help me please

Hello Deaf, I hope the information I'll give may help:). Any scientific text should contain the following aspects.First, the writer must be subjective. i.e he must not express his feeling in the text or give his opinion about it. Also, he must write scientificly without any emotional words. the scientific text should contain the chronologicle order of the events.i.e it needs logicle ideas in order to describe the events. Besides, the scientific text depends on the arguments and proves. Let's say, it is an argumentative text that make you convinced.Also, the structure of it is much more analyticle. It analyses the events in scientific way far from literary expressions. Well, I hope tha will be useful for you.Gooooooood luck

Wow, that's great ! Thank you EmilySo for the very useful and well explained information.
Here you surly meant objective, rather than subjective.

EmilySo wrote:First, the writer must be subjective.

Again, thanks and keep it up May God bless you

Hello dear all,
I have a document that discusses " Scientific Writing " in general. I believe scientific text writing is part of scientific writing, thus I decided to post this document . The document is part of my postgraduation studies provided by Doctor Marjane from Fèz University
Here we go:

Scientific Writing: Journal Papers

Part I: Introduction

1. General Features of Scientific Writing

Clarity, Reception, Simplicity, Appropriate Language

2. Some History of Scientific Writing

Early Journals

The Advent of the IMRAD Format

Infectious Diseases and the Search
for Miracle Drugs

Part I: Introduction

1. General Features of Scientific
Writing

1.1
Clarity

Scientific papers published in primary research journals are accepted for publication precisely because they contribute new knowledge. Thus, when stating new findings clarity is strictly essential. Successful scientific experimentation is the result of a clear mind attacking a clearly stated problem and producing clearly stated conclusions.
Hence, absolute clarity is a must in scientific writing.


1.2 Scientific papers shouldn’t fall silently in the woods.

Scientific communication is a two-way process. A scientific experiment is not complete until the results have been published. Moreover, a published scientific paper is useless unless it is both received and understood by its intended audience.

1.3 Clear and Simple

“The best English is that which gives the sense in the fewest possible words.” Instructions to Authors Journal of Bacteriology

Scientific writing should be as clear and simple and well-ordered as possible. In scientific writing, there is little need for embellishment. The flowery literary devices, metaphors, similes and the like are very likely to divert attention from the substance to the style or cause confusion and are seldom used if at all in writing scientific papers.

2. Some History

2.1 Early Journals

The first scientific journal, Journal des Sçavans, was published in France in January 1665. This was shortly before the appearance of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London in England (March, 1665). Since that time, journals have served as the primary means of communication in the sciences. These early journals published “descriptive” papers where scientific observations were reported in simple chronological order, a style that is still being used today in "letters" journals, in case reports in medicine, in geological surveys, etc.

2.2 The IMRAD Story

By the mid-nineteenth century, especially because of the work of Louis Pasteur (1822-1895), both science and the reporting of science made great advances. To quiet fanatic believers in the theory of spontaneous generation, Pasteur found it necessary to describe his experiments in exquisite detail. Because competent peers could reproduce Pasteur's experiments, the principle of reproducibility of experiments became a fundamental tenet of the philosophy of science, and a methods section led the way toward the highly structured IMRAD format.

2.3 The Mad Search for Miracle Drugs

The work of Pasteur was followed in the early 1900s by the work of Paul Ehrlich on the tuberculosis bacillus and, in the 1930s, by the work of Gerhard Domagk (sulfa drugs). The World War prompted the development of penicillin (Alexander Fleming , 1929). Streptomycin was reported in 1944, and soon after World War II the mad search for "miracle drugs" produced the
tetracycline and dozens of other effective antibiotics. These developments led to the virtual elimination of many infectious diseases. As these miracles were pouring out of medical research laboratories after World War II, investment in research greatly increased.

2.4 Implications for Journal Editors, Referees and Authors

As investment in research exploded, science produced thousands of papers.The resulting powerful pressure on the existing and new journals led editors to demand that manuscripts be tightly written and be well organized. Journal space became too precious to waste on verbosity or redundancy. The IMRAD format that was slowly progressing for about half a century now came into almost universal use.

Part II: What is a Scientific Paper?

1.1 Definition of a Scientific Paper

1.2 Another Definition of a Scientific Writing

1.3 Papers that do not qualify as primary journal paper

Review Papers

Conference Report

Conference Papers

Meeting Abstracts


2. Organization of a Scientific Paper

2.1 The IMRAD Format

2.2 The IRDAM Format

2.3 Exceptions to the IMRAD Format


1.1 Definition of a Scientific Paper

“An acceptable primary scientific publication must be the first disclosure containing sufficient information to enable peers (1) to assess observations, (2) to repeat experiments, and (3) to evaluate intellectual processes; moreover, it must be susceptible to sensory perception, essentially permanent, available to the scientific community without restriction, and available for regular screening by one or more of the major recognized secondary services (e.g., Biological Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts, Index Medicus, etc., in the United States and similar services in other countries).”


(Council of Biology Editors, 1968)

1.1 Cont.

An acceptable primary scientific publication must be the first disclosure (original) of research results in a form that allows the peers of the author (either now or in the future) to fully comprehend and use that which is disclosed. Thus, sufficient information must be presented so that potential users of the data can (1) assess observations, (2) repeat experiments, (3) evaluate intellectual processes. Then, the disclosure must be susceptible to sensory perception, i.e. published in printed journals, electronic journals, microfilm, recorded on audio cassettes or on CD-ROMs.

1.2 Another Definition of a Scientific Paper
“A scientific paper or its substance published in a conference report, symposium proceeding, or technical bulletin, posted on a
host computer to which there is access via the Internet, or made available through any other retrievable source, including CD-ROM and other electronic forms, is unacceptable for submission to an ASM journal on grounds of prior publication. A manuscript whose substance was included in a thesis or dissertation posted on a host computer to which there is access via the Internet is unacceptable for submission to an ASM journal on the grounds of prior publication.”
American Society for Microbiology

(Instructions to Authors. Journal of Bacteriology, January 1998)

1.2 Cont.

Primary publication is (1) the first publication of research results, (2) in a form whereby peers of the author can repeat the experiments and test the conclusions, and (3) in a journal or other source document readily available within the scientific community. In other words, regardless of the form of publication, that form must be available to the information retrieval services (Biological Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts, Index Medicus,etc). Moreover,
scientific papers are published in peer-reviewed publications

1.3 Papers that do not qualify as primary journal papers

A review paper reviews the recent work in a defined subject area or the work of a particular individual or group. As such it summarizes, analyzes, evaluates, or synthesizes information that has already been published (in primary journals).

A conference report is a paper published in a book or journal as part of the proceedings of a symposium, congress, workshop, roundtable or the like.

A conference presentation very often is a review paper presenting reviews of recent work of particular scientists or that carried in particular laboratories.

Part II: Organization of a Journal Paper

2.1 The IMRAD Format
The logic of IMRAD can be defined in question form:

What question (problem) was studied?

The answer is the Introduction.

How was the problem studied?

The answer is the Methods (Materials and Methods).

What were the findings?

The answer is the Results. And

What do these findings mean?

The answer is the Discussion.


2.2 The IRDAM Format
Although the tendency toward uniformity has increased since the IMRAD system was prescribed as a standard by the American National Standards Institute, first in 1972 and again in 1979, this is not the only standard format. A recent variation in IMRAD has been introduced by Cell and several other journals. In this variation, methods appear last rather than second and thus may be called the IRDAM format.

2.3 Exceptions to the IMRAD Format
The basic IMRAD format is so tightly logical that it turns out to be the best choice not only for scientific journal papers but also for many other types of expository writing (archeology, economics, sociology, etc.)

However, there are exceptions such as field study reports in earth sciences, clinical case reports in medical sciences, and even reports of scientific laboratory studies.

Part III: Building Blocks of Journal Papers

1. The Title

1.2 Length of the Title

1.3 Need for Specific Titles

1.4 The Title as a Label

1.5 Abbreviations and Jargon

1.6 Series Titles


2. Authors’ Names

2.2 Proper Form of Names

2.3 Authors’ Addresses

3. The Abstract

3.1 Definition

3.2 Types of Abstracts

3.3 Economy of Words

1. The Title
First impressions are strong impressions; a title ought therefore to be well studied, and to give, a definite and concise indication of what is to come.

The title will be read by thousands of people, but perhaps few people will read the entire paper.

Thus, the title can be defined as the fewest possible words that adequately describe the contents of the paper.

Moreover, the indexing and abstracting services as well as many computerized retrieval systems depend heavily on the accuracy of the title.

1.2 Length of the Title
Titles that are too short are not very helpful to potential readers. A title such as “Studies on Brucella” does not indicate if
the study is biochemical, medical, genetic or other.

Titles that are too long are no less meaningless because they contain “waste” words such as titles starting with A, An, or The, as do those that start with words like “Studies on,” “Investigations on,” and “Observations on,” etc.

Titles that are excessively long might make good abstracts rather than titles; e.g.:“On the Addition to the Method of Microscopic Research by a New way of Producing Color-Contrast between an Object and its Background.”

1.3 Need for Specific Titles

Most titles that are too short are too short because they include general rather than specific terms.

For example, “Action of Antibiotics on Bacteria” is a good title in form; it is short and carries no excess baggage. However, it may contrary to facts assume that the study tests the effect of all antibiotics on all kinds of bacteria! Thus, if only one or two antibiotics were tested, they should be individually listed in the title. Moreover, if the word “Action” could be more explicitly defined, the title would be more meaningful.

1.4 The Title as a Label
The title is not a sentence with the usual subject, verb, object arrangement. And because it is shorter than a sentence, the order of its constituents is even more important.
For example, a title such as “Preliminary Canine and Clinical Evaluation of Streptovitacin” suggests that dogs can evaluate a given antibiotic precisely because of faulty word order.

The presence of a verb in the active in the title turns it into an assertive sentence title (AST), which improper in scientific writing genrally.

1.5
Abbreviations and Jargon

Titles should not contain abbreviations, chemical formulas, proprietary names, jargon, and the like. In designing the title, the author should ask: "How would I look for this kind of information in an index?" If the paper concerns an effect of hydrochloric acid, the title should include the words "hydrochloric acid" rather than the shorter and readily recognizable "HCI." If some journal editors permitted HC1 and others used hydrochloric acid, the user of the bibliographic services might locate only part of the published literature, not noting that additional references are listed under another, abbreviated, entry. And the same rule should apply to proprietary names, jargon, or outdated terminology.

1.6
Series Titles

Most editors are opposed to main title-subtitle arrangements (e.g., "Studies on Bacteria. IV. Cell Wall of Staphylococcus aureus.") The main title-subtitle (series) arrangement was quite common some years ago.
Today, many editors believe that it is important, especially for the reader, that each published paper "should present the results of an independent, cohesive study; thus, numbered series titles are not allowed."

(Instructions to Authors, Journal of Bacteriology)

2.1
Authors’ Names

There are no agreed-upon rules or generally accepted conventions concerning the right order of authors. Some authors agree to list their names alphabetically. In the field of mathematics, this practice appears to be universal, but the alphabetical system has not yet become common in many other disciplines, especially in the US. So far, there has been a general tendency to list the head of the laboratory as an author whether or not he or she actively participated in the research. Often, the "head" is placed last (second of two authors, third of three, etc.).

2.2 Proper Form of Names

The preferred designation of authors normally is first name, middle initial, last name. If an author uses only initials, the scientific literature services may become confused. If dozens of people publish under the name J. B. Jones, the retrieval services have a hopeless task in keeping things neat and tidy. In addition, many computerized library catalogs and literature retrieval systems are based on the principle of truncation. Thus, one does not need to key in a whole name; time is saved by truncating the entry. But, if one types in "Day, RA," for example, a screen will appear showing all of the Rachel Days, Ralph Days, Raymond Days, etc., but not Robert A. Day. Therefore, the use of initials rather than first names can cause trouble.

2.3 Authors’ Addresses

With one author, one address is given (the name and address of the laboratory in which the work was done). If, before publication, the author has moved to a different address, the new address should be indicated in a
"Present Address" footnote. Clear identification of authors and addresses is useful to readers who may want to know whether R. Jones is at Yale or at Harvard. It is also of prime importance to the secondary services. These services need to know whether a paper published by J. Jones was authored by the J. Jones of Iowa State or the J. Jones of Cornell or the J. Jones of Cambridge University in England. Only when authors can be properly identified can their publications be grouped together in citation indexes.

3. The Abstract

3.1 Definition

"A well-prepared abstract enables readers to identify the basic content of a document quickly and accurately, to
determine its relevance to their interests, and thus to decide whether they need to read the document in its entirety" (American National Standards Institute, 1979).

The abstract is a mini-version of the paper. Because many people will read it in one of the secondary publications, it should (1) state the principal objectives and scope of the investigation, (2) describe the methods employed, (3) summarize the results, and (4) state the principal conclusions.

The Abstract should not exceed 250 words and should be typed as a single paragraph. It should
also be written in the past tense, because it refers to work done, and it should never give any information or conclusion that is not stated in the paper. References to the literature must not be cited in the Abstract.

3.2 Types of Abstracts

The above rules apply to the abstract referred to as an informative abstract, and it is designed to condense the paper. Abstracts such as these are used in primary journals and often without change in the secondary services. It is often the same as the type of abstract that is used as a heading in most journals today. Another common type of abstract is the indicative
abstract/descriptive abstract. This is designed to indicate the subjects dealt with in a paper, making it easy for potential readers to decide whether to read the paper. However, because of its descriptive rather than substantive nature, should not be used as "heading" abstracts in research papers, but they may be used in other types of publications (review papers, conference reports, etc.). Such indicative abstracts are often of great value to reference librarians.
3.3 Economy of Words

A scientist may occasionally omit something important from the Abstract but the serious fault, however, would be the inclusion of extraneous detail. When writing the Abstract, every word should be examined carefully. The use of clear, significant words in the Abstract will impress the editors and reviewers. Because a heading Abstract is required by primary journals and
because a meeting Abstract is a requirement for participation in most meetings (participation determined on the basis of submitted abstracts), authors should master the fundamentals of Abstract preparation.

4. The Paper

4.1 The Introduction

The first section of the text proper is the Introduction. The purpose of the Introduction is to supply sufficient background information to allow the reader to understand and evaluate the results of the study. The Introduction should also provide the rationale for the present study. Above all, it should state briefly and clearly the purpose of the paper. The references should
provide the most important background information. Much of the Introduction should be written in the present tense, because it will be referring primarily to the problem and the established knowledge relating to it at the start of the work. Suggested rules for a good Introduction are: (1) the Introduction should present first, with all possible clarity, the nature and scope of the problem investigated; (2) it should review the pertinent literature to orient the reader; (3) it should state the method of the investigation. If necessary, the reasons for the choice of a particular method should be stated. (4) It should state the
principal results of the investigation. (5) It should state the principal conclusion(s) suggested by the results. Do not keep the reader in suspense; let the reader follow the development of the evidence. Reading a scientific article isn't the same as reading a detective story.

4.2 The Materials and Methods Section

While the Introduction states the methodology employed in the study and probably defends the reasons for the choice of a particular method over competing methods, the Materials and Methods section gives the full details.
Most of this section should be written in the past tense. The main purpose of the Materials and Methods section is to describe the experimental design and then provide enough detail so that a competent worker can repeat the
experiments. Although the general methods used in the paper is already given in the Introduction, careful writing of this section is critically important because the cornerstone of the scientific method requires that the results, to
be of scientific merit, must be reproducible; and, for the results to be reproducible, the author must provide the basis for repetition of the experiments by others

4.2.1 Materials

Materials, include the exact technical specifications and quantities and source or method of preparation. Sometimes it is necessary to list pertinent chemical and physical properties of the reagents used. Trade names are to be avoided; generic or chemical names is usually preferred. This avoids the advertising inherent in the trade name. Besides, the nonproprietary name is likely to be known throughout the world, whereas the proprietary name may be known only in the country of origin. However, if there are known differences among proprietary products and if these differences might be critical (as with certain microbiological media), then the use of the trade name, plus the name of the manufacturer, is essential. When trade names, which are usually registered trademarks, are used, they should be capitalized (Teflon, for example) to distinguish them from generic names. Normally, the generic description should immediately follow the trademark, as in Kleenex facial tissues. Experimental animals, plants, and microorganisms should be identified accurately, usually by genus, species, and other designations.

4.2.1 Materials (Cont.)

Sources should be listed and special characteristics (age, sex, genetic and physiological status) described. If human subjects are used, the criteria for selection should be described, and an "informed consent" statement should be added to the manuscript if required by the journal. Because the value of the paper (and the author’s reputation) can be damaged if the results are not reproducible, the author must describe research materials with great care. Further important specifics are often detailed in the Instructions to Authors of the journal to which the paper is submitted.

4.2.2 Methods

The usual order of presentation of the Methods is chronological.
However, related methods should be described together. If a particular test was not done until late in the research, the test method should be described along with the other methods, not by itself in a later part of Materials and Methods.
Methods are similar to cookbook recipes. If a reaction mixture was heated, give the temperature. Questions such as "how" and "how much" should be precisely answered by the author and not left for the reviewer or the reader to puzzle over. Statistical analyses are often necessary, but the author should feature and discuss the data, not the statistics.

4.3 The Results

This part is the core of the paper, the data. The Results section should not start by describing methods that could have been omitted from the Materials and Methods section. There are usually two ingredients of the Results section. First, it should give some kind of overall description of the experiments, providing the "big picture," without, however, repeating the experimental details previously provided in Materials and Methods. Second, it should present the data. The results should be presented in the past tense.

4.4.1 The Discussion

The Discussion is harder to define than the other sections. Thus, it is usually the hardest section to write. In fact, many papers are rejected by journal editors because of a faulty Discussion, even though the data of the paper might be both valid and interesting. Alternatively, the true meaning of the data may be completely obscured by the interpretation presented in the Discussion, again resulting in rejection.

4.4.2 Components of a Good Discussion

The main components a good Discussion will be provided if it conforms to
the following :

1. Present the principles, relationships, and generalizations shown by
the Results. A good Discussion discusses--not recapitulates--the Results.

2. Point out any exceptions or any lack of correlation and define
unsettled points. Never take the high-risk alternative of trying to cover up or
fudge data that do not quite fit.

3. Show how the results and interpretations agree (or contrast) with
previously published work.

4. Discuss the theoretical implications of the work, as well as any
possible practical applications.

5. State the conclusions as clearly as possible.

6. Summarize the evidence for each conclusion.

4.5 Acknowledgments

The main text of a scientific paper is usually followed by two additional sections, namely, the Acknowledgments and the References. In the Acknowledgments section, two possible ingredients require consideration. First, you should acknowledge any significant technical help that you received from any individual, whether in your laboratory or else- where. You should also acknowledge the source of special equipment, cultures, or other materials. You might, for example, say something like "Thanks are due to J. Jones for assistance with the experiments and to R. Smith for valuable discussion." Second, it is usually the Acknowledgments wherein you should acknowledge any outside financial assistance, such as grants, contracts, or fellowships. (In these days, you might snidely mention the absence of such grants, contracts, or fellowships.) The important element in Acknowledgments is simple courtesy. There isn't anything really scientific about this section of a scientific paper. The same rules that would apply in any other area of civilized life should apply here.

4.6.1 References

There are two rules to follow in the References section. First, only significant, published references should be listed. References to unpublished data, abstracts, theses, and other secondary materials should not clutter up the References. A paper that has been accepted for publication can be listed by citing the name of the journal followed by "In press." Second, check all parts of every reference against the original publication before the manuscript is submitted. And, as a final check, make sure that all references cited in the text are indeed listed in the References and that all references listed under References are indeed cited somewhere in the text.

4.6.2 References Styles

Journals vary considerably in their style of handling references. Some journals print titles of articles and some do not. Some insist on inclusive pagination, whereas others print first pages only. However, most journals cite references in one of three general ways that may be referred to as "name and year," "alphabet number," and "citation order." In the name and year system (the Harvard system), the references are unnumbered and thus can be added or deleted easily. If the reference list is modified, "Smith and Jones (1998)" remains exactly that. If there are two or more "Smith and Jones (1998)" references, the problem is easily handled by listing the first as "Smith and Jones (1998a)," the second as "Smith and Jones (1998b)," etc.

4.6.2 References Styles (Cont.)

Since some papers are written by several authors, most journals that use name and year have an "et al." rule. Most typically, it works as follows. Names are always used in citing papers with either one or two authors,
e.g., "Smith (1998)," "Smith and Jones (1998)." If the paper has three authors, list all three the first time the paper is cited,
e.g., "Smith, Jones, and McGillicuddy ( 1998)." If the same paper is cited again, it can be shortened to "Smith et al. (1998)." When a cited paper has four or more authors, it should be cited as "Smith et al. (1998)" even in the first citation.

Example: Sproul, J., H. Klaaren, and F. Mannarino. 1993. Surgical
treatment of Freiberg's infraction in athletes. Am. J. Sports Med. 21:381-384.

4.6.2 References Styles (Cont.)

In the Alphabet-Number system, citation by number from an alphabetized list of references, is a modification of the name and year system. As references are cited in the text, decide whether names or dates are important. If they are not, use only the reference number: "Pretyrosine is quantitatively converted to phenylalanine under these conditions (13)." If you want to feature the name of the author, do it within the context of the sentence: "The role of the carotid sinus in the regulation of respiration was discovered by Heymans (13)." If you want to feature the date, you can also do that within the sentence: "Streptomycin was first used in the treatment of tuberculosis in 1945 (13).“

Example: 3. Sproul, J., H. Klaaren, and F. Mannarino. 1993. Surgical treatment of Freiberg's infraction in athletes. Am. J. Sports Med. 21:381-384.

4.6.2 References Styles (Cont.)

The citation order system is simply a system of citing the references (by number) in the order that they appear in the paper. This system is a useful system for a journal that is basically a "note" journal, each paper containing only a few references. For long papers, with many references, citation order is probably not a good system.

Example: 2. Sproul J, Klaaren H, Mannarino F. Surgical treatment of
Freiberg's infraction in athletes. Am J Sports Med 1993; 21:381-4.

This is a very comprehensive and well explained post Norinet, thanks a lot

Hi deaf
The difference between entire and whole

There is very little difference between whole and entire. They are both adjectives but whole can be used as a noun (e.g. he stayed in London the whole of the summer) whereas entire cannot. The corresponding noun would be entirety.

In most cases the two words mean the same thing. Whole can be used in more situations than entire; e.g. whole food meaning healthy food.

Besides, sometimes 'entire' sounds more formal than 'whole'

Have a look also at this:
http://englishhelponline.me/2010/03/24/the-difference-between-words-all-whole-entire-each-and-every/

**Hope it will help you somehow. Please bro always make a new post with specified title, this will help when one is looking for a topic in the forum. Bless you