For many university students and young researchers, facing their first scientific publication can feel like a monumental task. The blank page weighs as heavily as the data they have gathered and the research they have conducted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In addition, the pressure to publish can turn writing into a test of endurance. However, far from being an innate talent, scientific writing is a skill that can be trained<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWriting a scientific paper is complex, yes, but it is something that can be practiced,\u201d explains \u00d3scar Arias<\/strong>, Dean of Graduate Studies at the School of Medicine and Health Sciences<\/a> at Tec de Monterrey, in an interview with TecScience<\/em>. He compares it to training as an Olympic-level athlete: \u201cIf we want to compete at the Olympic level without preparation, we will surely end up injured. In academia, something very similar happens: you need consistency, mastery of the subject, technical skills, and a lot of practice.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Mar\u00eda Luisa del Prado<\/strong> is a research professor at the School of Engineering and Sciences<\/a> at Tec de Monterrey and the only Mexican woman among the scientific editors of Elsevier\u2019s Next family of journals. She notes that one of the major gaps in scientific training is writing. \u201cWe learn how to do research, but not necessarily how to write; that is a skill developed over time and through practice,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although more courses and tools exist today, she acknowledges that academic writing is not always formally included in curricula, at either the undergraduate or graduate levels. \u201cIt should be part of the program,\u201d<\/strong> suggested the researcher, who was recognized last year as one of the world\u2019s most influential researchers due to the impact of her scientific publications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The pressure increases when it comes to publishing in a scientific journal. \u201cYou defend a thesis before a committee you already know, so there may be more trust, but with a scientific article, you don\u2019t know who will evaluate it,\u201d she explains. The peer-review system adds rigor, but also uncertainty: \u201cYou don\u2019t know into whose hands your manuscript will fall.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is also a widespread misconception among students: that a good scientific text must be complicated. \u201cMany times, people confuse quality with complexity and countless references, when in reality it\u2019s about finding your own voice<\/strong> and telling the scientific community what you discovered,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the most common questions when writing is where to begin. Mar\u00eda Luisa del Prado suggests starting with the most tangible parts: \u201cFirst, the methodology and the results<\/strong>, because you already did them and already have them. That gives you the sense that you\u2019re moving forward.\u201d The introduction, she explains, can be written later, once you are clear about which journal the article will be submitted to and what angle best suits it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n From his experience as a professor, \u00d3scar Arias has detected a recurring pattern in theses and other scientific publications: too much background and too little discussion.<\/strong> \u201cI\u2019ve seen these with four or five chapters full of background information and very detailed methods, but increasingly shorter project results and a half-page discussion,\u201d he notes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For this reason, he explains that scientific papers should be structured like an hourglass<\/strong>: starting with a broad overview, narrowing down to the results, and then returning to the broader implications of those findings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe most complex part for many students is the discussion. That\u2019s where you really see whether they master the field,\u201d adds the researcher, who shares content related to scientific publishing on his X account, @OACerebro<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Still, he believes there is no formula or secret narrative<\/strong>, since everyone has their own writing style and method. However, he offers a practical recommendation: be clear about the central message<\/strong> so that the story does not become diluted. \u201cIt often happens that you talk about many things and, in the end, you run out of space to describe the results.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n This logic also applies to science communication texts<\/strong>. When an article begins with lengthy background information and leaves the findings for the end, it loses impact. In science communication, they agree, results should appear early to hook the reader.<\/p>\n\n\n\nWe teach research, but we don\u2019t always teach writing<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Where to Start Writing?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n