Novelty with a new message.

Thank you Prof.Chris Oliver

Gratien Twagirayezu Thank you, This is important topic. I agree with Chris Oliver that novelty with a new message is important. In a good paper, it is needed to explicate enough well the research gap, and also the methodology. Often a challenge is that papers are not enough coherent so that, for ecample, the Discussion section has not been enough well connected to the theoretical framework.

Dear Prof. Raimo kaasila

Thank you very much for your contribution.

God bless you and your family

Dear Filipe,

Novelty with solid and clear methodology and argument.

Best Regards!

Thank you Prof.Vinícius Souza Ribeiro

Thanks Gratien. As I see your topic contains two questions: About the quality of a good paper, I agree with colleagues that the relevancy of the topic, used methodology, the novelty in the paper, among others are the principals of a good paper. You asked also about characteristics of a well published paper: Here I think it is about how the paper meet both readers visibility and publishers requirements. Thanks

Thank you very much Prof.Leopold Mbereyaho

Very interesting topic.

Dear Dr.Humberto Costa

We need to know much in this journey of research.

Research should be original and highlight some important aspect. It should be concluded after adequate follow up or observations. It should be presented in a relevant journal with subject readership.

Dear Nareshkumar Dhaniwala

Thank you very much for your Idea .Your are building world

God bless you and your family

Dear Gratien Twagirayezu many thanks indeed for your very interesting technical question. This is certainly a question of broad general interest. Personally I have published 400+ research papers, all of them in international, peer-reviewed journals. In my personal experience I would suggest the following criteria for a good / well-published research paper:

1. The topic of the paper should perfectly match the scope of the journal.

2. The paper should be written in error-free English.

3. The manuscript should have an eye-catching title.

4. Most importantly, the work described in the manuscript should have at least some degree of novelty. Lack of novelty (= routine work) is the most common reason for "desk rejections".

5. The manuscript should describe a "full story", i.e. the work must not be unduly fragmented.

That's about it. Of course you can find numerous guides about "Characteristics of a Good research Paper" or "What are the characteristics of a well-published paper" but this is just my personal advice.

Good luck with publishing your own work. Please stay safe and healthy! 👍

There are many things that contribute to the quality of a research paper. Any report of

research begins with a review of the relevant body of literature, and there is excellent

guidance for undertaking a literature review in Silverman (2000: 12) and in Rudestam

and Newton (1998: 50-51). Based upon this guidance, this paper offers a personal view

of what we should be looking for in research papers, with the aim of prompting wider

debate.

In all papers, a structure is required and the argument should flow from one section to the

next. Obviously, clear English should be used throughout and jargon should be avoided.

Good papers will move from the general to the particular and begin with the context of

the work, move through the statement of the problem being investigated, deal with the

empirical and/or analytical aspects of the work, then develop the discussion and draw

conclusions based upon what has been covered in the paper, relating these back to the

original context of the work. Generally, papers will either develop theory or test theory.

A paper that does neither will not add to the sum of knowledge and therefore will not fall

into the category of a research paper. Issues connected with style, structure and

presentation are dealt with extensively elsewhere in the literature (for example, Turk and

Kirkman 1982) and there is no need to reiterate that guidance here, other than to state that

the easiest questions can be the most difficult to answer: what have you done, why is it

important and how have you gone about it?.

An excellent basis for a discussion of what constitutes a good research paper:

• Conceptualization and theoretical basis of the work

• Analytical framework and hypotheses

• Research design

• Results and discussion

• Conclusions of the paper

Dear Gratien Twagirayezu P.S. I just thought which of your own papers would most perfectly fulfill all the criteria which I listed in my first answer. As chemists we have a large choice of high-ranked journals to publish our work. The attached list gives you an overview of the most renowned journals in our disciplines. As you can see, the impact factors of these journals range from ca. 1 to over 50. One of the most sought-after high-IF journal in your field of research is the Journal of the American Chemical Society (JACS). The current impact factor of JACS is 14.612. Needless to say that this journal has a high rejection quote, and even quick desk-rejections are quite common here. I have only three papers published in this journal, and I can say that these are papers which I am particularly proud of. Coming back to the initial question which of our papers would best fulfill the criteria listed in my first answer, I would name the one cited below. It has a very short eye-catching title (just one word!), it describes a completely novel class of chemical compounds and it has a full story.

Article Carboranylamidinates

Dear Prof.Frank T. Edelmann

Firstly, I thank you very much for your heart, kindness, advice and assistance you provide every time.

More blessing from almighty God

More importantly, I wish you to stay healthy

Dear Subham Preetam

Thank you for your contribution

God bless you,God bless your family

Dear Prof Umar Ashraf

very well narrated and fruitful contribution from Prof Frank T. Edelmann

The research paper results should be interesting which can use in manufacturing and industry after publish. Research should be based on market demand, should be novelty and English language should be excellent. One common things that follow journal criteria.

Dear Nagendra Yadav

Thank you again for your contribution.

God bless you , God bless your family

The article must be well thought out, with palpable results, evidencing rigor, systematization of the information, quality in the writing and, above all, novelty

In addition to the informative comments above, especially Frank T. Edelmann 's typically brilliant contributions, a research paper is considered exceptional if it is both well-researched and properly structured.

Dear Prof.Ahmed T. Hussein

Thank you for addition information and now we are ready to make our research more virtuously .

I'm really surprised by this discussion. The question is interesting. The post of Frank T. Edelmann is evidently the best. But this post received only 9 recommendations (including mine). The best answers based on the number of recommendations was something like "thank you." This is unacceptable from my point of view. What is the reason to recommend such absolutely useless answers?

The leaders giving such recommendations are all from Lanzhou Jiaotong University. Should I report thus to the RG administration?

Please, don't recommend this post.

Dear Prof.Yurii V Geletii

What you said is absolutely right.

Dear Yurii V Geletii thank you for your recommendation and particularly for your comment. I made the experience that it is a very common phenomenon that answers like "Thank you" or "Good question" receive more recommendations than the original scientific answers. As a typical recent example please also have a look at the following thread:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_difference_between_Principal_Research_Scientist_and_Senior_Research_Scientist#view=609889886060b5251c6c8642

This is why some time ago I asked the question "What is spamming on this platform?":

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_spamming_on_this_platform

In this thread you can find many more surprising examples of how recommendation cartels work.

New techniques and original ideas

I totally agree with your last comment dear Frank T. Edelmann .

For me, I think recommending a colleague's publication is a good activity and there is nothing dubious about it. But, for quite sometime, I've been noticing several (they used to be quite a few) scandalous and totally unethical activities by some "researchers" on RG with regard to a "recommendations game"! I, too, put a thread a while ago on the same issue:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_Strange_Recommendations_Phenomenon_X_answers_first_gets_2_Y_agrees_with_X_gets_52_recommendations_How_come_Explain_if_you_can

Not too much to my surprise, it failed to attract any responses. Certainly, not from members of these "vicious mafia-like circles" whose presence on RG is pursing the "replies" & "comments" of X and shower him/him with preposterous recommendations merely because the comments belong to the particular name regardless of the content of that comment. Mostly, as you said "Nice Q." or "Good Question" or "I agree with Professor Y"

If only some measure can be taken to cleanse the platform because these activities spoil much of the academic and scientific objectives of RG.

Best regards!

Ahmed T. Hussein I don't see any problems with recommending a colleague's publication. I'm against recommendation of useless answers in discussion. One of the way to discourage such recommendation is to report to the RG administration. Click blue "share' in the end of the post (next to recommend) and you will "report. "

Gratien Twagirayezu if you said that I'm absolutely right, why do you continue such a practice?

Dear Gratien Twagirayezu

One of the most important points that can help you is teamwork and their experience. Try to follow their directions as much as you can. After publishing some research papers, you will get your own way to write a good paper.

Dear Yurii V Geletii Ahmed T. Hussein Abdulla Abdulla Frank T. Edelmann

I thank you for virtuous advises.

I thank you for your cooperation,Kindness and Humanity.

We need to build right platform and fruitful research.

These were caused by my collegues.

I have to text them.

God bless you,God bless your families

I wish you to stay healthy.

Dear Prof. Abdelhameed Ibrahim

Hopeful everything is fine with you.

Thank you very much for good contribution.

Stay healthy with your family

God bless you , God bless you family

before the submission: article structure, literature review, contributions/original ideas, clear methodology, deep discussion of results.

after the publication: number of citations.

Dear Daniel Stilpen

Thank you very much for your valuable contribution.

Be safe and healthy endlessly

I noticed that Gratien Twagirayezu has more recommendations for "thanks" posts than the answers. What are the reasons for such recommendations? Gratien, why not just recommend the answer instead of posting "thanks?"

It was before not now!I have texted these one who made errors.

A well published paper is a paper that is not boring to read and doesn't overwhelm the reader with disorganization.

Make your paper as simple to follow and read as possible and it will be a successful one. But I think most journals don't like simply written papers, they like obfuscation and gobbledygook.

1) Unique research question, 2) Systematic approach to answer the research questions.

A good research article easily explains a research contribution to the community.

first of all, the actual topic is important. Secondly, it is important to analyze previously published works so that yours does not repeat them, but only supplements or expands the boundaries of research

A well-published paper needs to have a novel contribution with well-defined methods. Most importantly, the paper should include a detailed evaluation to validate the proposed idea/work.

Dear Minakshi Kaushik , George Marin , Rahul Sharma , Nandita Chaudhuri , Jose Risomar Sousa

Thank you for your contribution

Stay healthy

Novelty, continuity and expert creation....

Please, see the following helpful link:

https://centaur.reading.ac.uk/4306/1...hat_makes_a_good_research_paper.pdf

Relevance of the topic, good methodology and novelty of the findings and the presentation of the final paper.

Conceptual and theoretical frameworks are paramount to an excellent research paper. Albert Einstein wrote: I was sitting in a chair in the patent office at Bern when all of a sudden a thought occurred to me: “If a person falls freely he will not feel his own weight.” I was startled. This simple thought made a deep impression on me. It impelled me toward a theory of gravitation.

In my humble opinion, a good research paper will always back up the abstract in any section of the paper. In some high-impact factor journals, I have seen the intermediate sections create a chunk of jargon with the outcomes going nowhere, making it difficult to read and understand. I have personally lost interest in many papers, although they had excellent introduction sections. The novelty always adds something new to the literature but it need not be some rocket science as depicted in some papers, difficult to understand. To avoid this, I generally read review or conference papers to get the premise and look into industry application type journals to develop my concept. The other journals come at a later stage.

A publishable paper has presented research gaps; clearly written methodology; credible findings and conclusions. Above all, new knowledge produced must be highlighted.