Founder member Thomas Sprat wrote on the importance of plain and accurate description rather than rhetorical flourishes in his History of the Royal Society of London.
[9] Besides the customary readability tests, software tools relying on Natural Language Processing to analyze text help writer scientists evaluate the quality of their manuscripts prior to submission to a journal.
[30] One typical citation style used for a specific discipline is the ACS (American Chemical Society) system, used for Scientific articles on Chemistry.
[33] While not mandatory, scientific writers often follow the IMRaD format, which stands for Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion.
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.
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.
[36] 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,[37] making it impossible for other scientists in the peer-review process to differentiate a person-written article from one written by artificial intelligence.
This lack of transparency was criticized by Joseph Priestley as early as 1767 as mystifying the research process[42] and more recently for similar reasons by Nobel Laureate Peter Medawar in a BBC talk in 1964.
[43] Ethical principles are fundamental to the practice of scientific writing, ensuring integrity, transparency, and accountability in the dissemination of research findings.
Adhering to ethical standards not only upholds the credibility of scientific literature but also promotes trust among researchers, institutions, and the broader public.
Plagiarism,[44] the appropriation of another person's ideas, words, or work without proper attribution, is a serious ethical violation in scientific writing.
Plagiarism undermines academic integrity and can result in severe consequences, including retraction of publications and damage to one's reputation.
The widely-used guidelines of the International Committee for Medical Journal Editors, for instance, recommends that all authors must also contribute to "Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content".
Thus, the restrictions are a hindrance to receiving formal credit for scientific contributions and this is opposed by some who believe that a guiding principle should be to indicate who did what, which is sometimes called "contributorship".
[47] Scientific writing requires transparency in reporting research methods, data collection procedures, and analytical techniques to ensure the reproducibility and reliability of findings.
Authors are responsible for accurately representing their data and disclosing any conflicts of interest or biases that may influence the interpretation of results.
Reviewers are entrusted with providing constructive feedback and identifying any ethical concerns or scientific misconduct present in the manuscript.
[49] Promoting diversity in authorship, peer review, and editorial boards enhances the quality and relevance of scientific literature and fosters a more equitable research environment.