1.2. Tips for Authors in the Scientific Paper Writing Process

Understanding the target audience is crucial in scientific writing. Knowing who will read your paper helps tailor the research's language, depth, and focus. Researchers often overlook this aspect, yet audience-oriented writing enhances comprehension and impact (Hyland, 2018). Therefore, for whom the researcher will write emerges as a factor that directly affects how he/she will write. Thus, as a writer you should always remember your audience because the authors academic publication aims to educate and persuade their intelligent readers (Lipson, 2005). From this perspective, you should give adequate information to educate your audience in your specific subject and show sufficient proof that you conducted proper research process, used appropriate methodology, extract original findings and results contribute literature and gave useful suggestion to the target audiences and new researchers. We can explain these two components as: 

• Giving enough information to your audience: When you write an academic paper on specific subject you should give some information about your topic, main concepts about it, and background or history knowledge if necessary. In this point, if you give too much information to educate your audience it can be prolong your writing process and product. This can make hard to limit your study and write in the word limit of your target journal. Also, too much information can be understood as you were underestimating your audience. For example, you conducted an experiment on the effects of writing strategies usage in undergraduate level writing lesson. What kind of informative introduction is proper for it?
• Type 1: What is language? à Definitions of language skills à Writing as a language skill à How writing was invented? à Writing’s importance for development of civilization à Education and writing relationship à What is writing education? à Writing problems in education à Strategy usage to deal with problems in education àDefinitions of writing strategies à Types of writing strategies à Related studies à Defining the gap in literature à Importance of the study à Aims and research questions.
• Type 2: Complexity of writing process à Main writing problems of the study group of the study à Writing strategies as a solution of writing problems à Definition of writing strategies à Types of writing strategies à Related studies à Defining the gap in literature à Importance of the study à Aims and research questions.
• Type 3: Types of writing strategies à Related studies à Importance of the study à Aims and research questions.

As you can see, Type 1 contains too much information, and its theoretical framework is broader than it is needed. If author write that amount information in his/her paper it can be distractive and boring for the audience. For instance, in this example readers want to see whether writing strategies worked on undergraduate students’ writings so reading the kind of information such as definitions of language and language skills are useless and distractive. On the other hand, less information also does not work too. In Type 3, there is not any description of writing strategies, information about study groups’ writing skills/problems and defining the gap in the literature. Thus, as an author you should give information about main concepts in your paper, draw a theoretical framework and define the gap in literature that your study fill in. Hence, the Type 2 seem better for that kind of study.

Persuade your audience: As an informative text, academic studies have argumentative and persuasive features. Due to these aspects your academic studies should prove your argument and persuade your audience in both your research is qualified as it expected, and your findings and results make sense. In line with this purpose, there are some tips: 

• In order to persuade your audience to your study’s contribution to the literature, define the gap in literature that your study fill in.
• Explain your aim and research questions certainly. Then design your results section in terms of it. Ambiguity in these elements can make your audience confused.
• Explain in detail why you chose the method and research design you used. By this way, your readers will be able to see which path your study followed and how it generated original data.
• Explain how you collect and analyze data. It is important to persuade your audience you implemented proper data collection and analysis process to your aim and method you chose.
• In order to ensure your audience that you presented dependable data you should explain them in different ways in terms of your study method. If you write a quantitative research paper, you should explain your data’s validity and reliability; if it is qualitative, you should explain your data’s trustworthiness; and if it is mixed method research you should explain all validity, reliability, and trustworthiness together in your method section.
• In order to convince your reader that no ethical violations occurred during your scientific study, you should explain in the methods section under the ethics heading how you obtained ethical approvals from the authorized institutions, how ethical procedures were followed in experiments using humans or other living beings, how verbal and written participant consents were obtained, and how you ensured the confidentiality of the participants' profiles.
• If you want your readers to understand your findings in a systematic way, organize your results section in synchronize with your research questions.
• To convince your readers that your findings are original and contribute to the literature, compare the findings of your study with the findings of previous studies in the literature in the discussions section. In the discussions section you will prepare in this way, especially revealing the results that differ from previous studies will persuade your readers about the originality of your study.

In conclusion, understanding the target audience is paramount in scientific writing. Tailoring the language, depth, and focus of research to the intended readership enhances comprehension and impact. Neglecting this aspect can result in disengagement and reduced effectiveness. It is essential for writers to remember their audience, aiming to educate and persuade them effectively. Providing adequate information while avoiding overwhelming the audience is crucial. The balance lies in Type 2, which offers sufficient detail without being overly exhaustive. Additionally, academic studies should possess persuasive features, substantiating arguments and findings while demonstrating their contribution to the literature. Clear articulation of aims, research questions, methodology, data collection, and analysis methods are vital to engender trust and credibility. Moreover, addressing ethical considerations and organizing findings in line with research questions aids in systematic understanding and enhances the persuasiveness of the study. Ultimately, effective scientific writing not only disseminates knowledge but also convinces and influences its audience, thereby advancing scholarly discourse and contributing to the broader scientific community.  

Publishing scientific research is a long-term commitment. Authors should set achievable goals and deadlines to manage the process efficiently. From data collection to final submission, establishing a realistic timeline prevents undue stress and enhances the quality of work (Boice, 2000). Certainly, one of the most important elements of a successful work is to make correct planning and act according to this plan. Here is 12-week-long article writing plan example from Belcher’s (2019) book. You can create your timeline in terms of your goals and your academic study’s deadline.

Determining realistic goals and timelines is an important stage in the publication process of scientific research. To effectively manage the process from data collection to final presentation, it is necessary to establish achievable goals and timelines. One of the most important elements of a successful work is to make correct planning and act in accordance with this plan. Proper planning encourages creating a personal timeline based on the goals of a research and the deadline for academic work.

Two heads are often better than one, especially in academic research. Collaboration can lead to richer data sets, varied perspectives, and a more thorough analysis of findings (Katz & Martin, 1997). For this reason, it is considered valuable for researchers to construct and continue their studies with a collaborative approach. Peer reviews are an invaluable part of this collaborative spirit. They offer constructive criticism that could significantly elevate the quality of the paper (Lee et al., 2013). These criticisms will guide researchers both in their current studies and in their future studies. In this way, researchers will be able to include the experiences of different researchers in their studies. According to literature, there are two types of team working styles, these are collaboration and cooperation. In a cooperative work, the distribution of tasks is done according to the principle of individual specialization in tasks or subtasks. Here, tasks are distributed at the beginning of the work and each individual performs the part that is his/her responsibility and at the end of the process all parts come together. Whereas, in a collaborative work, each carries out all the work together from the beginning to the end of the work. Beau et.al. (2010) explain collaborative and cooperative working as:

Table 2 explains the differences between cooperating and collaborating. Collaboration is based on skills such as maturity, experience, autonomy and self-control, while cooperating is based on skills such as mentoring/supervision, pyramidal hierarchy and control of top management. Modes of participation are individual and collective, voluntary/spontaneous for collaboration, where division of tasks and subtasks are mandatory/mandatory for cooperation, and the accomplishment of tasks is about exploring, creating, communicating, and providing global responsibility and peer support in collaboration, while the process of cooperating is a process of specialization, and it involves responsibility for the individual task. The domain of collaboration involves the synergy between interaction, cognitive, and collective aspects, while the domain of cooperating involves the learning of collaborative skills and the transfer of knowledge and information. In order to provide good and effective teamwork environment; Before you start your teamwork choose the way you work together: collaborative, or cooperative. If you choose to collaborate, be sure that everyone joins in all phases of the process because in collaboration everyone should take responsibility in all process, and they can contribute all phases of the study with their own working styles and creativity. If you choose to cooperate, be sure that tasks distributed from the beginning, and everyone take their own parts’ responsibility. In this kind of working to avoid complexity and confusion hierarchical structure should be created. By this way unifying in working style and univocality in written product can be provided.  

Data management is pivotal for maintaining the integrity of the research process. Authors should invest in organizing data meticulously and referencing sources accurately. Good practices in data management lend credibility to your work and make it replicable for future research (Tenopir et al., 2011). Apart from the usage in your study, managing data and resources has two different aspects.

• One of them is how to share this data and its copyright issues. If you are funded from an institution publishing or re-working with data can be restricted. Also, there can disagreement between peers so these kinds of issues should be agreed before study begins.
• The second aspect of managing data and resources is how to store them. This aspect is also ethical issue because storing sensitive data and providing their confidentiality are very important for studies and researchers’ reliability.  

In other words, data management is vital to maintaining the integrity of the research process. Organizing data neatly and referencing sources accurately increases the reliability of the study and ensures its reproducibility for future research. While data management includes sharing and copyright issues, it also addresses ethical issues such as storing and protecting the privacy of data.

Maintaining ethical standards is non-negotiable in scientific writing. This includes transparent reporting of methods and results, giving due credit through citations, and obtaining necessary permissions for copyrighted material (Resnik, 2015). Ethical violations, which are currently one of the most problematic issues for the scientific community, not only harm the studies carried out, but also significantly damage the credibility and therefore the career of the researcher conducting the study. In this regard, compliance with ethical principles in scientific research is an important issue that researchers should pay careful attention to.

In scientific research ethics, researchers must adhere to a series of important ethical standards. Compliance with ethical standards enhances the credibility of researchers, improves the quality of their research, maintains the integrity of the scientific community, and ultimately provides reliable information to society. Here are some key points they need to pay attention to:

• Transparency and Accuracy: It is essential to transparently report the methods and findings of the research and present them accurately. Data manipulation should be avoided, and the results should be realistically reflected.
• Copyright and Citation: Proper credit should be given when quoting from other works. Permissions required for the use of copyrighted materials should be obtained.
• Human and Animal Experiments: Ethical standards must be followed in experiments conducted on humans or animals. This includes obtaining informed consent from participants.
• Data Management: It is important to manage data in an orderly and secure manner. The confidentiality of sensitive data should be maintained, and it should be accessible when necessary.
• Conflict of Interest: Researchers should clearly disclose any conflicts of interest related to their studies and take measures to minimize the impact of these conflicts on the results.
• Plagiarism: Respect should be shown for the ideas and works of other researchers, and forms of plagiarism such as plagiarism should be avoided.

The ethical standards mentioned above can be obtained from a wide range of sources, and these principles are generally accepted practices in the scientific community. These ethical standards are generally considered as principles of scientific research ethics and are often included in the ethical rules of various research institutions, universities, and scientific publishing organizations. Additionally, these principles can be detailed in scientific publications, research guidelines, and ethical codes. For example, organizations such as the American Psychological Association (APA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) provide guidance and policies on scientific research ethics. Moreover, the publication rules of scientific journals often include these ethical principles, and authors are required to follow these principles.