As an academic writing coach, here are the 5 most common mistakes I see researchers make when they write their Discussion sections. A thread. 🧵 #PIchat #newPI #ECRchat — Mistake #1: Providing paragraphs of background information 📝 The Introduction section is meant for context. In the Discussion section, any mentioned background info needs to be *discussed* together with your own findings. — Mistake #2: Expecting the reader to have read all previous sections 💡 Tell the whole story by restating the problem you are solving with your study so that readers understand the motivation for your research. — Mistake #3: Describing the purpose and result of each experiment 🔬 This should be provided in the Results section. The Discussion is for actually *discussing* your findings, i.e. how your study has changed the state of the art and what the potential implications are. — Mistake #4: Too general implication statements 🌍 Avoid too broad statements that could mean everything and nothing. Be specific when you describe the potential implication of your findings even when some of them are speculative. — Mistake #5: Skipping the discussion altogether 🚫 Discussion sections are helpful for fellow researchers, journal editors and also journalists! If you have a combined Results & Discussion section, don't forget to include the discussion part! — TL;DR: The 5 most common mistakes in the Discussion section: #1: Providing too much background info #2: Not restating the motivation of your study #3: Describing the purpose of each experiment #4: Too general implication statements #5: Skipping the discussion altogether