Other trials of CBT with young people have tended to concentrate on managing the anxiety or discomfort experienced when undertaking exposure and response prevention, e.
To be honest, you will edit the Discussion part of your manuscript numerous times. Focus on the significance of the most noteworthy results.
Additionally, our sample was predominantly Caucasian, and thus, we do not know how these results would generalize to ethnic minority groups. Address any limitations of your study and how relevant they are to interpreting your results and validating your findings.
Give the big picture: One of them is to allocate at least 30 minutes a day for writing a manuscript which amounts to 3. Within each subpart of a Discussion, the information should flow as follows: The discussion section can be written in 3 parts: Do they agree, contradict, or are they exceptions to the rule?
The justification of this approach is to see the missing aspects of the study and the manuscript writing methodology, and try to solve the relevant problems before completion of the writing research discussion section.
The Discussion section is sort of an odd beast because it is here where you speculate, but must avoid rambling, guessing, or making logical leaps beyond what is reasonably supported for your data. In a nutshell, your Discussion fulfills the promise you made to readers in your Introduction.
This period of time is adequate for completion of a manuscript within a few weeks which can be generally considered as a long time interval. If you discovered something unexpected, offer reasons. Your suggestions should inspire other researchers to conduct follow-up studies to build upon the knowledge you have shared with them.
Give evidence for each conclusion.
Results can take the form of data, hypotheses, models, definitions, formulas, etc. Herein your findings rather than those of the other researchers are discussed.
Notice how using parallel structure will eliminate extra narration in the Discussion part since we can anticipate the flow of your ideas based on what we read in the Results segment.
Nowadays, articles questioning available information, rather than confirmatory ones attract attention. Generally, after completion of the study, it is very difficult to solve the problems which might be discerned during the writing process.
For the placement of references use of software programs detailed in other sections is a rational approach. Summarize the most important findings at the beginning. What are the common mistakes made related to the writing process of a manuscript? Discuss whether your findings agree with current knowledge and expectations.
Answer each of the questions you asked in your Introduction and explain how your results support those conclusions. Previously, similar articles might have been published, however innovative messages, and new perspectives on the relevant subject will facilitate acceptance of the article for publication.
Explain plausibly any agreements, contradictions, or exceptions. In addition, a pre-peer review process is recommended to obtain feedback on the manuscript. If conflicting inferences can be drawn from your results, evaluate the merits of all of them.
Comments coming from the reviewers should be criticized, but a defensive attitude should not be assumed during this evaluation process. In line with the opinions of the referees, the manuscript can be critically reviewed, and perfected.
The table below offers some questions effective discussion sections in scientific reports address. At the beginning of your paper, you tell us why we should care about your research.
Besides application of a template which contains the intended clear-cut messages to be followed will contribute to the communication of net messages. Reducing wordiness is important when you only have a few paragraphs to devote to the Discussion section!
What do your observations mean? These results are inconsistent with prior research indicating that interruptions negatively affect task performance. You then guide us through a series of intricate images and graphs that capture all the relevant data you collected during your research.
Mainly, you want to remind us of how your research will increase our knowledge base and inspire others to conduct further research. Explain how your results relate to expectations and to literature cited in your Introduction.
Rather, discuss your findings in the context of answering your hypothesis.Writing the Discussion The discussion section is a framing section, like the Introduction, which returns to the significance argument set up in your introduction.
So reread your introduction carefully before writing the discussion; you will discuss how the hypothesis has been demonstrated by the new research and then show how the field's. Think of the results section as the place where you report what your study found; think of the discussion section as the place where you interpret your data and answer the "So What?" question.
As you become more skilled writing research papers, you may want to meld the results of your study with a discussion of its implications. The Difficulties of Writing a Discussion Section. In an ideal world, you could simply reject your null or alternative hypotheses according to the significance levels found by the statistics.
That is the main point of your discussion section, but the process is usually a lot more complex than that. Feb 12, · Writing manuscripts to describe study outcomes, although not easy, is the main task of an academician.
The aim of the present review is to outline the main aspects of writing the discussion section of a manuscript. Additionally, we address various issues regarding manuscripts in general. It is. Learn how to write an effective discussion section.
With these tips, you'll engage readers and create strong arguments that highlight the significance of your For additional information about how to write a strong research paper, make sure to check out our full research writing series!
email us at [email protected] or reach out to us. This section describes an organizational structure commonly used to report experimental research in many scientific disciplines, the IMRAD format: Introduction, Methods, Results, And Discussion.
Although the main headings are standard for many scientific fields, details may vary; check with your instructor, or, if submitting an article to a journal.Download