Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Should an academic paper contain all text at the same structuring depth?

+0
−0

I'm not sure whether or not this is standard practice, but I've been taught that between two different-level headings, there shouldn't be any text. For example, the following would not be permitted (or is at least considered bad practice):

1. Chapter

blah ← no text here

1.1. Subchapter

Following this convention, should all text be at the same structuring depth?

I.e. all text would be for example at X.Y.Z. level, and no text at A.B. level.

Visualization:

1. Chapter

blah ← no text here (depth=1), because chapter 2 has text at depth=2

2. Chapter

2.1 Subchapter

blah

Note: I'm aware that chapters aren't supposed to stand alone (i.e. if there's chapter 1.1, there has to be at least a 1.2), but I omitted those for the sake of readability.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/38752. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

0 comment threads

1 answer

+1
−0

I have published several peer-reviewed scientific papers, also Master's Theses in two different disciplines and a long doctoral dissertation. Your proposed rule is not one I have ever followed, and not one any editor or reviewer ever complained about.

I take a pragmatic approach: In some sections like "Future Work", 100% of the text follows the main section heading; 7 Future Work. There are no subsections; to save space I don't subhead different kinds of future work. I might enumerate them, or might just start new paragraphs, since the description is generally short.

In other sections, I have introductory text following the main section then sub-sections and sub-sub-sections. I say "pragmatic" because if no text is necessary then I don't write any!

The point is to communicate the science in an orderly fashion, beyond that, anything there as filler to follow a form is extraneous and should be omitted. Also on the pragmatic side, unlike theses and dissertations, most journals have a page limit, and I compress away as much of the headings as I can to fit more prose or charts into the writing, because I am usually up against the page limit.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

Sign up to answer this question »