7 Steps for Writing a Scientific Report To Share Research Results

7 Steps for Writing a Scientific Report To Share Research Results

A well-written scientific report turns raw data and preliminary ideas into a coherent contribution to knowledge. It shows readers what you did, why you did it, what you found and why your findings matter. At university, a strong report can mean higher grades and a smoother path through dissertations and theses. In professional research, it can mean journal acceptance, successful grant applications and approval from ethics or regulatory committees.

Yet many researchers feel daunted when they sit down to write, especially for the first time. They may have excellent results but struggle to organise them, choose what to include, or meet specific journal or course requirements. The good news is that scientific reporting is a skill that can be learned and improved through a clear, repeatable process.

This article presents a practical seven-step workflow for writing a high-quality scientific report:

1. Consulting instructions and guidelines.
2. Anticipating your audience.
3. Outlining contents and structure.
4. Designing tables, figures and supplementary material.
5. Drafting the report in a productive order.
6. Adding and finalising citations and references.
7. Revising, editing and correcting the full report.

You can adapt this workflow to suit different disciplines and formats—from lab reports and journal articles to project reports and funding documents—but the underlying logic remains the same. Each step supports the next, reducing wasted effort and helping you produce a clear, accurate and convincing report.

1. Consulting Instructions and Guidelines

The first step is deceptively simple and frequently neglected: learn exactly what is required before you write a single sentence. Many otherwise strong reports fail or need extensive rewriting simply because they ignore explicit instructions.

Depending on your purpose, you may need to consult:

• Journal “Instructions for Authors” – These specify article types, length limits, section headings, reference style, figure requirements, ethical statements, data-sharing policies and more.
• Funding or ethics guidelines – Granting agencies and ethics committees often provide detailed templates for scientific reports, with required headings and maximum word counts for each section.
• Course or thesis handbooks – University modules, lab courses and postgraduate programmes usually issue style sheets, marking criteria or sample reports that indicate expectations for structure, content and referencing.
• Discipline-specific manuals – Laboratory manuals, statistical guidelines and style guides (e.g. APA, AMA, Vancouver) clarify how methods, results, units, abbreviations and references should be presented.

As you read these documents, make a checklist of the key requirements:

• Required sections and their order.
• Word or page limits overall and per section.
• Limits on number of tables, figures and references.
• Preferred tense and person (e.g. past tense, third person).
• Formatting details (margins, headings, font, line spacing, file types).

If anything is unclear, ask your supervisor, instructor or the journal’s editorial office. It is far easier to clarify expectations at the outset than to discover after writing that your report does not fit the required format.

When guidance is limited, use high-quality reports in your field as models. Read them not just for content but for structure, phrasing, level of detail and how they handle methods, statistics and limitations. Ask yourself: What makes this report easy to follow? How does the author move from question to methods to results to interpretation?

2. Anticipating Your Audience

Scientific writing is not a private record; it is communication. To communicate well, you need a clear picture of who will be reading your report and what they need from it. Even when the immediate audience feels obvious—your lab instructor, a journal editor, a funding panel—it is worth thinking more widely.

Ask yourself questions such as:

• Who are my primary readers? Undergraduate markers, PhD examiners, peer reviewers, clinicians, policymakers, industry partners, or researchers from neighbouring fields?
• What is their background? Will most readers be specialists who know the methods and jargon, or a mixed committee including non-specialists?
• Why are they reading? To grade, to decide on funding, to apply the findings in practice, to build on the work, or to learn about a new method?

The answers should influence your decisions about:

• Level of explanation – Do you need to define key terms, explain basic concepts and justify standard procedures, or can you assume prior knowledge and focus on novel aspects?
• Framing of the research question – Highlight why the study matters not just technically but scientifically, clinically or socially, depending on your audience’s interests.
• Balance of detail – For practitioners, you may emphasise methods and practical implications; for theorists, conceptual advances may be central.

Remember that scientific reports often have multiple audiences over time. A journal article, for example, will first be read by an editor and reviewers, then by colleagues in your field, and later perhaps by students using it as a model. A funding report may be read by a panel now and later archived as an example for future applicants. Writing with this wider and longer-term audience in mind helps you produce a report that remains useful beyond its immediate purpose.

3. Outlining Contents and Structure

Once you understand the external requirements and your audience’s needs, you are ready to plan the internal structure of your report. A good outline is like a map: it shows where you are going, helps you see the logical route and reduces the risk of getting lost in the details.

For most empirical scientific studies, a variation of the classic IMRaD structure works well:

• Introduction – What is the problem or question? What is already known? What gap does your study address? What are your aims or hypotheses?
• Methods (Materials and Methods) – How did you design the study? Who or what did you study? What procedures, instruments and analyses did you use?
• Results – What did you find? Present the main findings clearly, using tables and figures where appropriate.
• Discussion – What do the results mean? How do they relate to previous work? What are the limitations and implications?

Many reports also include:

• a Literature Review (as part of the Introduction or in its own section),
• a separate Conclusion section that summarises the main message and future directions, and
• sections on Ethics, Data Availability or Author Contributions, depending on journal or institutional requirements.

When you outline, break each section down into subsections with working headings—for example, in Methods: “Participants,” “Instruments,” “Procedure,” “Statistical Analysis.” Under each heading, jot bullet points about the content and approximate length. This helps you:

• ensure that all required elements are covered,
• avoid repetition between sections, and
• maintain a logical flow from one part of the report to the next.

Think of your outline as a flexible blueprint: detailed enough to guide your writing, but open to adjustment as your ideas evolve.

4. Designing Tables, Figures and Supplementary Material

Visual elements—tables, graphs, diagrams, photographs, flowcharts and supplementary datasets—are powerful tools for presenting scientific information. Used well, they clarify complex patterns and save readers from wading through dense paragraphs of numbers. Used poorly, they confuse or duplicate the text.

A good strategy is to plan and prepare key tables and figures before you draft the full text. Ask for each potential visual:

• What specific question does this table or figure help the reader answer?
• Is a table (precise values) or a figure (patterns and trends) more effective?
• Does this information already appear in another form? If so, can something be removed?

When designing visuals:

• Use clear, descriptive titles (e.g. “Figure 2. Dose–response relationship between X and Y”).
• Label axes, units and categories consistently and legibly.
• Avoid excessive decimal places or unnecessary gridlines that clutter the display.
• Ensure that colours or patterns are distinguishable in greyscale, if the report may be printed.
• Check that all abbreviations are defined in legends or footnotes.

Consider also whether your report would benefit from:

• Appendices with extended tables or methodological details,
• Multimedia files (e.g. videos of procedures, interactive datasets), or
• Online supplementary material such as additional analyses, code or full questionnaires.

Once you have a draft set of tables and figures, number them in a logical order (Table 1, Figure 1, etc.) and note in your outline where each one will be cited in the text. As you write, you can then refer explicitly to them—for example, “As shown in Table 2…”—ensuring that visuals and text work together rather than compete.

5. Drafting the Scientific Report

With guidelines consulted, audience defined, outline prepared and visuals drafted, you are ready to write. Many writers assume they must start with the Introduction and write straight through to the end. This is rarely the most efficient or the most comfortable approach.

Instead, consider drafting sections in an order that matches how “fixed” the information feels in your mind:

1. Methods – You already know what you did; this section is largely factual. Writing it first helps you clarify the study design.
2. Results – With tables and figures prepared, you can describe the key findings in a structured way, moving from primary to secondary outcomes.
3. Discussion and Conclusion – Once the results are on paper, you can interpret them, compare them to previous work and discuss limitations and implications.
4. Introduction (and Literature Review) – Now that you know exactly what you are introducing, you can frame the research question and context more precisely.
5. Abstract – This is usually written last, once the final structure and wording of the report are settled.

As you draft, aim for:

• Clarity – Use straightforward sentences and avoid unnecessary jargon. If technical terms are essential, define them the first time they appear.
• Conciseness – Say what you need to say, but no more. Remove redundant phrases (“It is important to note that…”) and avoid restating the same point in multiple places.
• Consistency – Use the same terms for key concepts throughout, and keep tenses consistent (often past tense for methods and results, present tense for general statements).
• Logical flow – Within each section, use topic sentences and transitions to guide the reader: “First, we describe…,” “In contrast…,” “Taken together, these findings suggest….”

Do not worry about perfection at this stage. Drafting is about getting a complete version of the report on the page. You will refine wording, tighten arguments and polish style during revision.

6. Adding or Finishing Citations and References

A scientific report is part of an ongoing conversation. Citations show how your work builds on, extends or challenges previous research, and they give readers pathways to follow if they wish to explore sources in more depth. They also protect you from accidental plagiarism by making clear which ideas and data originate elsewhere.

There are two main approaches to handling citations during drafting:

• Integrate as you write – Insert full in-text citations (and possibly even reference entries) immediately when you mention a study or source. This reduces the risk of forgetting where ideas came from, but it can disrupt your writing flow.
• Use placeholder notes – Insert simple notes such as (Smith 2019), (recent Nature paper on X) or (meta-analysis ref) while drafting, then return later to fill in full details. This keeps you moving but requires careful checking later.

Whichever approach you choose, it is essential to:

• Match each in-text citation to a complete reference in the final list.
• Follow the required documentation style (e.g. numbered Vancouver-style references, author–date APA-style, or a journal-specific variant).
• Check that all cited sources are actually relevant and that you have represented their findings accurately.

Consider using reference management software (such as Zotero, Mendeley or EndNote) to store and format your sources. These tools can generate in-text citations and reference lists automatically in different styles, saving time and reducing formatting errors. However, you should still proofread references carefully for accuracy in titles, authors, years and page numbers.

Do not forget to cite:

• methods or protocols you adapted from other researchers,
• datasets, software or code that you used, and
• figures or tables reproduced or adapted from published work (with permission where required).

Strong referencing not only shows respect for other researchers but also strengthens your credibility as a careful and ethical scientist.

7. Revising, Editing and Correcting

With a complete draft in hand, it can be tempting to submit immediately. Resist the urge. Revision, editing and proofreading are where a decent report becomes a strong one. These stages take time, but they are often the difference between acceptance and rejection—or between a borderline and an excellent grade.

Begin by taking a short break from the text, even just a day or two. Distance helps you return with fresh eyes. Then work through at least three passes, each with a different focus:

1. Structural and conceptual revision – Does the report as a whole make sense? Is the research question clearly stated? Do methods and results directly address that question? Is the discussion aligned with the data, or does it drift into speculation? Are sections in a logical order, and are transitions smooth?
2. Paragraph- and sentence-level editing – Within each section, check that each paragraph has a clear main idea and that sentences follow logically. Simplify convoluted phrasing, remove repetition, and ensure that technical terms are used consistently. Look for opportunities to make writing tighter and clearer.
3. Language and formatting checks – Carefully correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. Check that tables and figures are numbered and cited correctly, that headings follow the required style, and that references match the required format. Ensure that abbreviations are defined at first use and used consistently.

Helpful techniques include:

• Reading aloud – This can reveal awkward phrasing and long, unwieldy sentences.
• Printing the report – Errors often stand out more clearly on paper than on screen.
• Using track changes and comments – Note potential changes before committing, especially when revising structure.
• Seeking feedback – Ask supervisors, colleagues or peers to read your draft and comment on clarity, logic and completeness.

Respond thoughtfully to feedback, even when you do not agree with every suggestion. If multiple readers struggle with the same section, that is a strong sign that revision is needed. Your goal is not simply to satisfy reviewers but to make your report as clear and accurate as possible for all its future readers.

Bringing the Seven Steps Together

Writing a scientific report is a complex task, but it becomes far more manageable when broken into clear steps. By consulting instructions and guidelines at the outset, you ensure that your efforts align with expectations. By anticipating your audience, you tailor content and explanation to readers’ needs. By outlining structure, designing visuals and drafting sections in a productive order, you reduce confusion and build a coherent narrative. By handling citations carefully and revising in multiple focused passes, you polish the report into a professional document.

You can adapt and refine this seven-step workflow as you gain experience. Over time, many parts will become more intuitive: you will internalise journal styles, anticipate reviewer questions and develop a personal voice that balances precision with readability. Yet even experienced researchers benefit from occasionally returning to basics—checking guidelines, revisiting outlines and allowing time for genuine revision.

Ultimately, a high-quality scientific report does more than meet formal requirements. It honours the effort invested in the research by presenting it in a way that others can trust, understand and build upon. That is the real purpose of scientific writing: to turn individual experiments and analyses into shared knowledge that advances your field.

---

At Proof-Reading-Service.com, our specialist scientific editors help researchers and students at every stage of this process. We can check structure, clarity, style and referencing to ensure that your report presents your research results accurately, professionally and in line with journal, funding or university guidelines.