---
title: "Scientific writing"
chunk: 2/3
source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_writing"
category: "reference"
tags: "science, encyclopedia"
date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:37:57.612484+00:00"
instance: "kb-cron"
---

Dissuasion from, and sometimes advocacy of, the passive voice. Advocates for the passive voice argue for its utility in avoiding first-person pronouns, while critics argue that it can be hard to make claims without an active voice.
Generalizations about tense. In the mathematical sciences, for example, it is customary to report in the present tense, while in experimental sciences reporting is always in the past tense, as the experiments happened in the past.
Preferences about "we" vs. "I" as a personal pronoun or a first-person pronoun (e.g., mathematical deductions sometimes include the reader in the pronoun "we.")
Contemporary researchers in writing studies have pointed out that blanket generalizations about academic writing are seldom helpful, for example, scientific writing in practice is  complex and shifts of tense and person reflect subtle changes in the section of the scientific journal article. Additionally, the use of passive voice allows the writer to focus on the subject being studied (the focus of communication in science) rather than the author. Similarly, some use of first-person pronouns is acceptable (such as "we" or "I," which depends on the number of authors). According to some journal editors, the best practice is to review articles recently published in the journal a researcher is planning to submit to.
Scientific writing has a strong emphasis on the use of peer-reviewing throughout the writing process. Primarily at the publication phase, when an article is about to be published, most scientific journals will require 1-3 peers to review. The process of peer-reviewing is to ensure that the information that is attempting to be published is accurate and well thought out.
Nobel Prize-winning chemist Roald Hoffmann has stated that, in the chemical sciences, drawing chemistry is as fundamental as writing chemistry.
Different types of citation and reference systems are used in scientific papers. The specific citation style scientific articles use depends on the journal in which the article is published. Some styles that are commonly used are Vancouver, Harvard, and Chicago. The Vancouver system and Parenthetical referencing style are primarily used in medicine. Chicago style is more common for writing that is focused in the social sciences. For the more natural sciences, CSE style is used.  Some of the less commonly utilized citation styles include MLA and AMA.
Two examples of styles commonly seen in scientific journals are the Vancouver System and the Harvard System. The Vancouver system is more used for medical journals, while the Harvard System is more used for social and natural science journals. One typical citation style used for a specific discipline is the ACS (American Chemical Society) system, used for Scientific articles on Chemistry. The AMS (American Mathematical Society) style is commonly used for research papers with a base in mathematics. The AIP (American Institute of Physics) Style is typically used for scientific writing pertaining to physics.

=== IMRaD format ===
While not mandatory, scientific writers often follow the IMRaD format, which stands for Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. This serves as a template and allows for consistency across scientific writing.
In articles and publications, the introduction serves a fundamental purpose. It convinces the reader that the information is worth telling. It is common for the "Introduction" to branch from a broad concept connecting to the objective of the research to a specific gap in knowledge that drives the research. In addition to this, another strategy accepted by the scientific community to develop introductions consists of explaining the steps that lead to the hypothesis and research discussed in the writings. The method section is where scientific writers explain the procedure of the experiment or research. In "Results," writers who follow the IMRaD format share, with neutrality, the experimental results, which in "Discussion," are compared with prior information to end with a conclusion about the research, which should be 3 to 5 paragraphs long and consist of statements that reflect the outcomes of the entire publication. As part of the "Result" section of the IMRaD, scientists utilize a plethora of analytical tools in order to analyze the data from the research in a way that allows other scientists to understand. This also gives the opportunity for expansion on certain aspects of the research if there are still unknowns present.

== Large language models in scientific writing ==
Artificial intelligence in scientific writing is considered by scholars to be a new dilemma for the scientific community. Large language models like ChatGPT have been demonstrated to be useful tools in the research and draft creation process, summarizing information and creating basic text structures, and they have also shown to be of utility in the review process by improving drafts and editing, reducing the revision time and the number of grammatical errors present. However, they have also raised questions about the morality of their utilization and the disparities they may widen if they stop being free.
Additionally, the scientific community discusses the possibility of unintended plagiarism when utilizing artificial intelligence programs, as texts generated by chatbots have passed plagiarism detectors as completely original work, making it impossible for other scientists in the peer-review process to differentiate a person-written article from one written by artificial intelligence.