The writing process on a scientific writing project is very complex, due in part to the variety of tasks that must be accomplished. The actual writing is only part of it. Researching and reading are just as much a part of it as planning beforehand and revising at the end. You can find an overview of the phases of scientific work and writing in our handout on the overview of work phases with the "Writing Dragon".

It is up to you to decide how you want to organize these individual steps. Some work through one phase after the other in a structured way, while others jump back and forth in a ping-pong style, for example because new research has resulted from reading. The important thing is to be aware of each of these steps or phases and schedule time for them accordingly. Not sure yet what type of writer you are? The writing type test can help you with this question.

Literature tips

Esselborn-Krumbiegel, Helga: Von der Idee zum Text. Eine Anleitung zum wissenschaftlichen Schreiben, Paderborn 2008. S. 16 – 23. (Kapitel: Phasen der Textproduktion)

For the daily writing time there is the recommendation: No more than four hours, because normally the effectiveness decreases strongly after that. However, such guidelines underestimate the fact that performance varies from person to person. It is much more important to reflect on one's own way of working than to stick to a given time. Questions that should be addressed in any case are:

• Do I work better in the morning or in the evening?
• What does my personal performance curve look like? (Tip: For most people, the low point is sometime between 12 and 4 p.m.
• At what time of the day do I have the least or no disruptions?

A very decisive and fundamental question that tends to fall by the wayside is: When do I write and when do I not? This already hints at something that is also very important: scheduling breaks! Working according to the Pomodoro technique helps you to take regular breaks. In this  handout from our Infothek, we show you how the Pomodoro technique works.

Literature tips

Esselborn-Krumbiegel, Helga: Von der Idee zum Text. Eine Anleitung zum wissenschaftlichen Schreiben, Paderborn 2008. S. 24 – 29. (Kapitel: Die Zeitschiene)

Rost, Friedrich: Lern- und Arbeitstechniken für das Studium, Wiesbaden 2004. S. 101 – 113. (Kapitel: (Zeit-)Planung und effizientes Arbeiten)

First of all: Yes, there is. Many scientific texts may give the impression that their information content is packed into a strict linguistic corset, so that there is no place for a linguistic style of one's own in science. However, the linguistic norms are not that strict. This is simply due to the different ways of working in different disciplines and cultural circles. It is important to realize that as an author you are entering into a dialogue with the research community. The text is therefore intended to convey knowledge to others, which creates a communication process. This follows some principles, namely that of exactness, unambiguity, and neutrality or objectivity. If you adhere to these principles, which provide the framework, you can give your own text your own touch and develop your own personal scientific style. Be sure to discuss this with your lecturer.

Literature tips

Auer, Peter und Baßler, Hager (Hrsg.): Reden und schreiben in der Wissenschaft, Frankfurt am Main 2007. S. 9 – 29. (Kapitel: Der Stil der Wissenschaft)

Esselborn-Krumbiegel, Helga: Richtig wissenschaftlich schreiben, Paderborn 2010. S. 11 – 22 . (Kapitel: Grundlagen wissenschaftlicher Sprache)

A good research question summarizes the goal of a scientific paper in a concise and comprehensible way. In it, the author formulates his or her interest in knowledge and delimits the topic under discussion. In this way, it offers both the reader and the writer a tangible point of orientation and guides the reader through the usually very extensive subject matter with which the paper deals.

One method that can help you develop a good research question is the three-step approach.

An essential principle of scientific work is that of comprehensibility. Foreign thoughts are desired and also necessary for one's own argumentation. However, they must also be marked as such and thus clearly distinguishable from one's own. Text passages that are not marked as a quotation are attributed to oneself. If you take over the thoughts of other authors without making this clear, you are claiming other people's property as your own and thus committing intellectual theft.

further information (in German):

Göttert, Karl-Heinz: Kleine Schreibschule für Studierende, München 2002. S. 35 – 39. (Kapitel: Zitate und Fußnoten)

Überblick über gängige Begriffe und Abkürzungen auf dem Citavi-Blog

Handreichung und die "SLUBcasts"-Videos zum Zitieren der Sächsischen Landes- und Universitätsbibliothek

Link zu YouTube: Warum zitieren wir? Ein Erklärfilm des Bibliothekertags 2017.

Auer, Peter und Baßler, Hager (Hrsg.): Reden und schreiben in der Wissenschaft, Frankfurt am Main 2007.

Esselborn-Krumbiegel, Helga: Von der Idee zum Text. Eine Anleitung zum wissenschaftlichen Schreiben, Paderborn 2008.

Esselborn-Krumbiegel, Helga: Richtig wissenschaftlich schreiben, Paderborn 2010.

Göttert, Karl-Heinz: Kleine Schreibschule für Studierende, München 2002. 

Rost, Friedrich: Lern- und Arbeitstechniken für das Studium, Wiesbaden 2004.