example of scientific paper introduction

Writing an Introduction for a Scientific Paper

Dr. michelle harris, dr. janet batzli, biocore.

This section provides guidelines on how to construct a solid introduction to a scientific paper including background information, study question , biological rationale, hypothesis , and general approach . If the Introduction is done well, there should be no question in the reader’s mind why and on what basis you have posed a specific hypothesis.

Broad Question : based on an initial observation (e.g., “I see a lot of guppies close to the shore. Do guppies like living in shallow water?”). This observation of the natural world may inspire you to investigate background literature or your observation could be based on previous research by others or your own pilot study. Broad questions are not always included in your written text, but are essential for establishing the direction of your research.

Background Information : key issues, concepts, terminology, and definitions needed to understand the biological rationale for the experiment. It often includes a summary of findings from previous, relevant studies. Remember to cite references, be concise, and only include relevant information given your audience and your experimental design. Concisely summarized background information leads to the identification of specific scientific knowledge gaps that still exist. (e.g., “No studies to date have examined whether guppies do indeed spend more time in shallow water.”)

Testable Question : these questions are much more focused than the initial broad question, are specific to the knowledge gap identified, and can be addressed with data. (e.g., “Do guppies spend different amounts of time in water <1 meter deep as compared to their time in water that is >1 meter deep?”)

Biological Rationale : describes the purpose of your experiment distilling what is known and what is not known that defines the knowledge gap that you are addressing. The “BR” provides the logic for your hypothesis and experimental approach, describing the biological mechanism and assumptions that explain why your hypothesis should be true.

The biological rationale is based on your interpretation of the scientific literature, your personal observations, and the underlying assumptions you are making about how you think the system works. If you have written your biological rationale, your reader should see your hypothesis in your introduction section and say to themselves, “Of course, this hypothesis seems very logical based on the rationale presented.”

• A thorough rationale defines your assumptions about the system that have not been revealed in scientific literature or from previous systematic observation. These assumptions drive the direction of your specific hypothesis or general predictions.
• Defining the rationale is probably the most critical task for a writer, as it tells your reader why your research is biologically meaningful. It may help to think about the rationale as an answer to the questions— how is this investigation related to what we know, what assumptions am I making about what we don’t yet know, AND how will this experiment add to our knowledge? *There may or may not be broader implications for your study; be careful not to overstate these (see note on social justifications below).
• Expect to spend time and mental effort on this. You may have to do considerable digging into the scientific literature to define how your experiment fits into what is already known and why it is relevant to pursue.
• Be open to the possibility that as you work with and think about your data, you may develop a deeper, more accurate understanding of the experimental system. You may find the original rationale needs to be revised to reflect your new, more sophisticated understanding.
• As you progress through Biocore and upper level biology courses, your rationale should become more focused and matched with the level of study e ., cellular, biochemical, or physiological mechanisms that underlie the rationale. Achieving this type of understanding takes effort, but it will lead to better communication of your science.

***Special note on avoiding social justifications: You should not overemphasize the relevance of your experiment and the possible connections to large-scale processes. Be realistic and logical —do not overgeneralize or state grand implications that are not sensible given the structure of your experimental system. Not all science is easily applied to improving the human condition. Performing an investigation just for the sake of adding to our scientific knowledge (“pure or basic science”) is just as important as applied science. In fact, basic science often provides the foundation for applied studies.

Hypothesis / Predictions : specific prediction(s) that you will test during your experiment. For manipulative experiments, the hypothesis should include the independent variable (what you manipulate), the dependent variable(s) (what you measure), the organism or system , the direction of your results, and comparison to be made.

If you are doing a systematic observation , your hypothesis presents a variable or set of variables that you predict are important for helping you characterize the system as a whole, or predict differences between components/areas of the system that help you explain how the system functions or changes over time.

Experimental Approach : Briefly gives the reader a general sense of the experiment, the type of data it will yield, and the kind of conclusions you expect to obtain from the data. Do not confuse the experimental approach with the experimental protocol . The experimental protocol consists of the detailed step-by-step procedures and techniques used during the experiment that are to be reported in the Methods and Materials section.

Some Final Tips on Writing an Introduction

• As you progress through the Biocore sequence, for instance, from organismal level of Biocore 301/302 to the cellular level in Biocore 303/304, we expect the contents of your “Introduction” paragraphs to reflect the level of your coursework and previous writing experience. For example, in Biocore 304 (Cell Biology Lab) biological rationale should draw upon assumptions we are making about cellular and biochemical processes.
• Be Concise yet Specific: Remember to be concise and only include relevant information given your audience and your experimental design. As you write, keep asking, “Is this necessary information or is this irrelevant detail?” For example, if you are writing a paper claiming that a certain compound is a competitive inhibitor to the enzyme alkaline phosphatase and acts by binding to the active site, you need to explain (briefly) Michaelis-Menton kinetics and the meaning and significance of Km and Vmax. This explanation is not necessary if you are reporting the dependence of enzyme activity on pH because you do not need to measure Km and Vmax to get an estimate of enzyme activity.
• Another example: if you are writing a paper reporting an increase in Daphnia magna heart rate upon exposure to caffeine you need not describe the reproductive cycle of magna unless it is germane to your results and discussion. Be specific and concrete, especially when making introductory or summary statements.

Where Do You Discuss Pilot Studies? Many times it is important to do pilot studies to help you get familiar with your experimental system or to improve your experimental design. If your pilot study influences your biological rationale or hypothesis, you need to describe it in your Introduction. If your pilot study simply informs the logistics or techniques, but does not influence your rationale, then the description of your pilot study belongs in the Materials and Methods section.  

How will introductions be evaluated? The following is part of the rubric we will be using to evaluate your papers.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Research paper

Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide

Published on September 24, 2022 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on March 27, 2023.

The introduction to a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals:

• Present your topic and get the reader interested
• Provide background or summarize existing research
• Position your own approach
• Detail your specific research problem and problem statement
• Give an overview of the paper’s structure

The introduction looks slightly different depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or constructs an argument by engaging with a variety of sources.

Table of contents

Step 1: introduce your topic, step 2: describe the background, step 3: establish your research problem, step 4: specify your objective(s), step 5: map out your paper, research paper introduction examples, frequently asked questions about the research paper introduction.

The first job of the introduction is to tell the reader what your topic is and why it’s interesting or important. This is generally accomplished with a strong opening hook.

The hook is a striking opening sentence that clearly conveys the relevance of your topic. Think of an interesting fact or statistic, a strong statement, a question, or a brief anecdote that will get the reader wondering about your topic.

For example, the following could be an effective hook for an argumentative paper about the environmental impact of cattle farming:

A more empirical paper investigating the relationship of Instagram use with body image issues in adolescent girls might use the following hook:

Don’t feel that your hook necessarily has to be deeply impressive or creative. Clarity and relevance are still more important than catchiness. The key thing is to guide the reader into your topic and situate your ideas.

What can proofreading do for your paper?

Scribbr editors not only correct grammar and spelling mistakes, but also strengthen your writing by making sure your paper is free of vague language, redundant words, and awkward phrasing.

See editing example

This part of the introduction differs depending on what approach your paper is taking.

In a more argumentative paper, you’ll explore some general background here. In a more empirical paper, this is the place to review previous research and establish how yours fits in.

Argumentative paper: Background information

After you’ve caught your reader’s attention, specify a bit more, providing context and narrowing down your topic.

Provide only the most relevant background information. The introduction isn’t the place to get too in-depth; if more background is essential to your paper, it can appear in the body .

Empirical paper: Describing previous research

For a paper describing original research, you’ll instead provide an overview of the most relevant research that has already been conducted. This is a sort of miniature literature review —a sketch of the current state of research into your topic, boiled down to a few sentences.

This should be informed by genuine engagement with the literature. Your search can be less extensive than in a full literature review, but a clear sense of the relevant research is crucial to inform your own work.

Begin by establishing the kinds of research that have been done, and end with limitations or gaps in the research that you intend to respond to.

The next step is to clarify how your own research fits in and what problem it addresses.

Argumentative paper: Emphasize importance

In an argumentative research paper, you can simply state the problem you intend to discuss, and what is original or important about your argument.

Empirical paper: Relate to the literature

In an empirical research paper, try to lead into the problem on the basis of your discussion of the literature. Think in terms of these questions:

• What research gap is your work intended to fill?
• What limitations in previous work does it address?
• What contribution to knowledge does it make?

You can make the connection between your problem and the existing research using phrases like the following.

Now you’ll get into the specifics of what you intend to find out or express in your research paper.

The way you frame your research objectives varies. An argumentative paper presents a thesis statement, while an empirical paper generally poses a research question (sometimes with a hypothesis as to the answer).

Argumentative paper: Thesis statement

The thesis statement expresses the position that the rest of the paper will present evidence and arguments for. It can be presented in one or two sentences, and should state your position clearly and directly, without providing specific arguments for it at this point.

Empirical paper: Research question and hypothesis

The research question is the question you want to answer in an empirical research paper.

Present your research question clearly and directly, with a minimum of discussion at this point. The rest of the paper will be taken up with discussing and investigating this question; here you just need to express it.

A research question can be framed either directly or indirectly.

• This study set out to answer the following question: What effects does daily use of Instagram have on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls?
• We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls.

If your research involved testing hypotheses , these should be stated along with your research question. They are usually presented in the past tense, since the hypothesis will already have been tested by the time you are writing up your paper.

For example, the following hypothesis might respond to the research question above:

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

• Missing commas and periods
• Incorrect usage of “et al.”
• Ampersands (&) in narrative citations
• Missing reference entries

The final part of the introduction is often dedicated to a brief overview of the rest of the paper.

In a paper structured using the standard scientific “introduction, methods, results, discussion” format, this isn’t always necessary. But if your paper is structured in a less predictable way, it’s important to describe the shape of it for the reader.

If included, the overview should be concise, direct, and written in the present tense.

• This paper will first discuss several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then will go on to …
• This paper first discusses several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then goes on to …

Full examples of research paper introductions are shown in the tabs below: one for an argumentative paper, the other for an empirical paper.

• Argumentative paper
• Empirical paper

Are cows responsible for climate change? A recent study (RIVM, 2019) shows that cattle farmers account for two thirds of agricultural nitrogen emissions in the Netherlands. These emissions result from nitrogen in manure, which can degrade into ammonia and enter the atmosphere. The study’s calculations show that agriculture is the main source of nitrogen pollution, accounting for 46% of the country’s total emissions. By comparison, road traffic and households are responsible for 6.1% each, the industrial sector for 1%. While efforts are being made to mitigate these emissions, policymakers are reluctant to reckon with the scale of the problem. The approach presented here is a radical one, but commensurate with the issue. This paper argues that the Dutch government must stimulate and subsidize livestock farmers, especially cattle farmers, to transition to sustainable vegetable farming. It first establishes the inadequacy of current mitigation measures, then discusses the various advantages of the results proposed, and finally addresses potential objections to the plan on economic grounds.

The rise of social media has been accompanied by a sharp increase in the prevalence of body image issues among women and girls. This correlation has received significant academic attention: Various empirical studies have been conducted into Facebook usage among adolescent girls (Tiggermann & Slater, 2013; Meier & Gray, 2014). These studies have consistently found that the visual and interactive aspects of the platform have the greatest influence on body image issues. Despite this, highly visual social media (HVSM) such as Instagram have yet to be robustly researched. This paper sets out to address this research gap. We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls. It was hypothesized that daily Instagram use would be associated with an increase in body image concerns and a decrease in self-esteem ratings.

The introduction of a research paper includes several key elements:

• A hook to catch the reader’s interest
• Relevant background on the topic
• Details of your research problem

and your problem statement

• A thesis statement or research question
• Sometimes an overview of the paper

Don’t feel that you have to write the introduction first. The introduction is often one of the last parts of the research paper you’ll write, along with the conclusion.

This is because it can be easier to introduce your paper once you’ve already written the body ; you may not have the clearest idea of your arguments until you’ve written them, and things can change during the writing process .

The way you present your research problem in your introduction varies depending on the nature of your research paper . A research paper that presents a sustained argument will usually encapsulate this argument in a thesis statement .

A research paper designed to present the results of empirical research tends to present a research question that it seeks to answer. It may also include a hypothesis —a prediction that will be confirmed or disproved by your research.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2023, March 27). Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved August 30, 2023, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-introduction/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, writing a research paper conclusion | step-by-step guide, research paper format | apa, mla, & chicago templates.

I am planning to undertake a research to Determine the Implementation Status of digital Marketing by Small and Medium Enterprises in Papua New Guinea.

Please your guide from start to finishing the project

Eoghan Ryan (Scribbr Team)

You can find information on writing a research paper from start to finish here .

Still have questions?

What is your plagiarism score.

This page has been archived and is no longer updated

Scientific Papers

Scientific papers are for sharing your own original research work with other scientists or for reviewing the research conducted by others. As such, they are critical to the evolution of modern science, in which the work of one scientist builds upon that of others. To reach their goal, papers must aim to inform, not impress. They must be highly readable — that is, clear, accurate, and concise. They are more likely to be cited by other scientists if they are helpful rather than cryptic or self-centered.

Scientific papers typically have two audiences: first, the referees, who help the journal editor decide whether a paper is suitable for publication; and second, the journal readers themselves, who may be more or less knowledgeable about the topic addressed in the paper. To be accepted by referees and cited by readers, papers must do more than simply present a chronological account of the research work. Rather, they must convince their audience that the research presented is important, valid, and relevant to other scientists in the same field. To this end, they must emphasize both the motivation for the work and the outcome of it, and they must include just enough evidence to establish the validity of this outcome.

Papers that report experimental work are often structured chronologically in five sections: first, Introduction ; then Materials and Methods , Results , and Discussion (together, these three sections make up the paper's body); and finally, Conclusion .

• The Introduction section clarifies the motivation for the work presented and prepares readers for the structure of the paper.
• The Materials and Methods section provides sufficient detail for other scientists to reproduce the experiments presented in the paper. In some journals, this information is placed in an appendix, because it is not what most readers want to know first.
• The Results and Discussion sections present and discuss the research results, respectively. They are often usefully combined into one section, however, because readers can seldom make sense of results alone without accompanying interpretation — they need to be told what the results mean.
• The Conclusion section presents the outcome of the work by interpreting the findings at a higher level of abstraction than the Discussion and by relating these findings to the motivation stated in the Introduction .

(Papers reporting something other than experiments, such as a new method or technology, typically have different sections in their body, but they include the same Introduction and Conclusion sections as described above.)

Although the above structure reflects the progression of most research projects, effective papers typically break the chronology in at least three ways to present their content in the order in which the audience will most likely want to read it. First and foremost, they summarize the motivation for, and the outcome of, the work in an abstract, located before the Introduction . In a sense, they reveal the beginning and end of the story — briefly — before providing the full story. Second, they move the more detailed, less important parts of the body to the end of the paper in one or more appendices so that these parts do not stand in the readers' way. Finally, they structure the content in the body in theorem-proof fashion, stating first what readers must remember (for example, as the first sentence of a paragraph) and then presenting evidence to support this statement.

The introduction

• First, provide some context to orient those readers who are less familiar with your topic and to establish the importance of your work.
• Second, state the need for your work, as an opposition between what the scientific community currently has and what it wants.
• Third, indicate what you have done in an effort to address the need (this is the task).
• Finally, preview the remainder of the paper to mentally prepare readers for its structure, in the object of the document.

Context and need

At the beginning of the Introduction section, the context and need work together as a funnel: They start broad and progressively narrow down to the issue addressed in the paper. To spark interest among your audience — referees and journal readers alike — provide a compelling motivation for the work presented in your paper: The fact that a phenomenon has never been studied before is not, in and of itself, a reason to study that phenomenon.

Write the context in a way that appeals to a broad range of readers and leads into the need. Do not include context for the sake of including context: Rather, provide only what will help readers better understand the need and, especially, its importance. Consider anchoring the context in time, using phrases such as recently , in the past 10 years , or since the early 1990s . You may also want to anchor your context in space (either geographically or within a given research field).

Convey the need for the work as an opposition between actual and desired situations. Start by stating the actual situation (what we have) as a direct continuation of the context. If you feel you must explain recent achievements in much detail — say, in more than one or two paragraphs — consider moving the details to a section titled State of the art (or something similar) after the Introduction , but do provide a brief idea of the actual situation in the Introduction . Next, state the desired situation (what we want). Emphasize the contrast between the actual and desired situations with such words as but , however, or unfortunately .

One elegant way to express the desired part of the need is to combine it with the task in a single sentence. This sentence expresses first the objective, then the action undertaken to reach this objective, thus creating a strong and elegant connection between need and task. Here are three examples of such a combination:

To confirm this assumption , we studied the effects of a range of inhibitors of connexin channels . . . on . . .

To assess whether such multiple-coil sensors perform better than single-signal ones , we tested two of them — the DuoPXK and the GEMM3 — in a field where . . . To form a better view of the global distribution and infectiousness of this pathogen , we examined 1645 postmetamorphic and adult amphibians collected from 27 countries between 1984 and 2006 for the presence of . . .

Task and object

An Introduction is usually clearer and more logical when it separates what the authors have done (the task) from what the paper itself attempts or covers (the object of the document). In other words, the task clarifies your contribution as a scientist, whereas the object of the document prepares readers for the structure of the paper, thus allowing focused or selective reading.

For the task,

• use whoever did the work (normally, you and your colleagues) as the subject of the sentence: we or perhaps the authors;
• use a verb expressing a research action: measured , calculated , etc.;
• set that verb in the past tense.

The three examples below are well-formed tasks.

To confirm this assumption, we studied the effects of a range of inhibitors of connexin channels, such as the connexin mimetic peptides Gap26 and Gap27 and anti-peptide antibodies, on calcium signaling in cardiac cells and HeLa cells expressing connexins.

During controlled experiments, we investigated the influence of the HMP boundary conditions on liver flows.

To tackle this problem, we developed a new software verification technique called oblivious hashing, which calculates the hash values based on the actual execution of the program.

The list below provides examples of verbs that express research actions:

For the object of the document,

• use the document itself as the subject of the sentence: this paper , this letter , etc.;
• use a verb expressing a communication action: presents , summarizes , etc.;
• set the verb in the present tense.

The three examples below are suitable objects of the document for the three tasks shown above, respectively.

This paper clarifies the role of CxHc on calcium oscillations in neonatal cardiac myocytes and calcium transients induced by ATP in HL-cells originated from cardiac atrium and in HeLa cells expressing connexin 43 or 26. This paper presents the flow effects induced by increasing the hepatic-artery pressure and by obstructing the vena cava inferior. This paper discusses the theory behind oblivious hashing and shows how this approach can be applied for local software tamper resistance and remote code authentication.

The list below provides examples of verbs that express communication actions:

Even the most logical structure is of little use if readers do not see and understand it as they progress through a paper. Thus, as you organize the body of your paper into sections and perhaps subsections, remember to prepare your readers for the structure ahead at all levels. You already do so for the overall structure of the body (the sections) in the object of the document at the end of the Introduction . You can similarly prepare your readers for an upcoming division into subsections by introducing a global paragraph between the heading of a section and the heading of its first subsection. This paragraph can contain any information relating to the section as a whole rather than particular subsections, but it should at least announce the subsections, whether explicitly or implicitly. An explicit preview would be phrased much like the object of the document: "This section first . . . , then . . . , and finally . . . "

Although papers can be organized into sections in many ways, those reporting experimental work typically include Materials and Methods , Results , and Discussion in their body. In any case, the paragraphs in these sections should begin with a topic sentence to prepare readers for their contents, allow selective reading, and — ideally — get a message across.

Materials and methods

Results and discussion.

When reporting and discussing your results, do not force your readers to go through everything you went through in chronological order. Instead, state the message of each paragraph upfront: Convey in the first sentence what you want readers to remember from the paragraph as a whole. Focus on what happened, not on the fact that you observed it. Then develop your message in the remainder of the paragraph, including only that information you think you need to convince your audience.

The conclusion

At the end of your Conclusion , consider including perspectives — that is, an idea of what could or should still be done in relation to the issue addressed in the paper. If you include perspectives, clarify whether you are referring to firm plans for yourself and your colleagues ("In the coming months, we will . . . ") or to an invitation to readers ("One remaining question is . . . ").

If your paper includes a well-structured Introduction and an effective abstract, you need not repeat any of the Introduction in the Conclusion . In particular, do not restate what you have done or what the paper does. Instead, focus on what you have found and, especially, on what your findings mean. Do not be afraid to write a short Conclusion section: If you can conclude in just a few sentences given the rich discussion in the body of the paper, then do so. (In other words, resist the temptation to repeat material from the Introduction just to make the Conclusio n longer under the false belief that a longer Conclusion will seem more impressive.)

The abstract

Typically, readers are primarily interested in the information presented in a paper's Introduction and Conclusion sections. Primarily, they want to know the motivation for the work presented and the outcome of this work. Then (and only then) the most specialized among them might want to know the details of the work. Thus, an effective abstract focuses on motivation and outcome; in doing so, it parallels the paper's Introduction and Conclusion .

Accordingly, you can think of an abstract as having two distinct parts — motivation and outcome — even if it is typeset as a single paragraph. For the first part, follow the same structure as the Introduction section of the paper: State the context, the need, the task, and the object of the document. For the second part, mention your findings (the what ) and, especially, your conclusion (the so what — that is, the interpretation of your findings); if appropriate, end with perspectives, as in the Conclusion section of your paper.

Although the structure of the abstract parallels the Introduction and Conclusion sections, it differs from these sections in the audience it addresses. The abstract is read by many different readers, from the most specialized to the least specialized among the target audience. In a sense, it should be the least specialized part of the paper. Any scientist reading it should be able to understand why the work was carried out and why it is important (context and need), what the authors did (task) and what the paper reports about this work (object of the document), what the authors found (findings), what these findings mean (the conclusion), and possibly what the next steps are (perspectives). In contrast, the full paper is typically read by specialists only; its Introduction and Conclusion are more detailed (that is, longer and more specialized) than the abstract.

An effective abstract stands on its own — it can be understood fully even when made available without the full paper. To this end, avoid referring to figures or the bibliography in the abstract. Also, introduce any acronyms the first time you use them in the abstract (if needed), and do so again in the full paper (see Mechanics: Using abbreviations ).

This page appears in the following eBook

Topic rooms within Scientific Communication

Within this Subject (22)

• Communicating as a Scientist (3)
• Papers (4)
• Correspondence (5)
• Presentations (4)
• Conferences (3)
• Classrooms (3)

Other Topic Rooms

• Gene Inheritance and Transmission
• Gene Expression and Regulation
• Nucleic Acid Structure and Function
• Chromosomes and Cytogenetics
• Evolutionary Genetics
• Population and Quantitative Genetics
• Genes and Disease
• Genetics and Society
• Cell Origins and Metabolism
• Proteins and Gene Expression
• Subcellular Compartments
• Cell Communication
• Cell Cycle and Cell Division

© 2014 Nature Education

• Press Room |
• Terms of Use |
• Privacy Notice |

Visual Browse

How to Practice Academic Medicine and Publish from Developing Countries? pp 193–199 Cite as

How to Write the Introduction to a Scientific Paper?

• Samiran Nundy 4 ,
• Atul Kakar 5 &
• Zulfiqar A. Bhutta 6  
• Open Access
• First Online: 24 October 2021

42k Accesses

129 Altmetric

An Introduction to a scientific paper familiarizes the reader with the background of the issue at hand. It must reflect why the issue is topical and its current importance in the vast sea of research being done globally. It lays the foundation of biomedical writing and is the first portion of an article according to the IMRAD pattern ( I ntroduction, M ethodology, R esults, a nd D iscussion) [1].

I once had a professor tell a class that he sifted through our pile of essays, glancing at the titles and introductions, looking for something that grabbed his attention. Everything else went to the bottom of the pile to be read last, when he was tired and probably grumpy from all the marking. Don’t get put at the bottom of the pile, he said. Anonymous

Download chapter PDF

1 What is the Importance of an Introduction?

An Introduction to a scientific paper familiarizes the reader with the background of the issue at hand. It must reflect why the issue is topical and its current importance in the vast sea of research being done globally. It lays the foundation of biomedical writing and is the first portion of an article according to the IMRAD pattern ( I ntroduction, M ethodology, R esults, a nd D iscussion) [ 1 ].

It provides the flavour of the article and many authors have used phrases to describe it for example—'like a gate of the city’ [ 2 ], ‘the beginning is half of the whole’ [ 3 ], ‘an introduction is not just wrestling with words to fit the facts, but it also strongly modulated by perception of the anticipated reactions of peer colleagues’, [ 4 ] and ‘an introduction is like the trailer to a movie’. A good introduction helps captivate the reader early.

2 What Are the Principles of Writing a Good Introduction?

A good introduction will ‘sell’ an article to a journal editor, reviewer, and finally to a reader [ 3 ]. It should contain the following information [ 5 , 6 ]:

The known—The background scientific data

The unknown—Gaps in the current knowledge

Research hypothesis or question

Methodologies used for the study

The known consist of citations from a review of the literature whereas the unknown is the new work to be undertaken. This part should address how your work is the required missing piece of the puzzle.

3 What Are the Models of Writing an Introduction?

The Problem-solving model

First described by Swales et al. in 1979, in this model the writer should identify the ‘problem’ in the research, address the ‘solution’ and also write about ‘the criteria for evaluating the problem’ [ 7 , 8 ].

The CARS model that stands for C reating A R esearch S pace [ 9 , 10 ].

The two important components of this model are:

Establishing a territory (situation)

Establishing a niche (problem)

Occupying a niche (the solution)

In this popular model, one can add a fourth point, i.e., a conclusion [ 10 ].

4 What Is Establishing a Territory?

This includes: [ 9 ]

Stating the general topic and providing some background about it.

Providing a brief and relevant review of the literature related to the topic.

Adding a paragraph on the scope of the topic including the need for your study.

5 What Is Establishing a Niche?

Establishing a niche includes:

Stating the importance of the problem.

Outlining the current situation regarding the problem citing both global and national data.

Evaluating the current situation (advantages/ disadvantages).

Identifying the gaps.

Emphasizing the importance of the proposed research and how the gaps will be addressed.

Stating the research problem/ questions.

Stating the hypotheses briefly.

Figure 17.1 depicts how the introduction needs to be written. A scientific paper should have an introduction in the form of an inverted pyramid. The writer should start with the general information about the topic and subsequently narrow it down to the specific topic-related introduction.

Flow of ideas from the general to the specific

6 What Does Occupying a Niche Mean?

This is the third portion of the introduction and defines the rationale of the research and states the research question. If this is missing the reviewers will not understand the logic for publication and is a common reason for rejection [ 11 , 12 ]. An example of this is given below:

Till date, no study has been done to see the effectiveness of a mesh alone or the effectiveness of double suturing along with a mesh in the closure of an umbilical hernia regarding the incidence of failure. So, the present study is aimed at comparing the effectiveness of a mesh alone versus the double suturing technique along with a mesh.

7 How Long Should the Introduction Be?

For a project protocol, the introduction should be about 1–2 pages long and for a thesis it should be 3–5 pages in a double-spaced typed setting. For a scientific paper it should be less than 10–15% of the total length of the manuscript [ 13 , 14 ].

8 How Many References Should an Introduction Have?

All sections in a scientific manuscript except the conclusion should contain references. It has been suggested that an introduction should have four or five or at the most one-third of the references in the whole paper [ 15 ].

9 What Are the Important Points Which Should be not Missed in an Introduction?

An introduction paves the way forward for the subsequent sections of the article. Frequently well-planned studies are rejected by journals during review because of the simple reason that the authors failed to clarify the data in this section to justify the study [ 16 , 17 ]. Thus, the existing gap in knowledge should be clearly brought out in this section (Fig. 17.2 ).

How should the abstract, introduction, and discussion look

The following points are important to consider:

The introduction should be written in simple sentences and in the present tense.

Many of the terms will be introduced in this section for the first time and these will require abbreviations to be used later.

The references in this section should be to papers published in quality journals (e.g., having a high impact factor).

The aims, problems, and hypotheses should be clearly mentioned.

Start with a generalization on the topic and go on to specific information relevant to your research.

10 Example of an Introduction

11 Conclusions

An Introduction is a brief account of what the study is about. It should be short, crisp, and complete.

It has to move from a general to a specific research topic and must include the need for the present study.

The Introduction should include data from a literature search, i.e., what is already known about this subject and progress to what we hope to add to this knowledge.

Moore A. What’s in a discussion section? Exploiting 2-dimensionality in the online world. Bioassays. 2016;38(12):1185.

CrossRef   Google Scholar  

Annesley TM. The discussion section: your closing argument. Clin Chem. 2010;56(11):1671–4.

CrossRef   CAS   Google Scholar  

Bavdekar SB. Writing the discussion section: describing the significance of the study findings. J Assoc Physicians India. 2015;63(11):40–2.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Foote M. The proof of the pudding: how to report results and write a good discussion. Chest. 2009;135(3):866–8.

Kearney MH. The discussion section tells us where we are. Res Nurs Health. 2017;40(4):289–91.

Ghasemi A, Bahadoran Z, Mirmiran P, Hosseinpanah F, Shiva N, Zadeh-Vakili A. The principles of biomedical scientific writing: discussion. Int J Endocrinol Metab. 2019;17(3):e95415.

Swales JM, Feak CB. Academic writing for graduate students: essential tasks and skills. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press; 2004.

Google Scholar  

Colombo M, Bucher L, Sprenger J. Determinants of judgments of explanatory power: credibility, generality, and statistical relevance. Front Psychol. 2017;8:1430.

Mozayan MR, Allami H, Fazilatfar AM. Metadiscourse features in medical research articles: subdisciplinary and paradigmatic influences in English and Persian. Res Appl Ling. 2018;9(1):83–104.

Hyland K. Metadiscourse: mapping interactions in academic writing. Nordic J English Stud. 2010;9(2):125.

Hill AB. The environment and disease: association or causation? Proc Royal Soc Med. 2016;58(5):295–300.

Alpert JS. Practicing medicine in Plato’s cave. Am J Med. 2006;119(6):455–6.

Walsh K. Discussing discursive discussions. Med Educ. 2016;50(12):1269–70.

Polit DF, Beck CT. Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47(11):1451–8.

Jawaid SA, Jawaid M. How to write introduction and discussion. Saudi J Anaesth. 2019;13(Suppl 1):S18–9.

Jawaid SA, Baig M. How to write an original article. In: Jawaid SA, Jawaid M, editors. Scientific writing: a guide to the art of medical writing and scientific publishing. Karachi: Published by Med-Print Services; 2018. p. 135–50.

Hall GM, editor. How to write a paper. London: BMJ Books, BMJ Publishing Group; 2003. Structure of a scientific paper. p. 1–5.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Liver Transplantation, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India

Samiran Nundy

Department of Internal Medicine, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India

Institute for Global Health and Development, The Aga Khan University, South Central Asia, East Africa and United Kingdom, Karachi, Pakistan

Zulfiqar A. Bhutta

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Nundy, S., Kakar, A., Bhutta, Z.A. (2022). How to Write the Introduction to a Scientific Paper?. In: How to Practice Academic Medicine and Publish from Developing Countries?. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5248-6_17

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5248-6_17

Published : 24 October 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-16-5247-9

Online ISBN : 978-981-16-5248-6

eBook Packages : Medicine Medicine (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Find a journal
• Publish with us

HOW TO WRITE A SCIENTIFIC PAPER INTRODUCTION

This blog post outlines the 7 most common mistakes I, as an academic writing coach, see researchers make when writing their scientific paper introduction. Learn how to write a scientific introduction instead.

The Introduction section is the part of a scientific paper that many researchers struggle with. It’s hard to know how many studies from your literature review you should cite, what not to include and how to make the scientific article introduction compelling by implementing a clear storyline.

If you don’t have a clear process for how to write a scientific introduction, it can result in a text that is unclear, and thus, difficult to read Even if you eventually get there, it can take time and feel like an emotional battle. If you have the hardest time with scientific paper introductions I can assure you, you are not alone.

Ok, let’s get to it! Here are seven mistakes I find authors make when writing an introduction for a scientific paper:

1. NOT including an element of tension in your scientific paper introduction

This is a big one. I’ve read countless scientific article introductions that only provide a literature review. But the main function of the Introduction section in a scientific paper is to contextualise your study. And the scientific paper introduction is also a great place to convince your reader (including your journal editor and peer-reviewers) that the topic you decided to study is an important one that needs investigating now.

A great way to contextualise the findings in your scientific paper introduction and to provide a strong motivation for your study is by using the concept of science storytelling . According to the principles of storytelling, the introduction for a scientific research paper serves to set the scene: it should present the main characters (what are you studying), the setting (where is this research field now), and an element of tension (what is still unknown).

That element of tension is some sort of problem, perhaps your research question, e.g., a debate in the research literature, a gap in the knowledge about a scientific topic, a contradiction in the literature, a disagreement between different scientific groups, a scientific claim that is only weakly evidenced etc.

The scientific paper introduction is the place where you can make a strong case for why the problem that you decided addressing is an important and urgent one. Use that space. This will make your whole scientific paper a lot more compelling.

2. The SCientific paper introduction is TOO LONG

Often, authors write Introduction sections that are simply too long. Sometimes scientific journals specify how long the introduction should be. Science , for example, doesn’t want you to write more than one or two paragraphs in a Research Article . And they don’t mean those kind of paragraphs that fill a whole page (see mistake #3). 😉

A common mistake is that authors of scientific papers are aiming to present a full review of the literature in their field. However, the goal isn’t to present all studies that are ever so slightly related to your research. It’s better to mention those aspects that are needed to contextualise the problem that your study is solving (see mistake # 1). And ONLY those aspects. I recommend this blog post for a guide on deciding who to cite and how to cite in the best way .

One tip I often give my clients inside our scientific writing course , the Researchers’ Writing Academy, is to go through every sentence in their introduction and analyse whether the reader would still get the whole story of the scientific paper if they deleted the sentence. If that’s the case, you can probably remove or rewrite it so that only the most essential information is left. Head here for more tips on how to cut your word count in your scientific paper .

Does it take you a long time to write the Introduction section of your scientific paper because you don’t have a clear process for it? Or do you struggle to get a clear story line in your introduction? Our free training covers both points and shows you how you can get published without lacking structure anywhere in the writing process.

3. The paragraphs of the scientific paper introduction are too long

Not only the whole introduction section of a scientific paper is frequently too long, also the paragraphs within often are. I know this may make some academics feel uncomfortable but permission granted to write short paragraphs in your scientific paper. You are not presenting less valuable information by doing so.

The optimal paragraph length for a scientific paper is 100-200 words. Nobody likes to read big walls of text (check your own reading behaviour if you don’t believe me). Short paragraphs also help people to skim read. And it ultimately helps you, the author, too. Writing a scientific paper introduction with short paragraphs efficiently requires you to plan the section in advance. By doing this, you’ll also achieve good flow in your Introduction section, which will help make it more readable too (see mistake #6). If you want more tips on writing great paragraphs in scientific papers , check out this recent blog post. PS: This paragraph is 110 words long.

4. The sentences of the scientific paper introduction are too long

Yes, sorry, the sentences too. 😁 You might find yourself trying to sound fancy in your scientific writing. But sounding like an expert is not what writing a scientific paper is about! Instead, we want our reader to quickly understand exactly what you want to say. Good scientific writing, therefore, is simple and clear. And sentences spanning several lines rarely are.

Writing shorter instead of longer sentences in your scientific article introduction is harder than it may seem at first. You may not know where to chop a sentence into two while maintaining flow. Practice will get you there. Here’s the rule of thumb I share with the course members inside our Researchers’ Writing Academy: Never write more than one main and one sub-ordinate clause. A sub-ordinate clause is the part of a sentence that begins with “that”, “which”, “although”, “because” and similar words.

And there’s a little trick that sometimes works to break up sentences in your scientific paper introduction: When you want to break off a sub-ordinate clause starting with “because”, you can do so easily by using the transition “This is owing to” at the start of the new sentence. A sub-ordinate clause starting with “which” can become a new sentence starting with “This” or “These”. It’s okay to cheat sometimes! 😉

5.  The first sentence of your scientific paper introduction is boring

The first sentence in any paragraph is a powerful position but the first sentence of your whole scientific paper is even more so. Therefore, it would be a shame if you threw away this chance. There is an art to writing first sentences. The first sentence in your scientific article introduction needs to capture your readers by signaling them why they need to care about your study. A great way of doing that is giving them a hint of the wider problem your study is motivated by.

One implication of this is that the first sentence in your scientific paper introduction needs to be tailored to the readership of the journal you are submitting your paper to. For Nature , Science and co, you will need a first sentence that describes a very broad scientific problem. For more specialist journals, you can start a little deeper into the matter.

6.  There’s no flow in your scientific paper introduction

What makes a scientific paper readable is when the writing flows. Flow means that the reader can easily follow from one sentence to the next one without getting stuck. This gives you as the author an advantage because your reader will be less likely to stop reading your Introduction section.

Once your reader stops reading (even if just to think about what exactly a word meant that you wrote), they may get distracted or deem it too much of an effort to weed through the text. In both scenarios, they may end up giving up on reading your scientific paper. A journal editor might even desk-reject your scientific paper when they don’t understand the point is you’re making in the introduction of your scientific paper.

That’s why I strongly recommend connecting your sentences and paragraphs so that your Introduction section flows. In fact, I think it’s a good idea to map out your scientific paper introduction before writing it. You can learn the whole process step by step inside our scientific writing course , the Researchers’ Writing Academy.

7. You use too many synonyms in your scientific paper introduction

When we write our Introduction sections, we often feel an urge to throw in as many synonyms as possible because we fear the reader may otherwise find our writing repetitive and get bored. The opposite is the case. Readers get bored when they don’t understand what’s going on and when they have to make an effort to understand what you’re trying to communicate. That’s when their minds starts to wander (see also mistake #6).

As the author, you are so familiar with the content of your scientific paper that it can be hard to realise how other people may fail to understand what is – to you – the most obvious synonym. But just think for a second about how much your reader has to process while reading your manuscript. The area might be new to them, or the methods, or your model system – or all those things. (This, by the way, is likely the case for your Nature or Science editor who receives manuscripts from a broader scientific spectrum.) They might never realise that your fancy abbreviation and what you call “the model system” are the same thing. And remember, a journal editor may make the decision to desk-reject your article straight away when what you studied isn’t clear to them.

There you have it, the 7 most common mistakes researchers make when writing their scientific paper introduction and how to write a scientific introduction instead.

If you found this blog post helpful, I highly recommend signing up for our free scientific writing training below where you will learn how to develop a scientific paper step by step.

This training is the perfect next step for you if you don’t know when to stop reading the literature and struggle to write Introduction sections effectively. Just click the button — it’s free!

Maria Olczak, PhD candidate at Queens Mary University of London, shares her experience in the Researchers’ Writing Academy.

Dr Amelie Jeanneau, bushfire risk researcher at The University of Adelaide in Australia details how she got the confidence to define her own voice through the Journal Publication Formula.

Dr Katia Canenguez, Health Disparities researcher at Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School shares her experience in the Researchers’ Writing Academy.

Dr Jourdan Davis, Assistant Professor at the University of North Carolina, reflects on her writing since joining the Researchers’ Writing Academy

Dr Jia Ng, Assistant Professor at the Zucker School of Medicine in the US, reflects on her writing and her writing process since joining the Researchers’ Writing Academy

It might seem far-fetched but there are lots of parallels between dog training and academic writing! Here are 5 unexpected lessons courtesy of my dog Zuza.

Dr Soundarya Soundararajan, medical scientist at the National Institute of Occupational Health in India, reflects on her writing since joining the Researchers’ Writing Academy

Danielle and I talk about burnout in academia, the all-to-common phenomenon of work addiction among researchers, the importance of feeling connected to yourself and other people and the necessary steps to tackle stress and overwhelm in the long term.

Jane and I talk about why writing is emotional labour, procrastination, fear of rejection, perfectionism and of course, writing books, which is Jane’s speciality.

Cathy and I talked about how to write more by working less

A Brilliant Mind

Writing and productivity boost for scientists

How to structure the introduction of your scientific paper

Have you ever struggled to write your introduction? If your answer to this question is a desperate “Yes”, don’t worry, you are not alone. The introduction is usually the hardest part of an article to write, especially if you don’t know how to structure it. Luckily, introductions of scientific articles are structured according to a defined template. In this post, I describe this template and give examples for you to see how it is concretely implemented (see here to get an overview of the structure of the whole article and here to download the template of your introduction).

The introduction of a scientific article follows an inverted triangle shape. It starts broadly with the general research topic and progressively narrows down to your research question and the study that you performed to answer this question. You can divide your introduction into five successive levels that become more and more specific. Here are these different levels.

Level 1. Start by introducing your research topic

The first paragraph(s) of the introduction aim(s) to introduce your research topic. Your research topic is the main character in your story. Just as a good story requires a compelling hero, a good scientific paper relies on an interesting research topic. Therefore, your first introductory paragraph(s) must convince your readers of the importance of your topic. Let’s take an example!

Imagine that you have run a study to test the efficacy of a new treatment to cure a disease called Dragon Pox – Dragon Pox is an imaginary disease that affects wizards and witches, like chickenpox (see the Harry Potter series). When writing the paper describing your research on this disease, you could start your introduction by emphasizing the preponderance of Dragon Pox.

“Dragon pox is one of the most problematic infectious diseases today. It is the most common disease in children under 12 years of age and about 2 out of 5 people contract it in their lifetime. Dragon pox causes green and purple rashes and sparks that come out of the nostrils when the patient sneezes. These symptoms can escalate, leading to serious complications (pneumonia, encephalitis, etc.) and significant sequelae (respiratory failure, mottled skin). In addition, in 8.4% of cases, the infection results in the patient’s death. In 2021, the fatal consequences and high prevalence of dragon pox have prompted the Wizzard Health Organization (WHO) to declare it as the priority public health issue of the next decade.”

After having read these few sentences, your reader knows that

• the article is about Dragon Pox,
• that it’s an important topic.

Your introduction should begin as broadly as possible to appeal to a wide audience. That being said, the breadth of your introduction should also depend on your readership. If your paper is aimed at specialists, being too general may bore them and make them lose interest in your research. So, when writing the first paragraph(s) of your introduction, it is important to keep in mind who your audience is and what they care about.

Level 2. Delineate your research niche

Once you have established your research topic and emphasized its importance, the next step is to narrow your paper down to your research niche. Your niche defines the specialized area you are researching; it is a more focused domain than the general research topic. For example, in the case of dragon pox, your niche could be one of the following topics:             – its diagnosis,             – its treatment,             – its mechanism of contagion,             – the increased vulnerability of some people to this disease,             – the genetic code of the virus,             – the proteins that make up the virus’ membrane,             – its evolutionary origins…

At Level 2, you need to provide general background information about what has been done so far in this niche. For instance, if your research is about dragon pox treatment, you could explain which drugs already exist to cure the disease.

“Dragon pox is primarily treated with anti-herpetic agents. Indeed, the disease results from a primary infection caused by the varicella-monster virus (VMV), which belongs to the human herpesvirus family. Recent studies suggest that oral aclocyvir is the most efficient method against VMV. Aclocyvir is a nucleoside analog that mimics guasonine…“

Level 3. Describe the problem that you will address

Once you have defined your niche, you need to describe the problem that your research will address. A good story needs a compelling character facing a daunting challenge . Which challenge does your article tackle? Why is this challenge important to your readers? These are the two questions that you need to answer at Level 3.

Let’s go back to our example. If you have tested a new treatment for Dragon Pox, it’s likely because the usual treatment poses some problems that your new treatment aims at circumventing. So your next paragraphs might be something like:

“Research shows that treatment by oral aclocyvir reduces by 23% the risks of complications following VMV infection. Unfortunately, aclocyvir has many side effects, such as nausea, appetite loss, or diarrhea. These side-effects cause one-third of the patients to interrupt the treatment before completion and thus considerably reduce its efficiency. “

At Level 3, it is essential that you frame your research question as a problem. Indeed, humans have a propensity to pay attention to negative information. In psychology, this phenomenon is called negativity bias . By highlighting the problems and risks associated with the current state of knowledge, you create tension in your readers. This tension motivates them to continue reading your article and makes them want you to find a solution to the problem.

Level 4. Provide a solution

At Level 3, you have created tension in your readers by highlighting a serious problem in your niche; at Level 4, you begin to resolve that tension by explaining how you will fix that problem.

In scientific writing, it’s important to convince your reader that the solution you’re proposing to solve this problem has a rational basis. You can do that in two ways: 1) by explaining the logic that led you to consider the solution tested in your paper, 2) and by providing arguments and citing already existing evidence to support your hypotheses and/or theory.

For instance:

“ Recent research suggests that the side effects of oral aclocyvir may be counteracted by adeninoside. Adeninoside appears to decrease nausea and loss of appetite. In recent years, physicians have begun to use a combination of oral acyclovir and adenoside to treat severe forms of herpes. Early clinical trials indicate fewer side effects and better patient acceptance of the treatment. Thus, this approach appears to be successful in the treatment of herpes. However, it has never been tested in patients with VMV. The present study intends to fill this gap .”

As you can see in this example, here again, I emphasize the gap that the research intends to fill. And, I’m sure you’ve guessed it, here again, I’m creating tension in the reader.

Level 5. State your hypotheses and introduce your methods

We are now at the end of the introduction. You have already set the stage for your study; now it is time to state your hypotheses (if you have any) and/or introduce the methods that you chose to test them. For example:

“In the study reported in this article, we investigated the efficacy of a new treatment to cure Dragon Pox. We tested the hypothesis that the administration of adeninoside reduces the side-effects of aclocyvir and, thus, increases the treatment efficiency. To that aim, we compared two groups of patients treated with either aclocyvir alone or aclocyvir combined with adeninoside…”

Introducing your methods serves two purposes. First, it facilitates the transition to the materials and methods section by giving your readers an overview of your research. This should help them better understand the study you have conducted. Second, it allows you to explain the reasons for the methodological approach you decided to take. This is especially important if you are relying on a new approach or if you are writing for an audience that is unfamiliar with this type of methodology. You can use the last paragraphs of the introduction to present the rationale for your methods and their value in solving the problem your paper addresses.

Be convincing, not exhaustive

If you are writing a scientific article, you certainly know a lot about this topic. That’s a good thing! It’s necessary to do good research. But one thing is important to keep in mind: You don’t need to demonstrate all your knowledge in your article.

A scientific article is not an essay that your teacher will grade. It has a different purpose. Indeed, the goal of an essay is to convince your teacher that you have the knowledge and skills he or she expects from you. These expectations vary from teacher to teacher, but some teachers might enjoy seeing that you know a lot about the topic at hand. The goal of a scientific article is to captivate the attention of your readers and convince them of the soundness of your research.

Your readers don’t care about you. They want to read something interesting that they can trust. Your job is to take their hands and smoothly lead them to your research question, your hypotheses, and, eventually, your methods. Everything that you write in the introduction should contribute to this progression. If a piece of information is not directly useful to understand the necessity of your study, it doesn’t belong to your introduction. Go right to the point and avoid complex detours. When it comes to being convincing, less is usually more.

In this post, we’ve seen that the introduction to a scientific article contains five main levels that describe: 1) your general research topic, 2) the more specific niche, 3) the problem that your research will address, 4) the solution that you intend to bring to this problem, and 5) an overview of your hypotheses and methods. Follow these five steps and you’ll write an introduction that will captivate your readers. It’s that easy!

To make it easier for you, I’ve created a template to write your introduction, with instructions almost as simple to follow as a cooking recipe. You can find this template below. To learn more about the structure of scientific papers, read my Ultimate Guide to Scientific Writing , as well as my posts on the Materials and Methods , Results , and Discussion sections. Good luck with your paper!

How to write your introduction + template

Signup for my newsletter and get your free download! Writing a good introduction is essential to getting your paper published in a top journal and captivating your readers. It’s essential… and challenging! With this template for writing your introduction, you will find:

• Pre-writing instructions
• Writing instructions
• Explanations on how to use the template
• A checklist to make sure you have included all the important elements for your introduction.

You May Also Like

Ocar, abdce, & ldr: 3 structures for scientific articles, breathing and mental performance, chat gpt for scientific writing: supercharge your writing with ai   .

Pingback: What makes a good scientific abstract? : A Brilliant Mind

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Turk J Urol
• v.39(Suppl 1); 2013 Sep

How to write an introduction section of a scientific article?

An article primarily includes the following sections: introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. Before writing the introduction, the main steps, the heading and the familiarity level of the readers should be considered. Writing should begin when the experimental system and the equipment are available. The introduction section comprises the first portion of the manuscript, and it should be written using the simple present tense. Additionally, abbreviations and explanations are included in this section. The main goal of the introduction is to convey basic information to the readers without obligating them to investigate previous publications and to provide clues as to the results of the present study. To do this, the subject of the article should be thoroughly reviewed, and the aim of the study should be clearly stated immediately after discussing the basic references. In this review, we aim to convey the principles of writing the introduction section of a manuscript to residents and young investigators who have just begun to write a manuscript.

Introduction

When entering a gate of a magnificent city we can make a prediction about the splendor, pomposity, history, and civilization we will encounter in the city. Occasionally, gates do not give even a glimpse of the city, and it can mislead the visitors about inner sections of the city. Introduction sections of the articles are like gates of a city. It is a presentation aiming at introducing itself to the readers, and attracting their attention. Attractiveness, clarity, piquancy, and analytical capacity of the presentation will urge the reader to read the subsequent sections of the article. On the other hand as is understood from the motto of antique Greek poet Euripides “a bad beginning makes a bad ending”, ‘Introduction’ section of a scientific article is important in that it can reveal the conclusion of the article. [ 1 ]

It is useful to analyze the issues to be considered in the ‘Introduction’ section under 3 headings. Firstly, information should be provided about the general topic of the article in the light of the current literature which paves the way for the disclosure of the objective of the manuscript. Then the specific subject matter, and the issue to be focused on should be dealt with, the problem should be brought forth, and fundamental references related to the topic should be discussed. Finally, our recommendations for solution should be described, in other words our aim should be communicated. When these steps are followed in that order, the reader can track the problem, and its solution from his/her own perspective under the light of current literature. Otherwise, even a perfect study presented in a non-systematized, confused design will lose the chance of reading. Indeed inadequate information, inability to clarify the problem, and sometimes concealing the solution will keep the reader who has a desire to attain new information away from reading the manuscript. [ 1 – 3 ]

First of all, explanation of the topic in the light of the current literature should be made in clear, and precise terms as if the reader is completely ignorant of the subject. In this section, establishment of a warm rapport between the reader, and the manuscript is aimed. Since frantic plunging into the problem or the solution will push the reader into the dilemma of either screening the literature about the subject matter or refraining from reading the article. Updated, and robust information should be presented in the ‘Introduction’ section.

Then main topic of our manuscript, and the encountered problem should be analyzed in the light of the current literature following a short instance of brain exercise. At this point the problems should be reduced to one issue as far as possible. Of course, there might be more than one problem, however this new issue, and its solution should be the subject matter of another article. Problems should be expressed clearly. If targets are more numerous, and complex, solutions will be more than one, and confusing.

Finally, the last paragraphs of the ‘Introduction’ section should include the solution in which we will describe the information we generated, and related data. Our sentences which arouse curiosity in the readers should not be left unanswered. The reader who thinks to obtain the most effective information in no time while reading a scientific article should not be smothered with mysterious sentences, and word plays, and the readers should not be left alone to arrive at a conclusion by themselves. If we have contrary expectations, then we might write an article which won’t have any reader. A clearly expressed or recommended solutions to an explicitly revealed problem is also very important for the integrity of the ‘Introduction’ section. [ 1 – 5 ]

We can summarize our arguments with the following example ( Figure 1 ). The introduction section of the exemplary article is written in simple present tense which includes abbreviations, acronyms, and their explanations. Based on our statements above we can divide the introduction section into 3 parts. In the first paragraph, miniaturization, and evolvement of pediatric endourological instruments, and competitions among PNL, ESWL, and URS in the treatment of urinary system stone disease are described, in other words the background is prepared. In the second paragraph, a newly defined system which facilitates intrarenal access in PNL procedure has been described. Besides basic references related to the subject matter have been given, and their outcomes have been indicated. In other words, fundamental references concerning main subject have been discussed. In the last paragraph the aim of the researchers to investigate the outcomes, and safety of the application of this new method in the light of current information has been indicated.

An exemplary introduction section of an article

Apart from the abovementioned information about the introduction section of a scientific article we will summarize a few major issues in brief headings

Important points which one should take heed of:

• Abbreviations should be given following their explanations in the ‘Introduction’ section (their explanations in the summary does not count)
• Simple present tense should be used.
• References should be selected from updated publication with a higher impact factor, and prestigous source books.
• Avoid mysterious, and confounding expressions, construct clear sentences aiming at problematic issues, and their solutions.
• The sentences should be attractive, tempting, and comjprehensible.
• Firstly general, then subject-specific information should be given. Finally our aim should be clearly explained.

Management Paper Blog Academic Writing Guides And Tips

• Three Research Paper Introduction Examples: Learn How to Initiate and Hook
• ManagementPaper
• Apr 13, 2021

A research paper introduction holds perhaps the most importance for a study to be successful. After a good research paper abstract , it is the introduction that builds the interest in a reader to continue reading the research paper. If the introduction turns out to be dull and drab, then the study would be a failed one.

A good research paper needs a lot of background study, which you often fail to do. To make your work easier, Management Paper is there for you to help you write yours efficiently.

Key Features of a Research Paper Introduction

• It forms the basic part of both the research paper as well as the research proposal .
• Apart from giving a general notion about the research paper topic , it includes important elements such as background, aim, objectives, questions and many more.
• It must contain the questions ‘WHY’: why is the research conducted, why it is important, why this chosen topic and so on is.
• It helps in pointing out the knowledge gaps and fills them up throughout the paper.
• Use precise and clear points.

The Most Commonly Included Elements in The Research Papers

There are different kinds of research papers like essays, reports, dissertations and journals. The introduction which is generally used in case of all other types of research paper except dissertations are similar in nature. Such an introduction is similar to a summary of the topic, defining the problem, stating the aims and objectives that are going to be established through the research.

But in case of dissertation, in a good research paper format the introduction is presented in great detail by dividing the section into the following parts:

• Research background
• Research problem
• Research rationale
• Research aim
• Research objectives
• Research hypothesis
• Research questions

Apart from this, many papers include time plan, scope and limitations of the research too. The experts from the team of Management Paper can help you with your paper writing and also make you understand the various aspects of a research paper.

Some Significant Examples of Research Paper Introduction

Research paper introduction example #1, topic: impact of leadership effectiveness on employees for the company amazon (dissertation).

The history and the various past events related to the topic are being mentioned in this section. Thsi supplies context to the paper and contains both relevant and important studies. Authenticating your information is a must by in-text citations.

The research problem states a specific area of concern, a bothering question, a difficulty which is to be eliminated or a condition that demands improvement. The missing knowledge about the topic is being found out through this and then only you can do further research about the problem.

The rationale answers the question of why the research is being conducted and thus states its importance.

The things that are expected to be achieved at the end of the research are generally mentioned here.

The objectives are the various goals or targets that are to be established and achieved throughout the study.

The research question points out the facts that are to be established through the paper and provides the research with a clear focus and purpose.

This is a specific predictive statement about the possible future outcome of the study which is mostly based upon the relationship between different variables or on a single variable.

Research Paper Introduction Example # 2

Topic: implementing online customer support service through chat portal at aldi, research paper introduction example # 3, topic: compare and contrast the policies for the aged people in various countries.

In both the second and the third example, the introduction is written in a single paragraph. In the first line itself you must introduce the topic. Try to avoid embellishments. Write any remarkable event about the topic then. Explain the problem and the purpose of the research. Try to build a reasonable thesis statement. Then with few lines, insert a smooth transition to make a shift from the introduction to the body.

 You can check out more examples from the page of Management paper, and can also avail paper writing service from them with ease. We do not compromise with quality and believe in time management.

Save Times & Improve Grades

Just share your ruquirements and get customized solutions on time

Popular Posts

• Research Paper Format: Know How to Structure Your Paper
• 50 Great Debatable Topics to Make Your Essay A Brilliant One

• Research Proposal Outline: Learn to Propose the Plan Properly
• The Types of Essays: Four Popular Genres
• Learn the Basic Essay Format Through Some Easy Steps
• The Various Angles of Essays Through Cause-and-Effect Essay Examples

• The Easiest Way to Draft A Formal Essay

• Comparing and Contrasting Through Compare and Contrast Essay Examples

• Step by Step Guide to Draft A Research Paper Outline