scientific writing erik dietzenbacher faculty of economics and business, university of groningen,...

SCIENTIFIC WRITING

Erik Dietzenbacher

•Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen, The Netherlands

•Regional Economics Applications Laboratory (REAL), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA•Graduate University, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, PR China

Student ↓Research Master studentPhD student ↓ResearcherFaculty staff member ↓Professor

›

Let’s talk about your future

Student ↓Research Master student › write application for projectPhD student › write PhD thesis ↓Researcher › write papers for scientificFaculty staff member journals ↓Professor › write papers and books

› write applications for research grants

Your future

Student ↓Research Master student › write application for projectPhD student › write PhD thesis ↓Researcher › write papers for scientificFaculty staff member journals ↓Professor › write papers and books

› write applications for research grants

Business/Governm › write policy reports

Your future

Three important issues in YOUR future:


1. WRITING


1. WRITING

2. WRITING


1. WRITING

2. WRITING

3. WRITING in English

Writing IS your future!

You’re in business!

You will be evaluated

(quality of your project application, your quality as researcher)

on the basis of WRITTEN output

Writing IS your future!

Whether you like it or not: language of science is English

as economist you don’t need to write poetrybut the reader must understand you!

(follow courses, spend some time abroad)

What is writing?

Writing is: conveying a message

There is a sender and there is a receiverwhat the receiver receives must be the same as what the sender has sent

What is writing?



Obvious??

My wife

What is writing?



(not trivial and far from easy, with written messages: no chance for corrections)

Two aspects of conveying a message

(1)

The reader must be willing to spend time on reading your message

Like with a good meal: the appetizer is crucialabstract and introduction are the appetizer

(if they are good: the reader has an appetite for the full story and wants to read all the details)


(2)

The reader must be able to understand your message when (s)he tries

You must express yourself very, very clearly

there must be absolutely no room for alternative interpretations


(2)

The reader must be able to understand your message when (s)he tries

You must express yourself very, very clearly

there must be absolutely no room for alternative interpretations

For poets: GDP = national income = welfarebut not for economists

Another (obvious) aspect of conveying a message

You must know what you are talking about!Obvious?

Another (obvious) aspect of conveying a message

You must know what you are talking about!Obvious?

NOT AT ALL!!

Too often: a poor story (or bad presentation) is not caused by poor writing (or presentation) skills

but by the researcher not mastering his/her subject

Yet another obvious aspect of conveying a message

You must know who is the receiver of your messagein other words: know your audience!

> experts in the field(come to the point quickly, convince on details)

> a more general audience(avoid jargon, convince on relevance)

> the most difficult case: more than one audience(the “best of both worlds” means walking on thin ice!)

This lecture’s immediate future:

Central message so far:writing will determine the rest of your lifestart practicing tomorrow!



Rest of this lecture:more specific14 lessons for writing a scientific paper



Rest of this lecture:more specific14 lessons for writing a scientific paper

Once again, recall the importance of writing:even the most brilliant research resultsshould not only exist in your headbut must be available on paper

Essentials: Paper should be:

well structured, clear and fun to read

How to write a paper in 14 lessons

Have a clear structurejust a bag of excellent ideas is not sufficientrecall: you’re in business, you have to sell you story

• Abstract• Introduction

◦ motivation◦ background

• Literature (review)• Methodology and techniques• Data description• Results and discussion• Summary and conclusions

Lesson 1: Structure of your paper

Talking about structure: structure of your “story” or line of reasoning

Often a struggle: what is absolutely essential what is not (and thus a potential cause for confusion)

TIP:




TIP: Tell it to your mother!strip your story to its bare essentialstake its clothes off → naked truththat is the starting-point for

building up (and dressing) the story




TIP: Tell it to your mother!strip your story to its bare essentialstake its clothes off → naked truththat is the starting-point for

building up (and dressing) the story

TIP 2: use presentationsusually limited time → you can only tell the essentials


Do not write a long introduction

The introduction should make clear what the research is about, why it is relevant and how it enhances our current knowledge

Remember: introductions are often read also by non-experts, so keep the introduction clear and simple

(the technical details to “convince” the expert reader must be kept for a later stage)

Lesson 2: The introduction

Very important:

Abstract ≠ Introduction ≠ Summary

Abstract is short and contains the central messageno technical terminologyif necessary: use “the so-called … indicator”

or “we will develop …”

Introduction: sketches background and line of reasoning

Summary (and discussion):summarizes the findings (empirical or theoretical)(in that case: do discuss something)

Lesson 2: The introduction

Research question should be as specific as possible

If possible, split it up in sub questions

However, make sure that sub questions are clearly related

and tell the reader about these relationships!!

recall: no-one “buys” a bag of loose ideas

(readers are not clairvoyant, inform them)

Lesson 3: The research question

• It should become clear to what literature your research contributes

• However: do not try to give an exhaustive survey of the literature, only refer to the most important papers

• Make clear how your research differs from previous research

Lesson 4: Literature

• It should become clear to what literature your research contributes

• However: do not try to give an exhaustive survey of the literature, only refer to the most important papers

• Make clear how your research differs from previous research

TIP(?): most literature reviews are absolutely booooooring!!can only be read by those who know the literature alreadyare impossible to follow by the uninitiated


TIP 1: make sure that you have some very recent references


TIP 1: make sure that you have some very recent referencesotherwise the reader may think that:◦ your knowledge is hopelessly outdated, or


TIP 1: make sure that you have some very recent referencesotherwise the reader may think that:◦ your knowledge is hopelessly outdated, or◦ your field of research has been “dead” for quite some time



TIP 2: have some references to top-field journals◦ only low-rated journals: then the topic must be low-rated

◦ be careful with websites (unless for data sources)



TIP 2: have some references to top-field journals◦ only low-rated journals: then the topic must be low-rated

◦ be careful with websites (unless for data sources)

TIP 3: have some references to papers in the journalyou are submitting it to


Explain your methodology very precisely

If your research is theoretical: explain the structure of the model, and how it has been solved

If your research is empirical: explain how you have analyzed the data (technique, estimation method, what data)

Lesson 5: Methodology

Explain your methodology very precisely

If your research is theoretical: explain the structure of the model, and how it has been solved

If your research is empirical: explain how you have analyzed the data (technique, estimation method, what data)

Be very, very clear:the reader should be able to replicate what you have done

if (s)he had the same data




Sounds so obvious,but is extremely difficult




Sounds so obvious,but is extremely difficultand rarely met!!!




Sounds so obvious,but is extremely difficultand rarely met!!!

Do the test:Read a paper and imagine you would have to replicate itwithout having to guess what the author has done


If you are going to use existing data: explain the sources very precisely

If you are going to construct your own data: explain very precisely how you will gather your data

If you gather data by a survey: explain the design of the surveyinclude a pilot and explain very precisely who will be surveyed and why

Lesson 6: The data

If you are going to use existing data: explain the sources very precisely

If you are going to construct your own data: explain very precisely how you will gather your data

If you gather data by a survey: explain the design of the surveyinclude a pilot and explain very precisely who will be surveyed and why

Be very, very clear:the reader should be able to “replicate” what you aim to do

just on the basis of your description

Lesson 6: The data

Once again: try to convince your mother

• Do not include an endless number of huge tables or complex graphs (in general: more ≠ better)

Lesson 7: Results section



• If you have zillions of results, try to summarize them in a simple table that highlights your key finding (what do you really want to tell?)each key finding may require a separate table




• If you have zillions of results, try to summarize them in a simple table that highlights your key finding (what do you really want to tell?)each key finding may require a separate table

• Once again: what is your message?strip down the results until you have the naked truththat is the starting point for dressing up again

which yields your table



How to discuss the results in the table?

• It is not very useful (and informative) to write downwhat the reader can see in the table(avoid: this is the largest, that ranks two, then we have etcetera)




• Macroscopic view: Sketch the rough, overall picture of your picturefocusing on your central message in the table




• Macroscopic view: Sketch the rough, overall picture of your picturefocusing on your central message in the table

• Microscopic view:Highlight (and discuss) the interesting (strange,surprising?) results

• If possible: make a connection between results

Explain how your research expands our current knowledge: what do we learn from it?

Indicate very precisely the new elements in your research (new model, new method, new data….)

Recall: you’re in business and trying to sell a storyif you have a unique selling point: tell itit will increase your “business success”

If you cannot tell what is so new about your story then why would the editor accept your paper?you are competing with many other authors who do have some news

Lesson 8: Innovation of your research


Example: we develop a new measure!




Q1: why, we already have 173 alternative measures?




Q1: why, we already have 173 alternative measures?we want a better measure!




Q1: why, we already have 173 alternative measures?we want a better measure!

A1: what’s wrong with the other measures(they cannot handle certain questions, they are incorrect or produce implausible results, this one is simpler to calculate)


Explain why your research may be relevant for society and science

If possible, explain why your research may be relevant for

other fields (e.g. if you develop a new methodology)

Recall: you’re in business and trying to sell a story

Lesson 9: Relevance of your research

Explain why your research may be relevant for society and science

If possible, explain why your research may be relevant for

other fields (e.g. if you develop a new methodology)

Recall: you’re in business and trying to sell a storyif you cannot tell what is so relevant about your story then why would the reader show an interest?you are competing with many other story-tellers who do have a relevant story

Lesson 9: Relevance of your research

Discuss your paper not only with your supervisor, but also with other students

Learn from them: is it clear what you have written?

Lesson 10: Testing your paper

You are the expert, your aim is to help the reader in becoming an expert

The reader must (be able to) understand each and every single detail

The reader should be able to replicate what you have doneif (s)he had the same data

Lesson 11: Be a reader yourself!

TIP: after writing your paper, put it aside for two monthsread again what you have written after these two months


TIP: after writing your paper, put it aside for two monthsread again what you have written after these two months

typically: what exactly did I mean here?that is the spot that needs improvement

because: if you as the writer cannot understand it after just two months

how on earth should an innocent reader be able to understand your scribbling?


Select the appropriate journal

Do not submit an average paper to a top journalit is a waste of time, it will be rejected

Lesson 12: Submission


Do not submit an average paper to a top journalit is a waste of time, it will be rejectedif you want to gamble, go to the casino




Do not submit a good paper to a low-ranked journalit’s a waste of quality, you can do better

Selecting the appropriate journal is important but difficultit requires you to know the quality of your workvery difficult for young researchers




Do not submit a good paper to a low-ranked journalit’s a waste of quality, you can do better

Selecting the appropriate journal is important but difficultit requires you to know the quality of your workvery difficult for young researchers

TIP: present it at conferences and use the feedback


Typically there are guidelines for submission(length of abstract, style, questions when submitting

electronically)



electronically)

don’t be stubborn, just obey the rulesand make sure to meet the guidelines!!!



electronically)

don’t be stubborn, just obey the rulesand make sure to meet the guidelines!!!

If you do not (or cannot) cope with a simple set of guidelines or questions

how can I (as editor) trust you can write a good paper?


Typically you will receive comments by the referees and (often) a chance to respond

For your response, there are two simple rules:

Lesson 13: Coping with the referees’ comments



RULE 1: The referee is always right!




RULE 1: The referee is always right!

RULE 2: In case the referee is not right, we fall automatically back to rule 1


These two rules sound silly and childishyet, they contain a lot of truth

Even if the referee makes very stupid comments

it indicates that you have failed to convey your messageadequately

so not the referee is to blame blame yourself and try to write better (i.e. more clear)


> Reference list and citing references:irrelevant

Lesson 14: Reference list

> Reference list and citing references:irrelevant but very important

> Do the test



> Do the test

> Take one minute to decide on the quality of the paper> What does the reference list “look like”> Like a mess: paper is of poor quality



> Do the test

> Take one minute to decide on the quality of the paper> What does the reference list “look like”> Like a mess: paper is of poor quality

> Surprisingly often: correct qualification

> For me: reference list contains a very important signal


SUCCESS !!!

> What are good journals?SSCI impact factors

IF(2008) for journal A =(# citations to papers published in 2007 in A + # citations to papers published in 2006 in A) :(# papers published in 2006 + 2007 in A)

the average number of times that a paper in A is cited in the next year and the year after that

Additional issues

> What are good journals?SSCI impact factors

> Although there is a lot of critique, all over the worldmany institutions use publications in journals withan impact factor as a criterion

Additional issues

> Measuring output

> In Groningen:top (field) journals: 5 pointsvery good journals: 3 pointsother SSCI journals: 1 point

for a list, see www.som.rug.nl

> n authors: each author receives a share 2/(n+1)of the number of points for that journal

Additional issues

> Requirement to become fellow of research school:

at least 5 points in 4 years

(5 papers in 1-point journals;10 papers, each with 3 authors, in 1-point journals1 single-authored paper in a 5-point journal

> visibility of an institute in the international scientificcommunity: only through publications intop and very good journals

> fellows get 40-50% of their time for research

Additional issues

scientific writing erik dietzenbacher faculty of economics and business, university of groningen,...

Documents

futurethree important

projectphd student

messagetwo aspects

detailstwo aspects

message2the reader

research grantsbusinessgovernm

message1the reader

research grantsyour