Writing a Journal Article. Part 3. Tables & Figures

Tables and figures attract the eye. Busy readers may get most of the detail they remember from your figures, so spend time thinking about the stories they tell. What you choose to show in your tables and figures is a statement about what you think is most important. And your tables and figures may well turn up in scientific presentations as slides.

The formatting requirements for tables varies among journals -- check what the instructions to authors say, and look at some recent published articles in the journal (preferably studies that are similar to your own) in order to get an idea of how readers and editors expect to see data presented, and what types of data belong in the paper.

Choosing figures is an opportunity for creativity. Think beyond your first choice. What can you include in the figure? What questions will readers have, and how can you make your figure answer those questions quickly and easily?

For example, in a paper I am currently working on, we are doing a case-control study. We are using the control group to generate regression equations to predict the expected score for our cases, and then comparing the expected scores with the observed scores.

So, the question is whether the difference between the observed and expected values is different from zero, and, if so, in which direction.

Our choices for figures include:

1. Mean &  SD for residual (observed-expected) values. 
2. Mean &  SD for residual values, by a mediating factor (in this case, sex).
3. Dot plot versions of each of A and B, showing the spread of the individual points (because our sample is small, we have space to show all of the points). 
4. Scatter plot of observed values (y) against expected values (x), with the x=y line drawn in, to illustrate the expectation of equality. 
5. Scatter plot of observed values (y) against expected values (x), with x=y, and individual points coded to show details (for example, to show men and women separately). 

Choosing something like figure E will provide all of the data in A, but adds considerable information about the distribution of data, the difference between men and women, and whether the degree of deviation from expectation is different across the range of the expected values.

Finally, when you are writing your table heading (as always, following the convention of the particular journal you plan to submit to) and choosing the axis labels and legends for your figure, make it easy for your reader to understand you, and hard for them to come to common misunderstandings. Spend some time to wordsmith so that you are concise and clear rather than wordy.


This is Part 3 of a 3 part series of articles. I wrote it because I was about to write all of this to send to a junior colleague as feedback about her article, and realized that it would be of more general interest/use. If you find this useful and wish to share it, please credit me.

(c) 2012 Christine L. Hitchcock, PhD.
chrysalis-creations.blogspot.com
chris.hitchcock.com

Writing a Journal Article. Part 2. Telling the Story

When you write a journal article, you are telling a story. The story starts by explaining what is already known, and what is important about the area. Then it sets the stage for your research by creating a compelling argument that your research addresses an unresolved but important issue in the field, one that meets the academic standards for value within your discipline, and that has broader social benefits (if you can swing that one without roflmao). You need to convince the reader that you have done your library work, and know what has already been published in the area (and you should do that anyway). In some fields, you brand yourself by which authorities you cite. Do that in a way that serves you. And it always helps to cite the important and relevant work that has been authored by likely peer reviewers and/or editors. :)

My thesis advisor, David Sherry, gave me a powerful metaphor for the structure of an academic article. He said that you should think of it as an hourglass. You start with a broad, general idea, and gradually lead the reader to the very specific point you are trying to make. Once you have made your point, you lead the reader back out again to the broader context, making it clear that your work has answered some broader questions, and contribute to both understanding and new questions in the field as a whole.

This metaphor is a useful one, because it speaks to the aesthetic of scientific story telling, the balance between the before-getting-to-the-point and afterwards. It also reminds you that there is something broader, that most people will not be experts or even particularly interested in your very specific expertise, and need to be shown how it fits into what they already know, and how your result can be useful.

Effective story-tellers consider their audience. What do they already know that will help you tell your story? What do they not know, that you need to provide for your story to make sense to them? What do they think they know that you need to correct in order for them to not misunderstand what you have to say? What are their interests, and how does your story speak to those interests? What will you tell them, and why will they remember, cite and use it?

Always check the journal first, to make sure you are following the expected narrative structure. If they say to use a structured abstract, use a structured abstract. Follow the sequence of sections that the journal says you should follow. Use the headings they ask for. If they want SI units and abbreviations, use SI units and abbreviations. Look at the format they want for tables and figures. This should be a no-brainer, but if your article is rejected and you are submitting to a new journal, it can be easy to overlook.

This is Part 2 of a 3 part series of articles. I wrote it because I was about to write all of this to send to a junior colleague as feedback about her article, and realized that it would be of more general interest/use. If you find this useful and wish to share it, please credit me.

(c) 2012 Christine L. Hitchcock, PhD.
chrysalis-creations.blogspot.com
chris.hitchcock.com

Writing a Journal Article. Part 1. Consider Your Audience

When you are writing a scientific article, it helps to think about your audience. Scientific publication is, in addition to a scholarly endeavour, a social act, and the social context in which you plan to publish is important.

So.

Think about which journal you might publish in. Yes, look at things like impact factors, etc, because they will contribute to the value of the paper for your CV. But also consider whether your particular study will fit. Does this journal like to publish things such as you are wanting to publish? Who reads the journal, and what kind of things can you expect that they already know?

Next, carefully read the instructions to authors. Read the description of what the journal would like to publish. Does your study fit? If so, make sure that that is obvious in the way that it is written, and in the covering letter you write to the editors. As in most things, there is a very rapid decision-making process (yes/no) that will happen as the incoming article is scanned. You want to clearly get into the Yes category, so at least you get a review.

Why are you publishing this study? Who do you want to influence? Who do you want to read it? Make sure that you consider that when you are writing. For example, if you want this to affect clinical care, think about what a clinician would like to know, and make sure that that information is clearly in the abstract, the first paragraph of the discussion/conclusion, and in the final conclusion.

If you want this to affect policy, find out how policy changes are made, and make sure that you have measured the appropriate things. Read up or chat with people who affect policy, and find out what they can use to effect change. Make sure you use their language. And, again, make sure it is crystal clear through language and clear statements, again, in the abstract, introduction, discussion and final conclusion. Remember that policy makers and decision makers are busy folks and will skim your article (or will only see it if a screener lets it pass) - make it easy to recognize that this article is relevant to them, and important enough to be considered.

On the other hand, this may be ordinary science, another brick in the academic wall, as it were. Still, you want to make sure that other brick-layers recognize how your findings might be used. What language do other practitioners use? What are their favourite references? Some people access the literature by scanning new journal issues - make sure your title will help them to find you. Many will use keyword searches. Make sure the keywords they might use appear somewhere in the title, abstract or keyword list. If you are a medical researcher, make sure that the standard MeSH terms will hit your article. Finally, some people will search the literature by using a scientific citation indexing process -- make sure you have cited major review articles or foundational papers, so that you are found through that route as well.


This is Part 1 of a 3 part series of articles. I wrote it because I was about to write all of this to send to a junior colleague as feedback about her article, and realized that it would be of more general interest/use. If you find this useful and wish to share it, please credit me.

(c) 2012 Christine L. Hitchcock, PhD.
chrysalis-creations.blogspot.com
chris.hitchcock.com