I'm a junior and I've written essays before, but my first big research paper is due in a month and I'm honestly confused about how to structure it. Every source I find seems to describe things differently. Some say IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion) , others add sections like Theory, and some journals want completely different formats depending on their style guide .
From what I've gathered, the classic IMRAD structure is the gold standard for most scientific and social science papers . The Introduction establishes the research problem and why it matters, the Methods section describes what was done in enough detail that others could replicate it, the Results present the findings objectively, and the Discussion interprets what those findings mean in context . Some formats also include a separate Conclusion section that ties everything together and suggests future directions .
But I'm seeing variations everywhere. Purdue's engineering guide includes sections like Theory/Basic Principles and Nomenclature that I hadn't considered . The Association for Psychological Science recommends a Research Transparency Statement between the Abstract and Introduction . And some journals combine Results and Discussion into one section .
For those who've successfully written research papers, what structure actually works in practice? Do you follow the IMRAD formula strictly, or does it vary by field? And how do you know what your professor expects when they just say 'use standard format' without specifying? I'd love to hear about real experiences with organizing long papers.
From what I've gathered, the classic IMRAD structure is the gold standard for most scientific and social science papers . The Introduction establishes the research problem and why it matters, the Methods section describes what was done in enough detail that others could replicate it, the Results present the findings objectively, and the Discussion interprets what those findings mean in context . Some formats also include a separate Conclusion section that ties everything together and suggests future directions .
But I'm seeing variations everywhere. Purdue's engineering guide includes sections like Theory/Basic Principles and Nomenclature that I hadn't considered . The Association for Psychological Science recommends a Research Transparency Statement between the Abstract and Introduction . And some journals combine Results and Discussion into one section .
For those who've successfully written research papers, what structure actually works in practice? Do you follow the IMRAD formula strictly, or does it vary by field? And how do you know what your professor expects when they just say 'use standard format' without specifying? I'd love to hear about real experiences with organizing long papers.