By: Tyler Saumur, ORT Times Writer
Researchers are constantly writing to either disseminate their research findings or secure funding for their research. According to Dr. Eve Marder of Brandeis University, “no active and creative scientist can afford to hate writing, because our published work is the currency of our profession.” To help trainees embrace writing and write better, I have summarized several tips based on Dr. Marder’s experience, as well as my own.
Write, write and write again. Students often treat writing a manuscript as a linear process where they first collect data and then write a paper. However, it is more effective to write through a cyclical and iterative process. Writing a manuscript or thesis should begin long before the experiments are completed. Often, our first task when starting a research project is to read about the current state of knowledge in the field of interest. This helps us grasp the novelty and rationale of our studies. When reading the literature, write down the main findings of the studies—even if only in point form— and their references. This information will act as a skeleton for the introduction of a manuscript or perhaps a literature review for your thesis. The same goes for your experimental methods: you will likely know your methodology before starting your experiments and can thus write them down. This text will not be a final draft, but it will ensure that you accurately document what you are doing and why you are doing it. More importantly, once you are done your study, you will not be staring at a blank page and wondering where to begin.
Write simple. As trainees, we often struggle to find the proper balance between writing too little and writing too much. Include only the information that the reader absolutely needs, not the information that you want them to have. After you have edited your draft to something close to the final version, re-read it and remove unnecessary jargon, sentences and paragraphs. Reading aloud also helps ensure the flow of your writing. Writing simply also applies to grant or scholarship applications. One of the main evaluation criteria for grant and scholarship applications is whether or not the project is feasible (i.e., can the project be completed in the amount of time proposed and is there any evidence to support this?). You should aim to answer these questions as clearly and concisely as possible.
Don’t overstate. In research, it can be easy to overstate your findings, especially in our era of ‘publish or perish’ which favours ‘significant’ findings. Interpreting your findings must always be done with caution, taking into consideration the limitations of the methodology used and what the statistical results tell you. I have fallen victim to this myself. The first reviewer comments that I received on a manuscript were: “instead of reading like a well-designed experiment, the presentation resembles a fishing expedition with, as above, claims made beyond the performance of the technology. This is a shame because there may be some valuable data here and the topic is of importance.” This example shows that writing a manuscript that is true to the data and methodology is valued, and overstating findings detracts from your message.
Overall, research and writing are highly intertwined, for better or worse. Writing is an important skill that should be honed and enjoyed for current and future success in academia.