Writing Research Papers at the Graduate Level: a 9 Step Routine

Having too many steps in your writing routine can hamper your routine’s effectiveness. But tackling a writing project (research paper, manuscript, school assignment) is equally ineffective without markers and milestones to guide you. In this guide, I show you my steps for writing research papers in grad school. The goal is to deliver a cohesive product that informs and communicates your ideas with clarity.

2022 Update: At the beginning of this year, I updated this guide to reflect improvements in my own research process. For example, I am now benefiting from Overleaf(www.overleaf.com), an incredibly powerful web-based manuscript and citation tool using LaTeX. I have shared those and other improvements in different sections of the guide, but feel free to skip around.

Step 1: Researching your topic

Topic selection can be a daunting task and generate plenty of research hours at a library. Work with your advisor or trusted faculty to choose a topic. Aim for specificity, with a flavor of novelty. Your topic should be both specific and yield a collection of available research. Assuming you have your selected topic, here are my three favorite sites for researching(with Google Scholar increasingly occupying the most frequency in my routine).

Google Scholar — Scholar excels at providing specific information about your topic. The wealth of Google data allows nearly all indexed research to be quickly searchable. Each entry lists a scientific journal article that closely matched your query. Scholar will sometimes allow you to download a PDF of the article. Scholar also indexes books and the corresponding number of citations — which is useful when determining which books enjoy high impact in their fields.

Microsoft Academic — Academic prioritizes high-impact journals, displaying those first. Helpful tools include side-bar topic filters, author filters, overall field, and a university-affiliation tooltip for a given researcher. I use Academic to help draw a big picture of the topic. Most of the articles have downloadable PDFs. The filter side-bar tool is more practical than Google Scholar’s, but the scope of search is smaller in Academic.

ResearchGate — ResearchGate is terrific for hunting down individual articles for which Google Scholar fails to provide a link. If you know the name of a researcher, ResearchGate will point you to their related research, collaborators and related research topics. ResearchGate stores a number of pre-prints (articles that are yet to be accepted by a journal and have not been peer-reviewed). Research Gate also features a community-powered Q&A that covers questions mostly about statistics and experimental design. Select the “Question” tab and type your question.

Library Databases: Your university library often has large research databases. Here are some popular and good ones in no particular order. Most of the time, you can access these by visiting your university’s online library portal and selecting the ‘Database’ or ‘Research” option. Here are some good databases I have used in the past.

1. APA PsycInfo
2. EBSCO
3. WorldCAT
4. PubMed
5. JSTOR

Step 2: Create “chunks” (smaller topics within that topic)

Begin by dividing the topic into smaller topics. Complex topics uniquely benefit from portioning them into smaller, digestible chunks. The concept of chunks or sub-division comes from theories of learning and knowledge acquisition in cognitive psychology.

Creating chunks helps focus your writing and gives you an early preview of the challenge of gluing everything together. I typically start thinking about possible connections between sub-topics, to be prepared when it comes time to stitch everything together.

Let’s look at an example. Let’s say my selected topic is “Does sleep deprivation impact job performance?”

Main research query— “Does sleep deprivation impact job performance?”

Chunk process — sub-division into smaller but fully explorable topics

• “The connection between sleep deprivation and performance.”
• “Measures of job performance”
• “Recent criticisms of sleep studies”

Once you have collected several chunks (sub-topics), you can rule out certain sub-topics and keep others. I typically rule out chunks that are either irrelevant, not very widely described in the literature, or tangential to the topic of the paper. In this example, I rule out ‘recent criticisms of sleep studies.’ Propose an order and you now have the makings of a preliminary outline.

Introduction

A: Connection between sleep deprivation and performance

B: Measures of job performance

Snippets: Snippets are just short sentences belonging to a chunk. They typically function as a cohesive strand of information. As you encounter paragraphs while researching, ask yourself these three questions.

a) Would this be a main, key point in my paper? If so, to what chunk (sub-topic) does it belong?

b) Would this be a supporting point, that is connected to a key point? If so, to what chunk does it belong?

c) Would this be ultimately irrelevant to the topic I chose?

Step 3: An early reference list

Get into the habit of starting a reference list early. There are several good approaches to do this. In the past, I followed the ‘Word’ approach which is easier but cumbersome. These days, I almost exclusively use the “LaTeX” approach.

The ‘Word’ approach: This is the approach that I recommend for most writers, since it involves no coding and the familiarity of Microsoft Word. This approach works by keeping a list of all the references you visit in your research on a separate Word document. This allows you to work on the paper without having to laboriously page-switch. Typically, I keep this reference list with little to no formatting. As you near completion of the paper, you can add the necessary formatting (e.g. APA format, MLA format). Below is an example of an early reference list:

The “LaTeX” approach: This approach involves a bit of coding. BUT, it is well-worth learning sooner than later because it saves so much time in the long-run. The coding is pretty simple, but I suggest giving it time to learn. Regardless, I can get you started with the basics. There are a number of flavors of LaTeX, but the one I recommend highly is Overleaf(www.overleaf.com). The citation syntax is very straightforward and it can instantly convert all your citations to the appropriate format (e.g. APA, MLA). Here is an example I used for my own writing. Thankfully the code is elegant and simple.

First, we need to declare the formatting of your choice. Use the following code below, delcaring APA 7th edition (change for your needs), and place the code in the preamble section of the manuscript.tex. See here for more details.

\documentclass[man]{apa7}

In the left-hand side of the Overleaf interface, create or select your .bib. I called mine bibliography.

Next, in Google Scholar, select ‘BibTex’ and copy paste that into your bibliography.bib

Complete these steps for all your references. Now, to display your references: simply go to your document with an extension ‘.tex.’ (in my case ‘manuscript.tex’) and add the following near the bottom

\printbibliography

We now get this:

Now here is the best part: every time you want to cite this paper, simply bring up the \cite command and type the first few letters — Overleaf automatically finds your paper.

Step 4: Stitching the Ideas into paragraphs

At this stage, we now have chunks, snippets, and an early reference list. In Step 4, I connect all our isolated snippets of information into working paragraphs. Keep in mind: Your sentences don’t have to be perfect at this stage, but tweak them well enough so that they read better each time you review the text. It is an iterative process after all, so aim for incremental improvements.

Ordering your sentences logically

Focus on logical flow. Arrange your sentences in each paragraph so that the main point is surrounded by relevant and interesting supporting points. Make sure that the sentences of each paragraph “understand’ each other. In other words, avoid any abrupt jumps or leaps.

Transitional words and phrases: A good research paper is like a monkey-bar in a playground. You want to provide the reader the next connection and lead them on to your next point. Below is a handy list of transitional words and phrases. You will notice their function depends on how you want to structure your sentence.

also, in the same way, just as … so too, likewise, similarly

for example, for instance, namely, specifically, to illustrate

but, however, in spite of, on the one hand … on the other hand, nevertheless, nonetheless, notwithstanding, in contrast, on the contrary, still, yet

I also frequently use phrases that express time:

More recently, recently, in the last decade

Structuring your paragraphs coherently

Paragraphs needs a good introductory sentence that previews the topic each paragraph will discuss. Below is an example introductory sentence:

“Even though recent criticisms cast doubt on self-reported measures, they remain an important tool in social psychology.

The sentence successfully

• introduces
• previews
• grabs your attention

In the snippets that you acquired, determine if a sentence or idea best serves as an introductory sentence or as a supporting sentence. Make sure that when you add a supporting sentences to an existing paragraph, the idea is relevant to the paragraph,— or else you risk tangents. It is better to break off several unrelated sentences into a new paragraph of their own (or just ax them all together if they are irrelevant)

Step 5: Arranging your paragraphs and designating headings

At this step, your paper should be composed of a series of nice, cogent paragraphs! Now we need to assign them an order and placement. Scientific practice has already established the headings and sections (i.e. Methods, Discussion) for a research paper. So, your (thankfully straightforward) job is to identify to what heading each idea should be matched and then move the corresponding sentence to its rightful heading.

You can think about this step as awarding a badge to a soldier. Each of your soldiers are well-deserving paragraphs but only certain paragraphs deserve to be in the ‘Discussion’ section etc. As the writer, you must take into account what the text is saying and appropriately assign it a section in the paper.

For instance, take this text:

“According to Theory of Planned Behavior, an individual’s attitude toward a behavior develops from beliefs held about that behavior (Ajzen, 1991).

PLACEMENT: In what section of the paper, does this sentence belong?

a) Introduction

b) Methods

c) Results

d) Discussion

In this example, I chose “Discussion”, because this text helps set the context if I am going to argue that people’s beliefs are a critical aspect of understanding behavior in the workplace. But it could vary — you might see the value of this sentence in the Introduction for example.

Good writing is not confusing. It is clear and leaves little room for misunderstanding.

Ensure that your writing is clear and the paragraphs follow reasonably. As we approach Step 6, make sure your paragraphs are strong and nearing their full effectiveness.

Step 6: Visually Distinguishing New-added Revisions

At this step, we begin to denote different parts of the text by highlighting the text in different colors.

Below is the scheme I use. The main purpose is to visually distinguish newly-added text from text that is freshly revised. But it is helpful to amplify the scheme to serve more distinctions:

• text that is newly added (BLUE) so that I can quickly track new additions.
• text that is re-written guided by the recommendations of my advisor(GREEN)
• text that sounds off or is poorly worded(ORANGE)
• text that is verbatim (BOLDED; reminding me to go back and provide a proper citation and paraphrase in my own words)

That arrangement is what I usually stick to — though sometimes, I end up just doing Blue and Orange. When I need to show my faculty adviser new additions to a paper, I can easily find the blue text and show him that. More recently, I upload my paper into a Google Docs, where my advisor can make any edits or suggestions and Docs marks the text accordingly. Google Docs tracks my adviser’s comments or edits rather painlessly. I still like using an Orange highlighter to draw my attention to text that needs to be revised due to poor word usage or something that sounds off.

Step 7: Refine and Polish

Step 7 is about polishing and refining. This is probably the most important step — a crucial exercise in quality control — yet it often goes overlooked. The key assumption at Step 7 is that the core text is satisfactory, but grammar, word usage, and sentence flow issues persist. In essence, we need to refine specific words and sentences.

You will undoubtedly find many words that just sound …off. Either because the word is inappropriately used (forcing in a word) or a better word exists that communicates clearer meaning. A couple of things to keep in mind:

The better word is always the word that is

• more specific — Keep your nouns and verbs relatively specific
• more clear
• more context-appropriate

As researchers and writers, we can’t always produce the perfect word or the perfect sentence. That’s fine — just make a note for yourself to edit for increased specificity and come back to it later.

Aim for Clarity: A successful research paper is not cumbersome to read— but rather specific and clear. By clarity, I mean that the words in the sentence are arranged for maximum comprehension. This means that a sentence by itself might see several revisions — for example moving a phrase to the beginning a sentence, moving an adverb towards predicate etc.

Clarity also involves using the most appropriate word to carry out the meaning! Following these four pillars can help narrow down if a word is appropriate or if it needs a revision: target audience, function and role of a paragraph, overall tone of your paper, match between word and meaning ( is the word matching what I intend to communicating.)

Cut back on words: Don’t be shy experimenting and re-adjusting as you see fit. You can often cut back on a sentence’s wordiness but analyzing what the subject and verb are doing. Look at the sentence below and try to identify what is wrong.

Sentence #1: A number of research studies tell us that there likely exists five main factors that cover an individual’s personality

Now look at the revised sentence:

Sentence #2: Numerous studies suggest evidence for five main factors of personality.

The second sentence is both more specific and less wordy. The second sentence wins.

Appropriate word usage in scientific writing/research papers

When dressing up your words, ensure you keep strong reader comprehension. I tend to avoid adding any distracting adverb or adjective choices.

Vivid but clear verbs: Isolate, determine, siloed, examine, conduct, delineate, demarcate, suggest, indicate, provide, relinquish, offer, support, intersect

Note about verbs in scientific papers: When discussing the results of a scientific study, you should lean on words that convey a degree of uncertainty (e.g. suggest, indicate, offer evidence) and avoid words that are ambiguous (e.g. tell, prove, show).

Typically, you should write your verbs in the past tense: discovered, revealed, suggested

Verbs I typically avoid due to their distracting imagery: buttress, escalate, erect, scaffold, interconnect,

Distinct nouns: Finding specific nouns helps correct redundant or poorly worded clauses. Picking a specific noun is best helped by completing good research before hand. For example, the concept of being tired is best referred to as fatigue in the literature.

Adverbs in scientific writing: Avoid general adverbs (e.g. most, some, usually, very)and lean on more specific adverbs (likely, rarely, predictably, unexpectedly, hypothetically, adequately, voluntarily, customarily, typically).

We already spoke about transitional words or phrases which are really just adverbs. Remember to pick specific words: Accordingly, Similarly, Recently.

In general, be sparse with your adjectives and adverbs: More often than not, technical research writing and research papers benefit more from a reduction of adjectives and adverbs.

Step 8: Read your Paper, Take a break, then Read again

At this step, your eyes are the last line of defense. Your job is to pick up and identify any stray sentences or poorly worded ideas. Read your paper. Take a break of a few hours to 1 day. Read your paper again. You will likely catch new things worth correcting at a subsequent revisit. Keep an eye for:

• word usage that sounds off,
• the flow of paragraphs is interrupted (paragraphs abruptly end or abruptly start)
• paragraphs don’t make sense (cohesion suffers within each paragraph)

Add your corrections and re-read again. As you read and revise the text, you likely will find more new things to correct. Resist the urge to hunt down errors and instead focus on adding the corrections you already identified.

Step 9: Run your paper through software: Grammarly & ProWriting Aid

For my last step, I typically run my papers through a paid service called ProWriting Aid. Although I recommend it, it is not necessary. The service’s reliability and automaticity wins my high praise and for several projects, it remains a part of my writing routine. ProWriting Aid functions as a catch-all editor, useful for polishing word choice, sentence length, identifying grammar issues, subject-verb agreement issues, and unusual uses of adverbs or adjectives.

A free software called Grammarly will help you catch grammar and spelling. I use Grammarly as a second line-of-defense.

ProWriting Aid running as a Microsoft Word plugin

Below is a report card from ProWriting Aid; this report card shows anything that I overlooked during the editing phase, making it easy to identify and fix.

A Cliche and Redundancies Report

Common Mistakes in Research Writing

To conclude, I want to mention some common mistakes of which I have become aware as a writer and researcher. By pointing these out, you can avoid them too and take the more successful road to research writing.

1. Rambling introductions
2. Introductions that start too broad. (which make it difficult to ‘arrive’ at your topic)
3. A Discussion section where you re-iterate more than you contribute. You need to do both: reiterate the results of your findings and contribute novel thoughts and findings derived from your findings
4. A Limitations section where you focus too much on pointing out your own research flaws and limitations
5. Not adequately elaborating concepts and theories, but instead, merely referencing them or ‘punting’ them
6. Abruptly jumping from one paragraph to another with no transition