A typical manuscript has the Introduction, the Methodology, the Result, the Discussion and the Conclusion sections. What is the most difficult part to develop in manuscript? Thanks.
1.The hard laboring part is the Literature review as you have make study seriously and have to scrutinize the same as per the requirement.
2 Secondly the methodology you will apply and 3.The thirdly the analysis, I think
Thanks
In my opinion, "Discussion" is the most difficult part to develop in a manuscript.
Please also have a look at this old RG thread.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/In_your_opinion_what_is_the_easiest_and_hardest_part_in_its_writing_in_a_scientific_research_or_thesis
In my personal view, Manuscript preparation is a challenging task in itself. I always feel challenging from the Title of manuscript, data analysis, and every part of data analysis. But with consistent hard work, every work goes smoothly.
Justifying the worth of the work contained in the paper and Discussion are the most difficult parts while writing a manuscript.
To me the 'Introduction' part. If it is clearly set, writing the rest of the sections becomes smooth.
Discussion is one of the important and difficult part of a research manuscript.
The wisdom of "Introduction" defines the spectrum of various segments of research manuscript.
Decide what type of the manuscript to write.
You have at least three options on the type of manuscript:
Full articles, or original articles, are the most important papers. Often they are substantial completed pieces of research that are of significance as original research.
Letters/rapid communications/short communications are usually published for the quick and early communication of significant and original advances. They are much shorter than full articles (usually strictly limited in size, depending on each journal).
Review papers or perspectives summarize recent developments on a specific hot topic, highlighting important points that have previously been reported and introduce no new information. Normally they are submitted on invitation by the editor of the journal.
When looking at your available information, you must self-evaluate your work: Is it sufficient for a full article, or are your results so thrilling that they should be shown as soon as possible?
You should ask your supervisor (if you are a PhD student) or a colleague for advice on the manuscript type to be submitted. Remember also that sometimes outsiders – i.e., colleagues not involved in your research – can see things more clearly than you.
Whatever type of article you write, plan to submit only one manuscript, not a series of manuscripts. (Normally editors hate this practice, since they have limited space in the journals and series of manuscripts consume too many pages for a single topic or an author/group of authors)
In my opinion the most difficult part in a manuscript to develop is the Abstract as it can not be developed until the completion of the manuscript.
Abstract reflects the Shadow of whole detailed Article so it should be Excellently written. Regards
The most difficult part of a manuscript is the development of the skeleton of the story of the manuscript. The time being taken for conceiving the idea to develop a skeleton of the manuscript is the most difficult part of any manuscript. As and when we develop it, the rest writing is more smooth.
Secondly, I also find difficult to write discussion of a manuscript but is can be made easier by imbibing the results thoroughly.
Thirdly, introduction is the best part of a manuscript and it inadvertently invites the readers to go through the full manuscript. So the most interesting and informative introduction can be the best part of an article.
Regards,
Rishikesh
I think , during preparation of manuscript mainly result section statistics i.e. significantly difference in treatment and discussion section is difficult for me.
For me,First to justify why i going to conduct the concern research, secondly what are the significance of the research, thirdly discussion section and fourthly future suggestion.
I think the part of preparing a rigorous research methodology is the hardest.
The abstract and the introduction, those reflect the authors deepness and an overall view of the work, lots of scholars constitute the idea about the paper from having a look at the abstract and the introduction, upon that they decide to continue reading the paper or not. Abstract and introduction must be written almost after finishing other parts of the manuscript.
In my personal view, manuscript preparation targeting the high impact journal is really a challenging task. For me, discussion portion is really tough task.
According to me, result and discussion is the most difficult portion of a manuscript.
I have not yet published any paper so i don't have any prior experience in manuscripts but my mentor has given me some head-start in this ..and the difficult part that i find is in introduction and discussion part as these two are the crucial part of the manuscript which reflects the how interesting is the paper going to be and how it is addressing the problems. which i find it difficult
Justification as to why this research is important, how it is different from previous work and the value-add that this article is going to provide are key elements to be mentioned up front. Then the Discussion section towards the end should (in the light of talking about results) re-emphasize the accomplishments of the current work in comparison to other work.
From my modest experience, my point that, if the work or study are consist of a huge of variables and their interference, interrelation, and their it's correlation coefficient then their discussions as separated results, in addition to the skeleton, headlines,and the final finishing of the manuscript.
All the best,
Naseer Almukhtar
Discussion of your findings is the most important and difficult part of your article.
Every section is connected to another. So when the first one is done well, the next one becomes simpler to handle and the process goes on! Despite this, reporting the findings needs lots of time and more critical thinking. At this stage, an author also needs to revisit the literature further and further.
Innovative idea, abstract, introduction, historical review, needs and scope, importance, methodology, very good connectivity between each sections and references are important parts of paper. But most important is discussion and future scope.
In my personal opinion the most difficult parts are (a) Introduction and (b) Discussion.
Abdulghani Muthanna has in his answer mentioned an important aspect of writing an article. In a publication, mostly all the sections are interconnected, and because of continuity, if you have written one section nicely, writing the subsequent sections become relatively easier.
With regards,
ARB
i feel that incorporation of data in a particular journal format/design is little hectic work and next to it - is the interpretation/discussion of data.
For me how to find ways present your idea and discuss it, is the most difficult since you have full picture about your paper then you can continue writing smoothly
I agree with Dr Nihada Ahmetovic. It is very important to achieve the proper project plan and design the work, with all its requirements
Personally I think the hardest part, is the summary and introduction, considering that this is the entry to the product, and is what at first glance defines whether a writing is relevant or not
Depending on (1) your study hypothesis and (2) your analyzed data results, all parts of a manuscript may be difficult to develop.
Depending on the type of manuscript and I think the choice of subject and method of design are more the hardest part .
It is boring to me to write an Introduction, because most of the things we are mentioning in the Introduction are already familiar. Other parts are more interesting and original.
The most important part of a manuscript is the introduction section, because it indicates the foundation of a research including the backgrounds, purposes and also contributions. So, writing a comprehensive introduction is a vital issue for a researcher in order to receive effective and positive feedback from readers and referees.
Good Luck.
Before beginning you need a clear structure of the text. It endures often (at least in my own case) to get this clear structure in the mind in order to start.
Choose the appropriate sample and appropriate statistical analysis and discuss the results
The discussion so far shows that everyone has their particular difficulties at a different point. It is easy to overcome them if, during one's studies, research activities or as an assistant, one constantly has smaller research projects, always with the task of writing a short informative summary of 2-3 pages.
One should read good journals. They often contain manageable smaller research projects that are methodologically excellent. Such role models should be collected in a separate folder and looked at from time to time. Then nothing really goes wrong with your own research project and the writing of the manuscript.
Hein Retter
In addition to general information I can confirm that the first problem for many young researchers is to begin and to get a good starting idea. In later years with some more experience and knowledge about the running discussion in the respektive field of research quite another problem is annoying: You can't finish. You are constantly thinking of a new aspect that needs to be mentioned. The result is that your text gets longer and longer and you have to start shortening it. This takes as long as writing the text.
Hein Retter
Discussion and clear and consize conclusion with limitations and proposals for future research
An article should give new insights to the readership. This could be new research results, a critical discussion of methods, a review of several articles on the same topic - whatever. The focus should be on what matters and the part that makes the most effort to make the statements accurate, resistant to contradiction and easily understandable to a broad readership. Many do not manage to do that without noticing it.
What bothers me the most personally today is that each editorial staffs prescribe their own editorial rules for submitted manuscripts. And the fulfillment of these rules, up to the way in which the bibliography is written, robs one of one's time and intellect of a completely pointless mess - which still exists, although some societies - as in psychology - issue their own guidelines, but others do it differently again.
That is really idiotic! Because the
Writing very appropriate introduction may prove as the most difficult part of paper writing.
For any particular scientific journal, author is expected to read the instructions of the journal carefully and prepare the manuscript accordingly. Most of the time, the template for manuscript preparation will be available in the author instructions section, if it is not available, then the author can refer to any of the published paper from the recent issue of that particular journal. Majority of the errors occur in the first page of a manuscript, for example, Abstract, etc. The manuscript should include a specific Title followed by the Authors (with the correct order of contribution), Affiliation identifying all the mentioned authors, a short running title, and corresponding details of the communicating author.
Justifying results with discussion on scientific logic and corroborative references.
I wrote above what bothers me and have got some confirmation from other colleauges. Because one must first read the guidelines for writing manuscripts, and these guidelines are never identical among the various scientific journals. And then the whole thing gets back with the request to follow the guidelines for writing manuscripts.
A typical manuscript has the Introduction, the Methodology, the Result, the Discussion and the Conclusion sections. What is the most difficult part to develop in manuscript?
Personally to me is the "discussion" section of a manuscript. My justification can be found in the following answer to another similar question.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/In_your_opinion_what_is_the_easiest_and_hardest_part_in_its_writing_in_a_scientific_research_or_thesis
I agree with Dr. Han Ping Fung .
The role of discussion section is to declare our opinions and analysis, explain the implications of our major findings, and give suggestions for future research.
In addition, this section is also responsible to answer the questions raised in the introduction.
Another important role of the discussion section is to explain how the results support the answers and, how the answers fit in with existing knowledge.
Thanks,
Rohith
There are similar views, namely: the introduction should be the most important/critical part, in addition to its importance; the section should be very brief/condensed. Likewise, the abstract section is also the most difficult one, as each part of the papers has to be condensed into one or two sentences, which have to contain the maximum/affluent amount of information. Furthermore, the discussion is considered to be the most difficult part, as it has to be kept as short as possible while clearly and fully stating, supporting, explaining, and defending the answers/findings and discussing other important and directly relevant issues. Please refer to the following papers for further elaboration/guidance.
- Eriksson, P., Altermann, W. and Catuneanu, O. (2005) Editorial: Some general advice for writing a scientific paper, Journal of African Earth Sciences, 41, 4, pp. 285-288.
- Kallestinova, E. D. (2011) How to write your first research paper, The Yale journal of biology and medicine, 84, 3, pp. 181-190.
- Mumpton, F. A. (1990) The universal recipe or how to get your manuscript accepted by persnickety editors, Clays and Clay Minerals, 39, 6, pp. 631-636.
- Rosenfeldt, F. L., Dowling, J. T., Pepe, S. and Fullerton, M. J. (2000) How to write a paper for publication, Heart, Lung and Circulation, 9, 2, pp. 82-87.
Make a link between all results, and finding something in literature for supporting your discussion.
The more empirical-quantiative and hypothesis-driven a research project is, the less the problem of having any difficulties arises because everything is routine. A real basic problem is never to be sure whether one can record all relevant books, essays, and documents for the discussion of the current state of theory. Most younger researchers are content with keywords in collectors like World Cat and other online services to filter all relevant journals, but forget that important works are still digitized or bibliographical. You have to go through the actual contents of the most important journals. This is usually no longer the case today, and is often incorrect in the case of promotions.
If it is a research work that relies on archival sources, one must be sure that one has recorded the archival holdings of a country or worldwide. That is one difficulty when it comes to qualitative or historical-systematic research. The second difficulty is to decide what is important - that has to be in the text - and what is not so important - that has to stay out for reasons of limited space.
Anyone who has difficulties starting with an essay or a book about a larger project because they need a coherent structure to accommodate all the material for the individual questions almost always has the problem - according to my own experience - of finishing at Ene.
I have experienced the problem especially with doctoral students - hard-working researchers. But then more than 1000 pages came out. That's too much, you have to cut back in good time. And that's really difficult.
This is the most important question for a recent time. However, Introduction plays a vital role in a better manuscript. It signifies why you have done this research work. It also reveals scientific interest. In addition, the Review portion and unique result is the most momentous part to improve manuscript- I think.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts