To spark interest among your audience — referees and journal readers alike — provide a compelling motivation for the work presented in your paper: The fact that a phenomenon has never been studied before is not, in and of itself, a reason to study that phenomenon.
Write the context in a way that appeals to a broad range of readers and leads into the need.
For the task, the effects of a range of inhibitors of connexin channels, such as the connexin mimetic peptides Gap26 and Gap27 and anti-peptide antibodies, on calcium signaling in cardiac cells and He La cells expressing connexins. In any case, the paragraphs in these sections should begin with a topic sentence to prepare readers for their contents, allow selective reading, and — ideally — get a message across.
Even the most logical structure is of little use if readers do not see and understand it as they progress through a paper. Most Materials and Methods sections are boring to read, yet they need not be.
Here are three examples of such a combination: An Introduction is usually clearer and more logical when it separates what the authors have done (the task) from what the paper itself attempts or covers (the object of the document).
In other words, the task clarifies your contribution as a scientist, whereas the object of the document prepares readers for the structure of the paper, thus allowing focused or selective reading. " Although papers can be organized into sections in many ways, those reporting experimental work typically include Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion in their body.Finally, they structure the content in the body in theorem-proof fashion, stating first what readers must remember (for example, as the first sentence of a paragraph) and then presenting evidence to support this statement.In the Introduction section, state the motivation for the work presented in your paper and prepare readers for the structure of the paper.Start by stating the actual situation (what we have) as a direct continuation of the context.If you feel you must explain recent achievements in much detail — say, in more than one or two paragraphs — consider moving the details to a section titled State of the art (or something similar) after the Introduction, but do provide a brief idea of the actual situation in the Introduction. Emphasize the contrast between the actual and desired situations with such words as but, however, or unfortunately.(Papers reporting something other than experiments, such as a new method or technology, typically have different sections in their body, but they include the same Introduction and Conclusion sections as described above.) Although the above structure reflects the progression of most research projects, effective papers typically break the chronology in at least three ways to present their content in the order in which the audience will most likely want to read it.First and foremost, they summarize the motivation for, and the outcome of, the work in an abstract, located before the Introduction.An explicit preview would be phrased much like the object of the document: "This section first . Do not make readers guess: Make sure the paragraph's first sentence gives them a clear idea of what the entire paragraph is about.If you feel you cannot or need not do more than list items, consider using a table or perhaps a schematic diagram rather than a paragraph of text.The traditional Results and Discussion sections are best combined because results make little sense to most readers without interpretation.When reporting and discussing your results, do not force your readers to go through everything you went through in chronological order.