IMRAD Format For Research Papers: The Complete Guide
Thank you for reading DrAiMD’s Substack. This post is public so feel free to share it.
Writing a strong research paper is key to succeeding in academia, but it can be overwhelming to know where to start. That’s where the IMRAD format comes in. IMRAD provides a clear structure to help you organize and present your research logically and coherently. In this comprehensive guide, we’ll explain the IMRAD format, why it’s so important for research writing, and how to use it effectively. Follow along to learn the ins and outs of crafting papers in the gold-standard IMRAD structure. In this article, I’ll walk you through the IMRAD format step-by-step. I’ll explain each section, how to write it, and what to avoid. By the end of this article, you’ll be able to write a research paper that is clear, concise, and well-organized.
What is IMRAD Format?
IMRAD stands for Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion . It’s a way of organizing a scientific paper to make the information flow logically and help readers easily find key details. The IMRAD structure originated in medical journals but is now the standard format for many scientific fields.
Thanks for reading DrAiMD’s Substack! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Here’s a quick overview of each section’s purpose:
Introduction : Summary of prior research and objective of your study
Methods : How you carried out the study
Results : Key findings and analysis
Discussion : Interpretation of results and implications
Most papers also include an abstract at the beginning and a conclusion at the end to summarize the entire report.
Why is the IMRAD Format Important?
Using the IMRAD structure has several key advantages:
It’s conventional and familiar. Since I MRAD is so widely used , it helps ensure editors, reviewers, and readers can easily find the details they need. This enhances clarity and comprehension.
It emphasizes scientific rigor. The methods and results sections encourage thorough reporting of how you conducted the research. This supports transparency, credibility, and reproducibility.
It encourages precision. The structure necessitates concise writing focused only on the core aims and findings. This avoids rambling or repetition.
It enables efficient reading. Readers can quickly skim to the sections most relevant to them, like only reading the methods. IMRAD facilitates this selective reading.
In short, the IMRAD format ensures your writing is clear, precise, rigorous, and accessible – crucial qualities in scientific communication.
When Should You Use IMRAD Format?
The IMRAD structure is ideal for:
Primary research papers that report new data and findings
Review papers that comprehensively summarize prior research
Grant proposals requesting funding for research
IMRAD is not typically used for other paper types like:
Editorials and opinion pieces
Popular science articles for general audiences
Essays analyzing a topic rather than presenting new data
So, if you are writing a scholarly scientific paper based on experiments, investigations, or observational studies, the IMRAD format is likely expected. Embrace this conventional structure to help communicate your exciting discoveries.
Now that we’ve covered the key basics let’s dive into how to write each section of an IMRAD paper.
The abstract is a succinct summary of your entire paper, typically around 200 words. Many readers will only read the abstract, so craft it carefully to function as a standalone piece highlighting your most important points.
Elements to include:
Research problem, question, or objectives
Methods and design
Major findings or developments
Conclusions and implications
While written first, refine the abstract last to accurately encapsulate your final paper. A clear precise abstract can help attract readers and set the tone for your work. Take a look at our complete guide to abstract writing here !
INTRODUCTION
The Introduction provides the necessary background context and sets up the rationale for your research. Start by briefly summarizing the core findings from previous studies related to your topic to orient readers to the field. Provide more detail on the specific gaps, inconsistencies, or unanswered questions in the research your study aims to address. Then, clearly state your research questions, objectives, experimental hypotheses, and overall purpose or anticipated contributions. The Introduction establishes why your research is needed and clarifies your specific aims. Strive for a concise yet comprehensive overview that lets readers learn more about your fascinating study. Writing a good introduction is like writing a good mini-literature review on a subject. Take a look at our complete guide to literature review writing here!
The methods section is the nuts and bolts, where you comprehensively describe how you carried out the research. Sufficient detail is crucial so others can assess your work and reproduce the study. Take a look at our complete guide to writing an informative and tight literature review here!
Research Design
Start by explaining the overall design and approach. Specify:
Research types like experimental, survey, observational, etc.
Study duration
Sample size
Control vs experimental groups
Clarify the variables, treatments, and factors involved.
Participants
Provide relevant characteristics of the study population or sample, such as:
Health status
Geographic location
For human studies, include recruitment strategies and consent procedures.
List any instruments, tests, assays, chemicals, or other materials utilized. Include details like manufacturers and catalog numbers.
Chronologically explain each step of the experimental methods. Be precise and thorough to enable replication. Use past tense and passive voice.
Data Analysis
Describe any statistical tests, data processing, or software used to analyze the data.
The methods section provides the roadmap of your research journey. Strive for clarity and completeness. Now we’re ready for the fun part – the results!
This section shares the key findings and data from your study without interpretation. The results should mirror the methods used.
Report Findings Concisely
Use text, figures, and tables to present the core results:
Focus only on key data directly related to your objectives
Avoid lengthy explanations and extraneous details
Highlight the most groundbreaking findings
Use Visuals to Present Complex Data
Tables and figures efficiently communicate more complex data:
Tables organize detailed numerical or textual data
Figures vividly depict relationships like graphs, diagrams, photos
Include clear captions explaining what is shown
Refer to each visual in the text
Reporting your results objectively lays the groundwork for the next section – making sense of it all through discussion.
Here, you interpret the data, explain the implications, acknowledge limitations, and make recommendations for future research. The discussion allows you to show the greater meaning of your study.
Interpret the Findings
Analyze the results in the context of your initial hypothesis and prior studies:
How do your findings compare to past research? Are they consistent or contradictory?
What conclusions can you draw from the data?
What theories or mechanisms could explain the outcomes?
Discuss the Implications
Address the impact and applications of the research:
How do the findings advance scientific understanding or technical capability?
Can the results improve processes, design, or policies in related fields?
What innovations or new research directions do they enable?
Identify Limitations and Future Directions
No study is perfect, so discuss potential weaknesses and areas for improvement:
Were there any methodological limitations that could influence the results?
Can the research be expanded by testing new variables or conditions?
How could future studies build on your work? What questions remain unanswered?
A thoughtful discussion emphasizes the meaningful contributions of your research.
The conclusion recaps the significance of your study and key takeaways. Like the abstract, many readers may only read your opening and closing, so ensure the conclusion packs a punch.
Elements to cover:
Restate the research problem and objectives
Summarize the major findings and main points
Emphasize broader implications and applications
The conclusion provides the perfect opportunity to drive home the importance of your work. End on a high note that resonates with readers.
The IMRAD format organizes research papers into logical sections that improve scientific communication. By following the Introduction-Methods-Results-and-Discussion structure, you can craft clear, credible, and impactful manuscripts. Use IMRAD to empower readers to comprehend and assess your exciting discoveries efficiently. With this gold-standard format under your belt, your next great paper is within reach.
Ready for more?
- Communicating in STEM Disciplines
- Features of Academic STEM Writing
- STEM Writing Tips
- Academic Integrity in STEM
- Strategies for Writing
- Science Writing Videos – YouTube Channel
- Educator Resources
- Lesson Plans, Activities and Assignments
- Strategies for Teaching Writing
- Grading Techniques
IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion)
Academic research papers in STEM disciplines typically follow a well-defined I-M-R-A-D structure: Introduction, Methods, Results And Discussion (Wu, 2011). Although not included in the IMRAD name, these papers often include a Conclusion.
Introduction
The Introduction typically provides everything your reader needs to know in order to understand the scope and purpose of your research. This section should provide:
- Context for your research (for example, the nature and scope of your topic)
- A summary of how relevant scholars have approached your research topic to date, and a description of how your research makes a contribution to the scholarly conversation
- An argument or hypothesis that relates to the scholarly conversation
- A brief explanation of your methodological approach and a justification for this approach (in other words, a brief discussion of how you gather your data and why this is an appropriate choice for your contribution)
- The main conclusions of your paper (or the “so what”)
- A roadmap, or a brief description of how the rest of your paper proceeds
The Methods section describes exactly what you did to gather the data that you use in your paper. This should expand on the brief methodology discussion in the introduction and provide readers with enough detail to, if necessary, reproduce your experiment, design, or method for obtaining data; it should also help readers to anticipate your results. The more specific, the better! These details might include:
- An overview of the methodology at the beginning of the section
- A chronological description of what you did in the order you did it
- Descriptions of the materials used, the time taken, and the precise step-by-step process you followed
- An explanation of software used for statistical calculations (if necessary)
- Justifications for any choices or decisions made when designing your methods
Because the methods section describes what was done to gather data, there are two things to consider when writing. First, this section is usually written in the past tense (for example, we poured 250ml of distilled water into the 1000ml glass beaker). Second, this section should not be written as a set of instructions or commands but as descriptions of actions taken. This usually involves writing in the active voice (for example, we poured 250ml of distilled water into the 1000ml glass beaker), but some readers prefer the passive voice (for example, 250ml of distilled water was poured into the 1000ml beaker). It’s important to consider the audience when making this choice, so be sure to ask your instructor which they prefer.
The Results section outlines the data gathered through the methods described above and explains what the data show. This usually involves a combination of tables and/or figures and prose. In other words, the results section gives your reader context for interpreting the data. The results section usually includes:
- A presentation of the data obtained through the means described in the methods section in the form of tables and/or figures
- Statements that summarize or explain what the data show
- Highlights of the most important results
Tables should be as succinct as possible, including only vital information (often summarized) and figures should be easy to interpret and be visually engaging. When adding your written explanation to accompany these visual aids, try to refer your readers to these in such a way that they provide an additional descriptive element, rather than simply telling people to look at them. This can be especially helpful for readers who find it hard to see patterns in data.
The Discussion section explains why the results described in the previous section are meaningful in relation to previous scholarly work and the specific research question your paper explores. This section usually includes:
- Engagement with sources that are relevant to your work (you should compare and contrast your results to those of similar researchers)
- An explanation of the results that you found, and why these results are important and/or interesting
Some papers have separate Results and Discussion sections, while others combine them into one section, Results and Discussion. There are benefits to both. By presenting these as separate sections, you’re able to discuss all of your results before moving onto the implications. By presenting these as one section, you’re able to discuss specific results and move onto their significance before introducing another set of results.
The Conclusion section of a paper should include a brief summary of the main ideas or key takeaways of the paper and their implications for future research. This section usually includes:
- A brief overview of the main claims and/or key ideas put forth in the paper
- A brief discussion of potential limitations of the study (if relevant)
- Some suggestions for future research (these should be clearly related to the content of your paper)
Sample Research Article
Resource Download
Wu, Jianguo. “Improving the writing of research papers: IMRAD and beyond.” Landscape Ecology 26, no. 10 (November 2011): 1345–1349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10980-011-9674-3.
Further reading:
- Organization of a Research Paper: The IMRAD Format by P. K. Ramachandran Nair and Vimala D. Nair
- George Mason University Writing Centre’s guide on Writing a Scientific Research Report (IMRAD)
- University of Wisconsin Writing Centre’s guide on Formatting Science Reports
Organization of a Research Paper: The IMRAD Format
- First Online: 01 January 2014
Cite this chapter
- P. K. Ramachandran Nair 3 &
- Vimala D. Nair 4
4299 Accesses
7 Citations
Most scientific papers are prepared according to a format called IMRAD. The term represents the first letters of the words Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, And, Discussion. It indicates a pattern or format rather than a complete list of headings or components of research papers; the missing parts of a paper are: Title, Authors, Keywords, Abstract, Conclusions, and References. Additionally, some papers include Acknowledgments and Appendices. The Introduction explains the scope and objective of the study in the light of current knowledge on the subject; the Materials and Methods describes how the study was conducted; the Results section reports what was found in the study; and the Discussion section explains meaning and significance of the results and provides suggestions for future directions of research. The manuscript must be prepared according to the Journal’s instructions to authors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Subscribe and save.
- Get 10 units per month
- Download Article/Chapter or eBook
- 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
- Cancel anytime
- Available as PDF
- Read on any device
- Instant download
- Own it forever
- Available as EPUB and PDF
- Compact, lightweight edition
- Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
- Free shipping worldwide - see info
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Institutional subscriptions
Similar content being viewed by others
The Roadmap to Research: Fundamentals of a Multifaceted Research Process
Literature reviews as independent studies: guidelines for academic practice
A Comprehensive Summary of the Contributions and the Quintessence of This Book
Author information, authors and affiliations.
University of Florida School of Forest Resources and Conservation, Gainesville, FL, USA
P. K. Ramachandran Nair
Soil and Water Science Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
Vimala D. Nair
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Corresponding author
Correspondence to P. K. Ramachandran Nair .
Rights and permissions
Reprints and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Nair, P.K.R., Nair, V.D. (2014). Organization of a Research Paper: The IMRAD Format. In: Scientific Writing and Communication in Agriculture and Natural Resources. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03101-9_2
Download citation
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03101-9_2
Published : 03 January 2014
Publisher Name : Springer, Cham
Print ISBN : 978-3-319-03100-2
Online ISBN : 978-3-319-03101-9
eBook Packages : Biomedical and Life Sciences Biomedical and Life Sciences (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
- Publish with us
Policies and ethics
- Find a journal
- Track your research
The Visual Communication Guy
Learn Visually. Communicate Powerfully.
- About The VCG
- Contact Curtis
- Five Paragraph Essay
- IMRaD (Science)
- Indirect Method (Bad News)
- Inverted Pyramid (News)
- Martini Glass
- Narrative Format
Rogerian Method
- Toulmin Method
- Apostrophes
- Exclamation Marks (Points)
- Parentheses
- Periods (Full Stops)
- Question Marks
- Quotation Marks
- Plain Language
- APPEALS: ETHOS, PATHOS, LOGOS
- CLUSTER ANALYSIS
- FANTASY-THEME
- GENERIC CRITICISM
- IDEOLOGICAL CRITICISM
- NEO-ARISTOTELIAN
- O.P.T.I.C. (VISUAL ANALSYIS)
- S.O.A.P.S.T.O.N.E. (WRITTEN ANALYSIS)
- S.P.A.C.E.C.A.T. (RHETORICAL ANALYSIS)
- BRANCHES OF ORATORY
- FIGURES OF SPEECH
- FIVE CANONS
- LOGICAL FALLACIES
- Information Design Rules
- Arrangement
- Organization
- Negative Space
- Iconography
- Photography
- Which Chart Should I Use?
- “P” is for PREPARE
- "O" is for OPEN
- "W" is for WEAVE
- “E” is for ENGAGE
- PRESENTATION EVALUTION RUBRIC
- POWERPOINT DESIGN
- ADVENTURE APPEAL
- BRAND APPEAL
- ENDORSEMENT APPEAL
- HUMOR APPEAL
- LESS-THAN-PERFECT APPEAL
- MASCULINE & FEMININE APPEAL
- MUSIC APPEAL
- PERSONAL/EMOTIONAL APPEAL
- PLAIN APPEAL
- PLAY-ON-WORDS APPEAL
- RATIONAL APPEAL
- ROMANCE APPEAL
- SCARCITY APPEAL
- SNOB APPEAL
- SOCIAL APPEAL
- STATISTICS APPEAL
- YOUTH APPEAL
- The Six Types of Résumés You Should Know About
- Why Designing Your Résumé Matters
- The Anatomy of a Really Good Résumé: A Good Résumé Example
- What a Bad Résumé Says When It Speaks
- How to Write an Amazing Cover Letter: Five Easy Steps to Get You an Interview
- Make Your Boring Documents Look Professional in 5 Easy Steps
- Business Letters
- CONSUMER PROFILES
- ETHNOGRAPHY RESEARCH
- FOCUS GROUPS
- OBSERVATIONS
- SURVEYS & QUESTIONNAIRES
- S.W.O.T. ANALYSES
- USABILITY TESTS
- CITING SOURCES: MLA FORMAT
- MLA FORMAT: WORKS CITED PAGE
- MLA FORMAT: IN-TEXT CITATIONS
- MLA FORMAT: BOOKS & PAMPHLETS
- MLA FORMAT: WEBSITES AND ONLINE SOURCES
- MLA FORMAT: PERIODICALS
- MLA FORMAT: OTHER MEDIA SOURCES
- Course Syllabi
- Checklists and Peer Reviews (Downloads)
- Communication
- Poster Prints
- Poster Downloads
- Handout & Worksheet Downloads
- QuickGuide Downloads
- Downloads License Agreements
How to Organize a Paper: The IMRaD Format
What is the IMRaD Format?
The IMRaD (often pronounced “im-rad”) format is a scientific writing structure that includes four or five major sections: introduction (I); research methods (M); results (R); analysis (a); and discussion (D). The IMRaD format is the most commonly used format in scientific article and journal writing and is used widely across most scientific and research fields.
When Do I Use the IMRaD Format?
If you are writing a paper where you are conducting objective research in order answer a specific question, the IMRaD format will most likely serve your purposes best. The IMRaD format is especially useful if you are conducting primary research (such as experimentation, questionnaires, focus groups, observations, interviews, and so forth), but it can be applied even if you only conduct secondary research (which is research you gather from reading sources like books, magazines, journal articles, and so forth.)
The goal of using the IMRaD format is to present facts objectively, demonstrating a genuine interest and care in developing new understanding about a topic; when using this format, you don’t explicitly state an argument or opinion, but rather, you rely on collected data and previously researched information in order to make a claim.
While there are nuances and adjustments that would be made to the following document types, the IMRaD format is the foundational structure many research-driven documents:
- Recommendation reports
- Plans (such as an integrated marketing plan or project management plan)
How Does the IMRaD Format Work?
As mentioned above, the IMRaD format includes four or five major sections. The little “a” has had multiple interpretations over the years; some would suggest it means nothing other than “and,” as in “Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion,” but others have argued that the “a” should be viewed as “Analysis” in papers where the “Results” section may not be immediately clear and a section that analyzes the results is important for reader comprehension. Either way, the “a” often remains in lower-case to indicate that, while it’s often important, it isn’t always necessary. Below, we’ll review the five major sections, with “a” given equal weight to the other sections.
Note that these five sections should always go in the order listed below:
- Statement of the topic you are about to address
- Current state of the field of understanding (often, we call this a literature review and it may even merit having its own section)
- Problem or gap in knowledge (what don’t we know yet or need to know? what does the field still need to understand? what’s been left out of previous research? is this a new issue that needs some direction?)
- Forecast statement that explains, very briefly, what the rest of the paper will entail, including a possible quick explanation of the type of research that needs to be conducted
- Separate each type of research you conducted (interviews, focus groups, experiments, etc.) into sub-sections and only discuss one research method in each sub-section (for clarity and organization, it’s important to not talk about multiple methods at once)
- Be very detailed about your process. If you interviewed people, for example, we need to know how many people you interviewed, what you asked them, what you hoped to learn by interviewing them, why chose to interview over other methods, why you interviewed those people specifically (including providing they demographic information if it’s relevant), and so forth. For other types of data collection, we need to know what your methods were–how long you observed; how frequently you tested; how you coded qualitative data; and so forth.
- Don’t discuss what the research means. You’ll use the next two sections–Analysis and Discussion–to talk about what the research means. To stay organized, simply discuss your research methods. This is the single biggest mistake when writing research papers, so don’t fall into that trap.
- Results: The results section is critical for your audience to understand what the research showed. Use this section to show tables, charts, graphs, quotes, etc. from your research. At this point, you are building your reader towards drawn conclusions, but you are not yet providing a full analysis. You’re simply showing what the data says. Follow the same order as the Methods section–if you put interviews first, then focus groups second, do the same in this section. Be sure, when you include graphics and images, that you label and title every table or graphic (“ Table 3: Interview Results “) and that you introduce them in the body of your text (“As you can see in Figure 1 , seventy-nine percent of respondents…”)
- Analysis: The analysis section details what you and others may learn from the data. While some researchers like to combine this section with the Discussion section, many writers and researchers find it useful to analyze the data separately. In the analysis section, spend time connecting the dots for the reader. What do the interviews say about the way employers think about their employees? What do the observations say about how employees respond to workplace criticism? Can any connections be made between the two research types? It’s important in the Analysis section that you don’t draw conclusions that the research findings don’t suggest. Always stick to what the research says.
- Discussion: Finally, you conclude this paper by suggesting what new knowledge this provides to the field. You’ll often want to note the limitations of your study and what further research still needs to be done. If something alarming or important was discovered, this is where you highlight that information. If you use the IMRaD format to write other types of papers (like a recommendation report or a plan), this is where you put the recommendations or the detailed plan.
Back to the Organization Memo
Other Formats
Indirect Method
Proposal Format
Shop for your perfect poster print or digital download at our online store!
Structure of a Research Paper
Structure of a Research Paper: IMRaD Format
I. The Title Page
- Title: Tells the reader what to expect in the paper.
- Author(s): Most papers are written by one or two primary authors. The remaining authors have reviewed the work and/or aided in study design or data analysis (International Committee of Medical Editors, 1997). Check the Instructions to Authors for the target journal for specifics about authorship.
- Keywords [according to the journal]
- Corresponding Author: Full name and affiliation for the primary contact author for persons who have questions about the research.
- Financial & Equipment Support [if needed]: Specific information about organizations, agencies, or companies that supported the research.
- Conflicts of Interest [if needed]: List and explain any conflicts of interest.
II. Abstract: “Structured abstract” has become the standard for research papers (introduction, objective, methods, results and conclusions), while reviews, case reports and other articles have non-structured abstracts. The abstract should be a summary/synopsis of the paper.
III. Introduction: The “why did you do the study”; setting the scene or laying the foundation or background for the paper.
IV. Methods: The “how did you do the study.” Describe the --
- Context and setting of the study
- Specify the study design
- Population (patients, etc. if applicable)
- Sampling strategy
- Intervention (if applicable)
- Identify the main study variables
- Data collection instruments and procedures
- Outline analysis methods
V. Results: The “what did you find” --
- Report on data collection and/or recruitment
- Participants (demographic, clinical condition, etc.)
- Present key findings with respect to the central research question
- Secondary findings (secondary outcomes, subgroup analyses, etc.)
VI. Discussion: Place for interpreting the results
- Main findings of the study
- Discuss the main results with reference to previous research
- Policy and practice implications of the results
- Strengths and limitations of the study
VII. Conclusions: [occasionally optional or not required]. Do not reiterate the data or discussion. Can state hunches, inferences or speculations. Offer perspectives for future work.
VIII. Acknowledgements: Names people who contributed to the work, but did not contribute sufficiently to earn authorship. You must have permission from any individuals mentioned in the acknowledgements sections.
IX. References: Complete citations for any articles or other materials referenced in the text of the article.
- IMRD Cheatsheet (Carnegie Mellon) pdf.
- Adewasi, D. (2021 June 14). What Is IMRaD? IMRaD Format in Simple Terms! . Scientific-editing.info.
- Nair, P.K.R., Nair, V.D. (2014). Organization of a Research Paper: The IMRAD Format. In: Scientific Writing and Communication in Agriculture and Natural Resources. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03101-9_2
- Sollaci, L. B., & Pereira, M. G. (2004). The introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) structure: a fifty-year survey. Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA , 92 (3), 364–367.
- Cuschieri, S., Grech, V., & Savona-Ventura, C. (2019). WASP (Write a Scientific Paper): Structuring a scientific paper. Early human development , 128 , 114–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2018.09.011
- Research article
- Open access
- Published: 21 July 2011
The introduction, methods, results and discussion (IMRAD) structure: a Survey of its use in different authoring partnerships in a students' journal
- Loraine Oriokot 1 ,
- William Buwembo 2 ,
- Ian G Munabi 2 &
- Stephen C Kijjambu 3
BMC Research Notes volume 4 , Article number: 250 ( 2011 ) Cite this article
136k Accesses
6 Citations
3 Altmetric
Metrics details
Globally, the role of universities as providers of research education in addition to leading in main - stream research is gaining more importance with demand for evidence based practices. This paper describes the effect of various students and faculty authoring partnerships on the use of the IMRAD style of writing for a university student journal.
This was an audit of the Makerere University Students' Journal publications over an 18-year period. Details of the authors' affiliation, year of publication, composition of the authoring teams and use of IMRAD formatting were noted. Data analysis gave results summarised as frequencies and, effect sizes from correlations and the non parametric test. There were 209 articles found with the earliest from 1990 to latest in 2007 of which 48.3% were authored by faculty only teams, 41.1% were authored by student only teams, 6.2% were authored by students and faculty teams, and 4.3% had no contribution from the above mentioned teams. There were significant correlations between the different teams and the years of the publication ( r s = -0. 338 p < 0.01 one tailed). Use of the IMRAD formatting was significantly affected by the composition of the teams (Χ 2 (2df) = 25.621, p < 0.01) especially when comparing the student only teams to the faculty only teams. (U = 3165 r = - 0.289). There was a significant trend towards student only teams over the years sampled. ( z = -4.764, r = -0.34).
Conclusions
In the surveyed publications, there was evidence of reduced faculty student authoring teams as evidenced by the trends towards students only authoring teams and reduced use of IMRAD formatting in articles published in the students' journal. Since the university is expected to lead in teaching of research, there is need for increased support for undergraduate research, as a starting point for research education.
Globally there is an increasing awareness of the importance of research for developing guidelines to direct social and economic interventions [ 1 , 2 ]. Research involves the critical analysis of each and every solution to a problem using the scientific method to identify the best evidence based solution for action at the time. Research is thus the foundation of evidence based practice [ 3 , 4 ]. Society expects universities to lead both the teaching and carrying out of research. This expectation has led to various policy recommendations and initiatives to promote research and innovation. An example of such a policy recommendation can be found in United States of America, where Gonzalez (2001) identifies the 1998 Boyer commission report encouraging universities to place more emphasis on undergraduate research experiences [ 5 ]. According to Laskowitz et al (2010), Stanford and Duke Universities have been running undergraduate research programmes for the last 40 years that instil in students an appreciation for rigorous research in academic medicine [ 6 ]. In Australia, students picked life skills like time management so long as they dealt with authentic science and had good supervision [ 7 ]. In Africa the demand for high quality research at undergraduate level of education, is yet to be met [ 8 ].
Research and innovation are critical for national social and economic development [ 2 ]. In response to the drive for more economic development, universities are redefining their roles and interactions with society by going from being the traditional storehouses of knowledge to becoming interactive knowledge hubs [ 9 ]. One way of ensuring that the Universities actually act as knowledge hubs is through promoting institutional visibility by encouraging research publication by students and faculty using internationally recognised scientific writing formats like Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion, [IMRAD] [ 5 , 9 , 10 ]. In addition to visibility, the adoption of high quality international standards benefits the university by the creation of a pool of individuals who are conversant with scientific writing. Having such a pool of people supports Gonzales (2001) recognition that research takes place anywhere, and the "teaching of research is a role that is increasingly becoming the preserve of the university" [ 5 ]. This role of how research is taught is further extended with Gonzales (2001) arguing that undergraduate research is actually the beginning of a "five stage continuum of research education that ends with a post-doctoral experience" [ 5 ]. Research education promotes the uniform conduction, interpretation and response to research findings reported using familiar standard formats of scientific writing. Finally according to Aravamudhan and Frantsve (2009) research education and adoption of uniform formats of scientific writing promotes evidence based practice by improving information awareness, seeking and eventual application of new practices [ 3 ]. The rapid increase in the volume of very advanced knowledge and equally rapid changes in the working environment make it increasingly important to equip students with key research skills like scientific writing to keep abreast [ 3 , 4 ].
This paper looks at work done on the Makerere Medical Journal (MMJ), one of the students' journals at Makerere University. MMJ is run for and by the health professional student body at the former Faculty of Medicine (FoM) that with the School of Public Health became Makerere University College of Health Sciences (MakCHS) in 2008, [ 11 – 13 ] one of the Colleges of Makerere University (one of the oldest universities in Sub-Saharan Africa). With the University's Vision to become a leader in research in Africa, there is a high demand for research and scientific writing currently focusing on graduate research [ 14 ]. The effect of student faculty partnerships on undergraduate scientific writing to our knowledge is not well documented. The paper describes the role of student faculty partnerships in determining the formatting of the MMJ articles over an 18 year (1990-2007) period in the journal's existence.
This was a retrospective audit of the Medical Journal MMJ, a publication of the health professional student body. The MMJ is a peer-reviewed publication that provides a platform for students to: share and exchange medical knowledge; develop writing and analytical abilities; promote awareness of students' contributions to health care; provide continuing medical education and foster valuable leadership and editorial skills. MMJ is published bi-annually and has been in existence from the early 1960's. The journal publishes: original articles, reviews, reports, letters to the editor, case reports, includes sections like: educational quizzes and cross word puzzles.
A hand search was made for complete journal volumes from various sources that included the Sir Albert Cook Library which is the main MakCHS library, personal collections and the journal editorial teams' files. For each article found, the following information was captured; the articles' authors and their affiliations, the use of the IMRAD format of writing papers, the composition of the authoring teams and the year of the publication. The data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences Inc. (version 12.0 for Windows, Chicago, Illinois) with the calculation of odd ratios and trend analysis being made with the aid of online Open Epi programme version 2.3.1 http://www.openepi.com [ 15 ]. The results were summarised as frequencies and presented in bar graphs and tables with calculation of odds ratios, effect sizes and trend analysis. Additional inferences were made with the aid of spearman's correlations and non parametric tests with the level of significance set as P value of less than 0.05.
Permission to use the data for this study was obtained from the editorial team for the journal. None of the authors' identification details were used during the analysis and the preparation of the paper.
Two hundred and nine (209) journal articles were found during the survey. The earliest publication was of the year 1990 and the most recent from 2007 from 13 volumes of the journal. Of the 209 articles 101/209 (48.3%) were authored by faculty only teams, 86/209 (41.1%) were authored by student only teams, 13/209 (6.2%) were authored by student faculty teams, and 9/209 (4.3%) had no affiliation indicated thus not classified into any of the above mentioned teams. Examination of the paper formatting revealed that only 70/209 (33.5%) of the papers were written using the IMRAD format. The number of articles found by year are summarised in Table 1 , with the highest number of 33 in 2007 and lowest number of 5 seen in 1990. There was no significant change in the odds for IMRAD use over the years. (Mantel Hertz chi square for trend = 1.71 p value 0.1906). There were significant correlations between the different teams and the years of the publication r s = - 0.338 (p < 0.01 one tailed) and for teams and use of IMRAD formatting r s = - 0.265 (p < 0.01 one tailed).
Use of the IMRAD formatting was significantly affected by the composition of the teams Χ 2 (2df) = 25.621, p < 0.001 using the Kruskal Wallis test. Post hoc Mann-Whitney team pair specific tests whose level of significance set at 0.025 showed that the use of IMRAD was not significant when comparing the mixed students-faculty with faculty only teams (U = 444, r = - 0.21), but, was significantly different when comparing the students only to faculty only teams (U = 3165, r = -0.289). Jonkheere's test revealed no trend in the use of IMRAD over the years sampled J = 10100, z = 0.211, r = 0.086. However there was a significant trend to more students only teams over the years sampled J = 6802, z = -4.764, r = -0.34.
The analysis of the data reveals that there is an increase in the number of students only teams submitting articles to the journal. This can be seen in the number of articles submitted which was highest at 33 in the 2007 journal. The increased interest in publication could be the result of a more aggressive editorial team or represent an increasing interest on the part of the student body in the value of research. Increase in undergraduate students interest in research is supported by the observation that globally there is increased interest in research at the undergraduate level as the beginning of research education [ 5 ]. The other factor that could support increased interest in research is the adoption of adult learning approaches to curriculum delivery by the FoM in 2003 [ 16 ].
Sadly the increased student interest in research is also accompanied by a significant trend towards reduced faculty engagement with students in research ( r = - 0.34). Reduced faculty engagement also manifests in two other ways as seen in no change in the use of IMRAD over time ( J = 10100, z = 0.211, r = 0.086) and the observation that the students only teams use IMRAD less than the faculty teams (U = 3165, r = -0.289). Even where the journal article had mixed student faculty teams there was no significant increase in the use of IMRAD when compared to faculty only teams (U = 444, r = - 0.21). Reduced engagement could also point to a different trend developing over time, there seems to be little support for undergraduate research in both the curricula and in extracurricular activities. This seems to have been going on for quite some time considering that most of the faculty were once students at this same university. Examining global trends as described by Gonzales (2001), research education has moved from being the premise of graduate students to a continuum that begins in undergraduate education [ 5 ]. Active support for undergraduate research is happening in more developed settings as is seen in the example of Duke and Stanford universities [ 6 ]. According to Lappato (2007) in undergraduate research experiences students' learn by being positively influenced by the process of investigation, and learning or from modelling higher order methods of thinking as they test and later communicate their research findings [ 17 ]. This makes the undergraduate research experiences a powerful tool for quickly increasing the number of high calibre researchers [ 18 ]. If one assumed that the use of the IMRAD format is a measure of scientific writing skill transfer then the deductions from the analysis of the data obtained from the student journal articles, suggests that for this population research is undergoing a slow but sure decline. This trend has been observed by other researchers concerning the African continent [ 8 ].
Given the powerful nature of the undergraduate research experiences as tools for grooming the next generation of scientists, it is important to look at other factors like the need for extra effort and time of faculty to transfer scholarly writing skills to students [ 19 ]. There is need for urgently exploration of mentoring undergraduates in research in line with global research education trends [ 5 ]. Some other interventions for consideration include using a training or mentoring programme each new MMJ editorial team [ 20 ], and use of the student assessment process as is done at the graduate level [ 8 ]. Using student assessment to promote scientific writing requires clear documentation of the different roles of the various participants and subsequent supervision, [ 21 ] in addition to the creation of an enabling environment using an institution wide research governance framework[ 22 ]. Given that individuals who participate in research as students will more likely continue to participate in research as faculty, it is important that all efforts are made to ensure that the students develop these vital scientific writing skills [ 19 , 23 ].
Study limitations
This retrospective study of the MMJ had some limitations like: the poor journal publication record keeping, annual turnover of the volunteer student editorial board and use of abbreviated names made it difficult to identify some of the author details. Despite this, it was possible to obtain an adequate sample of the journal's publication for detailed analysis.
This survey demonstrates that in the surveyed university population, faculty student partnerships are not producing the desired level of undergraduate research mentoring as evidenced by the reduced use of the IMRAD formatting in articles published in the MMJ. Given that the use of IMRAD is one of the core competencies for one to be an active member of the scientific community, inability to transfer this skill could help explain some of the identified gaps related to scientific writing in this university and Africa at large [ 8 ]. There is need to support undergraduate research in Africa using active mentoring programmes, providing training support for student journal editorial teams and use of innovative pro-scientific writing curricula. Such support could result in the quicker uptake and promotion of scientific writing and the reading of scientific literature in Africa over time.
Mason J, Eccles M, Freemantle N, Drummond M: Incorporating economic analysis in evidence-based guidelines for mental health: the profile approach. J Ment Health Policy Econ. 1999, 2: 13-19. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-176X(199903)2:1<13::AID-MHP34>3.0.CO;2-M.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Zoltan JA, Sameeksha D, Jolanda H: Entrepreneurship, economic development and institutions. Small Bus Econ. 2008, 31: 219-234. 10.1007/s11187-008-9135-9.
Article Google Scholar
Aravamudhan K, Frantsve-Hawley J: American Dental Association's Resources to Support Evidence-Based Dentistry. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2009, 9: 139-144. 10.1016/j.jebdp.2009.06.011.
Article PubMed CAS PubMed Central Google Scholar
Johnson N, List-Ivankovic J, Eboh WO, Ireland J, Adams D, Mowatt E, Martindale S: Research and evidence based practice: Using a blended approach to teaching and learning in undergraduate nurse education. Nurse Educ Pract. 2009
Google Scholar
Gonzalez C: Undergraduate research, graduate mentoring, and the university's mission. Science. 2001, 293: 1624-1626. 10.1126/science.1062714.
Article PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Laskowitz DT, Drucker RP, Parsonnet J, Cross PC, Gesundheit N: Engaging Students in Dedicated Research and Scholarship During Medical School: The Long-Term Experiences at Duke and Stanford. Acad Med. 2010, 85: 419-428. 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181ccc77a.
Howitt S, Wilson A, Wilson K, Roberts P: Please remember we are not all brilliant': undergraduates' experiences of an elite, research-intensive degree at a research-intensive university. Higher Education Research & Development. 2010, 29: 405-420. 10.1080/07294361003601883.
Kabiru CW, Izugbara CO, Wambugu SW, Ezeh AC: Capacity development for health research in Africa: experiences managing the African Doctoral Dissertation Research Fellowship Program. Health Res Policy Syst. 2010, 8: 21-10.1186/1478-4505-8-21.
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Youtie J, Shapira P: Building an innovation hub: A case study of the transformation of university roles in regional technological and economic development. Research Policy. 2008, 37: 1188-1204. 10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.012.
Sollaci LB, Pereira MG: The introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) structure: a fifty-year survey. J Med Libr Assoc. 2004, 92: 364-367.
PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Foster WD: Makerere Medical School: 50th anniversary. Br Med J. 1974, 3: 675-678. 10.1136/bmj.3.5932.675.
Kizza IB, Tugumisirize J, Tweheyo R, Mbabali S, Kasangaki A, Nshimye E, Sekandi J, Groves S, Kennedy CE: Makerere University College of Health Sciences' role in addressing challenges in health service provision at Mulago National Referral Hospital. BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 11 (Suppl 1): S7-
Pariyo G, Serwadda D, Sewankambo NK, Groves S, Bollinger RC, Peters DH: A grander challenge: the case of how Makerere University College of Health Sciences (MakCHS) contributes to health outcomes in Africa. BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 11 (Suppl 1): S2-
Nankinga Z, Kutyabami P, Kibuule D, Kalyango J, Groves S, Bollinger RC, Obua C: An assessment of Makerere University College of Health Sciences: optimizing health research capacity to meet Uganda's priorities. BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 11 (Suppl 1): S12-
OpenEpi: Open Source Epidemiologic Statistics for Public Health. [ http://www.openepi.com ]
Kiguli-Malwadde E, Kijjambu S, Kiguli S, Galukande M, Mwanika A, Luboga S, Sewankambo N: Problem Based Learning, curriculum development and change process at Faculty of Medicine, Makerere University, Uganda. African Health Sciences. 2006, 6: 127-130.
PubMed CAS PubMed Central Google Scholar
Lopatto D: Undergraduate research experiences support science career decisions and active learning. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2007, 6: 297-306.
Villarejo M, Barlow AE, Kogan D, Veazey BD, Sweeney JK: Encouraging minority undergraduates to choose science careers: career paths survey results. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2008, 7: 394-409.
Hunter A-B, Laursen SL, Seymour E: Becoming a Scientist: The Role of Undergraduate Research in Students' Cognitive, Personal, and Professional Development. Sci Ed. 2007, 91: 36-74. 10.1002/sce.20173.
Garrow J, Butterfield M, Marshall J, Williamson A: The Reported Training and Experience of Editors in Chief of Specialist Clinical Medical Journals. The Editors and Their Journals. 1998, [ http://www.ama-assn.org/public/peer/7_15_98/jpv71014.htm ]
Whiteside U, Pantelone DW, Hunter-Reel D, Eland J, Kleiber B, Larimer M: Initial Suggestions for Supervising and Mentoring Undergraduate Research Assistants at Large Research Universities. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. 2007, 19: 325-330.
Robinson L, Drewery S, Ellershaw J, Smith J, Whittle S, Murdoch-Eaton D: Research governance: impeding both research and teaching? A survey of impact on undergraduate research opportunities. Medical Education. 2007, 41: 729-736. 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02776.x.
Munabi IG, Katabira ET, Konde-Lule J: Early undergraduate research experience at Makerere University Faculty of Medicine: a tool for promoting medical research. Afr Health Sci. 2006, 6: 182-186.
Download references
Acknowledgements
The authors express their gratitude to the faculty in the Albert Cook Library, members of the editorial team who participated in searching for the various past volumes of the journal, the journal's reviewers who provided many insightful comments and to Ms Evelyn Bakengesa for the time she set aside to proof read the final draft of the paper.
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
Former Editor Makerere Medical Students Journal, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, New Mulago Hospital Complex, Kampala Uganda
Loraine Oriokot
Department of Human Anatomy, School of Biomedical Sciences, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, New Mulago Hospital Complex, Kampala Uganda
William Buwembo & Ian G Munabi
Dean's office, School of Medicine, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, New Mulago Hospital Complex, Kampala Uganda
Stephen C Kijjambu
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Ian G Munabi .
Additional information
Competing interests.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors' contributions
All the authors read and approved the final manuscript. LO: Participated in the conceptualisation, data collection and write up of the final paper. WB: Participated in all phases of the papers write up from conceptualisation, analysis to the final write up IGM: Participated in all phases of the study; conceptualization, data collection, analysis and write up. SCK: participated in the conceptualisation of the paper and review of the various drafts of the paper prior to submission.
Loraine Oriokot, William Buwembo and Stephen C Kijjambu contributed equally to this work.
Authors’ original submitted files for images
Below are the links to the authors’ original submitted files for images.
Authors’ original file for figure 1
Rights and permissions.
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reprints and permissions
About this article
Cite this article.
Oriokot, L., Buwembo, W., Munabi, I.G. et al. The introduction, methods, results and discussion (IMRAD) structure: a Survey of its use in different authoring partnerships in a students' journal. BMC Res Notes 4 , 250 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-4-250
Download citation
Received : 06 October 2010
Accepted : 21 July 2011
Published : 21 July 2011
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-4-250
Share this article
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
- publications
- undergraduate
BMC Research Notes
ISSN: 1756-0500
- Submission enquiries: [email protected]
- General enquiries: [email protected]
Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .
Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.
- We're Hiring!
- Help Center
Organization of a Research Paper: The IMRAD Format
Most scientific papers are prepared according to a format called IMRAD. The term represents the first letters of the words Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, And, Discussion. It indicates a pattern or format rather than a complete list of headings or components of research papers; the missing parts of a paper are: Title, Authors, Keywords, Abstract, Conclusions, and References.
Related Papers
Bharat Barad
Miressa Beyene
Agroforestry Systems
Diwaker Mourya
Pavel Collado
happy setiawan
Patricia Volland-Nail
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
RELATED PAPERS
Ioana Botian
Rambu Nitbani
eli kourangi
Carlos Benito Amat
Srinivasan Venkatesan
Lee Kwang Hong
Amona Eltokhei
magendira mani vinayagam
aris chandra
S. Dom, L. Kulikov, K. Bostoen (guest-eds), Valency-decreasing derivations and (quasi-)middles in Bantu. Grahamstown: NISC. (Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 36.3: Special issue)
Leonid Kulikov
Pablo Escobar
Paola De Castro
Biodiversitas
Fahmi LIPI , Agus Arifin Sentosa
Betsy Yarrison
Alyssa Fairudz Shiba
Professor Samy Azer
Denis Saunders
patrick papa
Writing for Publication
Christian Dueñas
Fakultas Syari'ah & Ekonomi Islam IAIN Syekh Nurjati Cirebon
Aan Jaelani (SCOPUS ID: 57195963463)
Cristian Perez
Tylor Burrows
Radek Švadlenka
Mohamed Hassan Taha
Tauseef Haider
Sebastian Garcia
SCAD Independent
Tabrani ZA , Saifullah Idris , Peter Jon Mendoza , Kamaruzzaman Bustamam-Ahmad
Izet Masic, MD, PhD, FWAAS, FEASA, FIAHSI, FEFMI, FACMI
- We're Hiring!
- Help Center
- Find new research papers in:
- Health Sciences
- Earth Sciences
- Cognitive Science
- Mathematics
- Computer Science
- Academia ©2024
Provide details on what you need help with along with a budget and time limit. Questions are posted anonymously and can be made 100% private.
Studypool matches you to the best tutor to help you with your question. Our tutors are highly qualified and vetted.
Your matched tutor provides personalized help according to your question details. Payment is made only after you have completed your 1-on-1 session and are satisfied with your session.
- Homework Q&A
- Become a Tutor
All Subjects
Mathematics
Programming
Health & Medical
Engineering
Computer Science
Foreign Languages
Access over 35 million academic & study documents
Sample quantitative research imrad format.
Sign up to view the full document!
24/7 Study Help
Stuck on a study question? Our verified tutors can answer all questions, from basic math to advanced rocket science !
Similar Documents
working on a study question?
Studypool is powered by Microtutoring TM
Copyright © 2024. Studypool Inc.
Studypool is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university.
Ongoing Conversations
Access over 35 million study documents through the notebank
Get on-demand Q&A study help from verified tutors
Read 1000s of rich book guides covering popular titles
Sign up with Google
Sign up with Facebook
Already have an account? Login
Login with Google
Login with Facebook
Don't have an account? Sign Up
How to cite ChatGPT
Use discount code STYLEBLOG15 for 15% off APA Style print products with free shipping in the United States.
We, the APA Style team, are not robots. We can all pass a CAPTCHA test , and we know our roles in a Turing test . And, like so many nonrobot human beings this year, we’ve spent a fair amount of time reading, learning, and thinking about issues related to large language models, artificial intelligence (AI), AI-generated text, and specifically ChatGPT . We’ve also been gathering opinions and feedback about the use and citation of ChatGPT. Thank you to everyone who has contributed and shared ideas, opinions, research, and feedback.
In this post, I discuss situations where students and researchers use ChatGPT to create text and to facilitate their research, not to write the full text of their paper or manuscript. We know instructors have differing opinions about how or even whether students should use ChatGPT, and we’ll be continuing to collect feedback about instructor and student questions. As always, defer to instructor guidelines when writing student papers. For more about guidelines and policies about student and author use of ChatGPT, see the last section of this post.
Quoting or reproducing the text created by ChatGPT in your paper
If you’ve used ChatGPT or other AI tools in your research, describe how you used the tool in your Method section or in a comparable section of your paper. For literature reviews or other types of essays or response or reaction papers, you might describe how you used the tool in your introduction. In your text, provide the prompt you used and then any portion of the relevant text that was generated in response.
Unfortunately, the results of a ChatGPT “chat” are not retrievable by other readers, and although nonretrievable data or quotations in APA Style papers are usually cited as personal communications , with ChatGPT-generated text there is no person communicating. Quoting ChatGPT’s text from a chat session is therefore more like sharing an algorithm’s output; thus, credit the author of the algorithm with a reference list entry and the corresponding in-text citation.
When prompted with “Is the left brain right brain divide real or a metaphor?” the ChatGPT-generated text indicated that although the two brain hemispheres are somewhat specialized, “the notation that people can be characterized as ‘left-brained’ or ‘right-brained’ is considered to be an oversimplification and a popular myth” (OpenAI, 2023).
OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT (Mar 14 version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat
You may also put the full text of long responses from ChatGPT in an appendix of your paper or in online supplemental materials, so readers have access to the exact text that was generated. It is particularly important to document the exact text created because ChatGPT will generate a unique response in each chat session, even if given the same prompt. If you create appendices or supplemental materials, remember that each should be called out at least once in the body of your APA Style paper.
When given a follow-up prompt of “What is a more accurate representation?” the ChatGPT-generated text indicated that “different brain regions work together to support various cognitive processes” and “the functional specialization of different regions can change in response to experience and environmental factors” (OpenAI, 2023; see Appendix A for the full transcript).
Creating a reference to ChatGPT or other AI models and software
The in-text citations and references above are adapted from the reference template for software in Section 10.10 of the Publication Manual (American Psychological Association, 2020, Chapter 10). Although here we focus on ChatGPT, because these guidelines are based on the software template, they can be adapted to note the use of other large language models (e.g., Bard), algorithms, and similar software.
The reference and in-text citations for ChatGPT are formatted as follows:
- Parenthetical citation: (OpenAI, 2023)
- Narrative citation: OpenAI (2023)
Let’s break that reference down and look at the four elements (author, date, title, and source):
Author: The author of the model is OpenAI.
Date: The date is the year of the version you used. Following the template in Section 10.10, you need to include only the year, not the exact date. The version number provides the specific date information a reader might need.
Title: The name of the model is “ChatGPT,” so that serves as the title and is italicized in your reference, as shown in the template. Although OpenAI labels unique iterations (i.e., ChatGPT-3, ChatGPT-4), they are using “ChatGPT” as the general name of the model, with updates identified with version numbers.
The version number is included after the title in parentheses. The format for the version number in ChatGPT references includes the date because that is how OpenAI is labeling the versions. Different large language models or software might use different version numbering; use the version number in the format the author or publisher provides, which may be a numbering system (e.g., Version 2.0) or other methods.
Bracketed text is used in references for additional descriptions when they are needed to help a reader understand what’s being cited. References for a number of common sources, such as journal articles and books, do not include bracketed descriptions, but things outside of the typical peer-reviewed system often do. In the case of a reference for ChatGPT, provide the descriptor “Large language model” in square brackets. OpenAI describes ChatGPT-4 as a “large multimodal model,” so that description may be provided instead if you are using ChatGPT-4. Later versions and software or models from other companies may need different descriptions, based on how the publishers describe the model. The goal of the bracketed text is to briefly describe the kind of model to your reader.
Source: When the publisher name and the author name are the same, do not repeat the publisher name in the source element of the reference, and move directly to the URL. This is the case for ChatGPT. The URL for ChatGPT is https://chat.openai.com/chat . For other models or products for which you may create a reference, use the URL that links as directly as possible to the source (i.e., the page where you can access the model, not the publisher’s homepage).
Other questions about citing ChatGPT
You may have noticed the confidence with which ChatGPT described the ideas of brain lateralization and how the brain operates, without citing any sources. I asked for a list of sources to support those claims and ChatGPT provided five references—four of which I was able to find online. The fifth does not seem to be a real article; the digital object identifier given for that reference belongs to a different article, and I was not able to find any article with the authors, date, title, and source details that ChatGPT provided. Authors using ChatGPT or similar AI tools for research should consider making this scrutiny of the primary sources a standard process. If the sources are real, accurate, and relevant, it may be better to read those original sources to learn from that research and paraphrase or quote from those articles, as applicable, than to use the model’s interpretation of them.
We’ve also received a number of other questions about ChatGPT. Should students be allowed to use it? What guidelines should instructors create for students using AI? Does using AI-generated text constitute plagiarism? Should authors who use ChatGPT credit ChatGPT or OpenAI in their byline? What are the copyright implications ?
On these questions, researchers, editors, instructors, and others are actively debating and creating parameters and guidelines. Many of you have sent us feedback, and we encourage you to continue to do so in the comments below. We will also study the policies and procedures being established by instructors, publishers, and academic institutions, with a goal of creating guidelines that reflect the many real-world applications of AI-generated text.
For questions about manuscript byline credit, plagiarism, and related ChatGPT and AI topics, the APA Style team is seeking the recommendations of APA Journals editors. APA Style guidelines based on those recommendations will be posted on this blog and on the APA Style site later this year.
Update: APA Journals has published policies on the use of generative AI in scholarly materials .
We, the APA Style team humans, appreciate your patience as we navigate these unique challenges and new ways of thinking about how authors, researchers, and students learn, write, and work with new technologies.
American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1037/0000165-000
Related and recent
Comments are disabled due to your privacy settings. To re-enable, please adjust your cookie preferences.
APA Style Monthly
Subscribe to the APA Style Monthly newsletter to get tips, updates, and resources delivered directly to your inbox.
Welcome! Thank you for subscribing.
APA Style Guidelines
Browse APA Style writing guidelines by category
- Abbreviations
- Bias-Free Language
- Capitalization
- In-Text Citations
- Italics and Quotation Marks
- Paper Format
- Punctuation
- Research and Publication
- Spelling and Hyphenation
- Tables and Figures
Full index of topics
IMAGES
COMMENTS
That's where the IMRAD format comes in. IMRAD provides a clear structure to help you organize and present your research logically and coherently. In this comprehensive guide, we'll explain the IMRAD format, why it's so important for research writing, and how to use it effectively. Follow along to learn the ins and outs of crafting papers ...
IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion) Academic research papers in STEM disciplines typically follow a well-defined I-M-R-A-D structure: Introduction, Methods, Results And Discussion (Wu, 2011). Although not included in the IMRAD name, these papers often include a Conclusion. Introduction. The Introduction typically provides ...
What Is An IMRaD Paper? IMRaD stands for Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. It is a widely used format for structuring scientific research papers. Following the IMRaD paper example below, you will see that the IMRaD format provides a logical flow of information, allowing readers to understand the context, methods, results, and interpretation of the study in a systematic manner.
Abstracts can vary in length from one paragraph to several pages, but they follow the IMRaD format and typically spend: 25% of their space on importance of research (Introduction) 25% of their space on what you did (Methods) 35% of their space on what you found: this is the most important part of the abstract (Results) ch (Discussion ...
The IMRAD layout is a fundamental system that is the basis of all scientific. papers, i.e. the relevant sections representing the acronym are their unavoid-. able parts, although there are some ...
What is an IMRaD report? "IMRaD" format refers to a paper that is structured by four main sections: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. This format is often used for lab reports as well as for reporting any planned, systematic research in the social sciences, natural sciences, or engineering and computer sciences.
and how these core section are combined and presented, so always review a journal's submission requirements before writing an article. In contrast to journal articles, many university lab reports may take a more standard and structured approach. Always refer back to specific assignment descriptions, rubrics, class notes, or TA or faculty feedback to most effectively complete coursework. In ...
IMRaD The IMRaD (often pronounced "im-rad") format is the most commonly used format in scientific article and journal writing and is used widely across most scientific and research fields.
* IMRaD refers to reports with the structure Introduction-Method-Results-Discussion used in empirical research in natural and social sciences. Please refer to the Writing Center quick guide "Writing an IMRaD Report" for more explanations.
Abstract. Most scientific papers are prepared according to a format called IMRAD. The term represents the first letters of the words Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, And, Discussion. It indicates a pattern or format rather than a complete list of headings or components of research papers; the missing parts of a paper are: Title ...
The IMRaD (often pronounced "im-rad") format is a scientific writing structure that includes four or five major sections: introduction (I); research methods (M); results (R); analysis (a); and discussion (D). The IMRaD format is the most commonly used format in scientific article and journal writing and is used widely across most scientific ...
Reports of research studies usually follow the IMRAD format. IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results, [and] Discussion) is a mnemonic for the major components of a scientific paper. These elements are included in the overall structure outlined below.
Scientific (IMRaD) Research Reports — Introduction Section. The goal of the introduction in an IMRaD* report is to give the reader an overview of the literature in the field, show the motivation for your study, and share what unique perspective your research adds. To introduce readers to your material and convince them of the research value ...
Background Globally, the role of universities as providers of research education in addition to leading in main - stream research is gaining more importance with demand for evidence based practices. This paper describes the effect of various students and faculty authoring partnerships on the use of the IMRAD style of writing for a university student journal. Findings This was an audit of the ...
Most scientific papers are prepared according to a format called IMRAD. The term represents the first letters of the words Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, And, Discussion. It indicates a pattern or format rather than a complete list of headings or components of research papers; the missing parts of a paper are: Title, Authors ...
IMRAD Outlining In many of your courses in the sciences and social sciences, such as sociology, psychology, and biology, you may be required to write a research paper using the IMRAD format. IMRAD stands for Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. In this format, you present your research and discuss your methods for gathering research.
Scientific Writing: The IMRaD Results and Discussion. This handout was created to accompany the Writing in the Sciences video series. The purpose of the Results is to prepare readers for the discussion section by presenting the data in manageable chunks, in an order that corresponds with the research questions or objectives. The purpose of the ...
Microsoft Word - IMRaD Paper Outline.docx. IMRaD Paper Outline. 1) Introduction. a) Introduce the problem underlying your research question. b) Explain the significance. c) Review of background or known information on your topic. d) Provide a paragraph that covers the research questions and logically presents hypotheses.
This paper reports on our experience in using realistic industry-oriented case studies in requirements in engineering course with graduate students. It indicates a strong positive effect on student motivations as well as the degree of comprehension of the instructed theoretical material.
Because the IMRaD abstract is a concise summary of the whole paper, writers draft their abstracts after they have written a full draft of their IMRaD report. * IMRaD refers to reports with the structure Introduction-Method-Results-Discussion used in empirical research in natural and social sciences.
Unformatted Attachment Preview SAMPLE FORMAT FOR QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PAPER USING IMRAD FORMAT PHILIPPINE WOMEN'S COLLEGE THE RELATIONSHIP OF WORK ENGAGEMENT TOWARDS JOB SATISFACTION OF PHILIPPINE WOMEN'S COLLEGE EMPLOYEES Juan Tamad Pedro Pandikoko Henry Uyamot INTRODUCTION Work engagement forms part of the enthusiasm-depression dimension. Work engagement is defined as a positive ...
This post outlines how to create references for large language model AI tools like ChatGPT and how to present AI-generated text in a paper.