The Structure of a Scientific Paper

Scientific papers, like Shakespearean or Petrarchan sonnets, have a standard structure.

Abstract

A brief summary of the study.
- What is the general problem or hypothesis that the paper addresses?
- What is already known?
- What was the specific hypothesis addressed by this paper?
- What was done to test the hypothesis?
- What results were found?
- What is the larger significance of these results?
A successful abstract summarizes the entire paper, and motivates a reader to finish the rest of the paper.

Background and significance
- What is the broad, general problem or question addressed by this research?
- What previous work has been done?
- What are the key unanswered questions?
- What is the specific hypothesis addressed by this study?
- What are the key results of this study?
A successful Introduction begins with a broad area of interest, and narrows the reader's focus to the value of this study.

How the study was done.
- What specific techniques were used, and how were they applied to this problem?
- Were any of these techniques novel? If so, how were they validated?
- How was the data analyzed?
- If a model was constructed, what assumptions, equations, and parameters were used?
A successful Materials and Methods section assures the reader that the results are likely to be valid, and could be used as a guide to reproduce the study.

What was found by doing the experiments.
- What was the logic of the sequence of experiments that were done?
- What was actually observed?
- Do the results support the central hypothesis of the paper?
- Were discrepancies observed? How serious were they?
- Were there unexpected findings?
A successful Results section provides the reader a guide through the results, usually illustrated by figures, and provides evidence for or against the central hypothesis of the paper.

The results are briefly summarized, and the evidence for or against the central hypothesis is weighed.
Limitations of the study:
- Potential errors in data acquisition
- Potential errors in data analysis
- Alternative interpretations of the results that could be proposed
Relationship to previous results:
- Do these results support prior studies, or conflict with them?
- If the results conflict, is there an explanation for the differences?
Broader implications:
- Given these results, what new ideas or hypotheses can be suggested?
- Do the results suggest a broader general principle?
Future studies:
- What experiments should be done next?
- What potential limitations of the study should be addressed in the future?
A successful Discussion starts from the narrower focus of the study, helps the reader understand the significant contribution of the paper, how that contribution relates to the larger field of study, and concludes with the broader significance of the results.