How do you write and present research well? Q4 – Do not metastasize with metadiscourse

Abstract

Abstract In the classic writing style, writers recognize that readers are competent and will recognize the truth as you lead them through your work. Soggy prose seeks “to argue for the truth.”[1] Your text should read like a conversation rather than a lecture. Match each sentence with one of the cardinal sins of writing to the left.[2,3] (Multiple choices possible) 1 Hedging b) In general these results show that a system with zero‐cost identities does not require centralized allocation of identities to encourage cooperation.[4] 2 Signposting f) In this section we shall evaluate the rate of recombination for nonequilibrium conditions.[5] 3 Redundant c) Here we report our new results on the samarium‐arsenide.[6] 4 Self‐conscious, 6 Boosting e) Whether established pests are suitable for attempted eradication is extremely controversial.[7] 5 Narcissism d) More recently researchers have attempted to quantify the effects of anxiety on foreign language learning.[8] 6 Boosting a) These results are extremely significant statistically and compare favorably with validation studies.[9]

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.