241 lines
5.6 KiB
Markdown
241 lines
5.6 KiB
Markdown
# Section Moves
|
|
|
|
Use this file only after the main section logic has been decided in `SKILL.md`. This file is for phrase-level and move-level support derived from `Academic Phrasebank`, not for deciding the paper's overall writing strategy.
|
|
|
|
## Introduction
|
|
|
|
Questions this section must answer:
|
|
|
|
1. Why does the topic matter?
|
|
2. What is already known?
|
|
3. What is still missing or contested?
|
|
4. What does the present study ask or do?
|
|
|
|
Preferred move order:
|
|
|
|
1. establish importance
|
|
2. summarize what is known
|
|
3. identify a gap, limitation, or controversy
|
|
4. state the study aim
|
|
5. indicate value or approach
|
|
|
|
Useful phrase families:
|
|
|
|
- `Recent years have seen increasing interest in ...`
|
|
- `X is a central issue in ...`
|
|
- `Previous studies have shown that ...`
|
|
- `However, the mechanisms underlying ... remain poorly understood.`
|
|
- `Few studies have examined ...`
|
|
- `Here, we investigate whether ...`
|
|
- `This work provides ...`
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
- long historical throat-clearing
|
|
- detailed results
|
|
- inflated novelty claims before the gap is defined
|
|
|
|
## Literature Review
|
|
|
|
Questions this section must answer:
|
|
|
|
1. What lines of work define the field?
|
|
2. What has been established?
|
|
3. Where do findings diverge or remain incomplete?
|
|
4. Which gap matters for the present paper?
|
|
|
|
Preferred move order:
|
|
|
|
1. describe the scope of existing work
|
|
2. identify dominant approaches
|
|
3. state what has been established
|
|
4. note disagreements or contradictions
|
|
5. isolate the missing piece
|
|
|
|
Useful phrase families:
|
|
|
|
- `A substantial body of work has focused on ...`
|
|
- `Most studies have relied on ...`
|
|
- `Previous work has established that ...`
|
|
- `Findings have been mixed regarding ...`
|
|
- `By contrast, little attention has been paid to ...`
|
|
- `No study has yet examined ...`
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
- citation-by-citation summary
|
|
- treating all prior work as uniformly weak
|
|
|
|
## Methods
|
|
|
|
Question this section must answer:
|
|
|
|
- Could another group reproduce the work from this description, or from this description plus a clearly cited protocol?
|
|
|
|
Preferred move order:
|
|
|
|
1. design or cohort
|
|
2. materials or data source
|
|
3. procedure
|
|
4. outcome measures
|
|
5. analysis and statistics
|
|
6. ethics when relevant
|
|
|
|
Useful phrase families:
|
|
|
|
- `A cross-sectional study was undertaken to ...`
|
|
- `Samples were collected from ...`
|
|
- `X was quantified using ...`
|
|
- `We used ... to assess ...`
|
|
- `Differences were analysed using ...`
|
|
- `All analyses were performed in ...`
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
- `under standard conditions`
|
|
- `using routine methods`
|
|
- `data were analysed statistically`
|
|
|
|
## Results
|
|
|
|
Question this section must answer:
|
|
|
|
- What was observed, under which condition, and with what evidence?
|
|
|
|
Preferred move order:
|
|
|
|
1. orient the reader to the figure, table, or experiment
|
|
2. state the main observation
|
|
3. add quantitative detail
|
|
4. note expected or unexpected patterns
|
|
5. compare with prior work only if it clarifies the result
|
|
|
|
Useful phrase families:
|
|
|
|
- `Figure 1 shows ...`
|
|
- `As shown in Table 1, ...`
|
|
- `The most notable finding was that ...`
|
|
- `Contrary to expectations, ...`
|
|
- `No significant difference was observed in ...`
|
|
- `These results are consistent with ...`
|
|
- `In contrast to earlier reports, ...`
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
- discussion-length mechanism explanations
|
|
- repeating every visual detail from the figure
|
|
|
|
## Discussion
|
|
|
|
Questions this section must answer:
|
|
|
|
1. What do the main findings mean?
|
|
2. How do they relate to earlier work?
|
|
3. Which explanations are plausible?
|
|
4. What limitations constrain interpretation?
|
|
5. What follows from the findings, and what does not?
|
|
|
|
Preferred move order:
|
|
|
|
1. restate the main finding
|
|
2. explain plausible reasons
|
|
3. compare with earlier work
|
|
4. note limitations
|
|
5. state implications
|
|
6. point to future work if needed
|
|
|
|
Useful phrase families:
|
|
|
|
- `Taken together, these findings suggest that ...`
|
|
- `A possible explanation is that ...`
|
|
- `This discrepancy may reflect ...`
|
|
- `These results should be interpreted with caution because ...`
|
|
- `An implication of this is that ...`
|
|
- `Further work is needed to determine whether ...`
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
- repeating the Results section in new words
|
|
- claiming mechanism when only association was shown
|
|
|
|
## Conclusion
|
|
|
|
Questions this section must answer:
|
|
|
|
1. What was the central contribution?
|
|
2. Which finding matters most?
|
|
3. What implication follows, with what boundary?
|
|
|
|
Preferred move order:
|
|
|
|
1. return to the aim
|
|
2. summarize the decisive finding
|
|
3. state contribution or significance
|
|
4. give a boundary or forward look
|
|
|
|
Useful phrase families:
|
|
|
|
- `This study set out to ...`
|
|
- `The present findings indicate that ...`
|
|
- `These results extend our understanding of ...`
|
|
- `Notwithstanding these limitations, ...`
|
|
- `Further studies are required to ...`
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
- introducing new experiments
|
|
- ending on vague praise of the work
|
|
|
|
## Abstract
|
|
|
|
Questions this section must answer:
|
|
|
|
1. What problem or gap is being addressed?
|
|
2. What was done?
|
|
3. What was found?
|
|
4. Why should the reader care?
|
|
|
|
Preferred move order:
|
|
|
|
1. broad context
|
|
2. concrete gap
|
|
3. approach
|
|
4. key result with numbers if available
|
|
5. implication
|
|
|
|
Useful phrase families:
|
|
|
|
- `X remains challenging because ...`
|
|
- `Here, we ...`
|
|
- `Using ... , we found that ...`
|
|
- `We show that ...`
|
|
- `These findings suggest ...`
|
|
|
|
Keep the abstract selective. If a detail does not affect editorial triage, it probably does not belong.
|
|
|
|
## Title
|
|
|
|
Question this section must answer:
|
|
|
|
- Which few words make the paper searchable, accurate, and interesting without overclaiming?
|
|
|
|
Target properties:
|
|
|
|
- searchable
|
|
- specific
|
|
- restrained
|
|
- defensible
|
|
|
|
Useful patterns:
|
|
|
|
- `[Core entity] in/through/by [mechanism or context]`
|
|
- `[Process] shapes [outcome] in [system]`
|
|
- `[Signature/pattern/framework] of [phenomenon]`
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
- `A study of ...`
|
|
- vague hooks
|
|
- unverified `first`
|
|
- stacked jargon
|