The Structure of Scientific Writing: An Empirical Analysis of Recent Research Articles in STEM

Cary Moskovitz Duke University ; Brooke Harmon Duke University ; Srishti Saha

Abstract

While the IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) format is common in scientific writing, it may not currently be as ubiquitous as often thought. We undertook a systematic, corpus-based study of primary section headings in research articles across a range of STEM disciplines to investigate adherence to the IMRAD structure in relation to type of study (computational, empirical, or theoretical) and field. We identified four categories of structure: IMRAD, IMRAD+ (IMRAD with additional sections and/or different order), Nested IMRAD (multi-part studies), and Non-IMRAD. Papers in biology mainly used an IMRAD format, while less than half in engineering or social sciences did so. While empirical papers tended to use IMRAD formats, most computational papers did not. Thus, our findings show that IMRAD is a common but not universal structure for contemporary scientific writing. Awareness of these differences should encourage teachers of scientific and technical writing and scholars of writing studies to pay closer attention to the actual structural forms used in different STEM disciplines and with different methodological types of research studies.

Journal
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Published
2024-07-01
DOI
10.1177/00472816231171851
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

References (28)

  1. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England)
  2. Anesthesiology. Instructions for Authors. 2022. https://pubs.asahq.org/anesthesiology/pages/instructions-for-…
  3. 10.1080/08989621.2020.1850284
  4. 10.1017/S0047404500019205
  5. 10.1177/004839318101100305
Show all 28 →
  1. 10.1177/030631284014002001
  2. Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science
  3. Bertin M., Atanassova I., Lariviere V., Gingras Y. (2013, July). The distribution of references in scientific…
  4. BioMed Central/Committee on Publication Ethics. (n.d.). Text recycling guidelines. https://publicationethics.…
  5. AMWA Journal
  6. 10.1177/1461445613482430
  7. 10.1007/s10980-011-9638-7
  8. 10.1371/journal.pone.0240288
  9. Annals of Internal Medicine
  10. 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003608
  11. 10.1016/j.esp.2011.10.002
  12. 10.1007/s11192-018-2640-y
  13. Meadows, A. J. (1985). The scientific paper as an archaeological artefact. Journal of I…
  14. 10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00050-7
  15. Asian ESP Journal
  16. 10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00001-5
  17. 10.1109/ICBK.2018.00034
  18. 10.1007/s10586-017-0914-4
  19. Journal of the Medical Library Association
  20. 10.1021/acs.accounts.6b00068
  21. The STM report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing
  22. White K. (2021). Publications output: US trends and international comparisons. Science & Engineering Indicato…
  23. 10.1007/s10980-011-9674-3