"Research is formalized curiosity."
- Zora Neale Hurston
Research as a form of inquiry is structured, purposive, and directed. It is not simply an aggregate of information, but a methodical process. In the humanities and social sciences in particular, research involves an acknowledgement of diverse perspectives, an appreciation for subjectivity, thick description (Clifford Geertz), an emphasis on context, a focus on the processual and relational, and a situated, critical, and reflexive approach to one's research questions.
Research might seek to uncover stories, interpretations, and narratives; structures, levels, and networks; individual voices; behaviours, actions, and events; the non-human or sensory world; or relationality, connections, and situations.
An abstract is a short summary of your research paper — usually around 6-7 sentences, between 150-250 words. A well-written abstract serves multiple purposes: it lets readers quickly grasp the essence of your paper and decide whether to read it in full; it prepares readers to follow the detailed information and arguments in your paper; and it helps readers later remember the key points.
What to include in an abstract:
Summarise the article, don't just introduce it. Tell a story — state the puzzle or problem the article addresses rather than offering a barrage of data without an argument. State the argument and make a claim for its significance. Reveal your most valuable findings, since people are more likely to read an article if they know upfront what is most interesting about it. State your methods briefly — no more than one sentence. Use strong verbs: your abstract "argues" or "demonstrates," not "explores" or "attempts to." Include all the most relevant keywords, since many search engines work from abstract and title alone.
What to avoid in an abstract: repeating yourself; long sentences; heavy jargon; ellipses; quoting from your own paper; over-citation or specific references to figures, tables, or images.
The introduction is the most effective paragraph of your paper. It introduces the central theme, sets the scene, and states the thesis. The key question driving any introduction is: why does this research need to exist?
Topic vs Research Problem
A topic is a broad subject area — descriptive and wide. A research problem is a specific, analytical question: an intellectual puzzle. The formula is: Topic + unresolved question + scholarly tension = research problem.
Examples:
Topic: Kafka and bureaucracy. Research Problem: How does The Trial anticipate modern theories of administrative violence and legal opacity?
Topic: Climate change and agriculture. Research Problem: How will rising nighttime temperatures affect rice yields in South Asia?
Identifying the Gap
A research gap is something existing scholarship has not yet adequately explained, tested, or interpreted. A gap is rarely "nobody has studied this" — it is more often about how existing work is incomplete. Gaps can be empirical (missing data or evidence), theoretical (lacking conceptual explanation), or methodological (limited in approach).
Establishing Scholarly Stakes
Stakes explain why solving the research problem matters. They answer: what difference does this research make? These can be practical, methodological, or conceptual.
Positioning Within Scholarly Debates
A strong introduction situates your work within existing conversations using three moves: stating the field context, identifying a limitation in existing work, and presenting your intervention.
A strong introduction must: move from topic to research problem; identify a gap in existing scholarship; demonstrate why the research matters; and position the study within scholarly conversations.
What to avoid: filler introductions; sweeping or generic claims; dictionary definitions as opening moves; report-style formatting.
Literature Review
A literature review is a critical synthesis of existing research, theories, and findings related to a particular topic or question. It involves summarising, analysing, and interpreting the current body of knowledge to highlight key trends, debates, and gaps.
A good literature review demonstrates awareness of prior work and debates on the research topic; identifies gaps on which the researcher can build their study; sharpens the research questions and identifies a suitable method of analysis; and positions the thesis with respect to prior literature. It should also challenge neutral scholarship, interrogate how knowledge is produced and used, and recognise how academic paradigms have historically privileged certain perspectives.
Every literature review should contain: an introduction or background section; a body that selectively and strategically discusses sources; and a conclusion that generally includes a gap statement.
How to organise the main body: Thematically — around key ideas, theories, or concepts; Chronologically — tracking how ideas have evolved over time; Contextually — comparing the literature across different country or regional contexts; By perspective — laying out different authors' debates; Methodologically — examining how research questions have been studied so far.
How to decide the scope: Define your topic clearly and refine it for the purpose of the review. Decide how comprehensive you want to be. Assess relevance — how close or distant is a particular text from your research question? Consider currency — how far back do you want to go, or do you want to focus on the last 20-25 years?
When engaging with a source, ask: What were the aims and objectives? What were the findings? What is the central argument? What method did the author use? What is the contribution to the field? Does it connect to your topic, and if so, how?
Synthesising vs Summarising
Summarising condenses what a source says. Synthesis brings multiple sources into conversation with one another and with your own argument. When synthesising: explore how sources support your own position; express a stance towards previous studies rather than simply agreeing or disagreeing; try to start and end paragraphs with your own ideas; use quotes sparingly.
Argument is reasoned thinking. Its essence is a claim (also called a thesis) supported by reasons, which are in turn backed by evidence — facts, data, examples, or expert testimony. Rhetoric is the art of effective persuasion.
A thesis statement must be debatable — something people could reasonably disagree on. It also needs to be narrow enough to be manageable.
The structural components of an argument are: Claim, Qualifiers, Data, Warrants, Backing/Evidence, and Rebuttals.
A warrant is the underlying assumption that makes a claim seem self-evident. Making your warrant explicit strengthens your argument by showing that it is deliberate and well-reasoned.
Rhetorical Appeals
Logos — the appeal to reason and logic, using inductive or deductive reasoning.
Ethos — the appeal to the writer's credibility and character, built through reliable sourcing, respect for opposing views, and logical organisation.
Pathos — the appeal to the audience's values, needs, and emotions, used appropriately to illuminate rather than distort.
Editing begins as soon as you finish your first draft. You re-read to assess organisation, transitions, and whether your evidence supports your argument. Proofreading is the final step — correcting spelling, punctuation, capitalisation, grammar, and citations.
Stages of editing: Macro edits (structure, key concepts, argument); Micro edits (voice, vocabulary, verbs, sentence variety); Standardisation and hygiene check (proofreading, spellcheck, citations).
A comprehensive checklist — start big, end small: Have you answered the question adequately? Are your claims accurate and consistent? Is the structure logical? Are transitions clear? Is your tone appropriate? Are your citations in order? Are there clunky sentences or unnecessary words?
Reverse Outlining: Read your draft, note the key theme of each paragraph, identify any jumps in logic, flag where too many ideas are packed into one paragraph, and rearrange as needed.
Basic presentation expectations: include a title page where applicable; number your pages; double-space text including quotations, footnotes, and reference lists; use 1-inch margins; use a standard 12-point font; place the bibliography on a separate page at the end.
Why publish and present? To share your work with wider audiences; to receive feedback and build scholarly community; to strengthen your academic profile; and to improve your writing, argumentation, and communication skills.
Finding calls for papers: SAS CFP Database (UPenn), H-Net, Humanities Commons CORE. You can also follow relevant hashtags on social media such as #AcademicChatter, #CFPAlert, and #PhDChat. Publishing short pieces — book reviews, experience logs, creative nonfiction, student blogs — is also a valuable habit.
Finding the right journal: Consider the scope (does your topic fit?), the intended audience, the type of article (empirical, theoretical, review, opinion), journal metrics (impact factor, peer-review process), open access versus subscription, and time to publication. Read a few articles from the journal before submitting.
Presenting at conferences: Start small — university, department, and regional conferences are a good entry point. A conference proposal is not the same as a full paper — follow the abstract structure. Stick to time limits (typically 10-20 minutes). Practise with peers beforehand. Use visuals wisely and don't overload slides. Be open to feedback and questions.
Acknowledgement
This resource has been developed from the Kashf Initiative Writing Studio session, on How to Write a Journal Article, based on presentation materials originally prepared by Sonakshi Srivastava, Senior Writing Fellow (ELT), Centre for Writing and Communication, Ashoka University. The Kashf Initiative extends its gratitude to Sonakshi for facilitating the sessions and to Sonali Kale from the team for her extensive effort in developing the Writing Studio.
The recordings of the session can be accessed on the Kashf Initiative YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@KashfInitiative
