از تغییر نترس
تغییر یعنی دگرگونی، تحول، عوض شدن. یعنی فرق کردن. خیلی از ما از تغییر میترسیم و در برابرش مقاومت میکنیم. ولی راه بهتری هم هست.
به عنوان انسان، برای ما عادیه که در برابر هر شکلی از تغییر از خودمون مقاومت نشون بدیم. اگر زندگی آدمهای مختلف در سراسر دنیا رو بررسی کنی، میبینی که در انبوهی از کارهای روزمره و آیینمانند زندگی میکنن. ما بردهی عاداتمون هستیم.
بیشتر ما از تغییر فراریایم. هنوز در زندگیم به آدمی برنخوردهام که هیچ مشکلی با تغییر زندگیش نداشته باشه، چه تغییر کوچکی باشه چه بزرگ. ما در برابر تغییر مقاومت میکنیم، چون برای ما ناشناخته است و در وضعیت جدید معذبیم؛ و هیچکس دلش نمیخواد معذب باشه.
با این حال چه بخواهیم چه نخواهیم، جنبههای مختلف زندگی ما تغییر میکنه. سنمون بالا میره، عزیزانمون رو از دست میدیم، شغل عوض میکنیم، اخراج میشیم، و چیزهای دیگه. هیچ چیز در دنیای ما تا ابد ثابت نمیمونه. تغییر به طور کلی، کشمکشیه که تمام وجود ما رو به چالش میکشه. ما ترجیح میدیم که در همون زندگیهای روزمره و راحت و معنیدار خودمون به سر ببریم و چیزی مزاحم این روزمرگی نشه.
تغییر یعنی دگرگونی، تحول، عوض شدن. یعنی فرق کردن. خیلی از ما از تغییر میترسیم و در برابرش مقاومت میکنیم. ولی راه بهتری هم هست.
به عنوان انسان، برای ما عادیه که در برابر هر شکلی از تغییر از خودمون مقاومت نشون بدیم. اگر زندگی آدمهای مختلف در سراسر دنیا رو بررسی کنی، میبینی که در انبوهی از کارهای روزمره و آیینمانند زندگی میکنن. ما بردهی عاداتمون هستیم.
بیشتر ما از تغییر فراریایم. هنوز در زندگیم به آدمی برنخوردهام که هیچ مشکلی با تغییر زندگیش نداشته باشه، چه تغییر کوچکی باشه چه بزرگ. ما در برابر تغییر مقاومت میکنیم، چون برای ما ناشناخته است و در وضعیت جدید معذبیم؛ و هیچکس دلش نمیخواد معذب باشه.
با این حال چه بخواهیم چه نخواهیم، جنبههای مختلف زندگی ما تغییر میکنه. سنمون بالا میره، عزیزانمون رو از دست میدیم، شغل عوض میکنیم، اخراج میشیم، و چیزهای دیگه. هیچ چیز در دنیای ما تا ابد ثابت نمیمونه. تغییر به طور کلی، کشمکشیه که تمام وجود ما رو به چالش میکشه. ما ترجیح میدیم که در همون زندگیهای روزمره و راحت و معنیدار خودمون به سر ببریم و چیزی مزاحم این روزمرگی نشه.
ولی بزرگترین حسن تغییر اینه که چون مجبوریم با تغییرات سازگار بشیم، در نتیجه یاد میگیریم و رشد میکنیم. در واقع، تنها چیز ثابت زندگی ما که همیشه و مداوما تجربه خواهیم کرد، تغییره. اگرچه این کشمکش همیشگی ما با تغییرات شاید طاقتفرسا به نظر بیاد، ولی باید بپذیریمش و ازش یاد بگیریم.
پذیرش تمام جنبههای تغییر
از زمانی که وارد این دنیا شدیم، انبوهی از تغییرات رو تجربه کردهایم و تا روزی که به دل خاک برگردیم باز هم تجربه خواهیم کرد. چیزی که باید یاد بگیریم، اینه که حالا که تغییر گریزناپذیره، لزومی نداره اینقدر باهاش بجنگیم. اگر فقط کمی دیدت رو عوض کنی، تغییر میتونه اتفاق محشری باشه.
برای این کار، لازمه اول به کشمکشهایی نگاه کنیم با هر تغییری که در زندگی تجربه کردهایم، داشتهایم. این کشمکشها دلیلی داره، و کارش اینه که به ما چیزی یاد بده. اگر هرگز پستیوبلندیهای زندگی رو تجربه نکنی، هیچوقت آدم بهتری نمیشی.
به هر کدوم از مشقتهایی فکر کن که قبلا تجربه کردی و نهایتا بهش غلبه کردی. اگر به نظرت در نتیجهی اون تغییر چیزی یاد نگرفتی یا دستکم خودت رو بهتر نشناختی، بهتره خودت رو به یه دکتر نشون بدی.
بنابراین، هر بار که با تغییر بزرگی در زندگی روبرو میشی، باید سعی کنی که این کشمکشها رو همونطور که هست بپذیری، و بدونی که ناراحتی و عذاب ناشی از تغییر تا ابد دوام نمیاره. لازمه درک کنی که دیدگاهت نسبت به شرایط، در کنترل خودته. و وقی که یاد گرفتی مشقتها رو همونطور که هست بپذیری، در نتیجهی اون تغییر میتونی یاد بگیری و رشد کنی.
عذاب، موقتیه
هر چیزی فصلهایی داره. زمستان بهار میشه و در انتهای تابستان برگهای زرد پاییز از راه میرسن. برای کسانی که بتونن از توفان عبور کنن، زندگی جدید و فرصتهای بیشماری وجود خواهد داشت. اگر با تغییر سخت و عذابآوری مثل از دست دادن یک عزیز یا مشکلات مالی یا یه طلاق بد روبرو شدی، یادت باشه که درد این تغییر هم بالاخره میگذره و ابدی نیست.
مهمترین جنبهی این فرایند اینه که بپذیری که تغییر پیش میاد؛ و تو باید احساست و تمام کشمکشهایی که در نتیجهی احساساتت تجربه میکنی رو بپذیری و باهاش کنار بیای. اشکالی نداره اگر ناراحت و عصبانی بشی؛ مهمترین جنبهی کنار اومدن با تغییرات ناخواسته اینه که یادت باشه که این عذاب فقط یک فصل گذرا است و تموم میشه.
به اکنون نگاه کن
«امروز» تمام چیزیه که داریم. دیروز تمام شده و برای همیشه رفته و به فردا اعتباری نیست. تمام چیزی که داریم این لحظه در زمانه. مادربزرگم زمانی به من گفت که به جز حسی که در هر لحظه داری هیچ چیز دیگهای اهمیت نداره. باید این رو درک کنیم که ما تنها در همین لحظه حس میکنیم (زمان حال)، و نه فردا و نه دیروز. اکنون تنها چیزیه که روش کنترل آگاهانه داریم.
لحظهای درنگ کن و ببین که الان چه خبره. چه چیزی در همین لحظه هست که درک میکنی و قدردانش هستی؟
چه چیزی میتونی از کشمکشهایی که الان باهاشون روبرو هستی یاد بگیری؟ با انتخاب اینکه چه حسی داشته باشی و با کنار اومدن با تغییراتی که روی ذهنت سنگینی میکنه، چه چیزی دربارهی خودت میتونی کشف کنی؟
یادت باشه، تغییر جزئی از زندگی روزمرهی همهی آدمهای دنیا است. هیچکس بدون تجربهی انبوهی از تغییراتِ بعضا شدید زندگی نمیکنه و نمیمیره. تنها راه کنار اومدن با این کشمکشها اینه که اونها رو همونطوری که هست بپذیری و تا جایی که میتونی از هر تجربه چیزی به دست بیاری.
پذیرش تمام جنبههای تغییر
از زمانی که وارد این دنیا شدیم، انبوهی از تغییرات رو تجربه کردهایم و تا روزی که به دل خاک برگردیم باز هم تجربه خواهیم کرد. چیزی که باید یاد بگیریم، اینه که حالا که تغییر گریزناپذیره، لزومی نداره اینقدر باهاش بجنگیم. اگر فقط کمی دیدت رو عوض کنی، تغییر میتونه اتفاق محشری باشه.
برای این کار، لازمه اول به کشمکشهایی نگاه کنیم با هر تغییری که در زندگی تجربه کردهایم، داشتهایم. این کشمکشها دلیلی داره، و کارش اینه که به ما چیزی یاد بده. اگر هرگز پستیوبلندیهای زندگی رو تجربه نکنی، هیچوقت آدم بهتری نمیشی.
به هر کدوم از مشقتهایی فکر کن که قبلا تجربه کردی و نهایتا بهش غلبه کردی. اگر به نظرت در نتیجهی اون تغییر چیزی یاد نگرفتی یا دستکم خودت رو بهتر نشناختی، بهتره خودت رو به یه دکتر نشون بدی.
بنابراین، هر بار که با تغییر بزرگی در زندگی روبرو میشی، باید سعی کنی که این کشمکشها رو همونطور که هست بپذیری، و بدونی که ناراحتی و عذاب ناشی از تغییر تا ابد دوام نمیاره. لازمه درک کنی که دیدگاهت نسبت به شرایط، در کنترل خودته. و وقی که یاد گرفتی مشقتها رو همونطور که هست بپذیری، در نتیجهی اون تغییر میتونی یاد بگیری و رشد کنی.
عذاب، موقتیه
هر چیزی فصلهایی داره. زمستان بهار میشه و در انتهای تابستان برگهای زرد پاییز از راه میرسن. برای کسانی که بتونن از توفان عبور کنن، زندگی جدید و فرصتهای بیشماری وجود خواهد داشت. اگر با تغییر سخت و عذابآوری مثل از دست دادن یک عزیز یا مشکلات مالی یا یه طلاق بد روبرو شدی، یادت باشه که درد این تغییر هم بالاخره میگذره و ابدی نیست.
مهمترین جنبهی این فرایند اینه که بپذیری که تغییر پیش میاد؛ و تو باید احساست و تمام کشمکشهایی که در نتیجهی احساساتت تجربه میکنی رو بپذیری و باهاش کنار بیای. اشکالی نداره اگر ناراحت و عصبانی بشی؛ مهمترین جنبهی کنار اومدن با تغییرات ناخواسته اینه که یادت باشه که این عذاب فقط یک فصل گذرا است و تموم میشه.
به اکنون نگاه کن
«امروز» تمام چیزیه که داریم. دیروز تمام شده و برای همیشه رفته و به فردا اعتباری نیست. تمام چیزی که داریم این لحظه در زمانه. مادربزرگم زمانی به من گفت که به جز حسی که در هر لحظه داری هیچ چیز دیگهای اهمیت نداره. باید این رو درک کنیم که ما تنها در همین لحظه حس میکنیم (زمان حال)، و نه فردا و نه دیروز. اکنون تنها چیزیه که روش کنترل آگاهانه داریم.
لحظهای درنگ کن و ببین که الان چه خبره. چه چیزی در همین لحظه هست که درک میکنی و قدردانش هستی؟
چه چیزی میتونی از کشمکشهایی که الان باهاشون روبرو هستی یاد بگیری؟ با انتخاب اینکه چه حسی داشته باشی و با کنار اومدن با تغییراتی که روی ذهنت سنگینی میکنه، چه چیزی دربارهی خودت میتونی کشف کنی؟
یادت باشه، تغییر جزئی از زندگی روزمرهی همهی آدمهای دنیا است. هیچکس بدون تجربهی انبوهی از تغییراتِ بعضا شدید زندگی نمیکنه و نمیمیره. تنها راه کنار اومدن با این کشمکشها اینه که اونها رو همونطوری که هست بپذیری و تا جایی که میتونی از هر تجربه چیزی به دست بیاری.
How to Write a World Class Paper
From title to references & From submission to revision
By Elsevier
From title to references & From submission to revision
By Elsevier
Reasons why Manuscripts are Rejected:
Manuscripts submitted for peer review publication may be rejected for a number of different reasons, most of which are avoidable. It should be noted that the reasons for accepting manuscripts are not the mirror image of the reasons for rejecting manuscripts. The main reasons for accepting manuscripts are: their contribution and relevance to the field, excellence of writing, and quality of the study design.
Many journals expect reviewers to assess the scientific merits and validity of research in submitted manuscripts; however, reviewers can become critical of manuscripts containing numerous language errors, which are difficult to eliminate without careful editing . Scientific writing demands both good science and well written manuscripts. Following are the principal reasons why manuscripts are rejected. They are all equally important because reviewers tend to focus on different issues depending on their individual concerns and the journal’s requirements.
1. Poor experimental design and/or inadequate investigation. An inadequate sample size, a biased sample, a non-unique concept, and scientific flaws in the study are common faults.
2. Failure to conform to the targeted journal. This is a common mistake. The focus of the manuscript is not within the scope of the journal and/or the guidelines of the targeted journal are not followed. This can easily be avoided by reading the targeted journal and reviewing the author guidelines.
3. Poor English grammar, style, and syntax. Though poor writing may not result in outright rejection of a manuscript, it may well influence the reviewer’s and editor’s overall impression of the manuscript. It has been shown that a well written manuscript has a better chance of being accepted.
4. Insufficient problem statement. It is important to clearly define and appropriately frame the study’s question.
5. Methods not described in detail. Details are insufficient to repeat the results. The study design, apparatus used, and procedures followed must be made clear. In some cases it might be better to put too much information into the methods section rather than to put too little; information deemed unnecessary can always be removed prior to publication.
6. Overinterpretation of results. Some reviewers have indicated that a clear and ‘‘honest’’ approach to the interpretation of the results is likely to increase the chances of a manuscript being accepted. Identify possible biases and confounding variables, both during the design phase of the study and the interpretation of the results. Describe experimental results concisely.
7. Inappropriate or incomplete statistics. Using inappropriate statistical methods and overstating the implications of the results is a common error. Use an appropriate test and do not make the statistics too complicated. Quantify and present findings with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty (such as confidence intervals).
8. Unsatisfactory or confusing presentation of data in tables or figures. The tables or figures do not conform in style and quantity to the journal’s guidelines and are cluttered with numbers . Make tables and graphs easy to read. Some editors may start by looking quickly at the tables, graphs, and figures to determine if the manuscript is worth considering.
9. Conclusions not supported by data. Make sure your conclusions are not overstated, are supported, and answer the study’s questions. Be sure to provide alternative explanations, and do not simply restate the results.
10. Incomplete, inaccurate, or outdated review of the literature. Be sure to conduct a complete literature search and only list references relevant to the study. The reviewers of your manuscript will be experts in the field and will be aware of all the pertinent research conducted.
11. Author unwilling to revise the manuscript to address reviewer’s suggestions. This can easily be resolved. Taking the reviewers’ suggestions into account when revising your manuscript will nearly always result in a better manuscript. If the e
Manuscripts submitted for peer review publication may be rejected for a number of different reasons, most of which are avoidable. It should be noted that the reasons for accepting manuscripts are not the mirror image of the reasons for rejecting manuscripts. The main reasons for accepting manuscripts are: their contribution and relevance to the field, excellence of writing, and quality of the study design.
Many journals expect reviewers to assess the scientific merits and validity of research in submitted manuscripts; however, reviewers can become critical of manuscripts containing numerous language errors, which are difficult to eliminate without careful editing . Scientific writing demands both good science and well written manuscripts. Following are the principal reasons why manuscripts are rejected. They are all equally important because reviewers tend to focus on different issues depending on their individual concerns and the journal’s requirements.
1. Poor experimental design and/or inadequate investigation. An inadequate sample size, a biased sample, a non-unique concept, and scientific flaws in the study are common faults.
2. Failure to conform to the targeted journal. This is a common mistake. The focus of the manuscript is not within the scope of the journal and/or the guidelines of the targeted journal are not followed. This can easily be avoided by reading the targeted journal and reviewing the author guidelines.
3. Poor English grammar, style, and syntax. Though poor writing may not result in outright rejection of a manuscript, it may well influence the reviewer’s and editor’s overall impression of the manuscript. It has been shown that a well written manuscript has a better chance of being accepted.
4. Insufficient problem statement. It is important to clearly define and appropriately frame the study’s question.
5. Methods not described in detail. Details are insufficient to repeat the results. The study design, apparatus used, and procedures followed must be made clear. In some cases it might be better to put too much information into the methods section rather than to put too little; information deemed unnecessary can always be removed prior to publication.
6. Overinterpretation of results. Some reviewers have indicated that a clear and ‘‘honest’’ approach to the interpretation of the results is likely to increase the chances of a manuscript being accepted. Identify possible biases and confounding variables, both during the design phase of the study and the interpretation of the results. Describe experimental results concisely.
7. Inappropriate or incomplete statistics. Using inappropriate statistical methods and overstating the implications of the results is a common error. Use an appropriate test and do not make the statistics too complicated. Quantify and present findings with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty (such as confidence intervals).
8. Unsatisfactory or confusing presentation of data in tables or figures. The tables or figures do not conform in style and quantity to the journal’s guidelines and are cluttered with numbers . Make tables and graphs easy to read. Some editors may start by looking quickly at the tables, graphs, and figures to determine if the manuscript is worth considering.
9. Conclusions not supported by data. Make sure your conclusions are not overstated, are supported, and answer the study’s questions. Be sure to provide alternative explanations, and do not simply restate the results.
10. Incomplete, inaccurate, or outdated review of the literature. Be sure to conduct a complete literature search and only list references relevant to the study. The reviewers of your manuscript will be experts in the field and will be aware of all the pertinent research conducted.
11. Author unwilling to revise the manuscript to address reviewer’s suggestions. This can easily be resolved. Taking the reviewers’ suggestions into account when revising your manuscript will nearly always result in a better manuscript. If the e
ditor indicates willingness to evaluate a revision, it means the manuscript may be publishable if the reviewers’ concerns could be addressed satisfactorily. For more detailed information regarding dealing with some of these issues, please review some of our other articles at http://www.sfedit.net/newsletters.htm. These articles approach such subjects as Writing the First Draft, Writing Effective Results, Methods and Materials, Discussions, Selecting a Journal, Responding to Reviewers, etc.
فرهنگ لغات رياضي آکسفورد؛ (ورق زن آنلاين) :
http://data.axmag.com/data/201301/U88866_F183426/FLASH/index.html
ورژن Pdf : http://www.mediafire.com/view/lsb5c85prl5wkng/OxfordDictionaryMathematics.pdf
http://data.axmag.com/data/201301/U88866_F183426/FLASH/index.html
ورژن Pdf : http://www.mediafire.com/view/lsb5c85prl5wkng/OxfordDictionaryMathematics.pdf
Developing an Effective Title
The title defines the contents of your manuscript in as few words as possible. An effective title “sells” your manuscript to the reader immediately and influences whether or not a reader will read the manuscript.
The title is essential in bringing your manuscript to the readers' attention, especially where the database being searched does not include the abstract of the article. It should include all essential words in the right order so the topic of the manuscript is accurately and fully conveyed. An excellent title is the key to ensuring your article will be found. An improperly titled paper may be lost and never reach its intended audience.
Your title will be read by many more people than the rest of your manuscript. Indexing services will use the title to categorize your paper. Authors who cite your paper will include the title in their list of references, which, in turn, will be read by thousands of readers.
1. Write the title early in the writing process and critique it the same as any other section of the manuscript.
2. A title should be the fewest possible words that accurately describe the content of the paper (the recommended length is 10 - 12 words).
3. The golden rule is: Express only one idea or subject in your title.
4. Put an important word first in the title.
5. Use key words which highlight the main content of your manuscript and can be understood, indexed, and retrieved by a database search.
6. Be concise. Omit all waste words such as "A study of ...", "Investigations of ...", "Observations on ...".
7. Eliminate redundant words such as verbs and articles so the title functions as a label rather than a sentence.
8. Use simple word orders and common word combinations.
9. Be as descriptive as possible and use specific rather than general terms: for instance, include the specific drug name rather than just the class of drug.
10. Write scientific names in full, for instance Escherichia coli rather than E. coli.
11. Avoid using abbreviations and acronyms; they could have different meanings: for instance "Ca" for calcium could be mistaken for "CA", which means cancer.
12. Refer to chemicals by their common or generic name instead of their formulas.
13. Avoid the use of Roman numerals in the title as they can be interpreted differently: for instance, part III could be mistaken for factor III.
14. Do not use words such as “significant”, which are considered too strong, state your conclusion too boldly, and trivialize your manuscript by reducing it to a one-liner.
15. Make certain that your title and abstract match the final version of your article.
The title defines the contents of your manuscript in as few words as possible. An effective title “sells” your manuscript to the reader immediately and influences whether or not a reader will read the manuscript.
The title is essential in bringing your manuscript to the readers' attention, especially where the database being searched does not include the abstract of the article. It should include all essential words in the right order so the topic of the manuscript is accurately and fully conveyed. An excellent title is the key to ensuring your article will be found. An improperly titled paper may be lost and never reach its intended audience.
Your title will be read by many more people than the rest of your manuscript. Indexing services will use the title to categorize your paper. Authors who cite your paper will include the title in their list of references, which, in turn, will be read by thousands of readers.
1. Write the title early in the writing process and critique it the same as any other section of the manuscript.
2. A title should be the fewest possible words that accurately describe the content of the paper (the recommended length is 10 - 12 words).
3. The golden rule is: Express only one idea or subject in your title.
4. Put an important word first in the title.
5. Use key words which highlight the main content of your manuscript and can be understood, indexed, and retrieved by a database search.
6. Be concise. Omit all waste words such as "A study of ...", "Investigations of ...", "Observations on ...".
7. Eliminate redundant words such as verbs and articles so the title functions as a label rather than a sentence.
8. Use simple word orders and common word combinations.
9. Be as descriptive as possible and use specific rather than general terms: for instance, include the specific drug name rather than just the class of drug.
10. Write scientific names in full, for instance Escherichia coli rather than E. coli.
11. Avoid using abbreviations and acronyms; they could have different meanings: for instance "Ca" for calcium could be mistaken for "CA", which means cancer.
12. Refer to chemicals by their common or generic name instead of their formulas.
13. Avoid the use of Roman numerals in the title as they can be interpreted differently: for instance, part III could be mistaken for factor III.
14. Do not use words such as “significant”, which are considered too strong, state your conclusion too boldly, and trivialize your manuscript by reducing it to a one-liner.
15. Make certain that your title and abstract match the final version of your article.
Eight Steps to Developing an Effective Outline
Preparing an outline is the most important step in the process of producing a manuscript for publication in a journal. The outline bears roughly the same relation to the final manuscript as an architectural blueprint does to a finished house. Its purpose of an outline is to divide the writing of the entire paper into a number of smaller tasks. A good outline will organize the various topics and arguments in logical form. By ordering the topics you will identify, before writing the manuscript, any gaps that might exist.
There is no single best way to prepare a scientific manuscript, except as determined by the individual writer and the circumstances. You should know your own style of writing best. Whatever you decide to do, you should follow at least these steps before beginning to write your manuscript. Remember, at this stage, you are only constructing an outline. You are not writing; you just need to put down some notes to guide your thinking.
1. Develop a central message of the manuscript Prepare a central message sentence (20-25 words). If you were asked to summarize your paper in one sentence, what would you say? Everything in the manuscript will be written to support this central message.
2. Define the materials and methods Briefly state the population in which you worked, the sampling method you employed, the materials you used, and most importantly, the methods you used to carry out the study.
3. Summarize the question(s) and problem(s) What was known before you started the study? What answers were needed to address the problem(s)? List the key points pertaining to the question(s) and problem(s). What did you do to answer the question(s)?
4. Define the principal findings and results Your central message sentence probably encapsulates the most important findings. There may be others that you feel ought to be included. List these in note form. Don’t worry about the order or about how many you put down.
5. Describe the conclusions and implications Make brief notes on each of the implications that arise from your study. What are the principal conclusions of your findings? What is new in your work and why does it matter? What are the limitations and the implications of your results? Are there any changes in practice, approaches or techniques that you would recommend?
6. Organize and group related ideas together List each key point separately. Key points can be arranged chronologically, by order of importance or by some other pattern. The organizing scheme should be clear and well structured. You can use a cluster map, an issue tree, numbering, or some other organizational structure. Identify the important details, describe the principal findings, and provide your analysis and conclusions that contribute to each key point.
7. Identify the references that pertain to each key point
8. Develop the introduction Before beginning on the introduction, read through the notes you have made so far in your outline. Read them through and see whether there is a coherent and cohesive story and a unifying theme that runs through the outline. Your introduction outline should start with the main message, describe what the purpose or objective of your study was, how you went about doing the study, what you found and what are the implications of what you found.
Preparing an outline is the most important step in the process of producing a manuscript for publication in a journal. The outline bears roughly the same relation to the final manuscript as an architectural blueprint does to a finished house. Its purpose of an outline is to divide the writing of the entire paper into a number of smaller tasks. A good outline will organize the various topics and arguments in logical form. By ordering the topics you will identify, before writing the manuscript, any gaps that might exist.
There is no single best way to prepare a scientific manuscript, except as determined by the individual writer and the circumstances. You should know your own style of writing best. Whatever you decide to do, you should follow at least these steps before beginning to write your manuscript. Remember, at this stage, you are only constructing an outline. You are not writing; you just need to put down some notes to guide your thinking.
1. Develop a central message of the manuscript Prepare a central message sentence (20-25 words). If you were asked to summarize your paper in one sentence, what would you say? Everything in the manuscript will be written to support this central message.
2. Define the materials and methods Briefly state the population in which you worked, the sampling method you employed, the materials you used, and most importantly, the methods you used to carry out the study.
3. Summarize the question(s) and problem(s) What was known before you started the study? What answers were needed to address the problem(s)? List the key points pertaining to the question(s) and problem(s). What did you do to answer the question(s)?
4. Define the principal findings and results Your central message sentence probably encapsulates the most important findings. There may be others that you feel ought to be included. List these in note form. Don’t worry about the order or about how many you put down.
5. Describe the conclusions and implications Make brief notes on each of the implications that arise from your study. What are the principal conclusions of your findings? What is new in your work and why does it matter? What are the limitations and the implications of your results? Are there any changes in practice, approaches or techniques that you would recommend?
6. Organize and group related ideas together List each key point separately. Key points can be arranged chronologically, by order of importance or by some other pattern. The organizing scheme should be clear and well structured. You can use a cluster map, an issue tree, numbering, or some other organizational structure. Identify the important details, describe the principal findings, and provide your analysis and conclusions that contribute to each key point.
7. Identify the references that pertain to each key point
8. Develop the introduction Before beginning on the introduction, read through the notes you have made so far in your outline. Read them through and see whether there is a coherent and cohesive story and a unifying theme that runs through the outline. Your introduction outline should start with the main message, describe what the purpose or objective of your study was, how you went about doing the study, what you found and what are the implications of what you found.
تغییر بیهدف به پیشرفت نمیرسه اگر مرتب اپ برنامهریزی روزانهات رو عوض کنی، مسیر رفتوآمدت به سر کار رو عوض کنی، در اتوبان خط عوض کنی، در فروشگاه صف عوض کنی، احتمالا خودت هم یک جایی متوجه میشی که فقط داری دور خودت میچرخی.
هر وقت قصد تغییر در چیزی رو داشتی، یک هدف نهایی در ذهنت داشته باش تا به یه پیشرفت منجر بشه.
خوبه که آدم در نقاط مختلف زندگیاش به قصد پیشرفت تغییری بده. شاید داری خودت رو متمایز میکنی، یا از دایرهی راحتیات خارج میشی. فقط حواست باشه که وقتی تغییر میکنی، هدف مشخصی در ذهن داشته باشی، وگرنه تغییری که میدی ممکنه بیفایده باشه.
اگر مرتب ابزارهای مدیریت شخصی، مسیرها و عادتهای خودت رو تغییر بدی، ممکنه مانع از این بشی که به نقطهی ثبات و کارآیی برسی.
این نه فقط در مورد آدمها که در مورد کسبوکار هم صدق میکنه. شرکتها ممکنه تغییر رو با بهبود اشتباه بگیرن، ولی تغییر همیشه هم به معنی بهبود و پیشرفت نیست.
«تغییر برای تغییر همیشه هم به پیشرفت نمیرسه.»
و با اینکه من کاملا تشویق میکنم که آدم از دایرهی راحتی خودش خارج بشه، ولی تغییر بیش از اندازه هم ممکنه باعث سردرگمی، به هم ریختگی، و کاسته شدن از توانایی باشه.
هر وقت قصد تغییر در چیزی رو داشتی، یک هدف نهایی در ذهنت داشته باش تا به یه پیشرفت منجر بشه.
خوبه که آدم در نقاط مختلف زندگیاش به قصد پیشرفت تغییری بده. شاید داری خودت رو متمایز میکنی، یا از دایرهی راحتیات خارج میشی. فقط حواست باشه که وقتی تغییر میکنی، هدف مشخصی در ذهن داشته باشی، وگرنه تغییری که میدی ممکنه بیفایده باشه.
اگر مرتب ابزارهای مدیریت شخصی، مسیرها و عادتهای خودت رو تغییر بدی، ممکنه مانع از این بشی که به نقطهی ثبات و کارآیی برسی.
این نه فقط در مورد آدمها که در مورد کسبوکار هم صدق میکنه. شرکتها ممکنه تغییر رو با بهبود اشتباه بگیرن، ولی تغییر همیشه هم به معنی بهبود و پیشرفت نیست.
«تغییر برای تغییر همیشه هم به پیشرفت نمیرسه.»
و با اینکه من کاملا تشویق میکنم که آدم از دایرهی راحتی خودش خارج بشه، ولی تغییر بیش از اندازه هم ممکنه باعث سردرگمی، به هم ریختگی، و کاسته شدن از توانایی باشه.