IMRAD

1. IMRAD When, Why, and How Science Research is Reported

2. IMRAD • IMRAD is an acronym that stands for the common sections of a scientific research or lab report. • Introduction • Method • Results • [And] • Discussion

3. Where did it come from? • In 2004, the Journal of the Medical Library Association published an historical study on the origins of the format, and found that although the first instance of the format appeared in 1665, it wasn't a standardized format to well into the twentieth century Sollaci, L.B. & Pereira, M.G. (2004). The introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) structure: a fifty-year survey. J Medical Library Association, 92(3): 364–371.

4. So What? • IMRAD is a standardized form the helps scientists easily find the relevant details in a research study or analysis. • Without a narrative structure (as in a novel or story), the format facilitates reading because it not only allows readers to easily go to the section and seek the information that most appeals to them, but it helps readers cognitively chunk and make sense of information. See: Kucer, S. L. (1985). The making of meaning. Written Communication2(3): 317-336. Meadows, A.J. (1985). The scientific paper as an archaeological artifact. J Information Science11(1): 27–30.

5. Introduction (Literature Review) • You begin your introduction by briefly explaining the importance of the topic, followed by clear explanation as to why you came up with the hypothesis that you did. • In most scientific reports, the introduction would include an extensive review of the literature. This isn’t Shakespeare, but an examination of a number of peer-reviewed research articles in sources similar to the one you are writing for to show what other researchers have done and what still needs to be done (i.e. gap), concluding with how the current hypothesis/study fills that gap. • For some purposes, a literature review is less extensive when few studies have been published. Nevertheless, you will have to provide some details as to what made you come up with your hypothesis. Always try to cite some outside research. • Your introduction should lead to your Hypothesis. • You might also state your research question, but it is not required. State your hypothesis in ONE sentence, if possible. Keep it simple. • The hypothesis is a statement: “Students at DU believe that the minimum wage should be higher than it currently is.” • The hypothesis is NOT a question: “Do more people work on campus or off of campus?” – is a bad hypothesis (although it is a fine title for the overall report). • The hypothesis is NOT an exact guess: “we hypothesized that 57.0265 percent of people feel part-time work contributes very little to helping a person get a job after college.” Predict “more people.” • DO NOT modify your hypothesis to fit your results. • The parts and/or alternative names for the Introduction: • Literature Review • Background

6. Purpose and Theory Introduction

7. Purpose The purpose of the Literature Review is to outline what has come before and what still remains to be done. • What is known about the subject? • Where are the gaps in the knowledge of the subject? • What do you argue is the reason for the gap? • What is your research question (hypothesis)?

8. Other functions of a literature review • Establish your ethos • you know your field • Summarize the findings in the area • as a way to introduce others to the topic • Situate yours and others’ research • demonstrate that others have found X or were looking at A, but you want to search for Y, or want to look at B.

9. Proper Use of Literature Reviews Martin Ritchie’s “Proper Use of Literature Reviews” discuses these hallmarks of source use in a good introduction: • Relevant – the sources and studies cited should be related to your issue. Avoid tangents. • Representative – sources should represent current research in the field or a current position of that field. • Accurate – they should come from reputable, credible sources. Most importantly, they should be cited and read carefully so as to not misrepresent the original source. • Critical – if a highly debated topic, conflicting research should be addressed. Do not select only that which agrees with you. • Concise – state your claim, provide your evidence, and lead your reader into asking the same research question you are about to ask.

10. Research Phase You might begin by answering these questions: • What is known about the research? • Who else is doing this type of research? • Who is the “star” or specialist in this area? • What is the current status of the research? • Is there agreement or disagreement about the topic? • What contributes to the debate or speculation? • What have others suggest as probable problems to assess or methods to use? • How have other methods failed to account for?

11. Organizing Phase: Outline Once you have some or all of the questions answered, you need to start position the parts. Remember, you will read, takes notes on, and consider far more sources than will end up appearing in your final project. • Begin by stating your topic, and try to back it up with a source or citation. • Next, state the issue, and what is known (or not known) about the issue (sometimes articles will go on for a few pages before they actually get to the issue). • Provide some context for what elements of the issue may or may haven’t been considered. • Lead the reader to ask the same research question you are asking. (many of you have already done this in your research plans)

12. Drafting Phase: Coherence framework • Coordinative (show similar findings) • and, also, similarly, in addition • Contrastive (show different findings) • but, however, on the other hand, yet, alternatively • Conclusive (show a result or conclusion) • so, thus, therefore, as a result, because • Alternative (show different location, time, subject findings) • other, or • Explicative (show specific or example findings) • for example, as shown by, as can be seen by • Speculative (consider possibility of findings or reasoning) • possible explanations, possibly, could/would/might

13. Literature Review FAQ

14. Where do I start in the Introduction? Introduce your topic. “Topic” is the larger category of the thing you are researching: professional writing (work), academic writing, journalistic writing. It’s a good idea to cite a source here as well. The “topic” part doesn’t have to refer to academic studies alone.

15. Then what? You want to move next into your issue. “Issue” is the specific of the thing you are researching; for example, things like resumes in professional writing, IMRAD in academic writing, or advice columnsin journalistic writing. Here’s where you need to cite academic studies to provide some background on previous studies. You would write much more here than about the topic. Ideally, you would cite 2-3 studies in this part, but at the very least, cite 1 academic source here.

16. How do I write about the gap? The gap is what is not known about your issue, and what you are hoping to fill. It follows the “issue” graf or grafs. The most common phrases that signal the gap are as follows: • “Little is known about [issue]” • “Previous studies have shown X about [issue], but none has looked at y”

17. Do I have to have a thesis? No. Please don’t. A “study” should end with the Research Question (RQ). The whole point of the Introduction is to lead to the RQ. Don’t spoil the rest of the paper, the results, or even the method (although some authors will discuss the method if it is novel or part of the research gap). The point is to get the reader to come to the same RQ as you are asking. And it is worded as a question. It can be under its own subheading (see the Williams et al. article we read).

18. Other Sections of IMRAD

19. Method [next Monday] • The purpose of the method is to describe every step you performed from coming up with your experiment to performing your experiment to tabulating your experiment data, so that future researchers, if they follow your exact steps, should find the same results. • Everything that appears in your methodology section should be described explicitly and be observable. • A methodology section should also: • Determine your measurement unit (e.g. “student attitudes towards ethics at work”). • Define all terms (e.g. “ethics are defined as norms associated with a given work environment”). • Determine and allow for all possible variables (e.g. location, double counting, weather, time of day, persons who do not have jobs). • Parts/alterative names for Method • Participants/Subjects • Design • Setting • Equipment • Procedures

20. Results [individual help during studio time] • The purpose of the results section is to tell the audience the aggregate data or results. • Do NOT interpret the implications or significance of the results mean until the Discussion. However, you WILL interpret what the results mean in the Results section. • Pie charts, graphs and tables can be very useful and effective, but you have to have text that describes the tables and graphs and responds to the hypothesis. All charts, graphs, tables should be labeled (e.g. Figure 1: “Title” above the graph), have a legend, and referred to in the Results section by that label (e.g. “as shown in figure 1, blah.”)

21. Discussion[individual help during studio time] • Significance, Limitations, and Implications. • In the discussion section, you answer the “so what?” question. You Analyze and Discuss the results. • What do these results tell? • What use is the information? • Did anything happen you didn't expect? How did that influence the results? • Did you goof? • Did you forget to allow for all variables? • Do you have suggestions for future researchers? • Maybe a question you asked provided a new avenue of research? • Remember: you can revise the report, but you can not redo the research. If it's a disaster, say so, and say why. “Discussion” is the place for you to speculate why you found what you found. It's also the place to say anything else that doesn't belong in other sections of the report. • Implications should both address what it means now that you have found what you found, as well as suggest avenues for further research