1

Checklist
Block
Title

Abstract

Introductio
n

Literature
Review

Concern
1. Pitch your paper in a few words.
2. Is the title clear and informative?
3. Does it reflect the aim and approach of the
work?
4. Is the title specific while still describing the
full range of the work?
5. Does the title, seen in isolation, give a full yet
concise and specific indication of the work
reported?
1. Does the abstract summarize the most essential
information in your paper
3. Does it satisfy the word limit?
Does it answer the following set of questions?
Who are the intended readers?
What did you do?
Why did you do it?
What happened when you did that?
What do your results mean in theory and in
practice?
What are the key benefits for the readers?
What remains unsolved?
1. What did I know and why did I do this
research?
2. Why this field is important?
3. What has already been done? (With proper
citations).
4 Indicate a gap, raise a research question, or
challenge prior work in this territory.
5 Outline the purpose and announce the present
research, clearly indicating what is novel?
6 Why it is significant?
Does it follow the MRCI Framework?
( Motivation , Results , Contribution , Implications)
1. Have you identified the knowledge frontier?
2. Have you identified the important keywords?
3. Have you ensured that the review is NOT
confusing/boring?
4. Have you written only what is important?
5. Do you have a purpose and proper outline?

Avoid /Ensure
Avoid titles that are
too short or too
long.

2.
Ensure that all of
the information
found in the abstract
also can be found in
the body of the
paper. Ensure that
the important
information of the
paper is found in the
abstract.

Avoid exaggerating
the importance of
the work. Do not
claim novelty
4.
without a proper
5literature search.

Read as much as
you can.

Method

Results

Conclusion

References

6. Have you ensured that you have NOT omitted

any key reference?
1. Have you specified what someone must do
to reproduce your results?
2. Has the chosen method been justified?
3. Are data analysis and statistical approaches
justified, with assumptions and biases
considered?
4. Can the reader assess internal validity
(conclusions are supported by the results
presented)?
5. Can the reader assess external validity
(conclusions are properly generalized
beyond these specific results)?
1. Have the results been presented in the paper, in
logical order, using tables and graphs as
necessary?
3. Explain the results and show how they help to
answer the research questions posed in the
Introduction.
5. Discuss any problems or shortcomings
encountered during the course of the work.
6. Discuss possible alternate explanations for the
results.
7. Answer why my results are important and what
needs to be done next?
1. What have I learned?
2. Provide a very brief summary of the Results
and Discussion.
3. Emphasize the implications of the findings.
4. Provide the most general claims that can be
supported by the evidence.
5. Provide a future perspective on the work.

1) Is the bibliography format suited to your

targeted journal?
2) Have you highlighted all key references?
3) Are your references international/accessible
enough?
4) Include citations that acknowledge and give
credit to sources relied upon for this work.
5) Include citations that provide examples of

Avoid including
results in the
Method section;
1.including
extraneous details
2.

3.

2.

4.

8.
Avoid repeating the
abstract; repeating
background
information from
the Introduction;
introducing new
evidence or new
arguments not
found in the Results
and Discussion;
Avoid spurious or
biased citations.
(citations that are
not needed but are
1.included anyway);

alternate ideas, data, or conclusions to compare

and contrast with this work, if they exist. Dont
exclude contrary evidence.

6) Are the citations up to date, referencing that

latest work on this topic?
9

Figures and
Tables

1. Do the figures accurately and carefully

document the data and their context?
2. Do the figures allow for comparisons and
inferences of cause and effect, avoiding
spurious readings?
3. Figures should have captions and legends to
allow them to be understood independent of
the text, if possible.
4. All figures should be referred to in the text,
with first references in numerical order.
5. A piece of data has four parts: a description
(what is it?), a number, a unit, and an
uncertainty estimate. Try to put all four parts of
the data in the figure.

10

General
format

1. Have you used proper language?

2. Did you correct all grammatical and spelling
mistakes?
3. Have you written in active voice?
4. Have you avoided usage of complicated
words?
5. Have you stayed within your word limit?
6. Does your paper have proper organization?
7. Did you format your figures are tables and
figures properly?
8. Have you ensured that your paper matches the
scope of the journal?

11

Coherence

1. Is your work original/novel?

2. Is your work consistent?
3. Does your work have sufficient illustrations?
4. Is your work too exhaustive?
5. Have you specified the implications of your
work?
6. Is your work too concise?

If no is another
suitable journal
available?