What problems should be avoided when writing an English thesis? How can we write an English paper well? Next, Xiaobian brings you problems that you need to avoid.
For scientific research authors, it is very important and proud to publish a paper in internationally renowned journals, but the reality is that the over contribution rate of these international journals is very low, some even less than 20%. Sometimes the author will also wonder why the project and research results can't be passed, because there is no problem with them? It is likely that there is a problem in the details, so you should pay special attention to the details summarized in the following plustudy editor in the subsequent polishing and revision of English papers.
1. Did not choose to discuss in depth.
Choosing appropriate results for in-depth discussion in the discussion part is the first problem to face in writing this part. Based on every major result. Generally speaking, it can be judged according to the following principles: if your result reflects the uniqueness of the experiment and is not obtained in other studies, then this result is the problem to be discussed emphatically; Some results are consistent with the previous studies, and there is no significant difference, so it should be mentioned without in-depth discussion. An important role of the discussion is to highlight the innovation of their own research and reflect the characteristics that are significantly different from others. The difference between big and small is another problem. The important thing is to have a difference. The difference is innovation.
2. The selected issues were not discussed from multiple perspectives at a certain level. Sometimes more than one question is selected (in most cases, more than two), so it should be clearly described at a certain level. Whether the problem is big or small or important, it should be discussed in depth from multiple perspectives (horizontal / vertical, vertical / horizontal). When retouching and revising an English paper, you can think about several angles and choose the right one to write, so that the content and innovation of the article will also be improved.
First of all, there should be a comparison of similar results to illustrate the uniqueness of their conclusions. Secondly, we should systematically explain why there are similarities and differences. There are many methods (from the perspective of experimental design, from the perspective of theoretical principles, from the perspective of analytical methods or from others' analytical methods, etc.). The important thing is to clarify this issue in depth, so as not to make people feel that there is more to be desired
3. Inconsistency with result. There is no one-to-one correspondence between the result and the discussion. A few discussions can lead to conclusions contrary to the experiment.
4. The author did not cite or systematically cite relevant literature during the discussion. The main reasons for this are: the author is not aware of the necessity of searching and quoting relevant literature; Due to limited conditions, the author cannot find and complete the relevant literature; A few authors deliberately do not cite relevant literature to highlight the "novelty" and "value" of their research.
5. Although the author cited relevant literature, he did not discuss it in combination with his own research, that is, although the author found and cited relevant literature, he did not integrate the previous results with his own results. The result of these two kinds of paper segmentation is the same, that is, the reader still lacks systematic, complete and in-depth understanding and understanding of the research after reading the paper.
6. Simply repeat the content of the introduction. Although the discussion is always connected with the problems or hypotheses you cite in the introduction. But it is not a simple repetition, but the expansion of introduction.
7. Repeat the content of the result. Don't restate your results in the discussion. Although you can occasionally mention diagrams and tables in the discussion section to help explain something, you can't include new data, and you can use flow charts to explain it.
8. Over explain the results. It is easy for us to over interpret the research results. Remember that the interpretation of the results cannot be without the support of data.
9. Exaggerate the importance of research results. We all hope to make important contributions to our research and be quoted by many people. However, the unwarranted praise of importance will disgust the judges and readers, and humility is the long-term way.
10. Digress. Adding digressive content to the discussion will distract and confuse readers. Digression will dilute and confuse the real information in the research.
11. Don't blame other studies in the discussion. Although your research may contradict other studies, these problems should be solved in a professional way. Don't use discussion to attack other scholars.