Tutorial in Scientific Writing: 9 Tips to Increase Your Chances of Getting Published

Writing a scientific paper is one of the most intellectually demanding — and deeply rewarding — parts of being a researcher. It’s not just a report of results; it’s a crafted message to the scientific world. And yet, for many early-career scientists, writing a publishable paper can feel overwhelming and mysterious. As Editor-in-Chief of Brain Organoids and Systems Neuroscience, I’ve read thousands of submissions — and I’d like to offer some guidance based on what I’ve learned from the other side of the desk.

Let’s begin with a truth that often surprises new authors: great science doesn’t automatically lead to a great paper. I’ve seen brilliant work get overlooked because the writing failed to communicate the significance. Conversely, I’ve seen modest results elevated by a clear, compelling presentation. The difference often comes down to how well the manuscript has been prepared — and how deliberately it has been crafted for its intended audience.

Tip 1: Know your journal and its audience.

Before writing, spend time understanding where your work belongs. Study recent papers in the journal you’re targeting. What kinds of questions does it prioritize? What methods, tone, or formats are typical? Your paper should feel like it naturally belongs in that space. Editors quickly recognize when a submission hasn’t taken the time to fit its audience — and those are the ones most likely to be rejected without review.

💬 “Your paper should feel like it belongs in the journal — right from the first paragraph.”

Tip 2: Write with clarity.

Clarity isn’t just about language — it’s about how your ideas are structured. The most successful papers guide the reader through a logical progression of thought, with each section doing its job efficiently. The introduction sets up the big picture and your specific question. The methods are transparent and replicable. The results build a clear arc. The discussion interprets, not repeats. And throughout, the prose is clean, direct, and jargon is kept to a minimum. If a colleague outside your field can’t follow your abstract, neither will most reviewers.

💬 “Clarity signals credibility. If the writing is confusing, the science will be doubted — even if it’s solid.”

Tip 3: Tell a cohesive scientific story.

Your manuscript should revolve around a central research question or hypothesis. All figures, results, and interpretations should relate back to that core. Avoid the temptation to include every dataset you’ve generated — focus instead on what builds your argument. A well-told scientific story doesn’t overwhelm the reader with data; it persuades them that your conclusion follows naturally from the evidence presented.

💬 “Think like a storyteller: what’s your message, and how do you guide the reader to it?”

Tip 4: Craft a strong title and abstract.

Your title and abstract are often the only parts of the paper many readers — and even editors — will read before making a decision. They should be specific, engaging, and informative. Avoid generic phrases like “novel insights” or “comprehensive analysis.” Instead, state what was done, to whom, and why it matters. A strong abstract is not just a summary — it’s a pitch for why your paper deserves attention.

💬 “The title is your handshake. The abstract is your elevator pitch. Make them count.”

Tip 5: Don’t bury the significance.

Too many authors hide the punchline. If your study reveals something important, make that clear in the first few sentences of the abstract and introduction — and reinforce it again in the discussion. Don’t wait until the end to reveal the main contribution. Editors and reviewers are busy, and they often skim. Make sure the “so what?” of your study is unmistakable from the beginning.

💬 “If the importance of your work isn’t clear to the editor in 30 seconds, it may never be.”

Tip 6: Use visuals strategically.

Figures are your most powerful communication tool. They should be clean, well-labeled, and stand alone in clarity. Each one should tell a part of the story, not just decorate it. Use color and layout intentionally to highlight patterns. And don’t forget your figure legends — they should explain what the reader is seeing and why it matters, almost like a caption to a scientific cartoon.

💬 “Good figures invite the reader in. Bad ones push them away.”

Tip 7: Respect the reviewer’s time.

Manuscripts that follow the journal’s guidelines, include line numbers, are free of typos, and are logically organized immediately earn goodwill. Reviewers are volunteers. If they have to guess what you meant or search for details, they’re more likely to get frustrated. Think of the review process as a professional collaboration. When authors make the reviewer’s job easier, the review is often more constructive.

💬 “Respecting the reviewer’s time is the most underrated publishing strategy.”

Tip 8: Be professional in revisions.

When you receive reviewer comments — whether glowing or skeptical — take them seriously and respond respectfully. Address every point thoughtfully. If you disagree, do so with evidence and a calm tone. Don’t just revise the manuscript; write a clear, polite response letter that explains what you changed and why. A well-handled revision can change the outcome of a submission more than the initial draft ever could.

💬 “Revisions are where many borderline papers turn into accepted ones.”

Tip 9: Own your voice, and learn through the writing.

Finally, don’t delegate the writing entirely to a senior co-author or try to mimic someone else’s style. As a young scientist, writing is how you clarify your thinking and find your scientific voice. Every draft is a step toward becoming a more confident communicator. Accept that your first version won’t be perfect — but that it can always be improved. Feedback is part of the process, not a reflection of failure.

💬 “Writing isn’t what you do after the science — it is the science.”

In the end, publishing a paper is not just about sharing results — it’s about contributing meaningfully to a collective conversation in science. That conversation thrives when voices are clear, stories are coherent, and ideas are presented with both humility and conviction.

Write with purpose. Revise with care. And trust that your voice — when crafted thoughtfully — deserves to be heard.

🧠✍️ You’re not just reporting results. You’re contributing to the future of science.