A Comprehensive Guide on Journal Writing in PhD

PhD Journal Writing
One of the most important points to note is that writing an article from a thesis is not simply a task of cutting and pasting. The aim and format of a thesis or thesis is very completely different from that of a journal article or book chapter. The primary audience for the journal is the examiner, and the student must convince the examiner that they have mastered research techniques and understand the arguments they are making. The wider audience for the journal article will want to know about the arguments or findings and at the same time be convinced that the findings are authentic and trustworthy. Selecting journal article depends greatly on the work itself as well as hiring a PhD dissertation writing service. There may be new theories, methods or findings that are worth sharing and the supervisor’s role is to help the student in formulating purposes for the journal. There are several steps involved:
  • Deciding on authorship
  • Planning the article
  • Selecting a journal
  • Writing the articles
  • Reviewing the article before submission

Guide for Writing the Journal in PhD

Introduction:

The purpose of this section is threefold. First, you want to trace previous work on the subject and set up the problem. Second, you need to identify how your paper addresses that problem. That is key: explaining what you do to address the gaps of literature or problem of the journal paper. Finally, you should note the broader contributions and implications of the piece. I like to think that the contributions of a journal paper can be theoretical, empirical and/or policy relevant, although often the journal papers published in top journals have all three.


Theoretical Framework:

This is commonly referred to as a literature review, but I don’t like the term because it implies simply} that you just doing a passive review of what others have aforesaid about your topic. Reviewing previous work is necessary but not sufficient. The purpose of this section goes beyond an accounting of what others have done. One way to understand the aim of the theoretical framework is to see it as leading your reader through gaps in the literature that your paper addresses. See the theme? It’s specific to what you're doing in the paper. It also includes info that your reader must know in order to understand your argument.

For example, you must incorporate any relevant foundational texts. One of the things you see in general journals is that the theoretical framework is often divided into two sections, exactly because general journals want papers that speak to multiple audiences. So one section of your theoretical framework will deal with one set of literature, while the next section deals with another. Part of your contribution can be uniting and filling in the gaps in both sets.

The theoretical framework often gets a bad reputation in the peer-review process, because reviewer comments usually build suggestions regarding the theoretical framing of a manuscript. But I see the framework of a paper to be one of its most central parts. If we view research as a conversation, then the framework signals who you're in conversation with -- that is, the relevant audience and broader contributions of your work.

Data And Methods:

This section answers the question “how does one know what you know?” That can be further broken down into three parts:
  • On what kind of data or material are you basing your findings (e.G., Interviews, statistics, documents)?
  • How did you find that data, or where did it come from (e.G., U.S. Census, national archives, fieldwork)?
  • How did you analyze that information? That is, what software or analytic strategies did you use to come up with your findings?


Results:

This section contains the meat of the journal paper, where you present the findings from your work, and you should keep 2 points in mind. First, make sure that your results speak to the theoretical and empirical queries that your paper raises in the front half -- in other words, that your paper is cohesive throughout. Second, and significantly for qualitative papers, organize your results analytically or thematically -- not, for example, in chronological order or according to another simple accounting. You should be thinking about how to present your results to get the most out of your findings. (For some reason, academics like the number three, so you will often see three main results in a given paper.)

Discussion Or Conclusion:

You may also find a combined discussion and conclusion at the end of the journal paper. What are the differences between a discussion and a conclusion? That can vary by author or paper, and it depends on how you’ve written up your results section. One way you can think about it's that the discussion section permits you to step back from the results section and reflect on the broader story or themes of your results and how they tie together. If you see a discussion section this way, then you can accept a conclusion as addressing 3 things: 1) summarizing what you did in the paper, including its main findings, 2) acknowledging the limitations of your work and 3) proposing steps for future research that builds on what you’ve done in the paper.
Share on Google Plus

About Albert Barkley

This is a short description in the author block about the author. You edit it by entering text in the "Biographical Info" field in the user admin panel.
    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment

0 comments :

Post a comment