Research paper criteria

A research your instructor has specific requirements for the format of your research paper, check them before preparing your final draft. When you submit your paper, be sure to keep a secure most common formatting is presented in the sections below:Running head with page ent of the list of works and tions and insertions on g a printed onic for the running head (see below), leave margins of one inch at the top and bottom and on both sides of the text. If you plan to submit a printout on paper larger than 8½ by 11 inches, do not print the text in an area greater than 6½ by 9 choose an easily readable typeface (e. Follow the rules for capitalization in the mla handbook (67–68), and italicize only the words that you would italicize in the television coverage of international news attitude toward violence in a clockwork use of the words fair and foul in shakespeare’s icism in england and the scapigliatura in not use a period after your title or after any heading in the paper (e. Research paper does not normally need a title page, but if the paper is a group project, create a title page and list all the authors on it instead of in the header on page 1 of your essay. If your teacher requires a title page in lieu of or in addition to the header, format it according to the instructions you are g head with page all pages consecutively throughout the research paper in the upper right-hand corner, half an inch from the top and flush with the right margin. The running head of a research ent of the list of works list of works cited appears at the end of the paper, after any endnotes. For example, if the text of your research paper (including any endnotes) ends on page 10, the works-cited list begins on page 11. A table in a research other type of illustrative visual material—for example, a photograph, map, line drawing, graph, or chart—should be labeled figure (usually abbreviated fig. A label and caption ordinarily appear directly below the illustration and have the same one-inch margins as the text of the paper (fig.

Guidelines for a research paper

A label and caption ordinarily appear directly below the example and have the same one-inch margins as the text of the paper (fig. A musical example in a research you print your paper, use only white, 8½-by-11-inch paper of good quality. Some instructors prefer papers printed on a single side because they’re easier to read, but others allow printing on both sides as a means of conserving paper; follow your instructor’s tions and insertions on ead and correct your research paper carefully before submitting it. If corrections on any page are numerous or substantial, revise your document and reprint the g a printed of a printed research paper may get misplaced or lost if they are left unattached or merely folded down at a corner. Many prefer that a paper be secured with a simple paper or binder clip, which can be easily removed and restored. Others prefer the use of onic are at present no commonly accepted standards for the electronic submission of research papers. If you are asked to submit your paper electronically, obtain from your teacher guidelines for formatting, mode of submission (e. Explore other sites on this network or register to build your ting a research your instructor has specific requirements for the format of your research paper, check them before preparing your final draft. Explore other sites on this network or register to build your e research paper november 12, ng compare and contrast essay high school personal development plan definition essay : november 16, 2017@honeyv_ a l'image de ta robe ou nouvelle coupe de cheveux, j'attends avec impatience la photo de l' : november 16, 2017he iiiiis!!!! I can do essay writing service yahoo answers page essay on the most memorable day of my life for class 4 essay on man summary epistle 2 walkthrough dissertation length words verbalisierung einer grafik beispiel essay kaleidos research paper research papers for mechanical engineering students school essay advice school essay advice research college g paragraph for argumentative essay : november 16, 2017@malibu_john my girlfriend and her daughter had to recently challenge a teacher about a grade.

University application essay questions college essay college board unt essay book in hindi pdf ch papers on education pdf number argumentative essays on abortion pro choice zone. Is 9 a good sat essay score experience abortion pros and cons essay pdf manual short essay on chemistry in our daily life essay competition high school students research college gcse coursework deadlines 2014 and 2016 coursework ums marks aqa persuasive essay outline mla format answers www essayforum com/writing-feedback-3 pages bar exam essay advice xm radio critical essay literary term side : november 16, 2017pour ma dissert j'ai recopié le corrigé de l'année dernière, la prof m'a marqué :" tu connais pas la méthode de la dissertation".. Research papers on nutritional status of tribes ascended dissertation repository michigan lottery, argumentative essay high school ppt : november 16, 2017playing @fatbellybella while gettin this essay done.. Essay on homework should be abolished or not voting process analysis essay purpose, dissertation proposal writing service uk : november 16, 2017if my liver was a person i'd write an mla formatted essay apologizing for these past 10 days and an ahead of time apology for the sive essay worksheet high school postscollege research paper criteriapt01: extraordinary pantstop movies for men’s style, part 1wallet or money clip—which is cooler? A comment cancel e research paper 01: extraordinary movies for men’s style, part or money clip—which is cooler? While numerous scientific and publishing organizations have written guidelines for determining author qualifications and author order, there remains much ambiguity when it comes to how these criteria are weighed by research faculty. Here, we sought to provide some initial insight on how faculty view the relative importance of 11 criteria for scientific authorship. We distributed an online survey to 564 biomedical engineering, biology, and bioengineering faculty members at 10 research institutions across the united states. Results revealed an agreement on some criteria, such as time spent conducting experiments, but there was a lack of agreement regarding the role of funding procurement. This study provides quantitative assessments of how faculty members in the biosciences evaluate authorship criteria.

We discuss the implications of these findings for researchers, especially new graduate students, to help navigate the discrepancy between official policies for authorship and the contributions that faculty truly on: kassis t (2017) how do research faculty in the biosciences evaluate paper authorship criteria? The last author is typically the senior author and is the principal investigator overseeing the lab, while the first author is the researcher, such as the student, postdoc or research scientist that led the project and carried out the majority of the experimental work and manuscript preparation. New graduate students and researchers joining research laboratories are often unclear of the criteria that their immediate supervisors value in determining authorship [16]. Junior researchers as well as their supervisors both benefit when the factors involved in authorship assignment are understood by both parties and the scientific community makes its expectations us universities, including stanford [17], georgia tech [18], and harvard university [19] have made efforts to write internal guidelines defining authorship. And while some attempts have been made to implement these guidelines practically within the health and biosciences [21], the criteria remain ambiguous and do not reflect which are most valued in determining authorship and rank. Icmje recommends that an author meet the following four criteria:Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; ng the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; approval of the version to be published; ent to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are investigated and gh these guidelines help define author inclusion, they are not of particular help when deciding authorship order [23]. In most cases, the principal investigator of a research group is the final arbiter in determining authorship inclusion and order. In this study, we aim to break down these criteria further to elucidate how faculty in the biosciences weigh them in determining both inclusion as an author and authorship order. We do not attempt to assess these criteria from an ethical perspective, but rather seek to provide empirical data that will improve new researchers’ understanding of faculty expectations within a research project and to bring these criteria to the attention of the community in order to reassess them in light of the ethics of justice and fairness for author attribution [9,11,24–28]. While there is no clear consensus on how to classify these contributions, we devised 11 explicit criteria based on prior literature [29] and our subjective assessment of what factors we thought the biosciences community would deem important for both determining one’s recognition as an author and their rank on the authorship list.

The 11 criteria are:Total time spent on a project: this refers to the total amount of time devoted to the research study, including conducting literature searches, planning experiments, performing experiments, analyzing data, writing and proofreading the spent carrying out background research and literature review: this refers to intellectual efforts put into initially deciding on a certain research area and reviewing the literature see what has been previously accomplished in the bution to hypothesis and idea generation: this refers to the hypothesis upon which a study is grounded in hypothesis-driven research, or the idea for non-hypothesis-driven research such as methodologies, tools, and exploratory contribution of a special reagent, material, or computer code: this refers to unique material-based contributions, like a particular genetically modified cell strain, a synthesized molecule or computer code for analysis or extent of involvement in obtaining research funding: this refers to the process of fundraising—through writing grant proposals to funding agencies or industry spent doing experiments: this refers to the total time conducting the experiments, whether they are simulations as part of a computational project or lab time spent culturing cells or working with uniqueness of experimental skills and techniques: this refers to laboratory-based skills that are unique and require considerable prior knowledge or experience. Writing quality includes being able to explain research findings well, and employ good grammar and spelling, good structure, and spent editing and proofreading manuscript: this refers to the final step before submission to a journal when the lead author sends the manuscript to all the listed authors for final commenting, editing, and assess the value that research faculty assign to each of these criteria, an online survey was emailed to research faculty in biology, biomedical engineering, and bioengineering at 10 research institutions (table 1). The institutions were chosen to represent a wide geographical area of the united states with a range of research interests across the biosciences. Given the interdisciplinary nature of biological research, we decided to lump three different departments together. Specifically, we asked:“on a scale of 1–10, how important are the following factors in determining authorship and authorship rank on a peer-reviewed journal paper? D’agostino & pearson omnibus normality test was conducted, and only three of the 11 criteria were normally distributed. All graphing and analysis was carried out using graphpad prism s and discussionmany criteria are used to assess authorship. The intellectual contribution of the hypothesis (for hypothesis-driven research) or coming up with a study idea had the second highest score. Overall, there seemed to be some agreement that the time spent conducting experiments, coming up with a hypothesis, analyzing data, and writing the manuscript were the four most important criteria for both determining one’s authorship status and rank (fig 1a). The blue bars represent the sionswhile the data gained through this survey is limited in scope, such information helps advance a standardized method for assessing authorship inclusion and rank on the authorship list and begins to understand how members of the biosciences community faculty evaluate various criteria.

We hope that in the future, objective methodology can standardize authorship across research laboratories and identify where author contributions can be better defined and tracked. In this small study, we provided some initial quantifiable insight to help early researchers and the biosciences community as a whole, but more work by individual researchers, organizations, and publishers is needed to arrive at generalizable and clearly communicated criteria for determining publication authorship and ting informations1 file. Research, i was fortunate enough to be working in a lab where authorship conflicts were rarely an e. A survey of perceived contributions to papers based on byline position and number of authors. Patterns of name ordering among authors of scientific papers: a study of social symbolism and its ambiguity. A systematic review of research on the meaning, ethics and practices of authorship across scholarly disciplines. Authorship and responsibility in health sciences research: a review of procedures for fairly allocating authorship in multi-author studies. Ethical aspects and dilemmas of preparing, writing and publishing of the scientific papers in the biomedical journals. Increasing web survey response rates in innovation research: an experimental study of static and dynamic contact design features. Less work, less respect: authors’ perceived importance of research contributions and their declared contributions to research articles.

Thinker, soldier, scribe: cross-sectional study of researchers’ roles and author order in the annals of internal medicine.