research paper of science

arXiv Accessibility Forum

The 2024 Forum has ended! Thank you for your support. Check the website or signup to be notified when recordings are available.

• Astrophysics ( astro-ph new , recent , search ) Astrophysics of Galaxies ; Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics ; Earth and Planetary Astrophysics ; High Energy Astrophysical Phenomena ; Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics ; Solar and Stellar Astrophysics
• Condensed Matter ( cond-mat new , recent , search ) Disordered Systems and Neural Networks ; Materials Science ; Mesoscale and Nanoscale Physics ; Other Condensed Matter ; Quantum Gases ; Soft Condensed Matter ; Statistical Mechanics ; Strongly Correlated Electrons ; Superconductivity
• General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology ( gr-qc new , recent , search )
• High Energy Physics - Experiment ( hep-ex new , recent , search )
• High Energy Physics - Lattice ( hep-lat new , recent , search )
• High Energy Physics - Phenomenology ( hep-ph new , recent , search )
• High Energy Physics - Theory ( hep-th new , recent , search )
• Mathematical Physics ( math-ph new , recent , search )
• Nonlinear Sciences ( nlin new , recent , search ) includes: Adaptation and Self-Organizing Systems ; Cellular Automata and Lattice Gases ; Chaotic Dynamics ; Exactly Solvable and Integrable Systems ; Pattern Formation and Solitons
• Nuclear Experiment ( nucl-ex new , recent , search )
• Nuclear Theory ( nucl-th new , recent , search )
• Physics ( physics new , recent , search ) includes: Accelerator Physics ; Applied Physics ; Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics ; Atomic and Molecular Clusters ; Atomic Physics ; Biological Physics ; Chemical Physics ; Classical Physics ; Computational Physics ; Data Analysis, Statistics and Probability ; Fluid Dynamics ; General Physics ; Geophysics ; History and Philosophy of Physics ; Instrumentation and Detectors ; Medical Physics ; Optics ; Physics and Society ; Physics Education ; Plasma Physics ; Popular Physics ; Space Physics
• Quantum Physics ( quant-ph new , recent , search )

Mathematics

• Mathematics ( math new , recent , search ) includes: (see detailed description ): Algebraic Geometry ; Algebraic Topology ; Analysis of PDEs ; Category Theory ; Classical Analysis and ODEs ; Combinatorics ; Commutative Algebra ; Complex Variables ; Differential Geometry ; Dynamical Systems ; Functional Analysis ; General Mathematics ; General Topology ; Geometric Topology ; Group Theory ; History and Overview ; Information Theory ; K-Theory and Homology ; Logic ; Mathematical Physics ; Metric Geometry ; Number Theory ; Numerical Analysis ; Operator Algebras ; Optimization and Control ; Probability ; Quantum Algebra ; Representation Theory ; Rings and Algebras ; Spectral Theory ; Statistics Theory ; Symplectic Geometry

Computer Science

• Computing Research Repository ( CoRR new , recent , search ) includes: (see detailed description ): Artificial Intelligence ; Computation and Language ; Computational Complexity ; Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science ; Computational Geometry ; Computer Science and Game Theory ; Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition ; Computers and Society ; Cryptography and Security ; Data Structures and Algorithms ; Databases ; Digital Libraries ; Discrete Mathematics ; Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing ; Emerging Technologies ; Formal Languages and Automata Theory ; General Literature ; Graphics ; Hardware Architecture ; Human-Computer Interaction ; Information Retrieval ; Information Theory ; Logic in Computer Science ; Machine Learning ; Mathematical Software ; Multiagent Systems ; Multimedia ; Networking and Internet Architecture ; Neural and Evolutionary Computing ; Numerical Analysis ; Operating Systems ; Other Computer Science ; Performance ; Programming Languages ; Robotics ; Social and Information Networks ; Software Engineering ; Sound ; Symbolic Computation ; Systems and Control

Quantitative Biology

• Quantitative Biology ( q-bio new , recent , search ) includes: (see detailed description ): Biomolecules ; Cell Behavior ; Genomics ; Molecular Networks ; Neurons and Cognition ; Other Quantitative Biology ; Populations and Evolution ; Quantitative Methods ; Subcellular Processes ; Tissues and Organs

Quantitative Finance

• Quantitative Finance ( q-fin new , recent , search ) includes: (see detailed description ): Computational Finance ; Economics ; General Finance ; Mathematical Finance ; Portfolio Management ; Pricing of Securities ; Risk Management ; Statistical Finance ; Trading and Market Microstructure
• Statistics ( stat new , recent , search ) includes: (see detailed description ): Applications ; Computation ; Machine Learning ; Methodology ; Other Statistics ; Statistics Theory

Electrical Engineering and Systems Science

• Electrical Engineering and Systems Science ( eess new , recent , search ) includes: (see detailed description ): Audio and Speech Processing ; Image and Video Processing ; Signal Processing ; Systems and Control
• Economics ( econ new , recent , search ) includes: (see detailed description ): Econometrics ; General Economics ; Theoretical Economics

About arXiv

• General information
• How to Submit to arXiv
• Membership & Giving

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

A Guide to Writing a Scientific Paper: A Focus on High School Through Graduate Level Student Research

Renee a. hesselbach.

1 NIEHS Children's Environmental Health Sciences Core Center, University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

David H. Petering

2 Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Craig A. Berg

3 Curriculum and Instruction, University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Henry Tomasiewicz

Daniel weber.

This article presents a detailed guide for high school through graduate level instructors that leads students to write effective and well-organized scientific papers. Interesting research emerges from the ability to ask questions, define problems, design experiments, analyze and interpret data, and make critical connections. This process is incomplete, unless new results are communicated to others because science fundamentally requires peer review and criticism to validate or discard proposed new knowledge. Thus, a concise and clearly written research paper is a critical step in the scientific process and is important for young researchers as they are mastering how to express scientific concepts and understanding. Moreover, learning to write a research paper provides a tool to improve science literacy as indicated in the National Research Council's National Science Education Standards (1996), and A Framework for K–12 Science Education (2011), the underlying foundation for the Next Generation Science Standards currently being developed. Background information explains the importance of peer review and communicating results, along with details of each critical component, the Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results , and Discussion . Specific steps essential to helping students write clear and coherent research papers that follow a logical format, use effective communication, and develop scientific inquiry are described.

Introduction

A key part of the scientific process is communication of original results to others so that one's discoveries are passed along to the scientific community and the public for awareness and scrutiny. 1 – 3 Communication to other scientists ensures that new findings become part of a growing body of publicly available knowledge that informs how we understand the world around us. 2 It is also what fuels further research as other scientists incorporate novel findings into their thinking and experiments.

Depending upon the researcher's position, intent, and needs, communication can take different forms. The gold standard is writing scientific papers that describe original research in such a way that other scientists will be able to repeat it or to use it as a basis for their studies. 1 For some, it is expected that such articles will be published in scientific journals after they have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication. Scientists must submit their articles for examination by other scientists familiar with the area of research, who decide whether the work was conducted properly and whether the results add to the knowledge base and are conveyed well enough to merit publication. 2 If a manuscript passes the scrutiny of peer-review, it has the potential to be published. 1 For others, such as for high school or undergraduate students, publishing a research paper may not be the ultimate goal. However, regardless of whether an article is to be submitted for publication, peer review is an important step in this process. For student researchers, writing a well-organized research paper is a key step in learning how to express understanding, make critical connections, summarize data, and effectively communicate results, which are important goals for improving science literacy of the National Research Council's National Science Education Standards, 4 and A Framework for K–12 Science Education, 5 and the Next Generation Science Standards 6 currently being developed and described in The NSTA Reader's Guide to A Framework for K–12 Science Education. 7 Table 1 depicts the key skills students should develop as part of the Science as Inquiry Content Standard. Table 2 illustrates the central goals of A Framework for K–12 Science Education Scientific and Engineering Practices Dimension.

Key Skills of the Science as Inquiry National Science Education Content Standard

National Research Council (1996).

Important Practices of A Framework for K–12 Science Education Scientific and Engineering Practices Dimension

National Research Council (2011).

Scientific papers based on experimentation typically include five predominant sections: Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion . This structure is a widely accepted approach to writing a research paper, and has specific sections that parallel the scientific method. Following this structure allows the scientist to tell a clear, coherent story in a logical format, essential to effective communication. 1 , 2 In addition, using a standardized format allows the reader to find specific information quickly and easily. While readers may not have time to read the entire research paper, the predictable format allows them to focus on specific sections such as the Abstract , Introduction , and Discussion sections. Therefore, it is critical that information be placed in the appropriate and logical section of the report. 3

Guidelines for Writing a Primary Research Article

The Title sends an important message to the reader about the purpose of the paper. For example, Ethanol Effects on the Developing Zebrafish: Neurobehavior and Skeletal Morphogenesis 8 tells the reader key information about the content of the research paper. Also, an appropriate and descriptive title captures the attention of the reader. When composing the Title , students should include either the aim or conclusion of the research, the subject, and possibly the independent or dependent variables. Often, the title is created after the body of the article has been written, so that it accurately reflects the purpose and content of the article. 1 , 3

The Abstract provides a short, concise summary of the research described in the body of the article and should be able to stand alone. It provides readers with a quick overview that helps them decide whether the article may be interesting to read. Included in the Abstract are the purpose or primary objectives of the experiment and why they are important, a brief description of the methods and approach used, key findings and the significance of the results, and how this work is different from the work of others. It is important to note that the Abstract briefly explains the implications of the findings, but does not evaluate the conclusions. 1 , 3 Just as with the Title , this section needs to be written carefully and succinctly. Often this section is written last to ensure it accurately reflects the content of the paper. Generally, the optimal length of the Abstract is one paragraph between 200 and 300 words, and does not contain references or abbreviations.

All new research can be categorized by field (e.g., biology, chemistry, physics, geology) and by area within the field (e.g., biology: evolution, ecology, cell biology, anatomy, environmental health). Many areas already contain a large volume of published research. The role of the Introduction is to place the new research within the context of previous studies in the particular field and area, thereby introducing the audience to the research and motivating the audience to continue reading. 1

Usually, the writer begins by describing what is known in the area that directly relates to the subject of the article's research. Clearly, this must be done judiciously; usually there is not room to describe every bit of information that is known. Each statement needs one or more references from the scientific literature that supports its validity. Students must be reminded to cite all references to eliminate the risk of plagiarism. 2 Out of this context, the author then explains what is not known and, therefore, what the article's research seeks to find out. In doing so, the scientist provides the rationale for the research and further develops why this research is important. The final statement in the Introduction should be a clearly worded hypothesis or thesis statement, as well as a brief summary of the findings as they relate to the stated hypothesis. Keep in mind that the details of the experimental findings are presented in the Results section and are aimed at filling the void in our knowledge base that has been pointed out in the Introduction .

Materials and Methods

Research utilizes various accepted methods to obtain the results that are to be shared with others in the scientific community. The quality of the results, therefore, depends completely upon the quality of the methods that are employed and the care with which they are applied. The reader will refer to the Methods section: (a) to become confident that the experiments have been properly done, (b) as the guide for repeating the experiments, and (c) to learn how to do new methods.

It is particularly important to keep in mind item (b). Since science deals with the objective properties of the physical and biological world, it is a basic axiom that these properties are independent of the scientist who reported them. Everyone should be able to measure or observe the same properties within error, if they do the same experiment using the same materials and procedures. In science, one does the same experiment by exactly repeating the experiment that has been described in the Methods section. Therefore, someone can only repeat an experiment accurately if all the relevant details of the experimental methods are clearly described. 1 , 3

The following information is important to include under illustrative headings, and is generally presented in narrative form. A detailed list of all the materials used in the experiments and, if important, their source should be described. These include biological agents (e.g., zebrafish, brine shrimp), chemicals and their concentrations (e.g., 0.20 mg/mL nicotine), and physical equipment (e.g., four 10-gallon aquariums, one light timer, one 10-well falcon dish). The reader needs to know as much as necessary about each of the materials; however, it is important not to include extraneous information. For example, consider an experiment involving zebrafish. The type and characteristics of the zebrafish used must be clearly described so another scientist could accurately replicate the experiment, such as 4–6-month-old male and female zebrafish, the type of zebrafish used (e.g., Golden), and where they were obtained (e.g., the NIEHS Children's Environmental Health Sciences Core Center in the WATER Institute of the University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee). In addition to describing the physical set-up of the experiment, it may be helpful to include photographs or diagrams in the report to further illustrate the experimental design.

A thorough description of each procedure done in the reported experiment, and justification as to why a particular method was chosen to most effectively answer the research question should also be included. For example, if the scientist was using zebrafish to study developmental effects of nicotine, the reader needs to know details about how and when the zebrafish were exposed to the nicotine (e.g., maternal exposure, embryo injection of nicotine, exposure of developing embryo to nicotine in the water for a particular length of time during development), duration of the exposure (e.g., a certain concentration for 10 minutes at the two-cell stage, then the embryos were washed), how many were exposed, and why that method was chosen. The reader would also need to know the concentrations to which the zebrafish were exposed, how the scientist observed the effects of the chemical exposure (e.g., microscopic changes in structure, changes in swimming behavior), relevant safety and toxicity concerns, how outcomes were measured, and how the scientist determined whether the data/results were significantly different in experimental and unexposed control animals (statistical methods).

Students must take great care and effort to write a good Methods section because it is an essential component of the effective communication of scientific findings.

The Results section describes in detail the actual experiments that were undertaken in a clear and well-organized narrative. The information found in the Methods section serves as background for understanding these descriptions and does not need to be repeated. For each different experiment, the author may wish to provide a subtitle and, in addition, one or more introductory sentences that explains the reason for doing the experiment. In a sense, this information is an extension of the Introduction in that it makes the argument to the reader why it is important to do the experiment. The Introduction is more general; this text is more specific.

Once the reader understands the focus of the experiment, the writer should restate the hypothesis to be tested or the information sought in the experiment. For example, “Atrazine is routinely used as a crop pesticide. It is important to understand whether it affects organisms that are normally found in soil. We decided to use worms as a test organism because they are important members of the soil community. Because atrazine damages nerve cells, we hypothesized that exposure to atrazine will inhibit the ability of worms to do locomotor activities. In the first experiment, we tested the effect of the chemical on burrowing action.”

Then, the experiments to be done are described and the results entered. In reporting on experimental design, it is important to identify the dependent and independent variables clearly, as well as the controls. The results must be shown in a way that can be reproduced by the reader, but do not include more details than needed for an effective analysis. Generally, meaningful and significant data are gathered together into tables and figures that summarize relevant information, and appropriate statistical analyses are completed based on the data gathered. Besides presenting each of these data sources, the author also provides a written narrative of the contents of the figures and tables, as well as an analysis of the statistical significance. In the narrative, the writer also connects the results to the aims of the experiment as described above. Did the results support the initial hypothesis? Do they provide the information that was sought? Were there problems in the experiment that compromised the results? Be careful not to include an interpretation of the results; that is reserved for the Discussion section.

The writer then moves on to the next experiment. Again, the first paragraph is developed as above, except this experiment is seen in the context of the first experiment. In other words, a story is being developed. So, one commonly refers to the results of the first experiment as part of the basis for undertaking the second experiment. “In the first experiment we observed that atrazine altered burrowing activity. In order to understand how that might occur, we decided to study its impact on the basic biology of locomotion. Our hypothesis was that atrazine affected neuromuscular junctions. So, we did the following experiment..”

The Results section includes a focused critical analysis of each experiment undertaken. A hallmark of the scientist is a deep skepticism about results and conclusions. “Convince me! And then convince me again with even better experiments.” That is the constant challenge. Without this basic attitude of doubt and willingness to criticize one's own work, scientists do not get to the level of concern about experimental methods and results that is needed to ensure that the best experiments are being done and the most reproducible results are being acquired. Thus, it is important for students to state any limitations or weaknesses in their research approach and explain assumptions made upfront in this section so the validity of the research can be assessed.

The Discussion section is the where the author takes an overall view of the work presented in the article. First, the main results from the various experiments are gathered in one place to highlight the significant results so the reader can see how they fit together and successfully test the original hypotheses of the experiment. Logical connections and trends in the data are presented, as are discussions of error and other possible explanations for the findings, including an analysis of whether the experimental design was adequate. Remember, results should not be restated in the Discussion section, except insofar as it is absolutely necessary to make a point.

Second, the task is to help the reader link the present work with the larger body of knowledge that was portrayed in the Introduction . How do the results advance the field, and what are the implications? What does the research results mean? What is the relevance? 1 , 3

Lastly, the author may suggest further work that needs to be done based on the new knowledge gained from the research.

Supporting Documentation and Writing Skills

Tables and figures are included to support the content of the research paper. These provide the reader with a graphic display of information presented. Tables and figures must have illustrative and descriptive titles, legends, interval markers, and axis labels, as appropriate; should be numbered in the order that they appear in the report; and include explanations of any unusual abbreviations.

The final section of the scientific article is the Reference section. When citing sources, it is important to follow an accepted standardized format, such as CSE (Council of Science Editors), APA (American Psychological Association), MLA (Modern Language Association), or CMS (Chicago Manual of Style). References should be listed in alphabetical order and original authors cited. All sources cited in the text must be included in the Reference section. 1

When writing a scientific paper, the importance of writing concisely and accurately to clearly communicate the message should be emphasized to students. 1 – 3 Students should avoid slang and repetition, as well as abbreviations that may not be well known. 1 If an abbreviation must be used, identify the word with the abbreviation in parentheses the first time the term is used. Using appropriate and correct grammar and spelling throughout are essential elements of a well-written report. 1 , 3 Finally, when the article has been organized and formatted properly, students are encouraged to peer review to obtain constructive criticism and then to revise the manuscript appropriately. Good scientific writing, like any kind of writing, is a process that requires careful editing and revision. 1

A key dimension of NRC's A Framework for K–12 Science Education , Scientific and Engineering Practices, and the developing Next Generation Science Standards emphasizes the importance of students being able to ask questions, define problems, design experiments, analyze and interpret data, draw conclusions, and communicate results. 5 , 6 In the Science Education Partnership Award (SEPA) program at the University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee, we found the guidelines presented in this article useful for high school science students because this group of students (and probably most undergraduates) often lack in understanding of, and skills to develop and write, the various components of an effective scientific paper. Students routinely need to focus more on the data collected and analyze what the results indicated in relation to the research question/hypothesis, as well as develop a detailed discussion of what they learned. Consequently, teaching students how to effectively organize and write a research report is a critical component when engaging students in scientific inquiry.

Acknowledgments

This article was supported by a Science Education Partnership Award (SEPA) grant (Award Number R25RR026299) from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health. The SEPA program at the University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee is part of the Children's Environmental Health Sciences Core Center, Community Outreach and Education Core, funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (Award Number P30ES004184). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health or the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.

Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

Peer Recognized

Make a name in academia

How to Write a Research Paper: the LEAP approach (+cheat sheet)

In this article I will show you how to write a research paper using the four LEAP writing steps. The LEAP academic writing approach is a step-by-step method for turning research results into a published paper .

The LEAP writing approach has been the cornerstone of the 70 + research papers that I have authored and the 3700+ citations these paper have accumulated within 9 years since the completion of my PhD. I hope the LEAP approach will help you just as much as it has helped me to make an real, tangible impact with my research.

What is the LEAP research paper writing approach?

I designed the LEAP writing approach not only for merely writing the papers. My goal with the writing system was to show young scientists how to first think about research results and then how to efficiently write each section of the research paper.

In other words, you will see how to write a research paper by first analyzing the results and then building a logical, persuasive arguments. In this way, instead of being afraid of writing research paper, you will be able to rely on the paper writing process to help you with what is the most demanding task in getting published – thinking.

The four research paper writing steps according to the LEAP approach:

I will show each of these steps in detail. And you will be able to download the LEAP cheat sheet for using with every paper you write.

But before I tell you how to efficiently write a research paper, I want to show you what is the problem with the way scientists typically write a research paper and why the LEAP approach is more efficient.

How scientists typically write a research paper (and why it isn’t efficient)

Writing a research paper can be tough, especially for a young scientist. Your reasoning needs to be persuasive and thorough enough to convince readers of your arguments. The description has to be derived from research evidence, from prior art, and from your own judgment. This is a tough feat to accomplish.

The figure below shows the sequence of the different parts of a typical research paper. Depending on the scientific journal, some sections might be merged or nonexistent, but the general outline of a research paper will remain very similar.

Here is the problem: Most people make the mistake of writing in this same sequence.

While the structure of scientific articles is designed to help the reader follow the research, it does little to help the scientist write the paper. This is because the layout of research articles starts with the broad (introduction) and narrows down to the specifics (results). See in the figure below how the research paper is structured in terms of the breath of information that each section entails.

How to write a research paper according to the LEAP approach

For a scientist, it is much easier to start writing a research paper with laying out the facts in the narrow sections (i.e. results), step back to describe them (i.e. write the discussion), and step back again to explain the broader picture in the introduction.

For example, it might feel intimidating to start writing a research paper by explaining your research’s global significance in the introduction, while it is easy to plot the figures in the results. When plotting the results, there is not much room for wiggle: the results are what they are.

Starting to write a research papers from the results is also more fun because you finally get to see and understand the complete picture of the research that you have worked on.

Most importantly, following the LEAP approach will help you first make sense of the results yourself and then clearly communicate them to the readers. That is because the sequence of writing allows you to slowly understand the meaning of the results and then develop arguments for presenting to your readers.

I have personally been able to write and submit a research article in three short days using this method.

Step 1: Lay Out the Facts

You have worked long hours on a research project that has produced results and are no doubt curious to determine what they exactly mean. There is no better way to do this than by preparing figures, graphics and tables. This is what the first LEAP step is focused on – diving into the results.

How to p repare charts and tables for a research paper

Your first task is to try out different ways of visually demonstrating the research results. In many fields, the central items of a journal paper will be charts that are based on the data generated during research. In other fields, these might be conceptual diagrams, microscopy images, schematics and a number of other types of scientific graphics which should visually communicate the research study and its results to the readers. If you have reasonably small number of data points, data tables might be useful as well.

Tips for preparing charts and tables

• Try multiple chart types but in the finished paper only use the one that best conveys the message you want to present to the readers
• Follow the eight chart design progressions for selecting and refining a data chart for your paper: https://peerrecognized.com/chart-progressions
• Prepare scientific graphics and visualizations for your paper using the scientific graphic design cheat sheet: https://peerrecognized.com/tools-for-creating-scientific-illustrations/

How to describe the results of your research

Now that you have your data charts, graphics and tables laid out in front of you – describe what you see in them. Seek to answer the question: What have I found?  Your statements should progress in a logical sequence and be backed by the visual information. Since, at this point, you are simply explaining what everyone should be able to see for themselves, you can use a declarative tone: The figure X demonstrates that…

Tips for describing the research results :

• Answer the question: “ What have I found? “
• Use declarative tone since you are simply describing observations

Step 2: Explain the results

The core aspect of your research paper is not actually the results; it is the explanation of their meaning. In the second LEAP step, you will do some heavy lifting by guiding the readers through the results using logic backed by previous scientific research.

How to define the Message of a research paper

To define the central message of your research paper, imagine how you would explain your research to a colleague in 20 seconds . If you succeed in effectively communicating your paper’s message, a reader should be able to recount your findings in a similarly concise way even a year after reading it. This clarity will increase the chances that someone uses the knowledge you generated, which in turn raises the likelihood of citations to your research paper. 

Tips for defining the paper’s central message :

• Write the paper’s core message in a single sentence or two bullet points
• Write the core message in the header of the research paper manuscript

How to write the Discussion section of a research paper

In the discussion section you have to demonstrate why your research paper is worthy of publishing. In other words, you must now answer the all-important So what? question . How well you do so will ultimately define the success of your research paper.

Here are three steps to get started with writing the discussion section:

• Write bullet points of the things that convey the central message of the research article (these may evolve into subheadings later on).
• Make a list with the arguments or observations that support each idea.
• Finally, expand on each point to make full sentences and paragraphs.

Tips for writing the discussion section:

• What is the meaning of the results?
• Was the hypothesis confirmed?
• Write bullet points that support the core message
• List logical arguments for each bullet point, group them into sections
• Instead of repeating research timeline, use a presentation sequence that best supports your logic
• Convert arguments to full paragraphs; be confident but do not overhype
• Refer to both supportive and contradicting research papers for maximum credibility

How to write the Conclusions of a research paper

Since some readers might just skim through your research paper and turn directly to the conclusions, it is a good idea to make conclusion a standalone piece. In the first few sentences of the conclusions, briefly summarize the methodology and try to avoid using abbreviations (if you do, explain what they mean).

After this introduction, summarize the findings from the discussion section. Either paragraph style or bullet-point style conclusions can be used. I prefer the bullet-point style because it clearly separates the different conclusions and provides an easy-to-digest overview for the casual browser. It also forces me to be more succinct.

Tips for writing the conclusion section :

• Summarize the key findings, starting with the most important one
• Make conclusions standalone (short summary, avoid abbreviations)
• Add an optional take-home message and suggest future research in the last paragraph

How to refine the Objective of a research paper

The objective is a short, clear statement defining the paper’s research goals. It can be included either in the final paragraph of the introduction, or as a separate subsection after the introduction. Avoid writing long paragraphs with in-depth reasoning, references, and explanation of methodology since these belong in other sections. The paper’s objective can often be written in a single crisp sentence.

Tips for writing the objective section :

• The objective should ask the question that is answered by the central message of the research paper
• The research objective should be clear long before writing a paper. At this point, you are simply refining it to make sure it is addressed in the body of the paper.

How to write the Methodology section of your research paper

When writing the methodology section, aim for a depth of explanation that will allow readers to reproduce the study . This means that if you are using a novel method, you will have to describe it thoroughly. If, on the other hand, you applied a standardized method, or used an approach from another paper, it will be enough to briefly describe it with reference to the detailed original source.

Remember to also detail the research population, mention how you ensured representative sampling, and elaborate on what statistical methods you used to analyze the results.

Tips for writing the methodology section :

• Include enough detail to allow reproducing the research
• Provide references if the methods are known
• Create a methodology flow chart to add clarity
• Describe the research population, sampling methodology, statistical methods for result analysis
• Describe what methodology, test methods, materials, and sample groups were used in the research.

Step 3: Advertize the research

Step 3 of the LEAP writing approach is designed to entice the casual browser into reading your research paper. This advertising can be done with an informative title, an intriguing abstract, as well as a thorough explanation of the underlying need for doing the research within the introduction.

How to write the Introduction of a research paper

The introduction section should leave no doubt in the mind of the reader that what you are doing is important and that this work could push scientific knowledge forward. To do this convincingly, you will need to have a good knowledge of what is state-of-the-art in your field. You also need be able to see the bigger picture in order to demonstrate the potential impacts of your research work.

Think of the introduction as a funnel, going from wide to narrow, as shown in the figure below:

• Start with a brief context to explain what do we already know,
• Follow with the motivation for the research study and explain why should we care about it,
• Explain the research gap you are going to bridge within this research paper,
• Describe the approach you will take to solve the problem.

Tips for writing the introduction section :

• Follow the Context – Motivation – Research gap – Approach funnel for writing the introduction
• Explain how others tried and how you plan to solve the research problem
• Do a thorough literature review before writing the introduction
• Start writing the introduction by using your own words, then add references from the literature

How to prepare the Abstract of a research paper

The abstract acts as your paper’s elevator pitch and is therefore best written only after the main text is finished. In this one short paragraph you must convince someone to take on the time-consuming task of reading your whole research article. So, make the paper easy to read, intriguing, and self-explanatory; avoid jargon and abbreviations.

How to structure the abstract of a research paper:

• The abstract is a single paragraph that follows this structure:
• Problem: why did we research this
• Methodology: typically starts with the words “Here we…” that signal the start of own contribution.
• Results: what we found from the research.
• Conclusions: show why are the findings important

How to compose a research paper Title

The title is the ultimate summary of a research paper. It must therefore entice someone looking for information to click on a link to it and continue reading the article. A title is also used for indexing purposes in scientific databases, so a representative and optimized title will play large role in determining if your research paper appears in search results at all.

Tips for coming up with a research paper title:

• Capture curiosity of potential readers using a clear and descriptive title
• Include broad terms that are often searched
• Add details that uniquely identify the researched subject of your research paper
• Avoid jargon and abbreviations
• Use keywords as title extension (instead of duplicating the words) to increase the chance of appearing in search results

How to prepare Highlights and Graphical Abstract

Highlights are three to five short bullet-point style statements that convey the core findings of the research paper. Notice that the focus is on the findings, not on the process of getting there.

A graphical abstract placed next to the textual abstract visually summarizes the entire research paper in a single, easy-to-follow figure. I show how to create a graphical abstract in my book Research Data Visualization and Scientific Graphics.

Tips for preparing highlights and graphical abstract:

• In highlights show core findings of the research paper (instead of what you did in the study).
• In graphical abstract show take-home message or methodology of the research paper. Learn more about creating a graphical abstract in this article.

Step 4: Prepare for submission

Sometimes it seems that nuclear fusion will stop on the star closest to us (read: the sun will stop to shine) before a submitted manuscript is published in a scientific journal. The publication process routinely takes a long time, and after submitting the manuscript you have very little control over what happens. To increase the chances of a quick publication, you must do your homework before submitting the manuscript. In the fourth LEAP step, you make sure that your research paper is published in the most appropriate journal as quickly and painlessly as possible.

How to select a scientific Journal for your research paper

The best way to find a journal for your research paper is it to review which journals you used while preparing your manuscript. This source listing should provide some assurance that your own research paper, once published, will be among similar articles and, thus, among your field’s trusted sources.

After this initial selection of hand-full of scientific journals, consider the following six parameters for selecting the most appropriate journal for your research paper (read this article to review each step in detail):

• Scope and publishing history
• Ranking and Recognition
• Publishing time
• Acceptance rate
• Content requirements
• Access and Fees

How to select a journal for your research paper:

• Use the six parameters to select the most appropriate scientific journal for your research paper
• Use the following tools for journal selection: https://peerrecognized.com/journals
• Follow the journal’s “Authors guide” formatting requirements

How to Edit you manuscript

No one can write a finished research paper on their first attempt. Before submitting, make sure to take a break from your work for a couple of days, or even weeks. Try not to think about the manuscript during this time. Once it has faded from your memory, it is time to return and edit. The pause will allow you to read the manuscript from a fresh perspective and make edits as necessary.

I have summarized the most useful research paper editing tools in this article.

Tips for editing a research paper:

• Take time away from the research paper to forget about it; then returning to edit,
• Start by editing the content: structure, headings, paragraphs, logic, figures
• Continue by editing the grammar and language; perform a thorough language check using academic writing tools
• Read the entire paper out loud and correct what sounds weird

How to write a compelling Cover Letter for your paper

Begin the cover letter by stating the paper’s title and the type of paper you are submitting (review paper, research paper, short communication). Next, concisely explain why your study was performed, what was done, and what the key findings are. State why the results are important and what impact they might have in the field. Make sure you mention how your approach and findings relate to the scope of the journal in order to show why the article would be of interest to the journal’s readers.

I wrote a separate article that explains what to include in a cover letter here. You can also download a cover letter template from the article.

Tips for writing a cover letter:

• Explain how the findings of your research relate to journal’s scope
• Tell what impact the research results will have
• Show why the research paper will interest the journal’s audience
• Add any legal statements as required in journal’s guide for authors

How to Answer the Reviewers

Reviewers will often ask for new experiments, extended discussion, additional details on the experimental setup, and so forth. In principle, your primary winning tactic will be to agree with the reviewers and follow their suggestions whenever possible. After all, you must earn their blessing in order to get your paper published.

Be sure to answer each review query and stick to the point. In the response to the reviewers document write exactly where in the paper you have made any changes. In the paper itself, highlight the changes using a different color. This way the reviewers are less likely to re-read the entire article and suggest new edits.

In cases when you don’t agree with the reviewers, it makes sense to answer more thoroughly. Reviewers are scientifically minded people and so, with enough logical and supported argument, they will eventually be willing to see things your way.

Tips for answering the reviewers:

• Agree with most review comments, but if you don’t, thoroughly explain why
• Highlight changes in the manuscript
• Do not take the comments personally and cool down before answering

The LEAP research paper writing cheat sheet

Imagine that you are back in grad school and preparing to take an exam on the topic: “How to write a research paper”. As an exemplary student, you would, most naturally, create a cheat sheet summarizing the subject… Well, I did it for you.

This one-page summary of the LEAP research paper writing technique will remind you of the key research paper writing steps. Print it out and stick it to a wall in your office so that you can review it whenever you are writing a new research paper.

Now that we have gone through the four LEAP research paper writing steps, I hope you have a good idea of how to write a research paper. It can be an enjoyable process and once you get the hang of it, the four LEAP writing steps should even help you think about and interpret the research results. This process should enable you to write a well-structured, concise, and compelling research paper.

Have fund with writing your next research paper. I hope it will turn out great!

Learn writing papers that get cited

The LEAP writing approach is a blueprint for writing research papers. But to be efficient and write papers that get cited, you need more than that.

My name is Martins Zaumanis and in my interactive course Research Paper Writing Masterclass I will show you how to  visualize  your research results,  frame a message  that convinces your readers, and write  each section  of the paper. Step-by-step.

And of course – you will learn to respond the infamous  Reviewer No.2.

Hey! My name is Martins Zaumanis and I am a materials scientist in Switzerland ( Google Scholar ). As the first person in my family with a PhD, I have first-hand experience of the challenges starting scientists face in academia. With this blog, I want to help young researchers succeed in academia. I call the blog “Peer Recognized”, because peer recognition is what lifts academic careers and pushes science forward.

Besides this blog, I have written the Peer Recognized book series and created the Peer Recognized Academy offering interactive online courses.

Related articles:

One comment

• Pingback: Research Paper Outline with Key Sentence Skeleton (+Paper Template)

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I want to join the Peer Recognized newsletter!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Privacy Overview

Copyright © 2024 Martins Zaumanis

Contacts:  [email protected]  

Privacy Policy 

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Research paper

Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide

Published on September 24, 2022 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on September 5, 2024.

The introduction to a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals:

• Present your topic and get the reader interested
• Provide background or summarize existing research
• Position your own approach
• Detail your specific research problem and problem statement
• Give an overview of the paper’s structure

The introduction looks slightly different depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or constructs an argument by engaging with a variety of sources.

The five steps in this article will help you put together an effective introduction for either type of research paper.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Step 1: introduce your topic, step 2: describe the background, step 3: establish your research problem, step 4: specify your objective(s), step 5: map out your paper, research paper introduction examples, frequently asked questions about the research paper introduction.

The first job of the introduction is to tell the reader what your topic is and why it’s interesting or important. This is generally accomplished with a strong opening hook.

The hook is a striking opening sentence that clearly conveys the relevance of your topic. Think of an interesting fact or statistic, a strong statement, a question, or a brief anecdote that will get the reader wondering about your topic.

For example, the following could be an effective hook for an argumentative paper about the environmental impact of cattle farming:

A more empirical paper investigating the relationship of Instagram use with body image issues in adolescent girls might use the following hook:

Don’t feel that your hook necessarily has to be deeply impressive or creative. Clarity and relevance are still more important than catchiness. The key thing is to guide the reader into your topic and situate your ideas.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

This part of the introduction differs depending on what approach your paper is taking.

In a more argumentative paper, you’ll explore some general background here. In a more empirical paper, this is the place to review previous research and establish how yours fits in.

Argumentative paper: Background information

After you’ve caught your reader’s attention, specify a bit more, providing context and narrowing down your topic.

Provide only the most relevant background information. The introduction isn’t the place to get too in-depth; if more background is essential to your paper, it can appear in the body .

Empirical paper: Describing previous research

For a paper describing original research, you’ll instead provide an overview of the most relevant research that has already been conducted. This is a sort of miniature literature review —a sketch of the current state of research into your topic, boiled down to a few sentences.

This should be informed by genuine engagement with the literature. Your search can be less extensive than in a full literature review, but a clear sense of the relevant research is crucial to inform your own work.

Begin by establishing the kinds of research that have been done, and end with limitations or gaps in the research that you intend to respond to.

The next step is to clarify how your own research fits in and what problem it addresses.

Argumentative paper: Emphasize importance

In an argumentative research paper, you can simply state the problem you intend to discuss, and what is original or important about your argument.

Empirical paper: Relate to the literature

In an empirical research paper, try to lead into the problem on the basis of your discussion of the literature. Think in terms of these questions:

• What research gap is your work intended to fill?
• What limitations in previous work does it address?
• What contribution to knowledge does it make?

You can make the connection between your problem and the existing research using phrases like the following.

Now you’ll get into the specifics of what you intend to find out or express in your research paper.

The way you frame your research objectives varies. An argumentative paper presents a thesis statement, while an empirical paper generally poses a research question (sometimes with a hypothesis as to the answer).

Argumentative paper: Thesis statement

The thesis statement expresses the position that the rest of the paper will present evidence and arguments for. It can be presented in one or two sentences, and should state your position clearly and directly, without providing specific arguments for it at this point.

Empirical paper: Research question and hypothesis

The research question is the question you want to answer in an empirical research paper.

Present your research question clearly and directly, with a minimum of discussion at this point. The rest of the paper will be taken up with discussing and investigating this question; here you just need to express it.

A research question can be framed either directly or indirectly.

• This study set out to answer the following question: What effects does daily use of Instagram have on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls?
• We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls.

If your research involved testing hypotheses , these should be stated along with your research question. They are usually presented in the past tense, since the hypothesis will already have been tested by the time you are writing up your paper.

For example, the following hypothesis might respond to the research question above:

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

The final part of the introduction is often dedicated to a brief overview of the rest of the paper.

In a paper structured using the standard scientific “introduction, methods, results, discussion” format, this isn’t always necessary. But if your paper is structured in a less predictable way, it’s important to describe the shape of it for the reader.

If included, the overview should be concise, direct, and written in the present tense.

• This paper will first discuss several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then will go on to …
• This paper first discusses several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then goes on to …

Scribbr’s paraphrasing tool can help you rephrase sentences to give a clear overview of your arguments.

Full examples of research paper introductions are shown in the tabs below: one for an argumentative paper, the other for an empirical paper.

• Argumentative paper
• Empirical paper

Are cows responsible for climate change? A recent study (RIVM, 2019) shows that cattle farmers account for two thirds of agricultural nitrogen emissions in the Netherlands. These emissions result from nitrogen in manure, which can degrade into ammonia and enter the atmosphere. The study’s calculations show that agriculture is the main source of nitrogen pollution, accounting for 46% of the country’s total emissions. By comparison, road traffic and households are responsible for 6.1% each, the industrial sector for 1%. While efforts are being made to mitigate these emissions, policymakers are reluctant to reckon with the scale of the problem. The approach presented here is a radical one, but commensurate with the issue. This paper argues that the Dutch government must stimulate and subsidize livestock farmers, especially cattle farmers, to transition to sustainable vegetable farming. It first establishes the inadequacy of current mitigation measures, then discusses the various advantages of the results proposed, and finally addresses potential objections to the plan on economic grounds.

The rise of social media has been accompanied by a sharp increase in the prevalence of body image issues among women and girls. This correlation has received significant academic attention: Various empirical studies have been conducted into Facebook usage among adolescent girls (Tiggermann & Slater, 2013; Meier & Gray, 2014). These studies have consistently found that the visual and interactive aspects of the platform have the greatest influence on body image issues. Despite this, highly visual social media (HVSM) such as Instagram have yet to be robustly researched. This paper sets out to address this research gap. We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls. It was hypothesized that daily Instagram use would be associated with an increase in body image concerns and a decrease in self-esteem ratings.

The introduction of a research paper includes several key elements:

• A hook to catch the reader’s interest
• Relevant background on the topic
• Details of your research problem

and your problem statement

• A thesis statement or research question
• Sometimes an overview of the paper

Don’t feel that you have to write the introduction first. The introduction is often one of the last parts of the research paper you’ll write, along with the conclusion.

This is because it can be easier to introduce your paper once you’ve already written the body ; you may not have the clearest idea of your arguments until you’ve written them, and things can change during the writing process .

The way you present your research problem in your introduction varies depending on the nature of your research paper . A research paper that presents a sustained argument will usually encapsulate this argument in a thesis statement .

A research paper designed to present the results of empirical research tends to present a research question that it seeks to answer. It may also include a hypothesis —a prediction that will be confirmed or disproved by your research.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2024, September 05). Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved September 14, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-introduction/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, writing a research paper conclusion | step-by-step guide, research paper format | apa, mla, & chicago templates, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal

• Open access
• Published: 30 April 2020
• Volume 36 , pages 909–913, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Clara Busse   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0178-1000 1 &
• Ella August   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5151-1036 1 , 2  

285k Accesses

17 Citations

708 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Communicating research findings is an essential step in the research process. Often, peer-reviewed journals are the forum for such communication, yet many researchers are never taught how to write a publishable scientific paper. In this article, we explain the basic structure of a scientific paper and describe the information that should be included in each section. We also identify common pitfalls for each section and recommend strategies to avoid them. Further, we give advice about target journal selection and authorship. In the online resource 1 , we provide an example of a high-quality scientific paper, with annotations identifying the elements we describe in this article.

Similar content being viewed by others

How to Choose the Right Journal

The Point Is…to Publish?

Writing and publishing a scientific paper

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Writing a scientific paper is an important component of the research process, yet researchers often receive little formal training in scientific writing. This is especially true in low-resource settings. In this article, we explain why choosing a target journal is important, give advice about authorship, provide a basic structure for writing each section of a scientific paper, and describe common pitfalls and recommendations for each section. In the online resource 1 , we also include an annotated journal article that identifies the key elements and writing approaches that we detail here. Before you begin your research, make sure you have ethical clearance from all relevant ethical review boards.

Select a Target Journal Early in the Writing Process

We recommend that you select a “target journal” early in the writing process; a “target journal” is the journal to which you plan to submit your paper. Each journal has a set of core readers and you should tailor your writing to this readership. For example, if you plan to submit a manuscript about vaping during pregnancy to a pregnancy-focused journal, you will need to explain what vaping is because readers of this journal may not have a background in this topic. However, if you were to submit that same article to a tobacco journal, you would not need to provide as much background information about vaping.

Information about a journal’s core readership can be found on its website, usually in a section called “About this journal” or something similar. For example, the Journal of Cancer Education presents such information on the “Aims and Scope” page of its website, which can be found here: https://www.springer.com/journal/13187/aims-and-scope .

Peer reviewer guidelines from your target journal are an additional resource that can help you tailor your writing to the journal and provide additional advice about crafting an effective article [ 1 ]. These are not always available, but it is worth a quick web search to find out.

Identify Author Roles Early in the Process

Early in the writing process, identify authors, determine the order of authors, and discuss the responsibilities of each author. Standard author responsibilities have been identified by The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) [ 2 ]. To set clear expectations about each team member’s responsibilities and prevent errors in communication, we also suggest outlining more detailed roles, such as who will draft each section of the manuscript, write the abstract, submit the paper electronically, serve as corresponding author, and write the cover letter. It is best to formalize this agreement in writing after discussing it, circulating the document to the author team for approval. We suggest creating a title page on which all authors are listed in the agreed-upon order. It may be necessary to adjust authorship roles and order during the development of the paper. If a new author order is agreed upon, be sure to update the title page in the manuscript draft.

In the case where multiple papers will result from a single study, authors should discuss who will author each paper. Additionally, authors should agree on a deadline for each paper and the lead author should take responsibility for producing an initial draft by this deadline.

Structure of the Introduction Section

The introduction section should be approximately three to five paragraphs in length. Look at examples from your target journal to decide the appropriate length. This section should include the elements shown in Fig.  1 . Begin with a general context, narrowing to the specific focus of the paper. Include five main elements: why your research is important, what is already known about the topic, the “gap” or what is not yet known about the topic, why it is important to learn the new information that your research adds, and the specific research aim(s) that your paper addresses. Your research aim should address the gap you identified. Be sure to add enough background information to enable readers to understand your study. Table 1 provides common introduction section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

The main elements of the introduction section of an original research article. Often, the elements overlap

Methods Section

The purpose of the methods section is twofold: to explain how the study was done in enough detail to enable its replication and to provide enough contextual detail to enable readers to understand and interpret the results. In general, the essential elements of a methods section are the following: a description of the setting and participants, the study design and timing, the recruitment and sampling, the data collection process, the dataset, the dependent and independent variables, the covariates, the analytic approach for each research objective, and the ethical approval. The hallmark of an exemplary methods section is the justification of why each method was used. Table 2 provides common methods section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Results Section

The focus of the results section should be associations, or lack thereof, rather than statistical tests. Two considerations should guide your writing here. First, the results should present answers to each part of the research aim. Second, return to the methods section to ensure that the analysis and variables for each result have been explained.

Begin the results section by describing the number of participants in the final sample and details such as the number who were approached to participate, the proportion who were eligible and who enrolled, and the number of participants who dropped out. The next part of the results should describe the participant characteristics. After that, you may organize your results by the aim or by putting the most exciting results first. Do not forget to report your non-significant associations. These are still findings.

Tables and figures capture the reader’s attention and efficiently communicate your main findings [ 3 ]. Each table and figure should have a clear message and should complement, rather than repeat, the text. Tables and figures should communicate all salient details necessary for a reader to understand the findings without consulting the text. Include information on comparisons and tests, as well as information about the sample and timing of the study in the title, legend, or in a footnote. Note that figures are often more visually interesting than tables, so if it is feasible to make a figure, make a figure. To avoid confusing the reader, either avoid abbreviations in tables and figures, or define them in a footnote. Note that there should not be citations in the results section and you should not interpret results here. Table 3 provides common results section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Discussion Section

Opposite the introduction section, the discussion should take the form of a right-side-up triangle beginning with interpretation of your results and moving to general implications (Fig.  2 ). This section typically begins with a restatement of the main findings, which can usually be accomplished with a few carefully-crafted sentences.

Major elements of the discussion section of an original research article. Often, the elements overlap

Next, interpret the meaning or explain the significance of your results, lifting the reader’s gaze from the study’s specific findings to more general applications. Then, compare these study findings with other research. Are these findings in agreement or disagreement with those from other studies? Does this study impart additional nuance to well-accepted theories? Situate your findings within the broader context of scientific literature, then explain the pathways or mechanisms that might give rise to, or explain, the results.

Journals vary in their approach to strengths and limitations sections: some are embedded paragraphs within the discussion section, while some mandate separate section headings. Keep in mind that every study has strengths and limitations. Candidly reporting yours helps readers to correctly interpret your research findings.

The next element of the discussion is a summary of the potential impacts and applications of the research. Should these results be used to optimally design an intervention? Does the work have implications for clinical protocols or public policy? These considerations will help the reader to further grasp the possible impacts of the presented work.

Finally, the discussion should conclude with specific suggestions for future work. Here, you have an opportunity to illuminate specific gaps in the literature that compel further study. Avoid the phrase “future research is necessary” because the recommendation is too general to be helpful to readers. Instead, provide substantive and specific recommendations for future studies. Table 4 provides common discussion section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Follow the Journal’s Author Guidelines

After you select a target journal, identify the journal’s author guidelines to guide the formatting of your manuscript and references. Author guidelines will often (but not always) include instructions for titles, cover letters, and other components of a manuscript submission. Read the guidelines carefully. If you do not follow the guidelines, your article will be sent back to you.

Finally, do not submit your paper to more than one journal at a time. Even if this is not explicitly stated in the author guidelines of your target journal, it is considered inappropriate and unprofessional.

Your title should invite readers to continue reading beyond the first page [ 4 , 5 ]. It should be informative and interesting. Consider describing the independent and dependent variables, the population and setting, the study design, the timing, and even the main result in your title. Because the focus of the paper can change as you write and revise, we recommend you wait until you have finished writing your paper before composing the title.

Be sure that the title is useful for potential readers searching for your topic. The keywords you select should complement those in your title to maximize the likelihood that a researcher will find your paper through a database search. Avoid using abbreviations in your title unless they are very well known, such as SNP, because it is more likely that someone will use a complete word rather than an abbreviation as a search term to help readers find your paper.

After you have written a complete draft, use the checklist (Fig. 3 ) below to guide your revisions and editing. Additional resources are available on writing the abstract and citing references [ 5 ]. When you feel that your work is ready, ask a trusted colleague or two to read the work and provide informal feedback. The box below provides a checklist that summarizes the key points offered in this article.

Checklist for manuscript quality

Data Availability

Michalek AM (2014) Down the rabbit hole…advice to reviewers. J Cancer Educ 29:4–5

Article   Google Scholar  

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Defining the role of authors and contributors: who is an author? http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authosrs-and-contributors.html . Accessed 15 January, 2020

Vetto JT (2014) Short and sweet: a short course on concise medical writing. J Cancer Educ 29(1):194–195

Brett M, Kording K (2017) Ten simple rules for structuring papers. PLoS ComputBiol. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005619

Lang TA (2017) Writing a better research article. J Public Health Emerg. https://doi.org/10.21037/jphe.2017.11.06

Download references

Acknowledgments

Ella August is grateful to the Sustainable Sciences Institute for mentoring her in training researchers on writing and publishing their research.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Maternal and Child Health, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr, 27599, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Clara Busse & Ella August

Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2029, USA

Ella August

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ella August .

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interests.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

(PDF 362 kb)

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Busse, C., August, E. How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal. J Canc Educ 36 , 909–913 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z

Download citation

Published : 30 April 2020

Issue Date : October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Manuscripts
• Scientific writing
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Accessibility Links

• Skip to content
• Skip to search IOPscience
• Skip to Journals list
• Accessibility help

The American Astronomical Society (AAS) , established in 1899 and based in Washington, DC, is the major organization of professional astronomers in North America. Its membership of about 7,000 individuals also includes physicists, mathematicians, geologists, engineers, and others whose research and educational interests lie within the broad spectrum of subjects comprising contemporary astronomy. The mission of the AAS is to enhance and share humanity's scientific understanding of the universe.

The Institute of Physics (IOP) is a leading scientific society promoting physics and bringing physicists together for the benefit of all. It has a worldwide membership of around 50 000 comprising physicists from all sectors, as well as those with an interest in physics. It works to advance physics research, application and education; and engages with policy makers and the public to develop awareness and understanding of physics. Its publishing company, IOP Publishing, is a world leader in professional scientific communications.

A publishing partnership

Resolving a Candidate Dual Active Galactic Nucleus with ∼100 pc Separation in MCG-03-34-64

Anna Trindade Falcão 1 , T. J. Turner 2 , S. B. Kraemer 3 , J. Reeves 3,4 , V. Braito 3,4,5 , H. R. Schmitt 6 , and L. Feuillet 3

Published 2024 September 9 • © 2024. The Author(s). Published by the American Astronomical Society. The Astrophysical Journal , Volume 972 , Number 2 Citation Anna Trindade Falcão et al 2024 ApJ 972 185 DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6b91

You need an eReader or compatible software to experience the benefits of the ePub3 file format .

Article metrics

1638 Total downloads

Share this article

Author affiliations.

1 Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden St., Cambridge, MA 02138, USA

2 Eureka Scientific, Inc., 2452 Delmer St., Suite 100, Oakland, CA 94602, USA

3 Institute for Astrophysics and Computational Sciences, The Catholic University of America, Washington, DC 20064, USA

4 INAF—Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, Via Bianchi 46, 23807, Merate (LC), Italy

5 Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Trento, Via Sommarive 14, Trento 38123, Italy

6 Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375, USA

Anna Trindade Falcão https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8112-3464

T. J. Turner https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2971-1722

S. B. Kraemer https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4073-8977

J. Reeves https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3221-6765

V. Braito https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2629-4989

H. R. Schmitt https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2450-3246

L. Feuillet https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5718-2402

• Received 2024 May 24
• Revised 2024 July 20
• Accepted 2024 August 4
• Published 2024 September 9

AGN host galaxies ; Seyfert galaxies ; High energy astrophysics

Receive alerts on all new research papers in American Astronomical Society ( A A S  ) journals as soon as they are published. Select your desired journals and corridors below. You will need to select a minimum of one corridor.

Please note, The Planetary Science Journal (PSJ) does not currently use the corridors.

What are corridors? opens in new tab

We report the serendipitous multiwavelength discovery of a candidate dual black hole system with a separation of ∼100 pc, in the gas-rich luminous infrared galaxy MCG-03-34-64 ( z = 0.016). Hubble Space Telescope/Advanced Camera for Surveys observations show three distinct optical centroids in the [O iii ] narrow-band and F814W images. Subsequent analysis of Chandra/ACIS data shows two spatially resolved peaks of equal intensity in the neutral Fe K α (6.2–6.6 keV) band, while high-resolution radio continuum observations with the Very Large Array at 8.46 GHz (3.6 cm band) show two spatially coincident radio peaks. Fast shocks as the ionizing source seem unlikely, given the energies required for the production of Fe K α . If confirmed, the separation of ∼100 pc would represent the closest dual active galactic nuclei reported to date with spatially resolved, multiwavelength observations.

Export citation and abstract BibTeX RIS

Original content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence . Any further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.

1. Introduction

The masses of supermassive black holes (SMBHs) in active galactic nuclei (AGNs) correlate with the global properties of their host galaxies' stellar components, such as luminosity, mass, and velocity dispersion, extending over kiloparsec scales (e.g., Kormendy & Ho 2013 ). This correlation highlights the need to understand the mechanisms driving SMBH growth.

Both galactic evolutionary models and observations suggest that a significant fraction of AGNs, particularly those at the center of large-scale structures, undergo major mergers (e.g., De Lucia & Blaizot 2007 ; Hopkins et al. 2008 ; Ginolfi et al. 2017 ; Castignani et al. 2020 ). Hydrodynamical simulations further demonstrate that major mergers induce gas inflows toward galactic centers, potentially triggering both star formation and accretion onto central SMBHs (Mayer et al. 2007 ). However, the overall impact of these events on SMBH growth throughout cosmic time remains poorly constrained.

SMBH pairs, often manifested as dual AGNs, provide distinctive evidence for merger-fueled SMBH growth (e.g., Wassenhove et al. 2012 ). Numerous dual AGN candidates have been identified using various techniques, including optical spectroscopy with emission line ratios (e.g., Liu et al. 2011 ), hard X-ray emission (e.g., Koss et al. 2011 ), and double-peaked narrow emission lines (e.g., Smith et al. 2010 ; Koss et al. 2023 ). Nonetheless, these methods have limitations, and multiwavelength follow-up observations have revealed a substantial number of false positives (e.g., Fu et al. 2011b ).

The advent of gravitational-wave astronomy, with the potential for detection through pulsar timing arrays (e.g., Verbiest et al. 2016 ), has heightened the importance of understanding the formation timescales of binary systems. Studying kiloparsec and subkiloparsec dual AGNs offers a unique window into the final stages of SMBH binary coalescence, a crucial process in gravitational wave astronomy.

Dual AGNs separated by kiloparsec or subkiloparsec scales are inherently more challenging to detect and investigate than wider-separation systems (e.g., >3 kpc). This difficulty arises from increased obscuration in late-stage mergers (e.g., Koss et al. 2016 ; Ricci et al. 2021 ; De Rosa et al. 2022 ), limitations in telescope spatial resolution (particularly at subkiloparsec scales), the scarcity of detected radio-bright dual systems (Burke-Spolaor 2011 ), and the limitations of optical selection using double-peaked narrow emission lines (prone to false positives; see Fu et al. 2011a ). Existing observations of dual AGNs tentatively suggest that AGN triggering becomes more prevalent in advanced mergers with stellar bulge separations <10 kpc (e.g., Koss et al. 2010 ; Fu et al. 2018 ; Stemo et al. 2021 ), aligning with simulations of SMBH accretion and evolution in such mergers (e.g., Blecha et al. 2018 ). Therefore, studying nearby galaxies hosting dual AGNs separated at subkiloparsec scales is crucial for advancing our understanding of the late stages of galaxy mergers, the triggering and fueling of AGN activity, and the dynamics of SMBH pairs (Steinborn et al. 2016 ). These close-separation systems provide a unique window into the processes leading to the eventual coalescence of SMBHs, which is a major source of gravitational waves, and plays a fundamental role in the growth of SMBHs and their host galaxies (Dotti et al. 2012 ; Kharb et al. 2017 ).

While several dual AGN candidates have been proposed at scales of hundreds of parsecs, often supported by single-wave band observations, these have frequently been challenged by subsequent studies. Notable examples include the nearby Seyfert NGC 3393 (Fabbiano et al. 2011 ), SDSS J101022.95 + 141300.9 (Goulding et al. 2019 ), and a third active nucleus in NGC 6240 (Kollatschny et al. 2020 ), later disputed in other works (Koss et al. 2015 ; Veres et al. 2021 ; Treister et al. 2020 ).

In this study, we present the serendipitous discovery of a candidate dual AGN system in MCG-03-34-64 (IRAS 13197-1627), a nearby early-type infrared luminous galaxy at z = 0.01654 (∼78 Mpc, from NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database). 7 This galaxy is identified as one of the hardest X-ray sources in the local Universe (Tatum et al. 2016 ). Earlier X-ray observations with ASCA, XMM-Newton, and BeppoSAX (Dadina & Cappi 2004 ; Miniutti et al. 2007 ) revealed an extremely hard and complex source spectrum, attributed to heavy absorption from a multilayered and clumpy medium. MCG-03-34-64 also shows extended radio emission (∼300 pc), roughly aligned with the major axis of the host galaxy (Schmitt et al. 2001 ), and ∼2'' extent in mid-infrared aligned in the same direction as the radio structure (Hönig et al. 2010 ).

We have obtained Hubble Space Telescope/Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) imaging of MCG-03-34-64 in 2022 June (P.I.: Turner, proposal ID: 16847), and 50 ks of Chandra/ACIS-S observations in 2023 April (obs ids 25253, 27802, and 27803, P.I.: Turner). This paper presents the results of the analysis of these new data sets, combined with existing Very Large Array (VLA) radio, and Hubble Space Telescope (HST) optical imaging of the source. Throughout this paper, we adopt Ω m = 0.3, Ω Λ = 0.7, and H 0 = 70 km s −1 Mpc −1 , and a scale of 340 pc arcsec −1 , based on the redshift at the galaxy's distance.

2. Multiwavelength Observations and Analysis

Table 1 lists all observations used in this paper, including instruments, filters, observation dates, obs ids, and exposure times. Details on the reduction of new HST/ACS and Chandra/ACIS-S observations are provided in Sections 2.1 and 2.2 , respectively. For reduction and analysis of archival HST F814W, VLA 8.46 GHz imaging, and Suzaku and XMM-Newton spectroscopy, see Section 2.3 . All the HST data used in this paper can be found in MAST at doi: 10.17909/53rj-fw34 .

Table 1.  Multiwavelength Observations of MCG-03-34-64

Download table as:  ASCII Typeset image

2.1. Hubble Space Telescope Imaging

HST/ACS observations of MCG-03-34-64 were obtained using the linear ramp filter FR505N (narrow-band [O iii ]) centered at 5089.6 Å, to characterize the morphology of the emission-line gas, while a continuum medium band image was obtained using FR647M, centered at 5590 Å. These filters have bandwidths of 2% and 9%, respectively. Standard HST pipeline procedures were employed for data reduction. The narrow-band and continuum images were acquired sequentially and did not require realignment. Flux calibration was performed using information available on the headers.

2.2. Chandra Imaging and Spectroscopy.

Subpixel imaging binning was employed to effectively oversample the Chandra point-spread function (PSF) and overcome the limitations of the ACIS instrumental pixel size. This method has been extensively used and validated in previous studies examining the subkiloparsec regions around nearby and obscured AGNs (e.g., Maksym et al. 2017 ; Fabbiano et al. 2018a ; Ma et al. 2021 ; Trindade Falcão 2023 ), demonstrating excellent agreement between reconstructed ACIS-S features and those imaged with higher spatial resolution instruments such as HST and VLA (e.g., Wang et al. 2011b ; Paggi et al. 2012 ; Maksym et al. 2019 ; Fabbiano et al. 2018b ). The Chandra PSF was simulated using ChaRT 9 and MARX . 10 This work uses a final Chandra scale of one-eighth of the native ACIS pixel.

2.3. Archival Radio/Optical/X-Ray Observations

In addition to the new Chandra and HST data sets, we analyze archival optical, radio, and X-ray observations of MCG-03-34-64, as listed in Table 1 . These data include 8.46 GHz radio imaging with VLA, optical continuum imaging with HST/ACS F814W, and X-ray spectra from Suzaku and XMM-Newton.

There are four additional archival Chandra observations with MCG-03-34-64 in the field of view (obs ids 27267, 27786, 7373, and 23690). However, three of these observations are not usable due to the galaxy being located at the very edge of the field (observations were optimized for the companion galaxy). The fourth available Chandra observation consists of a 7 ks snapshot (used in Miniutti et al. 2007 ), which has insufficient counts for meaningful imaging analysis.

3.1. Imaging Analysis

3.1.1. hubble space telescope imaging.

The [O iii ] narrow-line region (NLR) in MCG-03-34-64 has a highly unusual morphology, featuring three distinct, and compact emission regions, as shown in Figure 1 . The NLR extends ∼2.3 kpc along the NE–SW direction. In the perpendicular direction (NW–SE), we observe three diffraction spikes characteristic of point sources, while one diffraction spike is observed along the NE–SW cone. These features suggest high concentrations of [O iii ] gas within a relatively small region, a rare occurrence in the local Universe (Fischer et al. 2018 ).

Figure 1.  HST [O iii ] and F814W images of the central region of MCG-03-34-64. Note the prominent diffraction spikes present in the [O iii ] image.

Download figure:

To examine the overall structure of the NLR, we model the [O iii ] light distribution with GALFIT (Peng et al. 2002 , 2010 ). The modeling was performed with generic Sérsic profiles, and we allow all parameters to freely vary during the fitting process. The background level and standard deviation were determined from blank regions within the image's field of view.

The best-fit GALFIT model consists of four Sérsic components, one for each of the three peaks visible in the [O iii ] surface plot in the leftmost panel of Figure 2 , and an additional larger component to take into account the underlying fainter, more extended emission. In the second panel, we show a zoomed-in image of the [O iii ] emission, and mark the position of each Sérsic component corresponding to a strong peak of [O iii ] emission as green circles. The third panel of Figure 2 shows the best-fit GALFIT model, while the fourth panel shows the residual images from this best-fit model, with the different model components subtracted from the data.

Figure 2.  First panel: surface plot of the [O iii ] flux in the HST/ACS image where three distinct sources are visible. Second panel: HST/ACS [O iii ] image showing the presence of three closely separated emission peaks. We mark the position of each Sérsic component for the emission peaks as green circles. Third panel: best-fit GALFIT model, using four Sérsic components. Fourth panel: residual image after subtraction of the best-fit GALFIT model.

Table 2 lists the best-fit model parameters. The strong [O iii ] peaks of emission are fit with Sérsic components with indices 0.41 ≤ n ≤ 0.51, indicating that they are similar to Gaussians ( n = 0.5), but in two cases show a slightly more centrally concentrated distribution. Given that these components have effective radii ∼2–3 times that of an unresolved source, we opted to not include a PSF component in the fitting model, since it is not expected to significantly change the results.

Given the unique morphology of the optical emission observed in MCG-03-34-64 with HST, we examine other available multiwavelength observations (Table 1 ) to obtain a more comprehensive picture of this inner region.

3.1.2. Chandra Imaging

Figure 3 shows the inner ∼200 pc region of MCG-03-34-64, as observed with Chandra/ACIS in different energy bands. The images are binned at one-eighth of the native pixel to use the full-resolution of the instrument in the high-count inner region, and processed with 1 kernel Gaussian smoothing.

Figure 3.  Chandra/ACIS-S merged data set showing the inner 200 pc region of MCG-03-34-64 in different bands (one-eighth subpixel, and 1 kernel Gaussian smoothing). First panel: soft (0.3–3 keV) X-ray image. Second panel: 3–5 keV hard continuum image. Third panel: Fe K α (6.2–6.6 keV) Chandra image. We show the location of the two Fe K α centroids as blue circles. Fourth panel: 6–7 keV hard band Chandra image.

We measure nearly equal X-ray luminosities in the narrow 6.2–6.6 keV band from the Chandra image for both Fe K α peaks, L (6.2−6.6 keV) ∼ 3.2 ± 0.6 × 10 40 erg s −1 , for D ∼ 78 Mpc (e.g., de Grijp et al. 1992 ; Table 3 ).

Table 3.  Chandra/ACIS-S Merged Data Set—Astrometry, Fluxes, and Luminosities of the Individual Fe K α Regions

Note. The luminosities are calculated for D = 78 Mpc.

To address concerns that the dual morphology might be a spurious detection due to smoothing on scales smaller than the Chandra PSF, we examine the individual Chandra observations (prior to merging) listed in Table 1 , in the Fe K α band (Figure 4 ). These images are binned at one-eighth of the native pixel and smoothed with a 1 kernel Gaussian. As shown, the dual morphology of the Fe K α band is indeed observed in all individual observations, prior to merging, confirming the robustness of the detection. The differences in surface brightness between the individual Chandra exposures seen in Figure 4 for the individual nuclei are most likely due to statistical noise.

3.1.3. VLA Imaging

The morphology of the 8.46 GHz radio continuum emission in MCG-03-34-64 is also analyzed, and shown in Figure 5 . The positions of the two radio centroids identified by Schmitt et al. ( 2001 ) in the inner region are shown as white circles (see their Table 2). The 8.46 GHz emission starts as a linear structure at the position of the northern radio centroid, extending ∼100 pc southwestward to the central radio peak, and then bending southward in the direction of the southern [O iii ] centroid (Figure 5 ). Table 4 lists the positions and fluxes of the individual radio components, as measured in Schmitt et al. ( 2001 ). The separation between the two centroids is 116 ± 14 pc.

Figure 5.  VLA-A 8.46 GHz (3.6 cm) radio continuum image of MCG-03-34-64. White circles mark the position of the two radio peaks, and the [O iii ] centroids are shown in green. The image is shown in log scale.

Table 4.  VLA-A 3.6 cm Radio Continuum Image Decomposition—Position and Fluxes of Individual Components

Note. From Schmitt et al. ( 2001 ).

3.1.4. Astrometry Registration

We initially apply CIAO wavdetect 15 to the merged 0.3–7 keV Chandra image with a >5 σ detection threshold, detecting two faint sources near the edge of the chip array (via comparison with the Vizier source catalog). However, given their faintness, these are not suitable to use as a basis for astrometry correction.

We then create Chandra images in the narrow Fe K α band (6.2–6.6 keV), known to be dominated by nuclear emission in obscured sources (Fabbiano & Elvis 2024 ). Assuming that the radio emission in AGNs also originates from the innermost regions around the SMBH, we correct Chandra's absolute astrometry by aligning the emission peaks seen in the Fe K α band with those in the 8.46 GHz radio image. This alignment method has been used in similar studies, such as in Mrk 78 (Fornasini et al. 2022 ).

We apply a total shift of [Δx, Δy] = [0.1, 0.7] pixels to the Chandra/ACIS data, well within the absolute astrometry accuracy of the telescope. 16 Comparison with available HST observations confirms the accuracy of VLA's astrometry.

3.2. Spectroscopic Analysis

The overall spectral profile observed in the Chandra data is consistent across the earlier NuSTAR and XMM-Newton observations. All three spectra show an absorption feature at 6.8 keV, likely arising from Fe XXV absorption, and suggesting an outflow with v ∼ 5000 km s −1 , as noted in Miniutti et al. ( 2007 ). Below 3 keV, the soft X-ray emission is dominated by photoionized and collisionally ionized emission lines, from Ne, O, and Fe L ions (Miniutti et al. 2007 ).

3.2.1. XMM-Newton and NuSTAR Spectral Fitting

We proceed to model the X-ray spectrum of MCG-03-34-64 with MYTorus (Murphy & Yaqoob 2009 ), a physically motivated model built to describe the interaction of the emission from an X-ray point-source with a surrounding, and homogeneous torus of cold neutral material.

We fit the joint XMM+NuSTAR X-ray spectrum with a source model of the form:

A × TBabs × [ xstar × MYTZ × zpowerlw +( C × ( MYTS + MYTL × gsmooth )+ zpowerlaw _ soft + soft _ emiss )], where TBabs describes the absorption of emission by the Galactic column density, xstar is the photoionized absorber described previously in Miniutti et al. ( 2007 ), [ MYTZ × zpowerlw] describes the intrinsic continuum in transmission absorbed by torus, MYTS is the scattered (reflected) toroidal component off Compton-thick matter, MYTL is the associated Fe/Ni K α /K β line emission, and gsmooth accounts for some Gaussian broadening of the MYTorus line emission, where the upper limit on the line width is σ < 65 eV. The soft X-ray components are zpowerlaw _ soft , which is an unabsorbed scattered power-law component, and soft _ emiss , which is the sum of the photo and collisionally ionized emission components described by Miniutti et al. ( 2007 ). A is the cross normalization factor between NuSTAR and XMM ( A = 1.20 ± 0.05) and C is the offset between reflected/line components and intrinsic continuum components ( C is frozen at 1). The results of the fitting are shown in Figure 6 (center and right panels).

Given the quality and resolution of the X-ray observations used in this work, the spectra and fitting models employed in our analysis account for emission within the entire inner region of MCG-03-34-64, and cannot be performed separately for the individual Fe K α peaks uncovered in the Chandra imaging data. In this case, the resulting configuration suggested by MYTorus requires one where one is looking along the edge (Compton-thin line of sight) of a very Compton-thick absorber overall, which obscures both Fe K α regions.

We also note that the difference observed between the summed Fe K α luminosities derived from the Chandra imaging, ∼6.4 × 10 40 erg s −1 , and the total Fe K α luminosity yielded by the spectral fitting with MYTorus , L (6.2−6.6 keV) = 1.0 × 10 41 erg s −1 , may be attributed to line absorption by the absorber, which in turn implies a higher intrinsic X-ray luminosity, as yielded by the results of the spectral fit.

4. Discussion

The results presented in Section 3 reveal puzzling properties of the emission in MCG-03-34-64. Our imaging analysis identified three [O iii ]-emitting regions in the HST/ACS data, separated by 76 ± 8 and 79 ± 8 pc (Table 2 , Figure 2 ). In X-rays with Chandra/ACIS, two spatially resolved peaks of emission are observed in the narrow 6.2–6.6 keV Fe K α band, separated by 125 ± 21 pc (Table 3 , Figure 3 ). In the radio with VLA-A, Schmitt et al. ( 2001 ) previously identified two distinct radio cores in the 8.46 GHz continuum, separated by 116 ± 14 pc (Table 4 , Figure 5 ).

Figure 7 shows the Chandra/ACIS Fe K α image and the position of these multiwavelength centroids. The image is binned at one-eighth of the native ACIS-S pixel and smoothed with 1 kernel Gaussian.

Figure 7.  Chandra/ACIS-S merged Fe K (6.2–6.6 keV) image of MCG-03-34-64 (one-eighth subpixel, and smoothed with 1 kernel Gaussian). Optical centroids from HST/ACS are shown in red, VLA-A 8.46 GHz centroids in white, and Chandra/ACIS Fe K centroids in blue. The circle sizes reflect uncertainties in the position of the centroids.

4.1. Bolometric Luminosity

Table 5.  Joint XMM and NuSTAR Spectral Fitting Results from MYTorus

Notes. We use a correction factor k = 30 (Vasudevan & Fabian 2007 ) to obtain the integrated bolometric luminosity in X-rays.

4.1.1. HST F814W Continuum Fluxes

Our results reveal that the integrated observed fluxes are ≤3% of the integrated intrinsic flux in the band (Table 6 ), with the largest fraction originating from the central region. These fractions are consistent with scattered, hidden continuum (e.g., Pier et al. 1994 ), but could also include contributions from emission lines (e.g., Kraemer & Crenshaw 2000 ) and recombination continuum (Osterbrock & Robertis 1985 ). Therefore, it is unlikely that we will detect AGN continuum emission directly in the optical, and we cannot determine which of these regions harbors the AGN, given that all three regions are consistent with scatter continua from an active nucleus (but see below).

Table 6.  [O iii ] Luminosities Calculated from the Measured [O iii ] Fluxes from Table 2 , and Considering a Distance of D = 78 Mpc

Note We use a correction factor c = 454 (Lamastra et al. 2009 ) to calculate the bolometric luminosity in each [O iii ] region. We also show the measured F814W fluxes for each emitting region.

4.2. Multiwavelength Emission Centroids

The high fluxes and luminosities found in Section 3 for individual emission regions in the optical, X-ray, and radio bands support the presence of an AGN in this system. However, pinpointing the AGN's location is more challenging. We discuss possible interpretations for the system's configuration, based on our results and the limitations of the data.

4.2.1. Single AGN+Shocked Interstellar Medium

One interpretation is that the active nucleus is located at the position of the northern centroids ([O iii ], Fe K α , and radio; see Figure 7 ), based on the fluxes of individual components (Tables 2 , 3 , and 4 ). In this single AGN scenario, the remaining emission centroids (central Fe K α , [O iii ] and radio centroids, and southern [O iii ]) may arise from the interaction between the AGN and the interstellar medium (ISM). This would manifest as a mix of photoionized and collisionally ionized (shocked) gas from an extended NLR, similar to NGC 3393 (e.g., Maksym et al. 2016 ). Such an interpretation is consistent with previous spectral fitting results for this galaxy, which indicate a mix of photoionized and shock-ionized gas in the soft X-ray emission (Miniutti et al. 2007 ). Similarly, it is possible that the AGN in this system is located at the position of the central [O iii ], Fe K α , and radio peaks, while the remaining multiwavelength centroids may be attributed to AGN–ISM shock emission.

4.2.2. Dual AGN+Shocked ISM

Following the discussion in Section 4.2.1 , the high Fe K α luminosities (Table 3 ), and the high energies required for the production of such line emission suggest that both Fe K α regions could be powered by an active SMBH. In this scenario, the northern emission centroids would pinpoint the location of one AGN, while the central emission centroids (radio, Fe K α , and optical) may be associated with a second active SMBH in this system (given the high fluxes found for the central optical region in the F814W continuum band; Table 6 ). The distances measured between the different centroids attributed to each AGN are consistent across different wave bands (Table 7 ), supporting the dual AGN scenario.

Table 7.  Distances between Multiwavelength Centroids Found in This Work: HST/ACS, VLA-A, and Chandra/ACIS-S (Fe K α )

In this scenario, the southern [O iii ] region may arise from collisionally ionized emission in the ISM. Shock emission from jet–ISM interaction at the southern optical centroid location is supported by (1) the morphology of the radio emission at the central radio peak, which is observed to bend southward (Schmitt et al. 2001 ), in the direction of the southern [O iii ] peak (see Figures 5 and 3 , and Section 3.1.3 ); and (2) the morphology of the Chandra 0.3–3 keV (soft) emission, which is also observed to bend southward in the direction of the southern [O iii ] centroid (see Figure 3 , and Section 3.1.3 ). The lack of a corresponding southern radio or hard X-ray counterpart is consistent with the hypothesis that the northern and central [O iii ] centroids are powered by individual AGNs.

The dual AGN scenario is strengthened by the consistent values between the estimated bolometric luminosities derived from [O iii ] and X-rays (Tables 5 and 6 ), and the detection of nearly equal Fe K α emission peaks in the Chandra image, a powerful tool for identifying and confirming dual AGN systems (De Rosa et al. 2022 ). In the 3–5 keV Chandra image (Figure 3 ), the northern nucleus appears brighter than the central nucleus, although some extended emission is observed toward the central nucleus in this band. The column densities in the transmission of the two nuclei may not be the same, i.e., the AGN located at the central Fe K α region could have a higher absorbing column and appear fainter at lower energies. A higher contribution from the photoionized+thermal extended soft X-ray gas is expected at these lower energies. Given the resolution of the analyzed X-ray data, performing a separate spectral analysis of each individual Fe K α region is currently impractical.

5. Summary and Conclusions

We analyze new HST/ACS and Chandra/ACIS observations of the nearby Seyfert galaxy MCG-03-34-64, along with archival HST/ACS, XMM-Newton/Epic-pn, NuSTAR, and VLA-A data sets. Our analysis reveals the following:

In X-rays with Chandra: Two spatially resolved emission centroids are detected in the 6.2–6.6 keV Fe K α image, separated by 125 ± 21 pc. These peaks are evident in individual exposures and the merged data set. The northern and central Fe K α regions have 36 ± 6 and 37 ± 6 counts in the narrow 6.2–6.6 keV band, respectively, corresponding to ≥6 σ detections, and nearly equal Fe K α luminosities, L (6.2−6.6 keV) ∼ 3.2 ± 0.6 × 10 40 erg s −1 .

In the radio with VLA: Two emission regions are observed in the 3.6 cm VLA continuum image (Schmitt et al. 2001 ), spatially colocated with the northern and central Fe K α and [O iii ] regions.

We propose two possible physical interpretations of our results, and discuss these in the context of our analysis:

1. The "single AGN+shocked ISM" scenario, which proposes the existence of a single active nucleus in the system, while the remaining multiwavelength centroids may be attributed to the interaction of the ISM with the radio jet in the NLR.

This scenario is strengthened by:

a. Previous X-ray studies on this source, which find evidence for a mix of collisionally and photoionized X-ray gas in the NLR (Miniutti et al. 2007 ).

This scenario is challenged by:

b. The high Fe K α luminosities derived for individual regions and the energies required for the production of such line emission.

2. The "dual AGN+shocked ISM" scenario, which proposes the existence of a dual SMBH pair in this system separated by just 125 ± 21 pc.

a. The detection of two spatially resolved Fe K α regions in the Chandra imaging data, with high individual luminosities (Table 3 ).

b. The detection of three very bright and compact (<60 pc diameter) [O iii ]-emitting regions in the HST imaging data, and the respective individual bolometric luminosities (Table 6 ).

c. The detection of spatially coincident Fe K α , radio, and [O iii ] centroids at the northern and central regions. This is the first time spatially resolved, multiwavelength emission centroids in X-rays, radio, and optical are detected colocated in a nearby candidate dual AGN. For comparison, the recent study of Koss et al. ( 2023 ), which identified the presence of a dual AGN system separated by ∼230 pc in UGC 4211, detected colocated optical (HST F814W, MUSE AO [O iii ], and H α ), NIR (Keck J and K'), and submillimeter (Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array continuum at ∼230 GHz) centroids at the position of the two nuclei, but with no confirmation from X-rays or radio observations.

In summary, although we cannot definitively confirm or exclude the physical scenarios presented here, identification of the two nuclei in a deeper Chandra exposure would help to confirm a possible dual black hole system in this galaxy. Analysis of gas kinematics in the nuclear region of MCG-03-34-64 is crucial to determine the nature of the observed structures. Kinematic information obtained with HST/STIS long-slit spectroscopy could reveal disturbed kinematics expected from either the individual outflows of two SMBHs or the highly disturbed kinematics resulting from the merger environment. This information cannot be obtained from the archival X-Shooter data and requires the resolution of HST to probe the ∼100 pc region of interest.

https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/

https://cxc.cfa.harvard.edu/ciao/

https://cxc.cfa.harvard.edu/ciao/PSFs/chart2/

https://space.mit.edu/cxc/marx/

https://cxc.cfa.harvard.edu/ciao/ahelp/specextract.html

https://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/lheasoft/ftools/fhelp/mathpha.html

https://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/lheasoft/ftools/fhelp/addrmf.html

https://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/lheasoft/ftools/fhelp/addarf.html

https://cxc.cfa.harvard.edu/ciao/ahelp/wavdetect.html

https://cxc.cfa.harvard.edu/cal/ASPECT/celmon/

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER BRIEF
• 08 May 2019

Toolkit: How to write a great paper

A clear format will ensure that your research paper is understood by your readers. Follow:

1. Context — your introduction

2. Content — your results

3. Conclusion — your discussion

Plan your paper carefully and decide where each point will sit within the framework before you begin writing.

Collection: Careers toolkit

Straightforward writing

Scientific writing should always aim to be A, B and C: Accurate, Brief, and Clear. Never choose a long word when a short one will do. Use simple language to communicate your results. Always aim to distill your message down into the simplest sentence possible.

Choose a title

A carefully conceived title will communicate the single core message of your research paper. It should be D, E, F: Declarative, Engaging and Focused.

Conclusions

Add a sentence or two at the end of your concluding statement that sets out your plans for further research. What is next for you or others working in your field?

Find out more

See additional information .

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-01362-9

Related Articles

How to get published in high impact journals

So you’re writing a paper

Writing for a Nature journal

The grassroots organizations continuing the fight for Ukrainian science

Career Feature 11 SEP 24

How a struggling biotech company became a university ‘spin-in’

Career Q&A 10 SEP 24

The human costs of the research-assessment culture

Career Feature 09 SEP 24

How can I publish open access when I can’t afford the fees?

Career Feature 02 SEP 24

Tales of a migratory marine biologist

Career Feature 28 AUG 24

Nail your tech-industry interviews with these six techniques

Career Column 28 AUG 24

Faculty Positions at SUSTech School of Medicine

SUSTech School of Medicine offers equal opportunities and welcome applicants from the world with all ethnic backgrounds.

Shenzhen, Guangdong, China

Southern University of Science and Technology, School of Medicine

Postdoctoral Fellowships Worldwide

IBSA Foundation for scientific research offers 6 fellowships offers of € 32.000 to young researchers under 40 years.

The call is open to people from research institutes and universities from all over the world.

IBSA Foundation for scientific research

Staff Scientist - Immunology

Staff Scientist- Immunology

Houston, Texas (US)

Baylor College of Medicine (BCM)

Institute for Systems Genetics, Tenure Track Faculty Positions

The Institute for Systems Genetics at NYU Langone Health has tenure track faculty positions (assistant professor level) at the new SynBioMed Center.

New York City, New York (US)

NYU Langone Health

Faculty Position

The Institute of Cellular and Organismic Biology (ICOB), Academia Sinica, Taiwan, is seeking candidates to fill multiple tenure-track faculty position

Taipei (TW)

Institute of Cellular and Organismic Biology, Academia Sinica

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Critical Writing Program: Climate Science and Action: Earth in Crisis - Fall 2024: Researching the White Paper

• Getting started
• News and Opinion Sites
• Academic Sources
• Grey Literature
• Substantive News Sources
• What to Do When You Are Stuck
• Understanding a citation
• Examples of Quotation
• Examples of Paraphrase
• Chicago Manual of Style: Citing Images
• Researching the Op-Ed
• Researching Prospective Employers
• Resume Resources
• Cover Letter Resources

Research the White Paper

Researching the white paper:.

The process of researching and composing a white paper shares some similarities with the kind of research and writing one does for a high school or college research paper. What’s important for writers of white papers to grasp, however, is how much this genre differs from a research paper.  First, the author of a white paper already recognizes that there is a problem to be solved, a decision to be made, and the job of the author is to provide readers with substantive information to help them make some kind of decision--which may include a decision to do more research because major gaps remain. 

Thus, a white paper author would not “brainstorm” a topic. Instead, the white paper author would get busy figuring out how the problem is defined by those who are experiencing it as a problem. Typically that research begins in popular culture--social media, surveys, interviews, newspapers. Once the author has a handle on how the problem is being defined and experienced, its history and its impact, what people in the trenches believe might be the best or worst ways of addressing it, the author then will turn to academic scholarship as well as “grey” literature (more about that later).  Unlike a school research paper, the author does not set out to argue for or against a particular position, and then devote the majority of effort to finding sources to support the selected position.  Instead, the author sets out in good faith to do as much fact-finding as possible, and thus research is likely to present multiple, conflicting, and overlapping perspectives. When people research out of a genuine desire to understand and solve a problem, they listen to every source that may offer helpful information. They will thus have to do much more analysis, synthesis, and sorting of that information, which will often not fall neatly into a “pro” or “con” camp:  Solution A may, for example, solve one part of the problem but exacerbate another part of the problem. Solution C may sound like what everyone wants, but what if it’s built on a set of data that have been criticized by another reliable source?  And so it goes. 

For example, if you are trying to write a white paper on the opioid crisis, you may focus on the value of  providing free, sterilized needles--which do indeed reduce disease, and also provide an opportunity for the health care provider distributing them to offer addiction treatment to the user. However, the free needles are sometimes discarded on the ground, posing a danger to others; or they may be shared; or they may encourage more drug usage. All of those things can be true at once; a reader will want to know about all of these considerations in order to make an informed decision. That is the challenging job of the white paper author.     
 The research you do for your white paper will require that you identify a specific problem, seek popular culture sources to help define the problem, its history, its significance and impact for people affected by it.  You will then delve into academic and grey literature to learn about the way scholars and others with professional expertise answer these same questions. In this way, you will create creating a layered, complex portrait that provides readers with a substantive exploration useful for deliberating and decision-making. You will also likely need to find or create images, including tables, figures, illustrations or photographs, and you will document all of your sources. 

Computer Science & Engineering Librarian

Connect to a Librarian Live Chat or "Ask a Question"

• Librarians staff live chat from 9-5 Monday through Friday . You can also text to chat: 215-543-7674
• You can submit a question 24 hours a day and we aim to respond within 24 hours 
• You can click the "Schedule Appointment" button above in librarian's profile box (to the left), to schedule a consultation with her in person or by video conference.  
• You can also make an appointment with a  Librarian by subject specialization . 
• Connect by email with a subject librarian

Find more easy contacts at our Quick Start Guide

• Next: Getting started >>
• Last Updated: Sep 10, 2024 9:20 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.upenn.edu/climatescience

• BRAC University
• Department of Computer Science and Engineering (CSE)
• Rezuana Imtiaz Upoma

Rezuana Imtiaz Upoma BRAC University | BU  ·  Department of Computer Science and Engineering (CSE)

Connect with experts in your field

Join ResearchGate to contact this researcher and connect with your scientific community.

• Computer Science
• Dhaka, Bangladesh
• Junior DevOps Engineer
• As a Junior DevOps Engineer at Cloud Production Ltd, I assist in managing and optimizing cloud infrastructure and deployment processes. I collaborate with development teams to streamline CI/CD pipelines, troubleshoot issues, and implement best practices for cloud operations.

Publications

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up