What should be covered in ... ?

Main section: How do I structure my paper?
Current section: What should be covered by .... :
Further questions in this section:

... the introduction?

The introduction provides an overview of the entire paper. It gives the topic, the research question and the objective of the paper. You also explain how you will answer the research question, i.e. you provide a short overview of your theoretical approach and your method.

The introduction often needs to be written more than once: at the start of the drafting stage in order to get an overview; and in the course of finalising in order to align the introduction with the completed paper. The introduction describes what you are going to write about. In the main body of the text, you actually write about what you have announced in the introduction. In the conclusion, you summarise, i.e. explain, what you announced in your introduction and subsequently actually wrote about in the main body.

Checklist

Have you explained what topic you are writing about?
Have you defined your research subject?
Have you explained your research interest and the relevance of the topic?
Have you specified and described your focus and the phenomenon/problem connected with it?
Have you described the topic concisely?
Have you provided a brief overview of the theory/theories you are using, and introduced the research subject?
Have you explicitly specified your research question and integrated it into the theory?
Have you explained it and stated where you expect it to lead?
Have you specified and explained your conjectures and the (hypo)theses derived from them?
Have you provided a brief overview of your methodological approach and a brief explanation of why you are using it?
Have you given an overview of the paper's structure and informed your readers what to expect in the subsequent chapters?

... the chapter on theory?

The theory section of your paper describes the theories you are using. It should not summarise theoretical approaches but explain in greater detail how their concepts, definitions and approaches relate to your research question. Here, you address the theoretical framework presented in the introduction and explain the most important terms that you will be using in your writing project. You also describe the current state of research by outlining the development of the individual terms (either chronologically or hierarchically by topic).

Think about which terms and concepts are connected with your research question and your theoretical approach. Consider the current state of research in the subdiscipline in question for each topic and the definitions relating to it. This means that you briefly outline the development of the term and refer to the authors who have contributed to its development.

Tip

1.Take a look at the current state of research in articles and contributions in edited volumes of the relevant discipline: Pay attention to the way in which authors present and integrate prior results from their discipline. Usually, the current state of research is described on the first few pages of the theory chapter.
Consult research reviews or meta-studies to get an overview of the current state of research. They usually list all relevant trends within a field.
At the end of longer chapters in which you present a lot of information, provide a short summary before leading into the next chapter.

Checklist

Have you specified and introduced all the theoretical approaches you are using?
Do those theories link up with the short description in the introduction? Have you explained, defined and commented on the main terms?
Have you supplemented them with your view of the relevant approaches?
Have you linked them with your research question and explained in what way they are compatible?
Have you derived a meta-statement on the theoretical approaches from them? Have you described the individual theoretical approaches and checked them for commonalities and differences?
Have you explained the way in which the theory is suitable for investigating your conjectures and the (hypo)theses you have derived from them?>
Have you provided examples in order to make your theoretical considerations comprehensible to the reader?
Have you provided a summary at the end of the theory chapter, and a transition to the description of your methods?

... the chapter on methodology?

If you are working empirically: In the methods chapter, you write down your empirical approach. You describe the method you used and argue in favor of it. You also explain how you obtained your data, what material you used and why.

In the next step, explain how you used your method for data collection and/or analysis. Explain your thoughts on how the method should test the assumptions and how it contributes to answering the research question.

Checklist

Have you explained the method of data collection and data analysis?
Have you provided a theoretical basis for the methods used (e.g. by including secondary sources on the method)?
Have you given reasons why these methods are appropriate for examining the phenomenon/problem in question?
Have you explained what the subject of your research is?
Have you described your way of proceeding?
Have you specified the way in which you have applied the methods to your material?
Have you described the parameters of the analysis and given theory-based reasons for this?
Have you provided a brief summary at the end of the methodology chapter, and a transition to the analysis chapter?

For theoretical papers: Theoretical papers do not include a ‘traditional’ chapter on methodology. You use the current state of research and sketch your line of reasoning to define a logical framework for your statements, and (usually) follow the thesis-antithesis-synthesis principle. You (usually) compare or contrast different theories or test the applicability of a theory on the basis of a systematic approach. Define terms and arrange your arguments by topic and according to a hierarchy in order to arrive at a line of reasoning that leads the reader to the answer.

Checklist

Have you explained all relevant terms?
Have you related them to each other and to your research question?
Have you presented the differences and commonalities of your theoretical approaches, and what you would like to compare, critique or add?
Have you described the explanatory power that you expect the respective terms, definitions and theories to have?

… the chapter on analysis?

The analysis includes an ordered, systematic study of your materials and is aimed at data generation. In this chapter, you refer to the parameters and criteria that you have presented in the chapter on methodology, and write down the results of the analysis.

Tip

The chapter on analysis is closely connected to the chapter on methodology and provides the basis for the next step – the discussion. In the text body, the discussion and the analysis are often combined to form one text. Depending on the tradition in your discipline, the analysis chapter can be linked with the methodology chapter and/or the discussion chapter. Have a look at the practices common in your discipline or ask your supervisor.
Bear in mind that the description of the analysis may well include elements of interpretation and discussion. If you write a separate chapter on analysis, focus on describing the process of analysis and make sparing use of interpretation and comment, as this is part of the discussion.

Checklist

For empirical papers:

Have you described the path of analysis?
Have you described the data obtained?
Have you described, and commented on, your results?
Have you presented the parameters and criteria of the analysis again and linked them with your results?
Have you provided reasons for your results, backed by theories?
Have you used examples based on the data obtained in order to provide a schematic description of the process of analysis?
Have you provided a transition to the discussion?

For theoretical papers:

Have you linked all terms?
Have you compared, critiqued or added to them based on literature sources?
Have you described the way in which the approaches complement or differ from each other?
Have you examined them in conjunction with each other and drawn the respective conclusions?
Have you provided a transition to the discussion?