stable source of revenues, regardless of the publishing volumes, the APC business model requires journals to maintain large publishing volumes. Hence, editors pursuing quality via selectivity hinder the publishers’ goals, so that in for-profit APC journals the editors are often less experienced academics, or even nonacademics.

In turn, the for-profit APC model seems to fit well Christensen’s definition of disruptive innovations, namely innovations that make it much simpler and affordable to own and use a product for people who, historically, did not have the skills to be in the market [ 19 , 20 ]. Footnote 7 In this case, people that were not skilled enough to publish in the traditional system, now can, by paying… Disruptive innovations typically start in marginal market segments, so that dominant organizations need time before being able to realize how important they are [ 19 ]. But in this case, they eventually did, as APC turned to be a much more profitable business model than subscriptions fees, becoming increasingly popular also among traditional publishers [ 21 ].

Signals to consider when selecting a journal

Going back to the key point of the present contribution, we should carefully select journals with a good reputation and that will not lose their reputation at any time. What signals of quality, reputation, and rigorous ethical standards should we then be aware of? And are there any alarm bells of dubious practices?

Determining a journal’s quality is not simple. First, whereas the reputation of a scientific journal used to be correlated with its age, i.e., the older the better reputed, in recent years prestigious publishers have established new journals at increasing pace. These journals convey contrasting reputational signals: a prestigious brand combined with a young age. Second, and arguably most importantly, bibliometric indicators—which are commonly used to determine a journal quality—have several pitfalls and are vulnerable to manipulation. Bibliometrics indicators are based on citations received by the articles of a journals; citations are considered a signal of an article’s importance and quality, i.e., a proxy of scientific impact. Especially in natural aciences, the journal impact factor (IF) is used to estimate the quality and prestige of a journal. The IF measures the average number of citations received by the articles published in the last 2 years (or 5 years, for the IF at 5 years). However, the IF has several limitations. Most importantly, it weights every citation in the same way, and does not take into consideration the characteristics of who is citing. This may be problematic in several regards. For example, it has been debated whether indicators of scientific impact should consider self-citations, namely citations received from articles of the same journals. Clarivate—the company that owns and manage the Web of Science , the most known dataset of scientific publications—does include journal self-citations for the computation of the journal impact factor (JIF). On the contrary, Scopus, arguably the second most known dataset of scientific publications, controlled by Elsevier—does not consider self-citations for the calculation of the Scimago journal rank (SJR). Scientific journals vary remarkably in the share of self-citations, which can make a big difference. For example, considering the top 20 citing journals of the International Journal of Molecular Sciences, the largest journal in chemistry, 32.5% were self-citations; for the Journal of the American Chemical Society it was 12.4%. Footnote 8 The IF also does not take into account which other journals are the main source of citations; for example, considering the top-20 citing journals, 70% of the citations for the International Journal of Molecular Sciences were received from the journal itself or other journals from the same publisher (MDPI) and the rest from journals of the other major APC for-profit publisher, i.e., Frontiers.

In general, indicators of impact can be manipulated in many ways [ 22 ], and in recent years Clarivate delisted many journals from the science citation index due to suspicious practices, so that the IF of these journals is not reported anymore. Footnote 9 Therefore, when assessing a journal’s impact, scientists should preferably use indicators that do not consider self-citations, and check whether the share of self-citations and citations from journals of the same publisher are much higher compared to other journals in the same area.

Authors should also be wary of journals displaying some unusual traits, namely when they combine the two desirable properties of high acceptance rate and high values in indicators of impact, and when they display extreme growth rates. There is in fact a delicate balance between a journal reputation, the number of submissions it receives, and the level of selectivity: better reputation attracts more submissions, but the editors must be highly selective to maintain a good quality journal. Hence, it is very unlikely that a journal can couple good quality to low selectivity. A massive growth in the number of articles published by a journal in few years may also be a source of doubt about its rigor, because the mentioned delicate balance constitutes a constraint to the journal’ growth rate.

Signals of independence in the peer review process are also important. Special issues in many journals are not managed by the editors but by guest editors, which are often authors of one or more articles of the special issue and where co-authors often come from their own network. Hence, a high proportion of special issues can be considered a warning signal. In a similar way, one may keep an eye on whether the editors and the members of the editorial board publish frequently in the journal, and/or whether there are “serial” authors, i.e., authors publishing many articles a year, a large proportion of publications from the same country or institution(s), or from countries hosting paper mills.

As a final consideration, it is important to consider that our individual choices are not only relevant for our own career and recognition, but they also collectively shape scientific communication and science itself. Hopefully, an understanding of the mechanisms that are reshaping scientific publishing can inform better individual choices capable to promote the common scientific interest.

Data availability

The data are available upon request.

Elsevier, Springer–Nature, Taylor & Francis, Wiley–Blackwell, Sage.

Sources: Most profitable sectors in the USA: Statistica. https://www.statista.com/statistics/317657/most-profitable-industries-us/ accessed 1 April 2024; it is interesting to note that a 40% profit margin is also four times that of the very profitable arms industries, such as Lockheed Martin— https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/LMT/lockheed-martin/net-profit-margin .

Learned societies (also known as scientific societies) are nonprofit organizations or associations that promote a scientific discipline or a group of scientific disciplines, such as the American Chemical Society or the Academy of Management . They often own scientific journals, although they may not always manage the publishing activity themselves but delegate to companies offering the most convenient arrangement.

See: https://x.com/PaoloCrosetto/status/1370309130578186242?s=20

Source: Scopus–Scimago.

International Journal of Molecular Sciences; Sensors; Molecules.

Renowned examples of disruptive innovations are digital cameras disrupting film cameras and tabletop copiers disrupting photocopy centers.

Source: Web of Science, for these and later figures.

See: Clarivate, https://clarivate.com/blog/supporting-integrity-of-the-scholarly-record-our-commitment-to-curation-and-selectivity-in-the-web-of-science/

Scholz F (2022) Writing and publishing a scientific paper. ChemTexts 8:8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40828-022-00160-7

Article Google Scholar

Seeber M (2020) How do journals of different rank instruct peer reviewers? Reviewer guidelines in the field of management. Scientometrics 122:1387–1405

Csiszar A (2018) The scientific journal: authorship and the politics of knowledge in the nineteenth century. University of Chicago Press

Book Google Scholar

Larivière V, Haustein S, Mongeon P (2015) The oligopoly of academic publishers in the digital era. PLoS ONE 10(6):e0127502

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Hagve M (2020) The money behind academic publishing. Tidsskriftet. 17th August 2020. https://tidsskriftet.no/en/2020/08/kronikk/money-behind-academic-publishing . Accessed 15 Mar 2024

Malakoff D (2000). Librarians protest Elsevier merger. Science 30: 4–5. https://www.science.org/content/article/librarians-protest-elsevier-merger . Accessed 15 Mar 2024

Sivertsen G (2023) Endringer i markedet for akademisk publisering Universitetspolitisk seminar. University of Bergen

Google Scholar

Farquharson, Jamie (2022). Diamond open access venn diagram [en SVG]. figshare. Figure. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.21598179.v1

Siler K (2020) Demarcating spectrums of predatory publishing: economic and institutional sources of academic legitimacy. J Am Soc Inf Sci 71:1386–1401

Siler K, Vincent-Lamarre P, Sugimoto CR, Larivière V (2021) Predatory publishers’ latest scam: bootlegged and rebranded papers. Nature 598:563–565

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Severin A, Low N (2019) Readers beware! Predatory journals are infiltrating citation databases. Int J Public Health 64:1123–1124

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Else H, Van Noorden R (2021) The fight against fake-paper factories that churn out sham science. Nature 591(7851):516–520

Sabel BA, Knaack E, Gigerenzer G, Bilc M (2023) Fake publications in biomedical science: red-flagging method indicates mass production. medRxiv, 2023–05

Schimmer R, Geschuhn KK, Vogler A (2015) Disrupting the subscription journals’ business model for the necessary large-scale transformation to open access. Sci Open Res. https://doi.org/10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-EDU.AJRG23.v1

OSTP (2023) Report to the U.S. congress on financing mechanisms for open access publishing of federally funded research. Office of Science and Technology Policy, Washington, DC, USA

Hanson MA, Barreiro PG, Crosetto P, Brockington D (2023) The strain on scientific publishing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.15884

Seeber M (2022) Efficacy, efficiency, and models of journal peer review: the known and unknown in the social sciences. Handbook on research assessment in the social sciences. Edward Elgar Publishing, pp 67–82

Crosetto P (2021) Is MDPI a predatory publisher? Available at: https://paolocrosetto.wordpress.com/2021/04/12/is-mdpi-a-predatory-publisher/ . Accessed 15 Mar 2024

Christensen C, Euchner J (2011) Managing disruption: an interview with Clayton Christensen. Res Technol Manag 54:11–17

Seeber M, Klemenčič M, Meoli M, Sin C (2023) Publishing review reports to reveal and preserve the quality and fairness of the peer review process. Euro J Higher Educ 13:121–125

Zhang L, Wei Y, Huang Y, Sivertsen G (2022) Should open access lead to closed research? The trends towards paying to perform research. Scientometrics 127:7653–7679

Martin BR (2016) Editors’ JIF-boosting stratagems–which are appropriate and which not? Res Policy 45:1–7

Download references

Open access funding provided by University of Agder.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Political Science and Management, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway

Marco Seeber

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

M.S. wrote the manuscript and prepared figures and tables.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Seeber .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Seeber, M. Changes in scientific publishing and possible impact on authors’ choice of journals. ChemTexts 10 , 5 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40828-024-00190-3

Download citation

Received : 02 April 2024

Accepted : 08 April 2024

Published : 29 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40828-024-00190-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Scientific publishing
Choice of proper journal
Author processing charge—APC business model
Bibliometric indicators
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Submit Paper
Check Paper Status
Download Certificate/Paper

--> --> --> --> --> E-mail [email protected] --> -->

How to Write and Publish Your Research in a Journal

Choosing a Journal

Things You Should Know

Expert Q&A

About This Article

Reader Success Stories

Did this article help you?

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

How to Publish a Research Paper: A Step-by-Step Guide

Jordan Kruszynski

Understanding the Publishing Process

Step 1: Preparing Your Research Paper

Step 2: Finding the Right Journal

Step 3: Crafting a Strong Manuscript

Step 4: Navigating the Peer-Review Process

Step 5: Submitting Your Paper

Step 6: Dealing with Rejections and Revising Your Paper

Final Thoughts

Table of Contents

Behind the Scenes: What Does a Research Assistant Do?

How to Write a Research Paper Introduction: Hook, Line, and Sinker

Discover more from Audemic: Access any academic research via audio

Understanding the Publishing Process

What’s happening with my paper? The publication process explained

Internal Checks on New Submissions

Peer Review

Revision Decision

Revised Submission Received

Subsequent Peer Review

Preliminary Acceptance

Formal Acceptance and Publication

How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal

Publish an article

Step-by-step guide to article publishing

2. Write a cover letter

3. Submit your manuscript

4. Technical check

5. Editor and peer review

6. Final decision

Open access vs subscription publishing

Learn more about open access

Learn more about funding

Search all journals

Author support for publishing

How To Write A Research Paper

Overview: Writing A Research Paper

Overview: The 3-Stage Process

Need a helping hand?

Step 1: Find a topic and review the literature

Step 2: Develop a structure and outline

Step 3: Write and refine

Recap: Key Takeaways

You Might Also Like:

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

How to Write and Publish a Research Paper in 7 Steps

1. Check Whether Your Research Is Publication-Ready

2. Choose An Article Type

3. Choose a Journal

4. Construct Your Paper

4.1 The Title

4.2 The Abstract

4.3 Keywords

4.4 Introduction

4.5 Methods

4.6 Results

4.7 Discussion

4.8 Conclusion

4.9 Acknowledgments and Ethical Statements

4.10 References

5. Decide the Order of Authors

6. Check and Double-Check

7. Submit Your Paper

If you are interested, check out this related blog post

You might also be interested in

Library Community Gives Back: 2023 Webinar Speakers’ Charity Picks

Pin It on Pinterest

How to publish an article? – Step by step

1. Before you start