types of scientific essays

What this handout is about

Nearly every element of style that is accepted and encouraged in general academic writing is also considered good practice in scientific writing. The major difference between science writing and writing in other academic fields is the relative importance placed on certain stylistic elements. This handout details the most critical aspects of scientific writing and provides some strategies for evaluating and improving your scientific prose. Readers of this handout may also find our handout on scientific reports useful.

What is scientific writing?

There are several different kinds of writing that fall under the umbrella of scientific writing. Scientific writing can include:

• Peer-reviewed journal articles (presenting primary research)
• Grant proposals (you can’t do science without funding)
• Literature review articles (summarizing and synthesizing research that has already been carried out)

As a student in the sciences, you are likely to spend some time writing lab reports, which often follow the format of peer-reviewed articles and literature reviews. Regardless of the genre, though, all scientific writing has the same goal: to present data and/or ideas with a level of detail that allows a reader to evaluate the validity of the results and conclusions based only on the facts presented. The reader should be able to easily follow both the methods used to generate the data (if it’s a primary research paper) and the chain of logic used to draw conclusions from the data. Several key elements allow scientific writers to achieve these goals:

• Precision: ambiguities in writing cause confusion and may prevent a reader from grasping crucial aspects of the methodology and synthesis
• Clarity: concepts and methods in the sciences can often be complex; writing that is difficult to follow greatly amplifies any confusion on the part of the reader
• Objectivity: any claims that you make need to be based on facts, not intuition or emotion

How can I make my writing more precise?

Theories in the sciences are based upon precise mathematical models, specific empirical (primary) data sets, or some combination of the two. Therefore, scientists must use precise, concrete language to evaluate and explain such theories, whether mathematical or conceptual. There are a few strategies for avoiding ambiguous, imprecise writing.

Word and phrasing choice

Often several words may convey similar meaning, but usually only one word is most appropriate in a given context. Here’s an example:

• Word choice 1: “population density is positively correlated with disease transmission rate”
• Word choice 2: “population density is positively related to disease transmission rate”

In some contexts, “correlated” and “related” have similar meanings. But in scientific writing, “correlated” conveys a precise statistical relationship between two variables. In scientific writing, it is typically not enough to simply point out that two variables are related: the reader will expect you to explain the precise nature of the relationship (note: when using “correlation,” you must explain somewhere in the paper how the correlation was estimated). If you mean “correlated,” then use the word “correlated”; avoid substituting a less precise term when a more precise term is available.

This same idea also applies to choice of phrasing. For example, the phrase “writing of an investigative nature” could refer to writing in the sciences, but might also refer to a police report. When presented with a choice, a more specific and less ambiguous phraseology is always preferable. This applies even when you must be repetitive to maintain precision: repetition is preferable to ambiguity. Although repetition of words or phrases often happens out of necessity, it can actually be beneficial by placing special emphasis on key concepts.

Figurative language

Figurative language can make for interesting and engaging casual reading but is by definition imprecise. Writing “experimental subjects were assaulted with a wall of sound” does not convey the precise meaning of “experimental subjects were presented with 20 second pulses of conspecific mating calls.” It’s difficult for a reader to objectively evaluate your research if details are left to the imagination, so exclude similes and metaphors from your scientific writing.

Level of detail

Include as much detail as is necessary, but exclude extraneous information. The reader should be able to easily follow your methodology, results, and logic without being distracted by irrelevant facts and descriptions. Ask yourself the following questions when you evaluate the level of detail in a paper:

• Is the rationale for performing the experiment clear (i.e., have you shown that the question you are addressing is important and interesting)?
• Are the materials and procedures used to generate the results described at a level of detail that would allow the experiment to be repeated?
• Is the rationale behind the choice of experimental methods clear? Will the reader understand why those particular methods are appropriate for answering the question your research is addressing?
• Will the reader be able to follow the chain of logic used to draw conclusions from the data?

Any information that enhances the reader’s understanding of the rationale, methodology, and logic should be included, but information in excess of this (or information that is redundant) will only confuse and distract the reader.

Whenever possible, use quantitative rather than qualitative descriptions. A phrase that uses definite quantities such as “development rate in the 30°C temperature treatment was ten percent faster than development rate in the 20°C temperature treatment” is much more precise than the more qualitative phrase “development rate was fastest in the higher temperature treatment.”

How can I make my writing clearer?

When you’re writing about complex ideas and concepts, it’s easy to get sucked into complex writing. Distilling complicated ideas into simple explanations is challenging, but you’ll need to acquire this valuable skill to be an effective communicator in the sciences. Complexities in language use and sentence structure are perhaps the most common issues specific to writing in the sciences.

Language use

When given a choice between a familiar and a technical or obscure term, the more familiar term is preferable if it doesn’t reduce precision. Here are a just a few examples of complex words and their simple alternatives:

In these examples, the term on the right conveys the same meaning as the word on the left but is more familiar and straightforward, and is often shorter as well.

There are some situations where the use of a technical or obscure term is justified. For example, in a paper comparing two different viral strains, the author might repeatedly use the word “enveloped” rather than the phrase “surrounded by a membrane.” The key word here is “repeatedly”: only choose the less familiar term if you’ll be using it more than once. If you choose to go with the technical term, however, make sure you clearly define it, as early in the paper as possible. You can use this same strategy to determine whether or not to use abbreviations, but again you must be careful to define the abbreviation early on.

Sentence structure

Science writing must be precise, and precision often requires a fine level of detail. Careful description of objects, forces, organisms, methodology, etc., can easily lead to complex sentences that express too many ideas without a break point. Here’s an example:

The osmoregulatory organ, which is located at the base of the third dorsal spine on the outer margin of the terminal papillae and functions by expelling excess sodium ions, activates only under hypertonic conditions.

Several things make this sentence complex. First, the action of the sentence (activates) is far removed from the subject (the osmoregulatory organ) so that the reader has to wait a long time to get the main idea of the sentence. Second, the verbs “functions,” “activates,” and “expelling” are somewhat redundant. Consider this revision:

Located on the outer margin of the terminal papillae at the base of the third dorsal spine, the osmoregulatory organ expels excess sodium ions under hypertonic conditions.

This sentence is slightly shorter, conveys the same information, and is much easier to follow. The subject and the action are now close together, and the redundant verbs have been eliminated. You may have noticed that even the simpler version of this sentence contains two prepositional phrases strung together (“on the outer margin of…” and “at the base of…”). Prepositional phrases themselves are not a problem; in fact, they are usually required to achieve an adequate level of detail in science writing. However, long strings of prepositional phrases can cause sentences to wander. Here’s an example of what not to do from Alley (1996):

“…to confirm the nature of electrical breakdown of nitrogen in uniform fields at relatively high pressures and interelectrode gaps that approach those obtained in engineering practice, prior to the determination of the processes that set the criterion for breakdown in the above-mentioned gases and mixtures in uniform and non-uniform fields of engineering significance.”

The use of eleven (yes, eleven!) prepositional phrases in this sentence is excessive, and renders the sentence nearly unintelligible. Judging when a string of prepositional phrases is too long is somewhat subjective, but as a general rule of thumb, a single prepositional phrase is always preferable, and anything more than two strung together can be problematic.

Nearly every form of scientific communication is space-limited. Grant proposals, journal articles, and abstracts all have word or page limits, so there’s a premium on concise writing. Furthermore, adding unnecessary words or phrases distracts rather than engages the reader. Avoid generic phrases that contribute no novel information. Common phrases such as “the fact that,” “it should be noted that,” and “it is interesting that” are cumbersome and unnecessary. Your reader will decide whether or not your paper is interesting based on the content. In any case, if information is not interesting or noteworthy it should probably be excluded.

How can I make my writing more objective?

The objective tone used in conventional scientific writing reflects the philosophy of the scientific method: if results are not repeatable, then they are not valid. In other words, your results will only be considered valid if any researcher performing the same experimental tests and analyses that you describe would be able to produce the same results. Thus, scientific writers try to adopt a tone that removes the focus from the researcher and puts it only on the research itself. Here are several stylistic conventions that enhance objectivity:

Passive voice

You may have been told at some point in your academic career that the use of the passive voice is almost always bad, except in the sciences. The passive voice is a sentence structure where the subject who performs the action is ambiguous (e.g., “you may have been told,” as seen in the first sentence of this paragraph; see our handout on passive voice and this 2-minute video on passive voice for a more complete discussion).

The rationale behind using the passive voice in scientific writing is that it enhances objectivity, taking the actor (i.e., the researcher) out of the action (i.e., the research). Unfortunately, the passive voice can also lead to awkward and confusing sentence structures and is generally considered less engaging (i.e., more boring) than the active voice. This is why most general style guides recommend only sparing use of the passive voice.

Currently, the active voice is preferred in most scientific fields, even when it necessitates the use of “I” or “we.” It’s perfectly reasonable (and more simple) to say “We performed a two-tailed t-test” rather than to say “a two-tailed t-test was performed,” or “in this paper we present results” rather than “results are presented in this paper.” Nearly every current edition of scientific style guides recommends the active voice, but different instructors (or journal editors) may have different opinions on this topic. If you are unsure, check with the instructor or editor who will review your paper to see whether or not to use the passive voice. If you choose to use the active voice with “I” or “we,” there are a few guidelines to follow:

• Avoid starting sentences with “I” or “we”: this pulls focus away from the scientific topic at hand.
• Avoid using “I” or “we” when you’re making a conjecture, whether it’s substantiated or not. Everything you say should follow from logic, not from personal bias or subjectivity. Never use any emotive words in conjunction with “I” or “we” (e.g., “I believe,” “we feel,” etc.).
• Never use “we” in a way that includes the reader (e.g., “here we see trait evolution in action”); the use of “we” in this context sets a condescending tone.

Acknowledging your limitations

Your conclusions should be directly supported by the data that you present. Avoid making sweeping conclusions that rest on assumptions that have not been substantiated by your or others’ research. For example, if you discover a correlation between fur thickness and basal metabolic rate in rats and mice you would not necessarily conclude that fur thickness and basal metabolic rate are correlated in all mammals. You might draw this conclusion, however, if you cited evidence that correlations between fur thickness and basal metabolic rate are also found in twenty other mammalian species. Assess the generality of the available data before you commit to an overly general conclusion.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Alley, Michael. 1996. The Craft of Scientific Writing , 3rd ed. New York: Springer.

Council of Science Editors. 2014. Scientific Style and Format: The CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers , 8th ed. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.

Day, Robert A. 1994. How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper , 4th ed. Phoenix: Oryx Press.

Day, Robert, and Nancy Sakaduski. 2011. Scientific English: A Guide for Scientists and Other Professionals , 3rd ed. Santa Barbara: Greenwood.

Gartland, John J. 1993. Medical Writing and Communicating . Frederick, MD: University Publishing Group.

Williams, Joseph M., and Joseph Bizup. 2016. Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace , 12th ed. New York: Pearson.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Search type

University Wide

Faculty / School Portals

• Online Guides and Tutorials

Types and Conventions of Science Writing

The purpose of science writing is to communicate scientific research to various audiences. Like much writing, it includes both description and analysis: surveys of previous research and descriptions of current methodologies and results; and analysis related to the trends, importance, and implications of research findings. Although science writers present facts and careful reasoning based on evidence, they must also use techniques of good communication to shape their presentation of findings in an engaging and persuasive way. Therefore, most types of science writing follow a format that frames the information presented with a sense of context.

Engaging and informing the reader: The opening

An opening section introduces the topic and emphasizes its importance. This section also provides an overview of past and current research to show how the proposed or completed study addresses a gap in the body of knowledge. Finally, the introduction establishes the purpose of the literature review, research proposal, or lab report/research paper.

Making sense of it all: Discussion and conclusions

After a survey of research trends, proposed methodology/expected results, or results of a study, the concluding section (including the discussion) provides analysis. In this section the science writer emphasizes matters of significance for the reader: demonstrates the importance of the proposed research, explains results, accounts for unexpected results, proposes changes in methodology, and/or discusses the implications or applications of the research.

The types of science writing outlined here – the review article, the research proposal, and the lab report/research paper – tend to follow conventional formats, but there are variations within these formats according to the purposes of the writers and the expectations of their audiences.

The review article or literature review

Purpose : to summarize and synthesize research that has been done on a particular topic. A review emphasizes important findings in a field and may identify gaps or shortcomings in the research. As it describes and evaluates the studies of others, its primary focus is on what the research has demonstrated through the methodologies and results of study and experimentation.

Audience : usually a science journal’s broadest readership because a review is more general in its focus than a research article.

1) Introduction  – introduces the topic and its significance and provides a brief preview of the sub-topics or major trends to be covered in the paper

2) Body  – presents a survey of the stages or significant trends in the research

Studies are discussed in groups or clusters often identified with subheadings. To develop the body, the writer must determine criteria for grouping: will studies be clustered according to major advances in the research (chronological development) or areas of consensus or lack of consensus in the field? Will the body highlight similarities and differences in the findings in terms of methods, results, and/or the focus of research studies?

*Tips: the body should contain both generalizations about the set of studies under review (written in the present tense) and citations of specific studies (past tense) to identify and verify observed trends.

Topic and concluding sentences of paragraphs and/or sections should synthesize research findings and may show differences and similarities or points of agreement/disagreement.

3) Conclusion – provides a final general overview of what is known and what is left to explore in the field This section may discuss practical implications or suggest directions for future research.

Distinguishing Elements :

The review article is largely descriptive in that it identifies trends or patterns in an area of research across studies. However, analysis is required as the writer offers an interpretation of the state of knowledge in the field, perhaps calling attention to an issue in the field, proposing a theory or model to resolve it, or suggesting directions for future research. As well, unlike research papers that feature functional headings related to the IMRAD format, the review article uses topical or content headings to indicate the sections of the review.

The research proposal

Purpose : to convince a scientific audience that a proposed problem for investigation is worth exploring and that the proposed research approach will be effective. The proposal should present a specific, interesting research question and demonstrate the following: the question’s significance, the merit of the proposed research methods, the ways in which results will contribute to the solution to the problem, and the degree to which the research will advance the state of the science in this area.

Audience : academic departments that grant approval for dissertation projects and funding agencies. Research proposals are often read by a broader range of readers than a journal article.

1) Introduction  – presents the specific objectives and scientific significance of the proposed research and also previews the rest of the paper. Because the audience may be more general than for the research article, the introduction provides a more comprehensive orientation to the topic and to the purpose of and need for the proposed research.

2) Background  – provides a thorough, detailed discussion of the primary literature and requires synthesis and evaluation of that body of knowledge. The Background demonstrates the researcher’s breadth of knowledge and shows both how far the previous research has gone and where it needs to go. Although the major sections of the proposal are identified with functional headings – Introduction, Background, Methods – the headings within the background section are topical, according to trends in the research. This section ends with a summary of what is known and not known about the topic and a clear description of the specific research question(s) or hypothesis(es) that will be investigated.

3) Methods or Proposed Research  – shows how the proposed research question follows logically from the research that has gone before. This section is similar to a Materials and Methods section of a research article but is written in the future tense. It provides a detailed, heavily documented description of proposed methods, with citations that demonstrate the validity of the methodological approach. This section outlines specific aspects of methodology: sample sizes, number of replicates, sites, and how the data will be analyzed. It also provides plans to address possible problems in the research.

The research proposal isa persuasive piece of writing that needs to account for audience to a greater degree than the other types of science writing. It should show an alignment of the proposed research with a granting agency’s goals and priorities. In this type of writing, the persona of the researcher is more important than in other types, so the proposal demonstrates the researcher’s experience and expertise. Finally, in keeping with the persuasive nature of the proposal, the Methods section contains fewer details than in an article but more explanation for the rationale behind the methodological approach.

The lab or research paper

Purpose : to present either the results of primary research accomplished through study/experimentation or theoretical developments in a particular field. In both the lab report and research article, the writing is both descriptive/factual and analytical/ persuasive. It accurately reports the details of the research but also attempts to convince readers of the importance of the research in terms of its contribution to the advancing knowledge in the field.

Audience : for the student writer, most often a professor or teaching assistant; for the report writer, a wider audience – a journal editor, peer reviewers, a community of specialists in a discipline, the general scientific community.

Format : follows the dominant format of articles in science journals – Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion (IMRAD).*

*Note: If the focus of a paper is theoretical or historical rather than experimental, the IMRAD format will not be suitable. A more variable structure, with topical rather than functional headings, may be needed to propose new theories, models, formulations of hypotheses, or interpretations of previously observed phenomena.

Distinguishing Elements:

Although they use the same format, lab reports and research papers differ in terms of scope and the complexity of their analyses.

Description (subject, scope, style):

Lab reports focus on only one experiment or repeated experiment and report results in a spare, concise way. Research papers may report on a sequence of experiments or other wider subjects. Because the focus of the research paper is broader, it may address matters that don’t relate directly to experimentation – such as definitions, new research methods, or reinterpretations of data – and thus its style is more expansive.

Analysis (context, interpretation, and conclusions):

While a lab report provides a relatively short introduction and review of the literature, the research paper presents a thorough introduction of the topic and the importance of the research in the context of other work in the field. It provides a comprehensive review of all relevant literature.

A lab report interprets only specific aspects of the data related to the study / experiment at hand. It may not present any general conclusions aside from possibly recommending avenues for further research. A research paper, however, offers an extensive interpretation of results and may include both definite and tentative conclusions, alternate ways of interpreting results, and/or other kinds of speculation, in addition to possible applications and research directions.

The abstract is a short summary of the main points of a research report, proposal, or review article.It is usually 150-250 words and a single paragraph, though it may be longer; proposal abstracts are often one page or 200-300 words. The purpose is to provide the reader with a complete, accurate synopsis of the larger text and will reflect the structure of that text.The abstract for a research paper will follow the IMRAD format used in the report and contain these elements: topic (a sentence or two, written in present tense); background/rationale for or purpose of the study (several sentences, with no references to previous research); methods and results (written in past tense); and conclusions and implications (present tense).

Abstracts not following the IMRAD format will be structured differently; for example, they may reflect the line of reasoning in an article. The proposal abstract is structured according to the content of the proposal itself; it summarizes the research problem, goals, and proposed methods. Depending on the discipline or field, some abstracts are structured more formally, with the following headings: Objectives, Design, Setting, Participants, Intervention, Measurements, Results, Conclusions. In many formats, abstracts often conclude with a brief list of keywords.

There is no standard style of documentation in the sciences; styles tend to be journal-specific. Two common styles are the name-and-year system and the citation-order / citation-sequence system.

The name-and-year system includes a list of references at the end of the report that are arranged alphabetically. This system uses in-text citations in the body of the report to indicate information that comes from sources, for example (Anderson and Wyatt, 2010). In both the citations and the References section, the year of publication appears directly after the authors’ names.

Hargrave, C. W., K.D. Hambright, and J. W. Weider. 2011. Variation in resource consumption across a gradient of increasing intra- and interspecific richness. Ecology 92: 1226-1235.

A reference from an internet source would appear this way:

Anderson I, Wyatt D. 2004. False positives for the defibrillator: the effects of stress on cardio-pulmonary distress in emergency room patients. Emergent Care [Internet]. [cited 2005 May 31]; 24(330): 343-352. Available from: http:// (full URL).

The citation-order system also includes a list of references at the end of the report, but they are arranged in the order in which they appear in the text, rather than alphabetically. Each reference is given a number, and only one number, no matter how often it appears in the body of the report. When the reference is referred to in the text, only the number is given [6]. The full publication information for the source will appear in the References section.

[6] E.M. Iancu, D.E. Speiser, N. Rufer, Assessing ageing of individual T lymphocytes: mission impossible? Mech. Ageing Dev. 129 (2008) 67-78.

In the citation-order system, the year appears later in the reference than it does in the name-and-year system. Because there are many variations within and between systems, science writers must be aware of specific requirements of journals and follow those guidelines closely.

Acknowledgement:

Penrose, Ann M. and Katz, Steven B. (2010).Writing in the Sciences: Exploring Conventions of Scientific Discourse(third edition). New York: Longman.

Conventions of Science Writing

The purpose of science writing is to accurately communicate observations and analyses and their importance in a way that will convey a sense of context to the reader and possibly allow for repeatable experiments. Science writing demonstrates both the expertise and objective stance of the writer and is marked by a style that is clear, concise, and accurate.

Demonstrating expertise and objectivity

Emphasize facts and observation

Science writing often relates to experimentation and contributes to building a body of knowledge, so its primary focus is on facts and conclusions drawn from careful observation, not opinion. Conclusions should be directly supported by the data presented and/or by others’ research.

Use technical language appropriately

Science writers should be aware of the level of expertise of their audiences in order to determine what technical language to use. If the audience consists of readers in the same field, then technical terms common to the discipline should be used to refer to familiar theories, processes, and practices, and to achieve conciseness. If the audience is general, technical terms should be avoided or clearly explained.

Write with a formal tone

Science writing uses a formal tone that is consistent with its emphasis on the research rather than the researcher. Writing is free of contractions, colloquialisms, and informal language, and often uses the passive voice and/or the active voice in a limited way.

Passive Voice

The passive voice emphasizes the object receiving the action rather than the actor performing it.

The samples were diluted with 100 ml of H2O.

Here the subject (samples) receives the action of the verb (to dilute). While the passive voice has been commonly used in science writing, the practice is changing in many disciplines because the passive voice can produce wordy, awkward sentences and because there is a growing acknowledgment of the role of the researcher in the scientific process.

While use of the passive voice is giving way to more active, dynamic writing in the sciences, the passive voice may still be appropriate (and required), particularly in lab reports in the Methods and Results sections and/or in the Abstract.

Active Voice

The active voice places the actor performing the action at the beginning of the sentence.

The researcher diluted the samples with 100 ml of H2O.

Here the subject (researcher) performs the action of the verb (to dilute) on the object (samples). There are a number of ways to use the active voice in science writing without using the first-person “I.” Use the following alternatives to “I” as the subject of active-voice sentences:

• We – We modify the above model as follows.
• A figure, table, or section – Figure 1 illustrates…; The introduction highlights that…
• Results of studies – Experimental evidence shows that…
• A technique or procedure – PCR analysis produced clones…
• The researcher(s) – Jones and Martin (2010) found that…

When in doubt about whether active or passive voice is expected or required, consult articles in your field for guidance or check with course instructors or supervisors.

Avoid unsupported definitive conclusions

To support an objective stance, it is important to acknowledge limitations by explaining results in a way that allows for a degree of uncertainty. Thus, results suggest, indicate, or are significant rather than prove. If you use somewhat definitive statements, be sure to back them up with evidence.

Writing clearly

Organize material effectively

If you indicate an order for your sections early in your paper or report, it is important to maintain this order throughout so your reader can progress easily through your document.

Use plain language

To balance necessary technical terminology, science writing should be in plain, direct language.

• Not utilize but use Not elucidate but explain
• Not modification but change Not determinant but cause
• Not systematize but order Not numerous but many

Include short sentences

It is important in science writing to avoid overly complex sentences that include too many ideas or too much information for the reader to process. Short sentences convey information in a manageable way; combined with longer sentences, they also contribute to an interesting style. Further, sentences that begin with the subject and verb deliver meaning to the reader most efficiently.

Not As either a direct modifier (PPA) or a blowing agent (PPA or H 3 PO 4 ), phosphoric acid is a likely cause of the excessive ageing in Site A because it is known to gel asphalt cement, which leads to reduced stress relaxation, increased thermal stresses, and increased levels of cracking distress.

But Phosphoric acid, as either a direct modifier (PPA) or a blowing agent (PPA or H 3 PO 4 ), is a likely cause of the excessive ageing in Site A. This agent is known to gel cement, which leads to reduced stress relaxation…

Watch your verb tenses

• Use appropriate tenses for various purposes in science writing to clarify progression:
• To discuss concepts or generally occurring processes, use the present tense .
• Cellular replication involves one cell dividing itself into two identical copies.
• To describe what you or someone else did or asserted (particularly in the Methods and Results sections of lab reports), use the past tense .
• We observed that the inclusion of the N-protonated and N-alkylated guests within the CB[7] cavity caused the normally rapid chair/chair interconversions to become sufficiently slow …
• To present a plan for a proposal, thesis, or article, use the present or future tense .

In the next section we (will) state and put into context previously published dynamical models of telomere shortening.

Writing concisely

Avoid wordiness

To eliminate wordiness, try these strategies:

Substitute a single word for a phrase

• Not due to the fact that but because
• Not at this point in time but now

Use simple, active verbs instead of verb phrases

• Not make an assumption but assume
• Not come to a conclusion but conclude

Use abbreviations when appropriate

For conciseness, replace frequently used terminology with abbreviations. After the first use of a term, identify the abbreviation in parentheses and use it thereafter.

Writing accurately and precisely 

Use accurate word choices

It is important to use the most accurate wording possible in science writing, even if repetition is the result. A precise, accurate word that is repeated is better than a somewhat ambiguous, less precise substitution.

Frequently misused words: data (this word is always plural, as in data are collected ), criteria (this word is also plural; criterion is the singular), affect/effect ( affect is a verb meaning to influence ; effect is usually used as a noun meaning result )

*Definitions: a hypothesis is a possible explanation for what causes something to occur (e.g., wasps find their burrows using landmarks); a prediction is an expected result that should be observed if the hypothesis is true – a pattern in the collected data (e.g., if the above hypothesis is true, then moving the landmarks should cause wasps to go to a different place).

A study usually means an observational study in which researchers observe subjects and measure variables but do not assign subjects to treatments or manipulate them in any way. In an experiment , researchers control/manipulate the primary variables and usually assign subjects to treatments.

Be sure your writing is detailed

Science writing should provide enough detail about the context and purpose of the research that the reader knows why the study is important and interesting. Materials and methods should be described specifically enough for someone else to repeat an experiment. Detailed writing in the analysis will show the chain of logic used to draw conclusions from the data.

With guest 2, we observed the splitting of two of the methyl resonances, which suggests that these positions are sensitive to binding of both the 1:1 and 2:1 complexes.

While writing with sufficient detail is important, it is also important to include only information and description that is relevant to the purpose of the paper.

Include quantitative rather than qualitative observations

In describing the results, use specific, concrete wording rather than vague, qualitative language:

Not: The section of road north of Highway 33 had some transverse cracking in addition to some minor wheel path cracking.

But: The section of road 9.5 km north of Highway 33 had two transverse cracks, both a quarter lane wide, in addition to 19.8 m of minor wheel path cracking.

Avoid using modifiers such as much, very, and really because they are subjective and imprecise.

Note: use the modifier significant carefully and accurately – in science writing, a result is significant if it is statistically significant.

A note on referencing

Science writing does not generally include direct quotations from sources because what is said is considered more important than how it is said. Instead, information is summarized or paraphrased in the writer’s own words and cited using one of a number of styles of documentation. To determine which style to use, observe the references of journal articles in your field for direction.

Thanks to Queen’s University science faculty members, Drs. Bob Gooding, Donal Macartney, and Simon Hesp, for allowing use of their published materials for examples included in this document .

Write Like a Scientist

A Guide to Scientific Communication

What is scientific writing ?

Scientific writing is a technical form of writing that is designed to communicate scientific information to other scientists. Depending on the specific scientific genre—a journal article, a scientific poster, or a research proposal, for example—some aspects of the writing may change, such as its  purpose , audience , or organization . Many aspects of scientific writing, however, vary little across these writing genres. Important hallmarks of all scientific writing are summarized below. Genre-specific information is located  here  and under the “By Genre” tab at the top of the page.

What are some important hallmarks of professional scientific writing?

1. Its primary audience is other scientists. Because of its intended audience, student-oriented or general-audience details, definitions, and explanations — which are often necessary in lab manuals or reports — are not terribly useful. Explaining general-knowledge concepts or how routine procedures were performed actually tends to obstruct clarity, make the writing wordy, and detract from its professional tone.

2. It is concise and precise . A goal of scientific writing is to communicate scientific information clearly and concisely. Flowery, ambiguous, wordy, and redundant language run counter to the purpose of the writing.

3. It must be set within the context of other published work. Because science builds on and corrects itself over time, scientific writing must be situated in and  reference the findings of previous work . This context serves variously as motivation for new work being proposed or the paper being written, as points of departure or congruence for new findings and interpretations, and as evidence of the authors’ knowledge and expertise in the field.

All of the information under “The Essentials” tab is intended to help you to build your knowledge and skills as a scientific writer regardless of the scientific discipline you are studying or the specific assignment you might be working on. In addition to discussions of audience and purpose , professional conventions like conciseness and specificity, and how to find and use literature references appropriately, we also provide guidelines for how to organize your writing and how to avoid some common mechanical errors .

If you’re new to this site or to professional scientific writing, we recommend navigating the sub-sections under “The Essentials” tab in the order they’re provided. Once you’ve covered these essentials, you might find information on  genre-  or discipline-specific writing useful.