how to write a good research paper

cited from other persons.

CHECKLIST ONE:

1. Is my thesis statement concise and clear?

2. Did I follow my outline? Did I miss anything?

3. Are my arguments presented in a logical sequence?

4. Are all sources properly cited to ensure that I am not plagiarizing?

5. Have I proved my thesis with strong supporting arguments?

6. Have I made my intentions and points clear in the essay?

Re-read your paper for grammatical errors. Use a dictionary or a thesaurus as needed. Do a spell check. Correct all errors that you can spot and improve the overall quality of the paper to the best of your ability. Get someone else to read it over. Sometimes a second pair of eyes can see mistakes that you missed.

CHECKLIST TWO:

1. Did I begin each paragraph with a proper topic sentence?

2. Have I supported my arguments with documented proof or examples?

3. Any run-on or unfinished sentences?

4. Any unnecessary or repetitious words?

5. Varying lengths of sentences?

6. Does one paragraph or idea flow smoothly into the next?

7. Any spelling or grammatical errors?

8. Quotes accurate in source, spelling, and punctuation?

9. Are all my citations accurate and in correct format?

10. Did I avoid using contractions? Use "cannot" instead of "can't", "do not" instead of "don't"?

11. Did I use third person as much as possible? Avoid using phrases such as "I think", "I guess", "I suppose"

12. Have I made my points clear and interesting but remained objective?

13. Did I leave a sense of completion for my reader(s) at the end of the paper?

General form of a research paper

An objective of organizing a research paper is to allow people to read your work selectively. When I research a topic, I may be interested in just the methods, a specific result, the interpretation, or perhaps I just want to see a summary of the paper to determine if it is relevant to my study. To this end, many journals require the following sections, submitted in the order listed, each section to start on a new page. There are variations of course. Some journals call for a combined results and discussion, for example, or include materials and methods after the body of the paper. The well known journal Science does away with separate sections altogether, except for the abstract.

Your papers are to adhere to the form and style required for the Journal of Biological Chemistry, requirements that are shared by many journals in the life sciences.

General style

Specific editorial requirements for submission of a manuscript will always supercede instructions in these general guidelines.

To make a paper readable

• Print or type using a 12 point standard font, such as Times, Geneva, Bookman, Helvetica, etc.
• Text should be double spaced on 8 1/2" x 11" paper with 1 inch margins, single sided
• Number pages consecutively
• Start each new section on a new page
• Adhere to recommended page limits

Mistakes to avoid

• Placing a heading at the bottom of a page with the following text on the next page (insert a page break!)
• Dividing a table or figure - confine each figure/table to a single page
• Submitting a paper with pages out of order

In all sections of your paper

• Use normal prose including articles ("a", "the," etc.)
• Stay focused on the research topic of the paper
• Use paragraphs to separate each important point (except for the abstract)
• Indent the first line of each paragraph
• Present your points in logical order
• Use present tense to report well accepted facts - for example, 'the grass is green'
• Use past tense to describe specific results - for example, 'When weed killer was applied, the grass was brown'
• Avoid informal wording, don't address the reader directly, and don't use jargon, slang terms, or superlatives
• Avoid use of superfluous pictures - include only those figures necessary to presenting results

Title Page

Select an informative title as illustrated in the examples in your writing portfolio example package. Include the name(s) and address(es) of all authors, and date submitted. "Biology lab #1" would not be an informative title, for example.

Abstract

The summary should be two hundred words or less. See the examples in the writing portfolio package.

General intent

An abstract is a concise single paragraph summary of completed work or work in progress. In a minute or less a reader can learn the rationale behind the study, general approach to the problem, pertinent results, and important conclusions or new questions.

Writing an abstract

Write your summary after the rest of the paper is completed. After all, how can you summarize something that is not yet written? Economy of words is important throughout any paper, but especially in an abstract. However, use complete sentences and do not sacrifice readability for brevity. You can keep it concise by wording sentences so that they serve more than one purpose. For example, "In order to learn the role of protein synthesis in early development of the sea urchin, newly fertilized embryos were pulse-labeled with tritiated leucine, to provide a time course of changes in synthetic rate, as measured by total counts per minute (cpm)." This sentence provides the overall question, methods, and type of analysis, all in one sentence. The writer can now go directly to summarizing the results.

Summarize the study, including the following elements in any abstract. Try to keep the first two items to no more than one sentence each.

• Purpose of the study - hypothesis, overall question, objective
• Model organism or system and brief description of the experiment
• Results, including specific data - if the results are quantitative in nature, report quantitative data; results of any statistical analysis shoud be reported
• Important conclusions or questions that follow from the experiment(s)

Style:

• Single paragraph, and concise
• As a summary of work done, it is always written in past tense
• An abstract should stand on its own, and not refer to any other part of the paper such as a figure or table
• Focus on summarizing results - limit background information to a sentence or two, if absolutely necessary
• What you report in an abstract must be consistent with what you reported in the paper
• Corrrect spelling, clarity of sentences and phrases, and proper reporting of quantities (proper units, significant figures) are just as important in an abstract as they are anywhere else

Introduction

Your introductions should not exceed two pages (double spaced, typed). See the examples in the writing portfolio package.

General intent

The purpose of an introduction is to aquaint the reader with the rationale behind the work, with the intention of defending it. It places your work in a theoretical context, and enables the reader to understand and appreciate your objectives.

Writing an introduction

The abstract is the only text in a research paper to be written without using paragraphs in order to separate major points. Approaches vary widely, however for our studies the following approach can produce an effective introduction.

• Describe the importance (significance) of the study - why was this worth doing in the first place? Provide a broad context.
• Defend the model - why did you use this particular organism or system? What are its advantages? You might comment on its suitability from a theoretical point of view as well as indicate practical reasons for using it.
• Provide a rationale. State your specific hypothesis(es) or objective(s), and describe the reasoning that led you to select them.
• Very briefy describe the experimental design and how it accomplished the stated objectives.

Style:

• Use past tense except when referring to established facts. After all, the paper will be submitted after all of the work is completed.
• Organize your ideas, making one major point with each paragraph. If you make the four points listed above, you will need a minimum of four paragraphs.
• Present background information only as needed in order support a position. The reader does not want to read everything you know about a subject.
• State the hypothesis/objective precisely - do not oversimplify.
• As always, pay attention to spelling, clarity and appropriateness of sentences and phrases.

Materials and Methods

There is no specific page limit, but a key concept is to keep this section as concise as you possibly can. People will want to read this material selectively. The reader may only be interested in one formula or part of a procedure. Materials and methods may be reported under separate subheadings within this section or can be incorporated together.

General intent

This should be the easiest section to write, but many students misunderstand the purpose. The objective is to document all specialized materials and general procedures, so that another individual may use some or all of the methods in another study or judge the scientific merit of your work. It is not to be a step by step description of everything you did, nor is a methods section a set of instructions. In particular, it is not supposed to tell a story. By the way, your notebook should contain all of the information that you need for this section.

Writing a materials and methods section

Materials:

• Describe materials separately only if the study is so complicated that it saves space this way.
• Include specialized chemicals, biological materials, and any equipment or supplies that are not commonly found in laboratories.
• Do not include commonly found supplies such as test tubes, pipet tips, beakers, etc., or standard lab equipment such as centrifuges, spectrophotometers, pipettors, etc.
• If use of a specific type of equipment, a specific enzyme, or a culture from a particular supplier is critical to the success of the experiment, then it and the source should be singled out, otherwise no.
• Materials may be reported in a separate paragraph or else they may be identified along with your procedures.
• In biosciences we frequently work with solutions - refer to them by name and describe completely, including concentrations of all reagents, and pH of aqueous solutions, solvent if non-aqueous.

Methods:

• See the examples in the writing portfolio package
• Report the methodology (not details of each procedure that employed the same methodology)
• Describe the mehodology completely, including such specifics as temperatures, incubation times, etc.
• To be concise, present methods under headings devoted to specific procedures or groups of procedures
• Generalize - report how procedures were done, not how they were specifically performed on a particular day. For example, report "samples were diluted to a final concentration of 2 mg/ml protein;" don't report that "135 microliters of sample one was diluted with 330 microliters of buffer to make the protein concentration 2 mg/ml." Always think about what would be relevant to an investigator at another institution, working on his/her own project.
• If well documented procedures were used, report the procedure by name, perhaps with reference, and that's all. For example, the Bradford assay is well known. You need not report the procedure in full - just that you used a Bradford assay to estimate protein concentration, and identify what you used as a standard. The same is true for the SDS-PAGE method, and many other well known procedures in biology and biochemistry.

Style:

• It is awkward or impossible to use active voice when documenting methods without using first person, which would focus the reader's attention on the investigator rather than the work. Therefore when writing up the methods most authors use third person passive voice.
• Use normal prose in this and in every other section of the paper – avoid informal lists, and use complete sentences.

What to avoid

• Materials and methods are not a set of instructions.
• Omit all explanatory information and background - save it for the discussion.
• Omit information that is irrelevant to a third party, such as what color ice bucket you used, or which individual logged in the data.

Results

The page length of this section is set by the amount and types of data to be reported. Continue to be concise, using figures and tables, if appropriate, to present results most effectively. See recommendations for content, below.

General intent

The purpose of a results section is to present and illustrate your findings. Make this section a completely objective report of the results, and save all interpretation for the discussion.

Writing a results section

IMPORTANT: You must clearly distinguish material that would normally be included in a research article from any raw data or other appendix material that would not be published. In fact, such material should not be submitted at all unless requested by the instructor.

Content

• Summarize your findings in text and illustrate them, if appropriate, with figures and tables.
• In text, describe each of your results, pointing the reader to observations that are most relevant.
• Provide a context, such as by describing the question that was addressed by making a particular observation.
• Describe results of control experiments and include observations that are not presented in a formal figure or table, if appropriate.
• Analyze your data, then prepare the analyzed (converted) data in the form of a figure (graph), table, or in text form.

What to avoid

• Do not discuss or interpret your results, report background information, or attempt to explain anything.
• Never include raw data or intermediate calculations in a research paper.
• Do not present the same data more than once.
• Text should complement any figures or tables, not repeat the same information.
• Please do not confuse figures with tables - there is a difference.

Style

• As always, use past tense when you refer to your results, and put everything in a logical order.
• In text, refer to each figure as "figure 1," "figure 2," etc. ; number your tables as well (see the reference text for details)
• Place figures and tables, properly numbered, in order at the end of the report (clearly distinguish them from any other material such as raw data, standard curves, etc.)
• If you prefer, you may place your figures and tables appropriately within the text of your results section.

Figures and tables

• Either place figures and tables within the text of the result, or include them in the back of the report (following Literature Cited) - do one or the other
• If you place figures and tables at the end of the report, make sure they are clearly distinguished from any attached appendix materials, such as raw data
• Regardless of placement, each figure must be numbered consecutively and complete with caption (caption goes under the figure)
• Regardless of placement, each table must be titled, numbered consecutively and complete with heading (title with description goes above the table)
• Each figure and table must be sufficiently complete that it could stand on its own, separate from text

Discussion

Journal guidelines vary. Space is so valuable in the Journal of Biological Chemistry, that authors are asked to restrict discussions to four pages or less, double spaced, typed. That works out to one printed page. While you are learning to write effectively, the limit will be extended to five typed pages. If you practice economy of words, that should be plenty of space within which to say all that you need to say.

General intent

The objective here is to provide an interpretation of your results and support for all of your conclusions, using evidence from your experiment and generally accepted knowledge, if appropriate. The significance of findings should be clearly described.

Writing a discussion

Interpret your data in the discussion in appropriate depth. This means that when you explain a phenomenon you must describe mechanisms that may account for the observation. If your results differ from your expectations, explain why that may have happened. If your results agree, then describe the theory that the evidence supported. It is never appropriate to simply state that the data agreed with expectations, and let it drop at that.

• Decide if each hypothesis is supported, rejected, or if you cannot make a decision with confidence. Do not simply dismiss a study or part of a study as "inconclusive."
• Research papers are not accepted if the work is incomplete. Draw what conclusions you can based upon the results that you have, and treat the study as a finished work
• You may suggest future directions, such as how the experiment might be modified to accomplish another objective.
• Explain all of your observations as much as possible, focusing on mechanisms.
• Decide if the experimental design adequately addressed the hypothesis, and whether or not it was properly controlled.
• Try to offer alternative explanations if reasonable alternatives exist.
• One experiment will not answer an overall question, so keeping the big picture in mind, where do you go next? The best studies open up new avenues of research. What questions remain?
• Recommendations for specific papers will provide additional suggestions.

Style:

• When you refer to information, distinguish data generated by your own studies from published information or from information obtained from other students (verb tense is an important tool for accomplishing that purpose).
• Refer to work done by specific individuals (including yourself) in past tense.
• Refer to generally accepted facts and principles in present tense. For example, "Doofus, in a 1989 survey, found that anemia in basset hounds was correlatedwith advanced age. Anemia is a condition in which there is insufficient hemoglobin in the blood."

The biggest mistake that students make in discussions is to present a superficial interpretation that more or less re-states the results. It is necessary to suggest why results came out as they did, focusing on the mechanisms behind the observations.

Literature Cited

Please note that in the introductory laboratory course, you will not be required to properly document sources of all of your information. One reason is that your major source of information is this website, and websites are inappropriate as primary sources. Second, it is problematic to provide a hundred students with equal access to potential reference materials. You may nevertheless find outside sources, and you should cite any articles that the instructor provides or that you find for yourself.

List all literature cited in your paper, in alphabetical order, by first author. In a proper research paper, only primary literature is used (original research articles authored by the original investigators). Be cautious about using web sites as references - anyone can put just about anything on a web site, and you have no sure way of knowing if it is truth or fiction. If you are citing an on line journal, use the journal citation (name, volume, year, page numbers). Some of your papers may not require references, and if that is the case simply state that "no references were consulted."

如何写好论文的讨论部分

转载1:

讨论一开始要重新说明主要发现，用一个句子表示较为理想。接着全面说明本研究的长处和短处，两者不可偏废。实际上，编辑和读者最注意研究的短处，这是所有医学研究不可避免的。编辑和读者一旦发现研究的短处，而作者未加讨论，他们对文章的信任会发生动摇，心生疑窦：是否还有他们和作者都未发现的其它弱点呢？
　　其次，将该研究与以前的工作联系起来，不炫耀自己的工作比以前的工作如何好，而是比较其优劣。与其它研究进行对照，切忌将自己的缺陷掩盖起来。重要的是应该讨论为什么会得出不同于别人的结论，作者可以放开去推测；但是如果弄不清自己的研究结果为什么与别人的结果有差别，就不便作这种推测，也不该断言自已的研究结果正确，而别人的错误。
　　接着应该讨论自己的研究“表明”什么，如何解释自己的研究发现，对试验科学家和理论研究者有什么意义？此刻，作者的境地是危险的，多数编辑和读者能够理解作者的谨慎，不逾实证界限。由读者自己去判断研究的意义：他们是会做到的。作者甚至可以指出研究结果证明不了什么，防止读者得出过度、不实的结论。最后，应点明哪些问题尚未解答，以及要继续做的工作。显然，编辑和读者不喜欢夸大的作法。事实上，作者对论文的这一部分常常写得乱糟糟的。虽然无法阻止作者写一篇充满推测的文章，但切不可因推测而毁了证据。
　　讨论部分有时也许需要别的小标题，但我们以为，现在提出的结构适合大多数研究论文。尽管统一结构有难度，甚至受限制，我们相信这种结构会降低总的文字长度，防止不恰当的推测和重复，减少报道偏差，提高报道的总体质量。

讨论2

讨论是科技学术论文的重要组成部分。讨论的目的是解释现象、阐述观点，说明您的调查/研究结果的含义，为后续研究提出建议。其主要作用是回答引言中提出的问题，解释说明研究结果如何支持你的答案，这些答案如何与该主题现有的相关知识相吻合。讨论通常被认为是一篇论文的“心脏”，最能反映作者掌握的文献量和对某个学术问题的了解和理解程度。讨论是许多中国作者论文的薄弱环节，也是与国际作者论文的差距所在。讨论部分很难写，作者应予以高度重视，投入应有的时间和精力，认真写好讨论。讨论部分写作的好坏往往决定一篇文章的深度，也是其学术水平的标志。

作者应围绕主题，有针对性地进行讨论，避免重复叙述数据结果，避免重复摘要和引言内容，避免冗长的文字堆砌。讨论要以研究的结果为依据，作者既不要不敢下结论，也不可妄下结论。讨论部分应强调指出研究所获得的新的重要结果和结论，说明研究的价值和局限性；要与研究目的结合起来讨论，避免提出研究结果不支持的结论；如果未作经济学分析，一般不应下成本-效益方面的结论；要避免强调和暗示未完成的工作的重要性，如果有把握，可以提出新的假设和进一步研究的建议。

许多作者的论文讨论不系统深入，重要原因之一是没有正确引用相关文献，因而没有把研究结果放在更广阔的背景中讨论。许多作者在讨论时不引用或没有系统引用相关文献，有的认为没必要，有的因为没找到，有的故意回避引用，以凸显自己研究的“新颖”和“价值”。有的作者虽然引用了相关文献，但没有结合自身的研究讨论，也就是没有把前人的研究结果和自己的研究结果融合在一起讨论。如此讨论，导致论文分割（Balkanization），读者无法系统深入的了解和理解你的研究结果。

一个诚实的或者成熟的作者，应该对研究结果有一个客观的评价。既强调研究的成功和可取之处，也要指出研究的局限和不足。与外国作者不同，中国的许多作者不喜欢谈论研究的不足。

为使你的信息表达清楚，在清楚全面的阐述、支持、解释和论证你的答案和讨论其他重要的和直接相关的问题前提下，讨论部分应尽可能的简短。必须注意，讨论旨在对结果进行评论，而不是重复叙述结果。不应过多着墨于不太重要的枝节问题，因为这会使你的重要信息模糊不清。“文”无完“文”（No paper is perfect）。关键要让读者知道什么是确信无疑的，什么只是假设推理性的。

“讨论”部分的结构组织很重要，开始写作前，应草拟提纲，以符合逻辑的形式组织你的思想。可以采用链状图、问题树、数字编号或其他组织结构。汲取前人的经验，结合本人十年编辑工作的体会，总结写作“讨论”的十个步骤，以期有助于组织你的思想。

1 以“从特殊到一般”的逻辑结构来组织“讨论”：从你的发现到文献，到理论，到实践。在你写作“讨论”时，可讨论一切，但必须简洁、简短和明确。

2 以重申你试验验证的假设和回答引言中提出的问题作为开始。使用相同的术语，相同的动词时态（现在时）和你在引言中提出问题时相同的观点。

3 以试验结果支持答案。阐明你的结果如何与预期和已有文献相关联，清楚地说明为什么你的研究结果可接受，如何与该主题已发表文献的知识相一致或吻合。

4 讨论与所提问题相关的所有结果，简明的概括研究结果的主要含意，不管结果统计显著性如何。

5 应以正确的逻辑顺序来描述每一个主要的发现/结果所揭示的模型、原理和关系。表述这些信息的逻辑顺序很重要。首先陈述答案；其次提供相关结果；然后再引用他人的研究结果。如果必要，将读者指向插图或表格，以加深对“故事”的理解。

6 论证你的答案。如果必要，可解释为什么你的答案令人满意，而别人的不满意。只有提供正反两方面的论据，才能使你的解释更令人信服。

7 讨论和评价对结果相互矛盾的解释。这是一个好的讨论的标志。（中国的许多作者通常回避讨论与结论不一致的内容。）讨论任何意想不到的结果。当讨论一个意外的发现时，以发现作为段落的开始，然后叙述之。

8 指明潜在的局限和缺点，评述这些因素对你的结果解释的重要性以及如何影响研究结果的正确性。当指出这些局限和不足之处时，避免使用道歉的语气。

9 为进一步的研究提供建议（至多两条）。不要提出在该研究内本该谈及的建议，这样会表明你对数据的检验和诠释不充分。

10 阐明本研究的结果和结论如何的重要以及如何的影响我们的知识或如何影响我们对所研究问题的理解。

讨论3:

写好英语科技论文的诀窍：主动迎合读者期望，预先回答专家可能质疑

周耀旗印地安那大学信息学院印地安那大学医学院计算生物学和生物信息中心以此文献给母校中国科技大学五十周年校庆（刊载在《中国科大报》 579期和《中国科大新闻网》）

前言 2

导言 2

读者需要什么？ 2

读者期望什么？ 3读者对句子的期望 3读者对段落的期望 4

读者对图表的期望 5

审稿人要什么 ?6

怎样满足审稿人 7文章的结构 7

方法/实验步骤 7结果部分 8标题 8引言部分 8讨论部分 10摘要部分 10

总结 10

结束语 11

致谢 11

引用 11

前言

我的第一篇英语科技论文写作是把在科大的学士毕业论文翻译成英文。当我一九九零年从纽约州立大学博士毕业时，发表了 20多篇英语论文。但是，我对怎样写高质量科技论文的理解仍旧处于初级阶段，仅知道尽量减少语法错误。这是因为大多数时间我都欣然接受我的博士指导老师 Dr. George Stell和Dr. Harold Friedman的修改，而不知道为什么要那样改，也没有主动去问。这种情况一直持续到我去北卡州立大学做博士后。我的博士后指导老师 Dr. Carol Hall建议我到邻近的杜克大学去参加一个为期两天的写作短训班。这堂由 Gopen教授主办的短训班真使我茅塞顿开。第一次，我知道了读者在阅读中有他们的期望，要想写好科技论文，最有效的方法是要迎合他们的期望。这堂写作课帮我成功地完成了我的第一个博士后基金申请，有机会进入哈佛大学 Dr. Martin Karplus组。在哈佛大学的五年期间，在 Karplus教授的指导下，我认识到一篇好的论文需要从深度广度进行里里外外自我审查。目前，我自己当了教授，有了自己的科研组，也常常审稿。我觉得有必要让我的博士生和博士后学好写作。我不认为我自己是写作专家。我的论文也常常因为这样或那样的原因被退稿。但是我认为和大家共享我对写作的理解和我写作的经验教训，也许大家会少走一些我走过的弯路。由于多年未用中文写作，请大家多多指正。来信请寄： yqzhou@iupui.edu。欢迎访问我的网站： http://sparks.informatics.iupui.edu。

导言

通常来讲，研究生和博士后从他的导师那儿得到研究方向。经过多次反复试验，得到一些好的结果。接下来他们需要对得到的数据进行总结和分析，写成论文。好的结果是一篇好论文的前提。但是对相同的结果，一篇精写的论文会更容易被高档杂志接受。而写得不好的论文很可能被退稿。论文的数量和质量是学生和导师事业发展的敲门砖。不成文，便成仁，是学术生涯的写照。

很多学生以为当结果到手的时候研究就结束了。他们写的草稿，常常把原始数据放在一起，没有对方法和数据进行详细分析，没有对当今论文的评述。事实上，写作是研究不可分割的一部分。此刻是弄懂方法的成功与失败，寻找结果的解释及其隐含的意义，以及与其他相关研究进行比较的时候。

我们为什么需要在写作上如此认真努力？原因很简单。一个研究结果只有在被别人使用时才有意义。而想被别人使用，文章必须能引起其他科学家的兴趣，而且得保证其他人能看懂并可以重复和再现你的结果。只有可以被理解的研究才会被重复，也只有可以被再现的工作才能导致别人的引用和跟踪。而你的论文被引用的数量常常用来衡量研究的影响力。从某种角度看，写作就像是把你的工作成果推销给其他的科学家。

为了更好的推销，科学论文必须满足它独特的顾客：由聪明能干的科学家组成的尖端读者。它必须能先说服（通常也是竞争对手的）同行们，因为他们的评审是文章在发表前的第一道关口。同时，它也必须满足一般读者的要求。为了达到这个目标，我们首先要理解他们需要什么？

读者需要什么？

你的文章的潜在读者可能有刚进入这领域的新手：大学生和研究生，也有专家（潜在审稿人 )。他们对你的领域会有不同程度的了解。因此，写文章的时候应该力求简单到可以被新手理解，同时深刻到可以引起专家的兴趣。

所有的科学家（不论是学生还是他们的导师 )往往都很忙。大量期刊杂志使他们不可能仔细阅读每一篇论文。他们通常希望能在最短时间内找到文章最重要的信息。典型的情况是如果文章标题不吸引人，他们或许就会跳过这篇论文。如果文章的摘要没有包含重要的新方法或新结果，他们不会去读这篇文章。即使已经决定要读的论文，他们也会跳过很多段落直接去找自己最感兴趣的地方。因此，保证文章的结构能使读者很快找到所需的信息非常重要。文章的关键在于结构，不在于语法。语法错误易改，结构错误则往往让人无从下手，不知所云。我审过一些国内同行的论文，结构问题很常见。

总之，一篇文章只有在不需太多努力就可以理解的情况下才会被广泛地引用。文章清晰的关键就是使读者能在他们想找的地方找到他们需要的东西。这也就是说，要想让读者不费力理解你的论文，你必须费力去满足他们的期望。

读者期望什么？

读者对句子的期望

1.读者希望在句子的开始看到熟悉的信息。句子是文章的最小功能单元。最容易理解的句子是整句都在说读者知道的东西。但这对科技论文是不可能的，因为只有新的东西才会被发表。事实上科技论文通常会包含很多新术语，所以一个容易理解的句子应该从读者熟悉的信息（或刚刚提过的）开始而以新信息结束，并在它们之间平滑地过渡。好文章的所有句子都应该这样从旧到新地平滑过渡。写好一句开头的金科玉律是问问你自己：“我以前有没有提过这个概念？”大多数文章很难读是因为很多新概念在没有被介绍之前就使用了。例如：

Samples for the 2-dimensional projection of kinetic trajectories are shown in Figure 7. The coil states are loosely gathered while the native states can form a black cluster with extremely high density in the 2-dimensional projection plane.

这里从第一句到第二句信息无法流动。“ The coil states”不知道是从何而来的。读者会发现下面改动后的句子更容易明白。

Kinetic trajectories are projected onto xx and yy variables in Figure 7. This figure shows two populated states. One corresponds to loosely gathered coil states while the other is the native state with a higher density.

在这个新段里，新插入的第二句使每句均能从旧信息出发到新信息结束。第一句与第二句之间以“ Figure”相连而第二句与第三句之间以“ two states”相连。而新信息“ coil states”则出现在第三句的最后。整段环环相连，成为一个整体。再看一个例子：

The accuracy of the model structures is given by TM-score. In case of a perfect match to the experimental structure, TM-score would be 1.

在第二个句子里，旧信息“ TM-score”被埋在中间，被新信息“ a perfect match to experimental structure”打断了。这里建议修改如下：

The accuracy of the model structures is measured by TM-score, which is equal to 1 if there is a perfect match to the experimental structure.

科技写作中的最大问题就是新旧信息顺序颠倒。新信息和旧信息对作者来说可能不是很好区分，因为他非常熟悉所有的信息。为了避免这种问题，不管什么时候，每当你开始写新句，你应该问问自己，这些词前面有没有被提到过。一定要把提到过的放前面，没提过的放后面。

2.读者想在主语之后立刻看到行为动词。对一个说明谁在做什么的句子，读者需要找到动词才能理解。如果动词和主语之间相隔太远，阅读就会被寻找动词打断。而打断阅读就会使句子难以理解。这里有个例子： ^[1]

The smallest URFs (URFA6L), a 207-nucleotide (nt) reading frame overlapping out of phase the NH2-terminal portion of the adenosinetrip hosphatase (ATPase) subinit 6 gene has been identified as the animal equivalent of the recently discovered yeast H+-ATPase subunit 8 gene.

同样的句子，将动词放在主语之后： ^[1]

The smallest of the URFs is URFA6L, a 207-nucleotide (nt) reading frame overlapping out of phase the NH2-terminal portion of the adenosinetriphosphatase (ATPase) subinit 6 Gene; it has been identified as the animal equivalent of the recently discovered yeast H+-ATPase subunit 8 gene.

这样新的句子就更加平衡了。尽量避免过长的主语和过短的宾语。这就像头重脚轻的人很难站稳。短的主语紧跟着动词加上长的宾语效果会更好。

3.读者期望每句只有一个重点，这个重点通常在句尾。比较下面两个句子，我们可以感觉到他们着重强调不同的东西。 ^[1]

URFA6L has been identified as the animal equivalent of the recently discovered yeast H+-ATPase subunit 8 gene.

Recently discovered yeast H+-ATPase subunit 8 gene has a corresponding animal equivalent gene URFA6L.

很明显，前面的句子是关于一个最近发现的酵母基因，而第二句则着重强调了它有一个和动物一致的基因。另外一个例子：^[1]

The enthalpy of hydrogen bond formation between the nucleoside bases 2-deoxyguanosine (dG) and 2-deoxycytidine (dC) has been determined by direct measurement.

这个句子看起来好像是在强调“ direct measurement”。这不太像是原作者的目的。颠倒一下会使句子更加平衡。

[1]

We have directly measured the enthalpy of hydrogen bond formation between the nucleoside bases 2-deoxyguanosine (dG) and 2-deoxycytidine (dC).

新的句子更简单而且更短，同时避免了头重脚轻的症状。总之，句尾是读者对该句最后的印象。把最好的，最重要的，和想要读者记住的东西放在句尾。

读者对段落的期望

每一个段落都应该只讲一个故事。在一段里表述多个观点会使读者很难知道该记住什么、这段想表达什么。一段的第一句要告诉读者这一段是讲什么的。这样读者想跳过这段就可以跳过。一段的最后一句应该是这段的结论或者告诉读者下一段是什么。段落中的句子应该由始到终通过逻辑关系连接，实现由旧信息到新信息的流动。比如这一段： ^[1]

The enthalpy of hydrogen bond formation between the nucleoside bases 2-deoxyguanosine (dG) and 2-deoxycytidine (dC) has been determined by direct measurement. dG and dC were derivatized at the 5 and 3 hydroxylith triisopropylsilyl groups to obtain solubility of the

nucleosides in non-aqueous solto prevent the ribose hydroxyls from forming hydrogen bonds. From isoperibolic titration measurements, the enthalpy of dC:dG base pair formation is -6.650.32 kcal/mol.

很难知道作者在这段里想表达什么。从这段的起始和结束看来，焓 (enthalpy)应该是他想表达的重点。下面是重新组合后的段落。 ^[1]

We have directly measured the enthalpy of hydrogen bond formation between the nucleoside bases 2-deoxyguanosine (dG) and 2-deoxycytidine (dC). dG and dC were derivatized at the 5 and 3 hydroxyls with triisopropylsilyl groups; these groups serve both to solubilize the nuclides in

non-aqueous solvents and to prevent the ribose hydroxyls from formis. The enthalpy of dC:dG base pair formation is -6.650.32 kcal/mol according to isoperibolic titration measurements,

首句描述了整段的主题。原段里的第一句颠倒是为了 1）使新信息“ dG”和“ dC”在句子最后并强调它们。 2）更好地跟下面一句衔接。原段里的第二句被分成两部分，这样每一部分只表达了一个观点。最后一句时总结整段。再看另一个例子：^[1]

Large earthquakes along a given fault segment do not occur at random intervals because it takes time to accumulate the strain energy for the rupture. The rates at which tectonic plates move and accumulate strain at their boundaries are approximately uniform. Therefore, in first approximation, one may expect that large ruptures of the same fault segment will occur at approximately constant time intervals. If subsequent main shocks have different amounts of slipacross the fault, then the recurrence time may vary, and the basic idea of periodic main shocks must be modified.

在这个例子里，前两句共同阐明了积累张力的速度（ Rate Of Strain Accumulation)。然而，第一句里的旧信息并没有放在第二句的开始。读者读到第三句的时候通常就不明白这段到底要讲什么了。更清晰的描述应该如下： ^[1]

Large earthquakes along a given fault segment do not occur at random intervals because it takes time to accumulate the strain energy for the rupture. The rates of strain accumulation at the boundaries of tectonic plates are approximately uniform. Therefore, nearly constant time interval

(at first approximation) would be expected between large ruptures of the same fault segment[However?], the recurrence time may vary; the basic idea of periodic main shocks may need to be modified if subsequent main shocks have different amounts of slip across the fault.

新段现在着重阐明了地震的发生频率。下划线标明了以前描述过的旧信息。很明显，新旧信息的连接是理解这段的关键。从旧信息到新信息的流动是使读者轻松阅读的最佳方式。写文章的目的不是去测试读者的阅读能力，而是考验作者的表达能力。不能怪人没看懂，只能怪自己没写清楚。常常听到这样的抱怨：那审稿人连这都不懂 !审稿人也可以说：连这个也写不清楚。

读者对图表的期望

一些没有耐心的读者会直接通过图表来判断一篇文章是否值得一读。怎样能使读者不需读正文就能理解图表是至关重要的。对于表来说，由于我们是从左向右阅读的，我们熟悉的信息应该出现在左边而新的信息出现在右边。例如，下面列出的表 1和表 2是仅仅调换了两列。比较一下那个表格更易理解。

表１: ^[1]表 2: ^[1]

Temp (°C)	Time
25	0
27	3
29	6
32	12
32	15

Time	Temp (°C)
0	25
3	27
6	29
12	32
15	32

显然因为我们更熟悉时间作为独立变量，表 2就比表 1容易读些。制表的另一条规则是把最好的留在最后。也就是最能使人感兴趣的结果应该放在最右边一列或在最后一行，因为这些地方是读者结束阅读并能留下印象的地方。下面的例子比较了各种方法的精度。最后一行展示了现在得到的结果。

表 3:

Benchmark	SALIGN	Lindahl	PROSPECTOR 3	LiveBench 8
Method	Alignment	MaxSub	MaxSub	MaxSub
SPARKS	53.1%	325.9	529.0	38.3
SPARKS2	54.9%	341.0	591.0	40.7
This work	56.6%	349.2	601.9	42.2

对于图，我们至少应该对所有的标签（数字、座标和说明）使用大的黑体 Helvetica字体。只画出重要的区域。尽量不用彩色就能使曲线达到最大的区分（彩色的图很贵 )。^[2]

这是我喜欢的一个图。它说明了一些画图的原理。对你的工作用实线而对别人的工作用点画线。间隔使用实心和空心符号来使曲线之间的不同更加明确。详细说明 X和Y座标，标题不用缩写。

审稿人要什么 ?

文章在发表前必须经过审稿人的评审。他们一般是相关领域的专家甚至是你的竞争者。他们会尽力寻找你文章中的毛病。有时，由于不同的观点和竞争的需要，审稿人或许会试图阻止你的文章发表。因此，文章必须写得理由充足。在被别人挑剔之前，自己必须首先鸡蛋里挑骨头，预先回答审稿人的可能质疑。

怎样满足审稿人？

1. ).只提出“一”个中心命题。论文里的观点太多，不但不好写，问题也容易多，读者也不易记住你要说什么。

2. ).在这个中心命题的基础上，用一个迷人 (但绝不夸张 )的标题来吸引审稿人的兴趣。无偿审稿使审稿人只审批感兴趣的论文。如果你不能引起审稿人的兴趣，那最好不要发表那篇文章。编辑们有时候会很郁闷，因为找不到有兴趣的审稿人。

3. ). 合理解释每一个参数，合理说明每一个步骤。审稿人没时间考虑细节。程序和参数的合理化显示出你知道你在做什么，而不是凑数据。没理由要找理由，有理由要强调。

4. ).问问你自己是否提供了足够重复你工作的所有细节。审稿人 (或读者 )越容易再现你的工作，他就越可能接受你的文章。当然，审稿人并不会真正去重做你的工作，但你必须通过你的描述使他相信可以重做。

5. ). 必须有说服力！尽量做彻底而不是半成品的工作！用多方面测试来证明你的中心命题。要使文章像律师证明无罪官司，预先回答一切可能提出的疑问。

6. ).引用所有重要的研究工作，特别是经典力作。写作的时候要再做全面文献检索。

为了达到这些目标，写科学论文的时候必须遵照一定的框架结构。

文章的结构

典型的科学论文包括标题、摘要、引言、方法 /实验步骤、结果、讨论、致谢，和参考文献。这样的结构是用来帮助读者快速找到他们感兴趣的信息。把信息放错地方会使读者糊涂。常犯的错误是混淆事实 (结果 )和解释 (讨论 )。讨论是对结果的解释及说明它的意义，而不是重复结果的描述。

一篇论文是从摘要，引言开始，这里建议从方法和结果部分开始写，因为你对方法和结果最熟悉，此外只有更好地理解方法和结果，才能确定中心命题。而标题，引言和讨论的写作都需要中心命题。我们应该从最熟悉的事情开始，就像读者从他们最熟悉的地方开始理解一样。

方法 /实验步骤

如果文章是关于新的方法、技术或算法，要非常详细地写它的新颖之处。要用有逻辑的、合理的方式来描述它。这会帮助读者抓住新方法的要领。如果这个方法使用参数，则要把每一个参数 (或参数的取值 )合理化，或者是以前用过的，或者可以从物理或数学推导出来，或者通过了广泛的测试及优化。如果无法保证它的合理性，那就必须描述改变它会造成的影响 (实际的结果应该在结果部分或讨论部分，方法部分仅包含影响的描述 )。如果没有测试它们的合理性，你应该解释为什么 (做的代价太贵了？太费时间了？或者需要延期到将来做 )。

对于新方法的发展，你同样需要设计不同的方法来测试。让人信服就需要做尽可能多的测试。你所能找到或设计的测试越多，你的工作就越会被其他人所接受和使用。

当完成了方法部分以后，问一问自己以下的问题： 1)新的术语是不是都定义了？ 2)如果你是第一次读这部分，你能否得到重复整个工作的所有信息？记住，不要隐藏任何窍门或使用的捷径。人们如果不能重复你的结果的话就不会相信你的论文。永远不要弄虚作假！别人不是傻子，一山更比一山高，聪明的大有人在。如果你伪造数据，心存侥幸不会被人发现。如果真的没人发现的话，那就是没有任何人想重复或使用你的结果，那只能说明你的结果根本不值得发表，毫无意义。若要人不知，除非己莫为，这是千真万确的真理。

结果部分

当你开始写结果部分时，先考虑一下结果的意义。也就是说，你理解你的结果吗？这些结果是不是告诉了你更深刻的东西？你能从很多不同角度来理解结果吗？你能设计证明或者反驳你的一些解释的新测试吗？

如果你发现了新现象，你必须证明你的结果不是你方法制造出来的 (讨论部分的一个好内容 )。它可以在不同的条件下重复吗？如果你发展了一个新方法，你必须证明这个方法的重要性。它是否改进了现有的方法？你的结果部分必须用不同的角度或多重测试来支持新发现或验证新方法的重要性。

一旦你对结果有更好的理解，你需要决定卖点，也就是说这篇文章最有意义的一个观点是什么？确定这篇文章的中心命题之后要组织所有的段落来证明、支持它，用数据 (有必要的话再加数据 )来证明它。同时也要排除其它可能性。放弃与中心命题无关的数据，即使这些数据是很辛苦得来的。

标题

当你有了中心命题之后，就该决定文章的标题了。标题可以为你的方法，你的结果或结果的隐含意义做广告。标题是用一句话来概括你的文章。应该把最重要，最吸引人的信息放进标题。比如，标题 “Steric restrictiin protei

folding: an alpha-helix cannot be followed by a conti面，标“Interpreting the folding kinetics of helical proteins”突出了结果的含义。用标题 “Native proteins are surface-molten solids: Application of the Lindemann criterion for the solid versus liquid state”的话，同时突出了方法和结果的含义。注意标题 “Native proteins are surface-molten solids”是结果的解释，而不是结果本身。用既广泛又具体的标题，这样才能吸引更多的读者。

引言部分

中心命题和标题都决定了以后，就该写引言了。第一件该做的事就是围绕中心命题来收集所有相关文献。搜索并研究所有最近和相关的文章 (通过对中心命题关键字的搜索或用引用索引 )。确认你有所有最新的论文。引用所有重要的文章。如果你不引用别人的文献，别人也不会引用你的！如果你想谁引用你的工作，你要先引用他的。你引用的文章越多，他们越可能阅读并引用你的文章。因为人们更加关注引用他们的论文。仔细读你所引用的文章，避免引用错误。在引用上，不要偷懒。

引言的第一句最难写，因为它决定了你整个引言的走向。我的办法是把第一句和文章的标题连起来。在第一段以最基本和常见的术语来定义标题里用的一些术语。从这个术语，引入研究的领域和它的重要性。第二段应该对这个研究领域作一个鉴定性的论述。如果中心命题是关于解决一个问题的方法。这一段就应该指出这个当前研究中现存未解决的问题。描述解决这个问题的难度或挑战。第三段引入你提出的办法和它大致会带来什么效果。你可以大略地描述你的结果和它的含义。这里有个例子。^[3]

Assessing secondary structure assignments of protein structures by using pairwise sequence-alignment benchmarks

The secondary structure of a protein refers to the local conformation of its polypeptide backbone. Knowing secondary structures of proteins iessential for their structure classification, understanding folding dynamics and mechanims, and discovering conserved structural/functional motifs. Secondary structure informatiis also useful for sequence and

multiple sequence alignment, structure alience to structure alignment (or threading). As a result, predicting secondary structures from protein sequences continues to be an active field of research fifty six years after Pauling and Corey first predicted that the most common regular patterns of proteibackbones are the α-helix and the β-sheet. Prediction and application of proteidary structures rely on prior assignment of the secondary-structure elements from a given protein structure by human or computational methods.

Many computational methods have been developed to automate the assignment of secondary structures. Examplare DSSP,STRIDE, DEFINE, P-SEA, KAKSI,P-CURVE,

and VoTAP. These methods are based on either the hydrogen-bond pattern, geometric features, expert knowledge or their combinations. However, they often disagree on their assignments. For example, disagreement among DSSP, P-CURVE, and DEFINE can be as large as 25%. More beta sheet is assigned by XTLSSTR and more pi-helix by SECSTR than by DSSP. Thediscrepancy among different methods is caused by non-ideal configurations of helices and sheets. As a result, defining theboundaries between helix, sheet, and coil is problematical and a significant source of discrepancies between different methods.

Inconsistent assignment of secondary structures by different methods highlights the need for a criterion or a benchmark of “standard” assignments that could be used to assess and compare assignment methods. One possibility is to use the secondary structures assigned by the authors who solved the protein structures. STRIDE, in fact, has been optimized to achieve the highest agreement with the authors’ annotations. However, it is not clear what is the criterion used for manual or automatic assignment of secondary structures by different authors. Another possibility is to treat the consensus prediction by several methods as the gold standard. However, there is no obvious reason why each method should weight equally in assigning secondary structures and which method should be used in consensus. Other used criteriinclude helix-capping propensity, the deviation from ideal helical and sheet

configuratistructural accuracy produced by sequence-to-structure alignment guided by secondary structure assignment.

In this paper, we propose to use sequence-alignment benchmarks for assessing secondary structure assignments. These benchmarks are produced by 3D-structure alignment of structurally homologous proteins. Instead of assessing the accuracy of secondary-structure assignment directly, which is not yet feasible, we compare the two assignments of secondary structures in structurally aligned positions. We assume that the best method should assign the same secondary-structure element to the highest fraction of structurally aligned positions. Certainly, structurally aligned positions do not always have the same secondary structures. Moreover, different structure-alignment methods do not always produce the same lt. Nevertheless, this criterion provides a means to locate a

secondary-structure assinment method that is most consistent with tertiary structure alignment. We suggest that this approach provides an objective evaluation of secondary structure assignment methods.

在这个例子里，标题推荐了一个评估指派蛋白质二级结构的方法。第一段以二级结构的定义开始（与标题相连 )。整段描述了二级结构的重要性。最后一句过渡到指派二级结构的计算方法（下一段的主题 )。注意“计算方法”放在句子的最后是为了强调而且和第二段的开始连接在起来。第二段则聚焦在计算方法中存在的问题。旧信息“计算方法”逐渐的变到了“它们的不一致”。第三段的第一句把主题从“不一致”（旧信息）转变成了“评估的办法”（新信息)。然后，介绍了这个领域已有的工作。第四段引入新方法并讨论了新方法的优点。第五段（这里没有给出）将会简要地讨论结果。每一个引言应该包括研究领域的介绍和意义，做这工作的具体原因，结果和隐含的意义。一般而言，读者读完引言，对论文的来龙去脉就应该清清楚楚了。

讨论部分

现在到了你写论文的最后一部分。很多人认为讨论部分最难写。他们常常不知道该写什么。学生常常不能把结果从他们的解释、含意和结论中分离出来。此外，他们不善于思考可能存在的其他解释。好的讨论通常以得到的结果和解释的评论开始。其它可用于讨论的内容有：参数改变对结果的影响，与其他研究相比还有待解决的问题，将来或正在进行的工作（防止别人从事你显而易见的，立刻就能实现的后续工作 )。这里有一段文章中的讨论部分。 ^[4]

One question about the complex homopolymer phase diagram presented here is whether it is caused by the discontinuous feature of the square-well potential. We cannot give a direct answer because the DMD silation is required to obtain well-converged results for the thermodynamics. However, the critical enomena predicted for a fluid composed of partiles interacting with a square-well potentil are as realistic as those predicted for a fluimposed of particles interacting wiotential. Also an analogous complex phase diagram is found in simulations of LJ clusters. The present results for square-well homopolymers may well be found in more

realistic homopolymer models and even in real polymers.

这一段探究了可供选择的解释。

摘要部分

整篇文章写完了。你需要写文章的摘要了。典型的摘要包括课题领域的重要性（回到标题 )，要研究的问题，你方法的独特性，结果的意义和影响。这里有个例子。 ^[3]

How to make an objective assignment of secondary structures based on a protein structure is an unsolved problem. Defining the boundaries between helix, sheet, and coil structures is arbitrary, and commonly accepted standard assignments do not exist. Here, we propose a criterion that assesses secondary-structure assignment based on the similarity of the secondary structures assigned to structurally aligned residues in sequence-alignment benchmarks. Thiiterii

used to rank six secondary-structure assiP-SEA, and SEGNO with three established sequence-alignment benchmarks (PREFAB, SABmark and SALIGN). STRIDE and KAKSI achieve comparable success rates in assigning the same secondary structure elements to structurally aligned residues in the three benchmarks. Their success rates are between 1-4% higher than those of the other four methods. The consensus of STRIDE, KAKSI, SECSTR, and P-SEA, called SKSP, improves assignments over the best single method in each benchmark by an additional 1%. These results support the usefulness of the sequence alignment benchmarks as the benchmarks for secondary structure assignment.

前两句陈述了问题。第三句提出了解决办法。这些句子后面跟着结果。整个摘要以总结收尾。注意摘要里的主体部

分是结果及其意义和影响。总结

1. 认真对待写作。尽你最大努力花时间写作。它是科学研究的重要一环。文章没写好，没人看，没人用，等于没发表。

2. 除非这个研究是全面彻底的，而且你试了所有可以支持你结论的方法，否则不要去发表。

1. 重新思考，并合理解释为什么做这项工作，做了什么，什么是最重要的发现？为什么用这个方法？为什么用

2. 这些参数？什么是以前做过的（更新文献搜索 )？不同在什么地方？
3. 要从批判的角度来看你的工作，想一想别人会怎样来挑毛病。只有这样，才能找到弱点，进一步发展。我的许多论文是在反复讨论中大幅度修改，许多计算经常要重做。只有理顺和理解结果，文章才会更有意义。

4. 要能回答所有合理的质疑。如果你自己有疑问，一定要搞清楚，否则别人又怎会相信。不要轻易相信得到的革命性发现。

5. 以高标准严要求写论文，不与烂文章比，争取建立自己的品牌。不要隐藏任何事实，不作假，不要低估其他科学家的智慧。让你的研究可重复。把所有的材料和数据上网。

6. 从头（标题）到尾（结论或讨论）要从旧信息过渡到新信息。永远不要在句子的开头引入新信息。切忌在术语被定义之前使用它们。

7. 照抄别人文章里的句子是不道德的。这暴露出作者不愿思考，只走捷径，不是一个真正科学家的料。同时抄来的句子常常会打断文章中原有信息的流通，不利读者对文章的理解。一定需要用别人的原句，就必须用上引号，并引用该文献。

8. 在段首要有阐明整段主题的句子，在段尾要有连到下段的过渡句。从标题到结论都要连贯。句句相扣，段段相连，让一篇论文是一个整体而不是杂乱无章地把句子堆积在一起。这样才能使读者享受阅读你的文章。

9. 写，重写，再重写。没有人能第一次就写好。不花时间，不下功夫，写不好。我的文章一般要修改十次以上。

结束语

写科技论文不能像写散文，想到哪里就写到哪里。好的论文就像一部好的小说一样，需要构思策划，情节要一环扣一环，而结局是令人意外的。当然这一切，前提是你必须有令人激动的结果。这篇短文的目的是在有较好结果的基础上，怎样更好地实事求是地宣传你的结果。主要方法是使文章简单易懂，条理清楚，同时又全面深刻，令人信服。我反对虚假的包装，夸张的描述，这样往往适得其反。事实上，科技论文要避免用带有情感的形容词像 Exciting或 Remarkable来描述你的结果。也就是说要通过结果的描述来使读者体会到“ Exciting”或“ Remarkable”，让事实来说话。正如说笑话的人自己不笑会更有效果。

致谢

此文中的一些例子出自 “The Science of Scientific Writing” by G. D. Gopen and J. A. Swan, American Scientist, 78, 550-558, 1990.我在杜克大学 Gopen教授 1995年年度短训班受益非浅。我要特别感谢我的导师 MartiKarplus(哈佛大学 )，George Stell (纽约州立大学－石溪校区 ), Harold L. Friedman (纽约州立大学－石溪校区 )Carol Hall (北卡罗来纳州立大学 )的鼓励和指导。没有他们，我不会有那么多机会练习英文写作。最后，我要感谢我的学生和博士后。他们对科学的贡献使我可以继续写论文，基金申请，或评论。此文中的一部分例子来自与他们合作的文章。此文初稿是用英文写的。由于我的中文打字速度太慢，特别感谢徐贝思帮我翻译成中文初稿。如果有不妥的地方是我的问题，请多指教。此文在网上出现以后，得到不少关注。特别感谢赵立平教授的建议及感谢许多校友和网友的指正和鼓励。

讨论4

何种方式写SCI学术论文痛苦少些

从发表第一篇论文，到现在快20年了，虽然我一直从事着科研工作，可每次写论文总觉得是个苦差事。近几年在论文写作中找到了些窍门，不知是否是这些窍门起了作用，反正写论文比以前轻松多了。当然巧妇难为无米之炊，所以要有足够的数据才能写得出像样的论文（可以参阅我前面的博文《多少数据才够发表一篇像样的论文》）。有了足够数据后，有兴趣者可以试一试我的这些技巧，当然每个人的写作习惯不一样，不灵者可别见怪。 　　科学论文其实就是“八股文”，所包含的格式大同小异，主要有题目、作者、摘要、关键词、引言、材料和方法、结果、讨论、致谢，以及参考文献。但你的论文要想发表，都必须有新发现，如何让你的新发现以论文的形式表达出来让读者明白，并说服读者或审稿人相信你的发现是令人信服的，并不是件容易的事。如果你按上面说的论文顺序写下去，你一定会觉得枯燥、痛苦，甚至产生厌写的情绪（至少我曾经是这样），结果是写写停停，很容易导致久拖未完的局面。 要改变这一局面，我的做法是，首先把论文的题目写好，这是论文中的精华中的精华，你只能用一个短句告诉读者你的这篇论文的最新发现,同时也告诉自己下面所有的写作都围绕这个题目的内容展开。题目安好了，你应该知道用怎样的证据Show给读者，这些证据就是你的结果，所以接下来的事是列出你的结果的分题目，表明你用哪几方面的证据来论证你的题目。写好结果的分题目，别急着用文字来描述你的结果，而应先完成论文结果的直观表达方式——图表。作图对我来说是一件令人兴奋的事情，你想想，一两年，甚至几年来的工作（原始数据）就要变成漂亮的图，怎不令人期待。别小看这股兴奋和期待的心情，这可是快速完成论文的动力，如果没有这样的心情，估计做科研对你是一个沉重的负担，不如赶紧转行。作图我喜欢用Photoshop软件来做，因为其功能比较强大。统计图表可用EXCEL或别的统计学软件，然后再PASTE到Photoshop上。注意，作图前一定要参考你将要投的杂志对图表的要求，同时作图的内容要围绕你列出的结果分题目来进行，表格如能用图表示就尽量用图。通常一篇论文有六个图表即可。图表完成后，接下来的事情是我们从小就得到训练的功夫——看图释义，也就是写Figure Legends。这个应该比较容易，先给图安个题目，再按图上所标的A、B、C、D顺序解释图上内容的含义。图表是论文结果的精华，论文写到这你应该对你的论文的内容、水平和意义心中很有数，根据图表的内容，在写过Figure Legends后现在用文字在你所列的结果分标题下详细描述你的结果应该是顺理成章的事。材料和方法是最好写的部分，只要把你所用方法的PROTOCOL略做些修改放进去即可。写完以上容易的部分，你会有什么感想，我会给我自我鼓励，写论文也不是很难的事，瞧，进展不是挺快的吗？接下来要写的是论文最难写的部分：引言（Introduction）和讨论（Discussion）。说难写是相对于前面说的结果、材料和方法而言。其实，你把你的论文想明白了也就不难了。引言部分一定要说清楚你为什么要做这项研究，这项研究最大看点是什么，发现了什么，有什么重要意义。讨论部分则要针对你的结果进行，结合文献说清楚你的结果代表什么意思（What do your results mean?）, 然后推论出你的结论。最后剩下的摘要、作者、关键词、致谢、参考文献就像填空一样完成就行了。 我喜欢的论文写作的顺序如下图所示。 　　这些经验和窍门对我最近三年写的几篇论文还很管用，你不妨试试, 说不定从此写论文也成了你快乐的工作。