Technical Writing in EnglishProf. R.L. BoxmanCHECK-LIST FOR A JOURNAL ARTICLE

Instructions:

Authors:

__Write out the “research question” which your paper will answer. Append it to your file as an “comment” to the title (or directly under the title). If you can’t formulate a clear research question, you probably shouldn’t be writing this paper!

__In the upper right corner of the first page, in small print, write the following “to be submitted to XXX” – where XXX is the name of the intended target journal.

__Mark the stages of your introduction (stages I-IV required, stages V and VI optional) using “comments” (on Word file) or directly on m/s.

__Arrange to have a fellow “TechWrite” student, present or past, review your paper. He should fill in the appropriate column below, and if necessary append further comments. Submit your paper together with his review, after complying with any changes he demands (or rebutting them in a letter to me).Name of reviewer:______

___Submit the file with your paper (in *.doc format if composed in word, *.pdf + original source files in in Latex or other format), student reviewer’s comments, and this checklist via e-mail to with TechWritePaper in the “subject” field.

Authors and Reviewers

In each block in the appropriate column, enter a  or Y if the paper fulfills the indicated requirement, or an N or “No” if it does not.

Author / Rev. / Boxman
Title
Does the title describe the content of the paper?
Is the title free of abbreviations?
Abstract
Is the abstract self-contained (i.e. no references)?
Is the abstract informative (i.e. summarizes key results, rather than merely indicating scope or subject of the work)?
Is the abstract free of undefined abbreviations?
Introduction
Is stage I sufficiently broad so that a non-expert can understand what the subject matter is?
Does stage II cite the specific references closest to the present work?
Reference numbers are not used as nouns!
Does the tense of the reference sentences reflect the attitude of the author about the cited work?
Does stage III clearly indicate the ‘gap’ in the previous work?
Is the ‘research question’ clear from stage IV?
Is stage V, if present, modestly stated?
Experimental Set-up and Procedure
Is the experimental set-up clear?
If a drawing is used for the set-up or apparatus, is it clear?
Are all the components labeled on the drawing?
Does it have sufficient detail?
Is unimportant detail removed?
Is the experimental procedure clear?
Model Assumptions, Derivation of Equations, etc.
Are the model assumptions clearly and explicitly stated?
Is the derivation of each equation clear?
Is every symbol defined?
For both experimental and theoretical papers:
Is the experimental procedure or theoretical derivation sufficiently detailed for researchers in other labs to duplicate the results presented in this paper?
Results
Is the order “location”, “presentation”, “comment” (where “location and “presentation” elements may be combined in a single sentence) followed in all cases? (Is the paper free of instances where a result is commented upon before it is presented?)
Are all “location” sentences in the present tense?
Are all “presentation” sentences in either the present or past tense?
Are all “presentation” sentences as quantitatively detailed as possible without overburdening the reader with unimportant detail?
Are the presentation sentences sufficiently detailed that a reader can read the text without immediate reference to the figures or tables? Is there a summary of the main point to be learned from each figure and table within the text? (“Blind man’s rule!”)
Are the results free of details of the methodology which should best be presented in the “Experimental Apparatus and Procedure” section?
data figures and tables
Is the best method of presentation selected for each result figure and table?
Are all of the conditions required to obtain a particular result detailed?
Is as much information as possible displayed on the graph, so that repetitive eye motion between the graph, caption, and text is not necessary (“heads up display” principle), but without being overcrowded?.
Are axes labeled, including units (and without using “X” format)?
Do the graphs and their captions convey sufficient understanding so that a reader can understand the graph without reference to the body of the text (“illiterate man’s rule”)?
comments
Is there a clear distinction between the description of a result, and comments on them (i.e. contained in separate sentences)?
Are only short comments interspersed with the results?
Are “comparisons” in the present tense?
Are modal auxiliaries (may, can) used for “explanations”?
Are tentative verbs used for “generalizations”?
Discussion
Does the discussion begin with statements relating specifically to the present work, and then expand to more general statements?
Is the Discussion based solely on the results presented in the Results section and in cited references (and free from “new results” which are presented in the Discussion for the first time)?
Are the explanations presented in the Discussion reasonable, and backed up with sufficient evidence for the degree of certainty implied? Does the author use established language conventions to convey degree of certainty (i.e. on a sliding scale from “speculation” to “proof”)
Does the “Discussion” place the results in their scientific context – i.e. explain their significance in reference to previous results and/or in terms of potential applications or extensions?
Conclusions (or concluding paragraph of the discussion)
Is the Conclusions section reasonably short (~1 paragraph)?
Is the Conclusions section free of restatements of the methodology and objective?
Is the Conclusions section based firmly on results and ideas which are presented in detail in previous sections (i.e. no rabbits pulled from the hat)?
Is the Conclusions section free of indicative sentences (i.e. sentences which merely indicate the scope of the work).
Is the “answer” to the “research question” clearly contained in the Conclusions section?
Author: Does the Conclusions section summarize the ~3 main points that you would like the reader to remember?
References
Is a consistent style used in the list of references?
If a numerical listing style is used, are the references numbered in the order in which they are cited in the text?
Figures
Is each figure (together with its caption) sufficiently clear and self contained so that it can be generally understood without reference to the text?
Is the line thickness and letter size sufficient so that the figure will be clear when reduced in the journal?
General English Style
Is the paper free of 1-sentence paragraphs?
Does each paragraph begin with a sentence which identifies the subject of the paragraph, and end with a sentence containing the conclusion or most important point in the paragraph?
Is the paragraph organization evident – i.e. are sentences on related subjects grouped together in paragraphs, and is each paragraph free of sentences unrelated to the paragraph subject?
Is the paper reasonably self-contained – i.e. can it be read without reference to external sources?
Is the paper free of grammatical errors?
Is the paper free of spelling errors?
Word Processing Style
Are “styles” defined and used for normal paragraphs, and for the various categories of section and subsection titles?
Is a paragraph style defined and used which automatically indents the first line of each paragraph?
Do the various heading styles use “keep with next” and “keep lines together” to insure that a title doesn’t appear at the bottom of the page without any text?
Is the file free of extraneous spaces, tabs, and blank lines? Are spaces between titles and text regulated automatically by the style definition (rather than by blank lines)? Are new pages forced by using a forced page break or style definition (rather than inserting blank lines)?
Scientific Content (to be answered by the author, and also by the reviewer if he is sufficiently close to the subject to judge)
Does the paper present significant new results?
Is the paper free of errors?
Are the conclusions justified?

-1-