Some writing advice

​

The aim of writing a scientific paper is to communicate your results, methods and ideas clearly and comprehensively.

The challenge is mostly in clarifying for yourself beforehand what it is that you want to say (not the language!)

Guideline: write as simple as possible (don't use redundant/fancy language). KISS = keep it short and simple.

Guideline: don't assume that the readers are smart or know what you are talking about.

Guideline: be clear - don't leave anything open for interpretation (ambiguous). A confused reader is a frustrated reader.

Guideline: consistency: use the same term(s) to refer to the same concept(s) throughout the paper (+define each clearly). 

Guideline: each paragraph should have one main point (and be of length 6~15 lines).

Guideline: writing style differs by section (Intro/Methods/Results/Legends/Discussion) - write appropriately for each.

Guideline: read over your draft and edit it several times (writing is an iterative process of incremental improvement). 

Guideline: get your details in order (all of them) - "sloppy writing = sloppy science"  

Figures: these should tell the story of the paper, contain minimal text, and be understandable without extra explanation. make font sizes big and lines thick, for visibility.

Test: ask yourself - will an intelligent person with little background follow the main points (without being confused by extraneous details)? For this, focus on the main points and create logical flow. 

Test: are the relevant details there for someone who is looking for them (e.g. to recreate the study/results)? Good writing includes all relevant details without damaging flow and clarity.

Get feedback: present your work whenever you have an opportunity: e.g. conferences + vaadah melavah. See which explanation flows work (and don't). Take valuable suggestions, questions and criticism.

Read: reading other papers teaches you 1) how to write 2) the literature (needed for your context, Intro/Discussion).

Hope: scientific writing is a skill that improves with practice :). Using feedback helps improve the paper & your writing skills.

 

some potential points of conflict:

1) The feedback dilemma: getting critical feedback on your paper can be hard to hear (especially after hard work). However, minimizing/holding back on this leads to underestimating the work left, unpreparedness for reviews etc. Thus most feedback will be critical...apologies in advance. This is science. It is not about you. It is practical - what is not in line and still needs to be done . And.. brace yourselves for the reviews - they will be tougher.

2) We all underestimate the size of the job (and therefore most overestimate their relative contribution)

3) Authorship: this is earned (and determined at the end based on actual contribution). To be any (middle) author - you need to have made a significant scientific contribution + be part of the writing. First author needs to carry primary responsibility for the study from the beginning until the end (including revisions).

4) If the increments are small, my advice/edits will only take you a small step forward (and we will all have to work harder). The more details you have already taken care of (and the more readable your paper) the bigger the contribution of my review to your paper's progress.