Blog • Posted on Jul 19, 2024
The No BS Guide to Writing a High Impact Research Introduction
A great research introduction is key to getting your research paper published in high impact journals. But writing a great introduction can be daunting and the path to success isn’t clear. We’ve broken down exactly what makes a great research introduction into a step-by-step guide to follow for your manuscript.
Let’s take a look at what makes up a great research introduction. All introductions should, at minimum, cover the following four objectives.
Research Introduction Template:
1. Introduce the problem or gap
The best way to think of your introduction is to imagine it as an upside down pyramid. That is, you begin by introducing the reader to your topic in the broadest sense, and end by telling the reader exactly what your study does.
Paragraph 1 is comprised of 3 parts:
- A hook/opener
- Background context to explain the topic that we don't yet fully understand
- The problem or knowledge gap the study proposes to solve/fill
Hook/Opener
Your ‘hook’ or ‘opener’ is the first sentence, so it’s important to get this right. Your goal should be to pique reader interest. Aim to keep this short, as you avoid taxing the reader early on by fatiguing them with unnecessary words.
Tip: make sure to paraphrase the hook from your abstract. These should never be the same, word-for-word.
A great way to pique reader interest and evoke curiosity is to use an impressive fact or statistic relevant to the issue you will be introducing.
For example, if your study looks at belowground biodiversity, you might state:
“Almost two-thirds of all species on Earth are found belowground.”
For more examples of great hooks, check out this article on how to write a research abstract in 6 simple steps.
Background context
Write 1-2 sentences that give context to the topic that you’ve introduced. Ideally, these should guide the reader into understanding the overarching problem or knowledge gap that your study solves/fills.
The easiest way to write these sentences is to think in reverse from your problem or gap.
For example, if the problem is that no one has quantified the effects of warmer summer temperatures on insect foraging behavior, start by describing that we know that insect foraging behavior varies predictably with ambient air temperatures.
In other words, begin by saying what we do know before you state what we don’t.
“While insect foraging behavior is influenced by a myriad of environmental factors, ambient summer temperature is a well documented predictor of foraging activity. However, global warming is now driving record summer temperatures in central Europe and the impacts of this warming on insect foraging behavior have yet to be quantified.”
The problem or knowledge gap
Write one sentence that clearly and concisely articulates the problem at hand. This sentence almost always begins with “However”, “Yet” or “But”.
In the example above, this sentence has been merged with our second context sentence. This is another way to get the same point across. How you include this sentence is specific to your individual needs.
2. Contextualize the problem with examples
Paragraph 2 is where you should elaborate on the problem or gap that you’ve just introduced. To the reader, this will feel very natural as you’ve just introduced the idea in the final sentence of the last paragraph.
Take the reader on a historical tour
Beginners often make the mistake of using this paragraph to include every study on the topic that they have researched before writing their manuscript. More advanced writers are more deliberate in their approach.
The goal here is to strike a balance between providing enough background context that the reader can fully conceptualize the issue and its history, but also not get bogged down with unnecessary details that distract from the narrative.
These paragraphs typically explain the problem mechanistically, chronologically or both. If your field has a long history of trying to solve this problem, it makes sense to give the reader a brief historical account of what led to our current understanding.
For example, you could explain the first primary hypotheses put forward to explain the phenomenon and how much empirical support these have gained over the decades.
If the problem is new to your field, you might instead give the reader a brief outline of all the mechanistic hypotheses that have been put forth to explain it. Don’t forget to also include whether they have been formally tested or not.
- Have these tests been fruitful?
- Has our understanding of the problem changed at all?
- What have all previous studies failed to do?
These are the kinds of questions paragraph 2 should answer.
3. Narrow the scope to put your study in focus
Guide them to your destination
The purpose of paragraph 3 is to narrow the scope of what you’re talking about so that it feels natural when you shift to speaking about what your study did. Another way to think about this is to imagine you’re setting yourself up for a punchline, much like a joke.
If you stripped the introduction down to only what you did (i.e. paragraph 4), the reader wouldn’t understand why you did it the way that you did. And that’s the key. The why is what your story is founded upon. It tells the reader why your study is particularly valuable.
For instance, if your study aimed to answer why species richness is highest in the tropics, and you highlight in paragraphs 1 and 2 that all previous studies have failed to consider stochastic effects, your study is unique because it is the only study to date to do so. Therefore, your paragraph 3 should outline what kinds of stochastic effects could drive higher species richness in the tropics and how.
If there are 2-4 ways in which this could occur, you should list these in a logical manner that ends with the one that your study specifically addresses.
4. State your research questions or hypotheses
Congratulations, you’re at the final and easiest part! Paragraph 4 really is a no-brainer.
Here, you’ll simply want to state your research questions or hypotheses and bluntly as possible. This paragraph almost always begins with “Here, we…” or “In this study, we…”. You have a couple choices here.
First, you’ll want to decide whether to formulate your study’s objectives as questions or hypotheses. Some fields, especially ‘hard sciences’ and disciplines that are primarily experimental like ecophysiology, expect formal hypotheses. This is an ode to the strict scientific process by which these disciplines were founded. ‘Softer’ sciences and fields that are more observational in nature are more welcoming of the idea of research questions.
If possible, always choose questions over hypotheses. This is because questions pique interest, evoke curiosity and create drama that enhances our story. For example, consider the following two options:
Option 1: “We expected warmer temperatures to increase germination rates”
Option 2: “Are germination rates higher in warm environments than in cold environments?”
Option 2 is just better. Whatsmore, the underlying hypothesis is self-evident. This is because the question is closed. Why does this matter? And what’s the difference between a closed and open question anyway?
Open questions begin with “What”, “Why”, and “How”, and result in any number of possible answers. Closed questions behind with “Do”, “Are”, and “Is”, and can only be answered with a yes or no; this is what makes their underlying hypotheses self-evident.
Lastly, you’ll want to decide how to present your questions or hypotheses. If you’re running with hypotheses or predictions, it’s almost always best to list these in a numbered bullet format. It’s easy to read and easy to find or come back to later. If you’re running with questions, it’s best to give each their own sentence each. This also allows you to elaborate on why you are asking each question.
If you’ve done a good job of introducing the reader to the topic, outlining the problem or gap, and narrowing the scope in paragraphs 1-3, these questions should feel very natural to the reader and be of no surprise.
That’s it, folks! With these tips you should be well on your way to writing a high-impact, convincing research introduction. If you’re still unsure or want to have your work professionally edited, be sure to schedule a session with one of our mentors.
Dr. Matt Biddick is a Senior Consultant at RURU. You can book sessions with him here.
