Скачать или смотреть How to write Discussion for Research Papers (Updated May 2024)

Get ready for the most comprehensive overview you’ll ever find for how to write DISCUSSION in a research paper!

Stop getting frustration because you've been stuck all day - instead, learn the information you need and exactly how to apply it to your own discussion.

What you'll get out of this video:
6 essential key parts of discussion
How they come together and form 3 major sections
How to ensure the reader understands the importance of your work and why it deserves to be published

NOTE: I misspeak in this video at least once...if you spot the mistake, email me at [email protected] with the mistake and the timestamp, and I'll send you a code for 50% off my e-course below.

🔥**This video is ONE THIRD of ONE MODULE of my e-course "Blank Page to Manuscript Draft".
To get this same information for EVERY PART of your scientific research paper, find my course here:
https://bit.ly/BlankPageManuscriptDraft
🔥**Get 25% off the course for finding me on YouTube using this code: YT25OFF
✅FOREVER ACCESS ✅Exact FORMULAS ✅HOW TO AVOID common mistakes ✅Access to me for all questions

00:40 What is a discussion?
01:00 Why a discussion section is indispensable
02:12 Discussion Mindset
02:40 6 key parts of a discussion and how to think about them
06:50 Key parts - Breakdown
08:39 How to fit the key parts together - your necessary discussion outline
11:16 EXAMPLE 1 - Full breakdown (Intro, middle paragraph, conclusion)
12:52 How to write the 1st paragraph
14:36 How to write the final paragraph
14:46 How to write the middle paragraph
17:09 Limitations on discussion writing
17:30 Variations of middle paragraphs
17:53 Example 1
18:31 Example 2
19:03 Example 3
19:23 Example 4
19:58 Example 5
20:14 Outline of discussion
21:10 WHAT to write, WHERE to write and HOW to write
21:25 7 Biggest mistakes in your discussion

References and links:
Ruben, Adam. Thick Books and Thin Films | Science | AAAS. doi: 10.1126/science.caredit.a1200046

Lukauskas, S., Tvardovskiy, A., Nguyen, N.V. et al. Nature 627, 671–679 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07....

Wen, X., Luo, Z., Zhao, W. et al. Nature(2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07...

Montràs-Janer,T., Suggitt, A.J., Fox, . et al. NatEcolEvol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-024-02...


6 KEY PARTS OF DISCUSSION

1. SUMMARY of results
Reminds reader of key results of your work

2. Critical ANALYSIS of results
Highlight all trends, relationships, and limitations
“Translates” experimental output into meaning/significance

The reader may not know what the output of an experiment MEANS. Thus, we want to ensure they know what it tells you.

3. Relationship to FIELD
Shows how your results fit into the field as a whole
Reference related work and highlight conflicting/supporting papers

4. Relationship to GAP
Relates your results to the edge of knowledge in the field, i.e., research GAP!

5. SPECULATE beyond current knowledge
Speculate about what this means for field or new hypotheses/questions that can be made/asked
Highlight how the edge of knowledge has changed now that your work exists

6. FUTURE directions
Future studies that can address new hypotheses or limitations to your current study

In our discussion, we want to remember that our work is only one tiny dot in our field, and our field is only one tiny dot in the world as a whole. So we need to provide the reader sufficient context to see how our work relates to the field and beyond.


Outline of a discussion section:
we have three types of paragraph (examples in video):

An Intro to the Discussion: One paragraph that summarizes the key results in terms of how they affected the edge of current knowledge, as presented in the introduction.

Main results paragraphs (~2-6): Each paragraph takes one key result or idea from the paper and relates it to all applicable key parts of a discussion.

Conclusion: One forward-thinking paragraph that highlights the impact of your work and why it deserves to be published.

Also note that the first and last paragraphs of the discussion will relate to the study as a whole, while the middle ones generally delve deeper into various aspects of the study.


To brainstorm possible information to include in your conclusion, ask:
What exactly does this bring to the field? How has it advanced the field?
What can be built/done/made/calculated now that my research exists?
Why might other scientists in my field be excited about this? How about non-scientists?


Prefer this in text format?
https://butlerscicomm.com/?p=924

MORE DAILY USEFUL UPDATES AND TIPS, FIND US ON 🔻
INSTAGRAM:   / butlerscicomm  
TWITTER:   / butlerkaycie  
FACEBOOK:   / butlerscicomm  
LINKEDIN:   / butler-scientific-communications  
WEBSITE: https://butlerscicomm.com/

Find the detailed BLOG POST here:
https://butlerscicomm.com/?p=924

Visit us at:
https://butlerscicomm.com/