The Research Paper Writing Process: 7 Steps From Sources to Final Draft

You can understand your research and still struggle to write about it. Your notes are full of ideas and your references keep growing, but the paper isn’t coming together.

Drawing on Jackson’s Academic Writing 101 talk, this guide walks you through organising sources, drafting and revising your paper. The aim is to write better papers, not simply more of them.

The research paper writing process at a glance

1. Clarify the question your research paper addresses

Write the question your paper investigates in one sentence. Use it to decide what belongs in the draft.

Start with these three lines:

• Topic: My paper examines [subject].
• Research question: It investigates [specific question].
• Main finding or argument: The evidence shows or supports [answer].

If you cannot state the main finding yet, note what you still need to establish.

Keep these lines at the top of your outline. Check each planned paragraph against your research question. Keep it if it explains the problem, presents relevant evidence or helps interpret the findings. Leave unrelated detail in your notes.

2. Organise your sources so you can write from them

For every source you keep, record what it contributes to your paper.

Start with relevant papers, books and bibliographies you already know. Examine the references in a useful paper to find earlier work, then look at later papers that cite it. These connections give your next search a direction.

Keep track of terminology, too. Your subject may appear under different names, related concepts or terms used in another discipline. Record useful alternatives as you search.

Prof. Jackson recommends building an annotated bibliography: references accompanied by your notes, comments and insights. The purpose is to make the reading useful when you start writing.

What to record for each source

Keep what the author reports separate from your interpretation. Record the supporting page or passage so you can return to it when checking a claim.

Group the sources before writing the review

Prof. Jackson suggests looking at themes and chronology. Which papers address the same problem? How have the approaches or findings developed over time?

Use those groups to plan paragraphs. Instead of writing one summary per author, explain a shared finding, an important difference or an unresolved question, with the relevant sources together.

For more help with that stage, see the guide to writing a literature review.

3. Build a research paper outline around your evidence

Give each section a job, then place the relevant points and sources beneath it.

A heading such as “Discussion” becomes useful when you know which findings you will interpret and what you want readers to understand. Under each heading, add three notes:

• Purpose: What does this section need to explain?
• Material: Which findings, sources or ideas belong here?
• Missing work: What still needs evidence or explanation?

What each section needs to do

Use the headings required for your article type. Jackson describes 4 core functions: the introduction explains why the investigation matters; methods explain what you did and why; results present what you found; and discussion explains its significance.

The research paper structure guide covers section organisation in more detail.

Turn a heading into a paragraph plan

Place references beside the points they support. When something is missing, leave a specific note such as “[Explain why these findings differ].” That tells you what to investigate before writing the interpretation.

4. Write a first draft without stopping at every sentence

Start with a section where you have evidence and a point to explain.

You do not need to perfect the introduction before writing anything else. Choose a manageable part of your outline and develop it into a paragraph.

A useful paragraph gives the reader a point, the evidence supporting it and an explanation of the connection. When one of those is missing, mark the gap:

• Check whether this source supports the comparison
• Explain how this finding answers the research question

These notes let you continue drafting without losing track of what needs work.

Jackson describes reading and writing as connected activities. Writing can reveal an explanation you have not developed; returning to a source can help you address it.

“We always write fast and edit slow.” Prof. Iain Jackson

The first draft gives you something to examine. Revision is where you check whether the explanation is clear, the evidence is sufficient and the wording says what you intended.

Make each writing session specific: develop one paragraph, explain one finding or connect two parts of the argument. That is a more manageable task than simply “work on the paper.”

5. Explain your findings rather than simply reporting them

Tell the reader what you found, then explain what it means for your research question.

A paper can contain substantial evidence and still leave its contribution unclear. The missing part is often the connection between the findings and the wider problem.

Use the discussion to answer three questions:

• How do your findings address the problem?
• How do they relate to previous work?
• What do they help us understand?

Avoid repeating the results in slightly different words. A repeated finding tells readers what they already know. An interpretation explains its significance.

Test the paper’s contribution in three sentences

Jackson recommends working toward three statements covering the problem, the approach and findings, and why the work matters.

• The problem: This paper investigates [question or problem]
• The approach and findings: Using [approach or evidence], it finds or argues [supported finding or interpretation]
• The significance: This matters because [contribution to the wider field].

Which sentence is hardest to complete? Start your next revision there.

The contribution does not have to be an immediate practical application. It may clarify an unresolved question, explain a difference between studies or improve understanding of a subject. Be specific about what your evidence supports.

6. Revise the argument before polishing the language

Check what each paragraph establishes before deciding how to shorten or rephrase it.

Start with the explanation. Can you identify the paragraph’s main point? Does the evidence support it? Is the connection to your question clear?

Then examine the wording. Remove repetition, simplify sentences that are difficult to follow and replace vague expressions with precise ones.

A clearer edit keeps the same meaning

The first revision removes unnecessary wording. The second keeps “suggest” and “may,” preserving the strength of the claim. Changing “suggest” to “prove” would alter the meaning, not simply improve the style.

Jackson treats editorial assistance as something to review, not automatically accept.

“The last thing you want is to lose your voice as a writer.” Prof. Iain Jackson

Keep edits that make the reasoning easier to follow. Rework those that alter the claim, remove a necessary qualification or change what you intended to say.

7. Check that the reader can follow the paper

Read the paper as a whole, not only as individual sections. Your reader should understand the investigation without seeing your notes.

Check whether the introduction explains the problem, the sections develop the argument and the discussion makes the contribution clear.

Look especially at the connections between paragraphs. You may know why two points belong together, but the reader still needs that relationship explained. Add the missing explanation rather than relying on a word such as “however” or “therefore.”

Consider whether a table, diagram or timeline would make a difficult relationship easier to understand. Jackson encourages visual explanations where they help communicate the work.

Make the final read-through purposeful

Ask whether the reader can answer three questions:

• What was investigated ?
• What does the evidence establish ?
• why does it matter ?

When an answer is unclear, return to the section responsible for explaining it. Resolve remaining drafting notes and check that cited sources support the claims beside them.

Review the title as well. It should communicate the subject without trying to include every keyword. Finish by checking the reference and formatting requirements for your intended journal.

To try the editing approach, start with a paragraph you have already written. Compare a suggested revision with your original and keep the changes that help you say what you mean.

Put the steps into practice

Your paper should make three things clear: what you investigated, what the evidence shows and why it matters.

Start with the section that needs the most attention. Use SciSpace tools linked throughout this guide to organise your sources, develop an outline or revise your writing, then review the results against your evidence and intended meaning.

Watch Academic Writing 101 by Prof. Iain Jackson

Watch Prof. Iain Jackson explain the writing process and demonstrate the source-comparison, outlining and editing tasks behind this guide.

About Prof. Iain Jackson

Prof. Iain Jackson is Professor and Research Director at the Liverpool School of Architecture, University of Liverpool. He teaches research methods and supervises doctoral research, alongside sharing guidance on how researchers develop their projects and communicate their work.

Frequently asked questions

注意转载授权 · 阅读原文