do you use we in a research paper

Is It Okay to Use "We" In a Research Paper? Here's What You Need to Know

Explore the use of "we" in research papers: guidelines, alternatives, and considerations for effective academic writing. Learn when and how to use it appropriately.

Jun 25, 2024

When embarking on the journey of academic writing, particularly in research papers, one of the first questions that often arises is about pronoun usage. Specifically, many writers grapple with the question: Is it okay to use "we" in a research paper?

This seemingly simple grammatical choice carries significant weight in academic circles. Using pronouns, especially first-person pronouns like "we," can influence the tone, clarity, and perceived objectivity of your work. It's a topic that has sparked debates among scholars, with opinions evolving and varying across different disciplines.

The importance of pronoun usage in academic writing cannot be overstated, especially in contexts like thesis and scientific writing. It affects how your research is perceived, how you position yourself as an author, and how you engage with your readers using the first person or third person. The choice between using "we," maintaining a more impersonal tone, or opting for alternatives can impact the overall effectiveness of your communication.

In this blog post, we'll explore the nuances of using "we" in research papers, examining both traditional and modern perspectives. We'll delve into the pros and cons, provide guidelines for appropriate usage, and offer alternatives to help you confidently navigate writing academic papers.

Traditional Stance on Using "We" in Research Papers

 historical preference for third-person perspective.

Academic writing traditionally favored a third-person perspective, especially in scientific fields. This preference emerged in the late 19th century as part of a push for objectivity in scientific communication. The goal was to present research as unbiased facts and observations.

Key aspects:

• Emphasis on passive voice versus active voice when choosing to use the first person or third person in writing a research paper.
• The use of impersonal constructions and passive voice can help avoid personal pronouns.
• Third-person references to authors

Reasons for avoiding first-person pronouns

Arguments against using "we" in research papers:

• Perceived lack of objectivity
• Ambiguity in meaning
• Concerns about formality
• Shift of focus from research to researchers
• Adherence to established conventions
• Avoid presumption in single-authored papers when you decide to use first-person pronouns or not. when you decide to use first-person pronouns or not.

This approach shaped academic writing for decades and still influences some disciplines, especially in the context of writing a research paper. However, attitudes toward pronoun usage have begun to change in recent years.

Changing Perspectives in Academic Writing

Shift towards more personal and engaging academic prose.

Recent years have seen a move towards more accessible academic writing. This shift aims to:

• Increase readability
• Engage readers more effectively by incorporating second-person narrative techniques.
• Acknowledge the researcher's role in the work
• Promote transparency in research processes

Key changes:

• More direct language
• Increased use of active voice can make your academic papers more engaging.
• Greater acceptance of narrative elements

Acceptance of first-person pronouns in some disciplines

Some fields now allow or encourage the use of "we" and other first-person pronouns. This varies by:

• Discipline: More common in humanities and social sciences
• Journal: Some publications explicitly permit or prefer first-person usage
• Type of paper: Often more accepted in qualitative research or opinion pieces

Reasons for acceptance:

• Clarity in describing methods and decisions
• Ownership of ideas and findings is crucial when writing a research paper.
• Improved reader engagement in scientific writing
• Recognition of researcher subjectivity in some fields

However, acceptance is not universal. Many disciplines and publications still prefer traditional, impersonal styles.

When It's Appropriate to Use "We" in Research Papers

Collaborative research with multiple authors

• Natural fit for papers with multiple contributors
• Accurately reflects joint effort and shared responsibility
• Examples: "We conducted experiments..." or "We conclude that..."

Describing methodology or procedures

• Clarifies who performed specific actions, helping to avoid personal pronouns that might otherwise confuse the audience.
• Adds transparency to the research process, particularly when first-person pronouns are used effectively.
• Example: "We collected data using..."

Presenting arguments or hypotheses

• Demonstrates ownership of ideas
• Can make complex concepts more accessible in a research report.
• Example: "We argue that..." or "We hypothesize..."

Discipline-specific conventions

• Usage varies widely between fields
• More common in Social sciences, Humanities, and Some STEM fields (e.g., computer science)
• Less common in Hard sciences, Medical research
• Always check journal guidelines and field norms, particularly regarding the use of the first person or third person.

Key point: Use "we" judiciously, balancing clarity and convention.

When to Avoid Using "We" in Research Papers

Single-authored papers

• Can seem odd or presumptuous
• Alternatives: Use "I" if appropriate, Use passive voice, and Refer to yourself as " the researcher " or "the author"

Presenting factual information or literature reviews

• Facts stand independently of the author
• Keep the focus on the information, not the presenter, when writing a research paper.
• Examples: "Previous studies have shown..." instead of "We know from previous studies..."  "The data indicate..." instead of "We see in the data..."

When trying to maintain an objective tone

• Some topics in research reports require a more detached approach.
• Avoid "we" when: Reporting widely accepted facts, Describing established theories, Presenting controversial findings
• Use impersonal constructions:  "It was observed that...", "The results suggest..."

Remember: Always prioritize clarity and adhere to your field's conventions.

Alternatives to Using "We"

Passive voice.

• Shifts focus to the action or result
• Examples: "The experiment was conducted..." (instead of "We experimented...")  "It was observed that..." (instead of "We observed that...")
• Use personal pronouns sparingly to avoid overly complex sentences.

Third-person perspective

• Refers to the research or study itself
• Examples: "This study examines..." (instead of "We examine...") "The results indicate..." (instead of "We found...")
• Can create a more objective tone

 Using "the researcher(s)" or "the author(s)"

• Useful for single- authored papers
• Maintains formality while acknowledging human involvement
• Examples: "The researchers collected data..." (instead of "We collected data...")  "The author argues..." (instead of "We argue...")
• Can become repetitive if overused in writing research papers.

Tips for using alternatives:

• Vary sentence structure to maintain reader interest
• Ensure clarity is not sacrificed for formality
• Choose the most appropriate alternative based on context
• Consider journal guidelines and field conventions when writing a research paper.

Remember: The goal is clear, effective communication of your research, whether you use first person or third person.

Tips for Effective Academic Writing

Consistency in pronoun usage.

• Choose a style and stick to it throughout
• Avoid mixing "we" with impersonal constructions
• Exceptions:  Different sections may require different approaches, Clearly mark any intentional shifts in perspective

Balancing formality with clarity and engagement

• Prioritize clear communication
• Use simple, direct language where possible when writing research papers, and try to use the term that best fits the context.
• Engage readers without sacrificing academic rigor
• Techniques:  Use active voice judiciously, Vary sentence structure, Incorporate relevant examples or analogies

Seeking feedback from peers or mentors

• Share drafts with colleagues in your field to improve your research report.
• Ask for specific feedback on writing style
• Consider perspectives from Senior researchers , Peers at similar career stages, Potential target audience members, and how they prefer the use of the first person or third person in research.
• Be open to constructive criticism

Additional tips:

• Read widely in your field to understand style norms when writing research papers.
• Practice different writing styles to find your voice
• Revise and edit multiple times
• Use style guides relevant to your discipline
• Consider the reader's perspective while writing

Remember: Effective academic writing communicates complex ideas while meeting field-specific expectations.

Recap of key points

• The use of "we" in research papers is evolving
• Appropriateness depends on Discipline, Journal guidelines, Research type, Personal preference
• Alternatives include passive voice and third-person perspective, while the increased use of passive voice can sometimes create ambiguity.
• Consider audience, field norms, and clarity when choosing a style
• Consistency and balance in the use of first person or third person are crucial.

Encouragement to make informed choices in academic writing

• Understand the context of your work
• Stay informed about current trends in your field
• Prioritize clear communication of your research
• Be confident in your choices, but remain flexible
• Remember: No universal rule fits all situations, Effective writing adapts to its purpose and audience
• Continually refine your writing skills, including the appropriate use of personal pronouns in APA format.

Final thoughts:

• Writing style impacts how your research is received
• Make deliberate choices to enhance your paper's impact by using appropriate personal pronouns.
• Balance tradition with evolving norms in academic writing
• Your unique voice can contribute to advancing your field, particularly in writing a research paper.

Ultimately, choose a style that best serves your research and readers while adhering to relevant guidelines of scientific writing and thesis format. It may also be acceptable to use first-person pronouns where appropriate.

Easily pronounces technical words in any field

Writing Style

Pronoun Usage

Research Papers

Academic Writing

Recent articles

9 Free AI Tools for Research

Derek Pankaew

Jun 26, 2024

Academic research

Research papers

AI-powered research

Free AI tools

5 Best Reading Programs for Dyslexia: A Parent's Guide

Glice Martineau

Orton-Gillingham

How to Choose and Develop a Research Topic: Ideas and Examples

Kate Windsor

Thesis Development

Literature Review

Research Methodology

Research Idea Generation

Research Topic Selection

Quick Guide to Getting a College Financial Aid

Jun 27, 2024

Student Loans

College Funding

Financial Aid

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

Can You Use I or We in a Research Paper?

4-minute read

• 11th July 2023

Writing in the first person, or using I and we pronouns, has traditionally been frowned upon in academic writing . But despite this long-standing norm, writing in the first person isn’t actually prohibited. In fact, it’s becoming more acceptable – even in research papers.

 If you’re wondering whether you can use I (or we ) in your research paper, you should check with your institution first and foremost. Many schools have rules regarding first-person use. If it’s up to you, though, we still recommend some guidelines. Check out our tips below!

When Is It Most Acceptable to Write in the First Person?

Certain sections of your paper are more conducive to writing in the first person. Typically, the first person makes sense in the abstract, introduction, discussion, and conclusion sections. You should still limit your use of I and we , though, or your essay may start to sound like a personal narrative .

 Using first-person pronouns is most useful and acceptable in the following circumstances.

When doing so removes the passive voice and adds flow

Sometimes, writers have to bend over backward just to avoid using the first person, often producing clunky sentences and a lot of passive voice constructions. The first person can remedy this. For example: 

Both sentences are fine, but the second one flows better and is easier to read.

When doing so differentiates between your research and other literature

When discussing literature from other researchers and authors, you might be comparing it with your own findings or hypotheses . Using the first person can help clarify that you are engaging in such a comparison. For example: 

 In the first sentence, using “the author” to avoid the first person creates ambiguity. The second sentence prevents misinterpretation.

When doing so allows you to express your interest in the subject

In some instances, you may need to provide background for why you’re researching your topic. This information may include your personal interest in or experience with the subject, both of which are easier to express using first-person pronouns. For example:

Expressing personal experiences and viewpoints isn’t always a good idea in research papers. When it’s appropriate to do so, though, just make sure you don’t overuse the first person.

When to Avoid Writing in the First Person

It’s usually a good idea to stick to the third person in the methods and results sections of your research paper. Additionally, be careful not to use the first person when:

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

●  It makes your findings seem like personal observations rather than factual results.

●  It removes objectivity and implies that the writing may be biased .

●  It appears in phrases such as I think or I believe , which can weaken your writing.

Keeping Your Writing Formal and Objective

Using the first person while maintaining a formal tone can be tricky, but keeping a few tips in mind can help you strike a balance. The important thing is to make sure the tone isn’t too conversational.

 To achieve this, avoid referring to the readers, such as with the second-person you . Use we and us only when referring to yourself and the other authors/researchers involved in the paper, not the audience.

It’s becoming more acceptable in the academic world to use first-person pronouns such as we and I in research papers. But make sure you check with your instructor or institution first because they may have strict rules regarding this practice.

 If you do decide to use the first person, make sure you do so effectively by following the tips we’ve laid out in this guide. And once you’ve written a draft, send us a copy! Our expert proofreaders and editors will be happy to check your grammar, spelling, word choice, references, tone, and more. Submit a 500-word sample today!

Is it ever acceptable to use I or we in a research paper?

In some instances, using first-person pronouns can help you to establish credibility, add clarity, and make the writing easier to read.

How can I avoid using I in my writing?

Writing in the passive voice can help you to avoid using the first person.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

The “no first-person” myth

• First-Person Pronouns
• Research and Publication

In this series, we look at common APA Style misconceptions and debunk these myths one by one.

Many writers believe the “no first-person” myth, which is that writers cannot use first-person pronouns such as “I” or “we” in an APA Style paper. This myth implies that writers must instead refer to themselves in the third person (e.g., as “the author” or “the authors”). However, APA Style has no such rule against using first-person pronouns and actually encourages their use to avoid ambiguity in attribution!

When expressing your own views or the views of yourself and fellow authors, use the pronouns “I” or “we” and the like . Similarly, when writing your paper, use first-person pronouns when describing work you did by yourself or work you and your fellow authors did together when conducting your research. For example, use “we interviewed participants” rather than “the authors interviewed participants.” When writing an APA Style paper by yourself, use the first-person pronoun “I” to refer to yourself. And use the pronoun “we” when writing an APA Style paper with others. Here are some phrases you might use in your paper:

“I think…” “I believe…” “I interviewed the participants…” “I analyzed the data…” “My analysis of the data revealed…” “We concluded…” “Our results showed…”

This guidance can be found in Section 4.16 of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, Seventh Edition and in Section 2.16 of the Concise Guide to APA Style, Seventh Edition . It represents a continuation of a long-standing APA Style guideline that began with the second edition of the manual, in 1974.

Keep in mind that you should avoid using the editorial “we” to refer to people in general so that it is clear to readers to whom you are referring. Instead, use more specific nouns such as “people” or “researchers.”

As always, defer to your instructors’ guidelines when writing student papers. For example, your instructor may ask students to avoid using first-person language. If so, follow that guideline for work in your class.

Now that we’ve debunked another myth, go forth APA Style writers, using the first-person when appropriate!

What myth should we debunk next? Leave a comment below.

Related and recent

Comments are disabled due to your privacy settings. To re-enable, please adjust your cookie preferences.

APA Style Monthly

Subscribe to the APA Style Monthly newsletter to get tips, updates, and resources delivered directly to your inbox.

Welcome! Thank you for subscribing.

APA Style Guidelines

Browse APA Style writing guidelines by category

• Abbreviations
• Bias-Free Language
• Capitalization
• In-Text Citations
• Italics and Quotation Marks
• Paper Format
• Punctuation
• Spelling and Hyphenation
• Tables and Figures

Full index of topics

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

Can You Use First-Person Pronouns (I/we) in a Research Paper?

Research writers frequently wonder whether the first person can be used in academic and scientific writing. In truth, for generations, we’ve been discouraged from using “I” and “we” in academic writing simply due to old habits. That’s right—there’s no reason why you can’t use these words! In fact, the academic community used first-person pronouns until the 1920s, when the third person and passive-voice constructions (that is, “boring” writing) were adopted–prominently expressed, for example, in Strunk and White’s classic writing manual “Elements of Style” first published in 1918, that advised writers to place themselves “in the background” and not draw attention to themselves.

In recent decades, however, changing attitudes about the first person in academic writing has led to a paradigm shift, and we have, however, we’ve shifted back to producing active and engaging prose that incorporates the first person.

Can You Use “I” in a Research Paper?

However, “I” and “we” still have some generally accepted pronoun rules writers should follow. For example, the first person is more likely used in the abstract , Introduction section , Discussion section , and Conclusion section of an academic paper while the third person and passive constructions are found in the Methods section and Results section .

In this article, we discuss when you should avoid personal pronouns and when they may enhance your writing.

It’s Okay to Use First-Person Pronouns to:

• clarify meaning by eliminating passive voice constructions;
• establish authority and credibility (e.g., assert ethos, the Aristotelian rhetorical term referring to the personal character);
• express interest in a subject matter (typically found in rapid correspondence);
• establish personal connections with readers, particularly regarding anecdotal or hypothetical situations (common in philosophy, religion, and similar fields, particularly to explore how certain concepts might impact personal life. Additionally, artistic disciplines may also encourage personal perspectives more than other subjects);
• to emphasize or distinguish your perspective while discussing existing literature; and
• to create a conversational tone (rare in academic writing).

The First Person Should Be Avoided When:

• doing so would remove objectivity and give the impression that results or observations are unique to your perspective;
• you wish to maintain an objective tone that would suggest your study minimized biases as best as possible; and
• expressing your thoughts generally (phrases like “I think” are unnecessary because any statement that isn’t cited should be yours).

Usage Examples

The following examples compare the impact of using and avoiding first-person pronouns.

Example 1 (First Person Preferred):

To understand the effects of global warming on coastal regions,  changes in sea levels, storm surge occurrences and precipitation amounts  were examined .

[Note: When a long phrase acts as the subject of a passive-voice construction, the sentence becomes difficult to digest. Additionally, since the author(s) conducted the research, it would be clearer to specifically mention them when discussing the focus of a project.]

We examined  changes in sea levels, storm surge occurrences, and precipitation amounts to understand how global warming impacts coastal regions.

[Note: When describing the focus of a research project, authors often replace “we” with phrases such as “this study” or “this paper.” “We,” however, is acceptable in this context, including for scientific disciplines. In fact, papers published the vast majority of scientific journals these days use “we” to establish an active voice.   Be careful when using “this study” or “this paper” with verbs that clearly couldn’t have performed the action.   For example, “we attempt to demonstrate” works, but “the study attempts to demonstrate” does not; the study is not a person.]

Example 2 (First Person Discouraged):

From the various data points  we have received ,  we observed  that higher frequencies of runoffs from heavy rainfall have occurred in coastal regions where temperatures have increased by at least 0.9°C.

[Note: Introducing personal pronouns when discussing results raises questions regarding the reproducibility of a study. However, mathematics fields generally tolerate phrases such as “in X example, we see…”]

Coastal regions  with temperature increases averaging more than 0.9°C  experienced  higher frequencies of runoffs from heavy rainfall.

[Note: We removed the passive voice and maintained objectivity and assertiveness by specifically identifying the cause-and-effect elements as the actor and recipient of the main action verb. Additionally, in this version, the results appear independent of any person’s perspective.] 

Example 3 (First Person Preferred):

In contrast to the study by Jones et al. (2001), which suggests that milk consumption is safe for adults, the Miller study (2005) revealed the potential hazards of ingesting milk.  The authors confirm  this latter finding.

[Note: “Authors” in the last sentence above is unclear. Does the term refer to Jones et al., Miller, or the authors of the current paper?]

In contrast to the study by Jones et al. (2001), which suggests that milk consumption is safe for adults, the Miller study (2005) revealed the potential hazards of ingesting milk.  We confirm  this latter finding.

[Note: By using “we,” this sentence clarifies the actor and emphasizes the significance of the recent findings reported in this paper. Indeed, “I” and “we” are acceptable in most scientific fields to compare an author’s works with other researchers’ publications. The APA encourages using personal pronouns for this context. The social sciences broaden this scope to allow discussion of personal perspectives, irrespective of comparisons to other literature.]

Other Tips about Using Personal Pronouns

• Avoid starting a sentence with personal pronouns. The beginning of a sentence is a noticeable position that draws readers’ attention. Thus, using personal pronouns as the first one or two words of a sentence will draw unnecessary attention to them (unless, of course, that was your intent).
• Be careful how you define “we.” It should only refer to the authors and never the audience unless your intention is to write a conversational piece rather than a scholarly document! After all, the readers were not involved in analyzing or formulating the conclusions presented in your paper (although, we note that the point of your paper is to persuade readers to reach the same conclusions you did). While this is not a hard-and-fast rule, if you do want to use “we” to refer to a larger class of people, clearly define the term “we” in the sentence. For example, “As researchers, we frequently question…”
• First-person writing is becoming more acceptable under Modern English usage standards; however, the second-person pronoun “you” is still generally unacceptable because it is too casual for academic writing.
• Take all of the above notes with a grain of salt. That is,  double-check your institution or target journal’s author guidelines .  Some organizations may prohibit the use of personal pronouns.
• As an extra tip, before submission, you should always read through the most recent issues of a journal to get a better sense of the editors’ preferred writing styles and conventions.

Wordvice Resources

For more general advice on how to use active and passive voice in research papers, on how to paraphrase , or for a list of useful phrases for academic writing , head over to the Wordvice Academic Resources pages . And for more professional proofreading services , visit our Academic Editing and P aper Editing Services pages.

• How it works

Use of Pronouns in Academic Writing

Published by Alvin Nicolas at August 17th, 2021 , Revised On August 24, 2023

Pronouns are words that make reference to both specific and nonspecific things and people. They are used in place of nouns.

First-person pronouns (I, We) are rarely used in academic writing. They are primarily used in a reflective piece, such as a reflective essay or personal statement. You should avoid using second-person pronouns such as “you” and “yours”. The use of third-person pronouns (He, She, They) is allowed, but it is still recommended to consider gender bias when using them in academic writing.

The antecedent of a pronoun is the noun that the pronoun represents. In English, you will see the antecedent appear both before and after the pronoun, even though it is usually mentioned in the text before the pronoun. The students could not complete the work on time because they procrastinated for too long. Before he devoured a big burger, Michael looked a bit nervous.

The Antecedent of a Pronoun

Make sure the antecedent is evident and explicit whenever you use a pronoun in a sentence. You may want to replace the pronoun with the noun to eliminate any vagueness.

• After the production and the car’s mechanical inspection were complete, it was delivered to the owner.

In the above sentence, it is unclear what the pronoun “it” is referring to.

• After the production and the car’s mechanical inspection was complete, the car was delivered to the owner.

Use of First Person Pronouns (I, We) in Academic Writing

The use of first-person pronouns, such as “I” and “We”, is a widely debated topic in academic writing.

While some style guides, such as ‘APA” and “Harvard”, encourage first-person pronouns when describing the author’s actions, many other style guides discourage their use in academic writing to keep the attention to the information presented within rather than who describes it.

Similarly, you will find some leniency towards the use of first-person pronouns in some academic disciplines, while others strictly prohibit using them to maintain an impartial and neutral tone.

It will be fair to say that first-person pronouns are increasingly regular in many forms of academic writing.  If ever in doubt whether or not you should use first-person pronouns in your essay or assignment, speak with your tutor to be entirely sure.

Avoid overusing first-person pronouns in academic papers regardless of the style guide used. It is recommended to use them only where required for improving the clarity of the text.

If you are writing about a situation involving only yourself or if you are the sole author of the paper, then use the singular pronouns (I, my). Use plural pronouns (We, They, Our) when there are coauthors to work.

Avoiding First Person Pronouns

You can avoid first-person pronouns by employing any of the following three methods.

There are advantages and disadvantages of each of these three strategies. For example, passive voice introduces dangling modifiers, which can make your text unclear and ambiguous. Therefore, it would be best to keep first-person pronouns in the text if you can use them.

In some forms of academic writing, such as a personal statement and reflective essay, it is completely acceptable to use first-person pronouns.

The Problem with the Editorial We

Avoid using the first person plural to refer to people in academic text, known as the “editorial we”. The use of the “editorial we” is quite common in newspapers when the author speaks on behalf of the people to express a shared experience or view.

Refrain from using broad generalizations in academic text. You have to be crystal clear and very specific about who you are making reference to. Use nouns in place of pronouns where possible.

• When we tested the data, we found that the hypothesis to be incorrect.
• When the researchers tested the data, they found the hypothesis to be incorrect.
• As we started to work on the project, we realized how complex the requirements were.
• As the students started to work on the project, they realized how complex the requirements were.

If you are talking on behalf of a specific group you belong to, then the use of “we” is acceptable.

• It is essential to be aware of our own
• It is essential for essayists to be aware of their own weaknesses.
• Essayists need to be aware of their own

Use of Second Person Pronouns (You) in Academic Writing

It is strictly prohibited to use the second-person pronoun “you” to address the audience in any form of academic writing. You can rephrase the sentence or introduce the impersonal pronoun “one” to avoid second-person pronouns in the text.

• To achieve the highest academic grade, you must avoid procrastination.
• To achieve the highest academic grade, one must avoid procrastination.
• As you can notice in below Table 2.1, all participants selected the first option.
• As shown in below Table 2.1, all participants selected the first option.

Use of Third Person Pronouns (He, She, They) in Academic Writing

Third-person pronouns in the English language are usually gendered (She/Her, He/Him). Educational institutes worldwide are increasingly advocating for gender-neutral language, so you should avoid using third-person pronouns in academic text.

In the older academic text, you will see gender-based nouns (Fishermen, Traitor) and pronouns (him, her, he, she) being commonly used. However, this style of writing is outdated and warned against in the present times.

You may also see some authors using both masculine and feminine pronouns, such as “he” or “she”, in the same text, but this generally results in unclear and inappropriate sentences.

Considering using gender-neutral pronouns, such as “they”, ‘there”, “them” for unknown people and undetermined people. The use of “they” in academic writing is highly encouraged. Many style guides, including Harvard, MLA, and APA, now endorse gender natural pronouns in academic writing.

On the other hand, you can also choose to avoid using pronouns altogether by either revising the sentence structure or pluralizing the sentence’s subject.

• When a student is asked to write an essay, he can take a specific position on the topic.
• When a student is asked to write an essay, they can take a specific position on the topic.
• When students are asked to write an essay, they are expected to take a specific position on the topic.
• Students are expected to take a specific position on the essay topic.
• The writer submitted his work for approval
• The writer submitted their work for approval.
• The writers submitted their work for approval.
• The writers’ work was submitted for approval.

Make sure it is clear who you are referring to with the singular “they” pronoun. You may want to rewrite the sentence or name the subject directly if the pronoun makes the sentence ambiguous.

For example, in the following example, you can see it is unclear who the plural pronoun “they” is referring to. To avoid confusion, the subject is named directly, and the context approves that “their paper” addresses the writer.

• If the writer doesn’t complete the client’s paper in time, they will be frustrated.
• The client will be frustrated if the writer doesn’t complete their paper in due time.

If you need to make reference to a specific person, it would be better to address them using self-identified pronouns. For example, in the following sentence, you can see that each person is referred to using a different possessive pronoun.

The students described their experience with different academic projects: Mike talked about his essay, James talked about their poster presentation, and Sara talked about her dissertation paper.

Ensure Consistency Throughout the Text

Avoid switching back and forth between first-person pronouns (I, We, Our) and third-person pronouns (The writers, the students) in a single piece. It is vitally important to maintain consistency throughout the text.

For example, The writers completed the work in due time, and our content quality is well above the standard expected. We completed the work in due time, and our content quality is well above the standard expected. The writers completed the work in due time, and the content quality is well above the standard expected.“

How to Use Demonstrative Pronouns (This, That, Those, These) in Academic Writing

Make sure it is clear who you are referring to when using demonstrative pronouns. Consider placing a descriptive word or phrase after the demonstrative pronouns to give more clarity to the sentence.

For example, The political relationship between Israel and Arab states has continued to worsen over the last few decades, contrary to the expectations of enthusiasts in the regional political sphere. This shows that a lot more needs to be done to tackle this.            The political relationship between Israel and Arab states has continued to worsen over the last few decades, contrary to the expectations of enthusiasts in the regional political sphere. This situation shows that a lot more needs to be done to tackle this issue.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the 8 types of pronouns.

The 8 types of pronouns are:

• Personal: Refers to specific persons.
• Demonstrative: Points to specific things.
• Interrogative: Used for questioning.
• Possessive: Shows ownership.
• Reflexive: Reflects the subject.
• Reciprocal: Indicates mutual action.
• Relative: Introduces relative clauses.
• Indefinite: Refers vaguely or generally.

You May Also Like

This articles provides information on the order of adjectives in a string of adjectives that feels intuitive to native English speakers, but not to the non-native English speakers.

Question marks are frequently used in academic writing, considering the number of questions we try to address.

You can introduce elaborations, descriptions, a list of items, phrases, words, clauses, and pointers using a colon. This article explains the use of colons with examples.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

We Vs. They: Using the First & Third Person in Research Papers

Writing in the first , second , or third person is referred to as the author’s point of view . When we write, our tendency is to personalize the text by writing in the first person . That is, we use pronouns such as “I” and “we”. This is acceptable when writing personal information, a journal, or a book. However, it is not common in academic writing.

Some writers find the use of first , second , or third person point of view a bit confusing while writing research papers. Since second person is avoided while writing in academic or scientific papers, the main confusion remains within first or third person.

In the following sections, we will discuss the usage and examples of the first , second , and third person point of view.

First Person Pronouns

The first person point of view simply means that we use the pronouns that refer to ourselves in the text. These are as follows:

Can we use I or We In the Scientific Paper?

Using these, we present the information based on what “we” found. In science and mathematics, this point of view is rarely used. It is often considered to be somewhat self-serving and arrogant . It is important to remember that when writing your research results, the focus of the communication is the research and not the persons who conducted the research. When you want to persuade the reader, it is best to avoid personal pronouns in academic writing even when it is personal opinion from the authors of the study. In addition to sounding somewhat arrogant, the strength of your findings might be underestimated.

For example:

Based on my results, I concluded that A and B did not equal to C.

In this example, the entire meaning of the research could be misconstrued. The results discussed are not those of the author ; they are generated from the experiment. To refer to the results in this context is incorrect and should be avoided. To make it more appropriate, the above sentence can be revised as follows:

Based on the results of the assay, A and B did not equal to C.

Second Person Pronouns

The second person point of view uses pronouns that refer to the reader. These are as follows:

This point of view is usually used in the context of providing instructions or advice , such as in “how to” manuals or recipe books. The reason behind using the second person is to engage the reader.

You will want to buy a turkey that is large enough to feed your extended family. Before cooking it, you must wash it first thoroughly with cold water.

Although this is a good technique for giving instructions, it is not appropriate in academic or scientific writing.

Third Person Pronouns

The third person point of view uses both proper nouns, such as a person’s name, and pronouns that refer to individuals or groups (e.g., doctors, researchers) but not directly to the reader. The ones that refer to individuals are as follows:

• Hers (possessive form)
• His (possessive form)
• Its (possessive form)
• One’s (possessive form)

The third person point of view that refers to groups include the following:

• Their (possessive form)
• Theirs (plural possessive form)

Everyone at the convention was interested in what Dr. Johnson presented. The instructors decided that the students should help pay for lab supplies. The researchers determined that there was not enough sample material to conduct the assay.

The third person point of view is generally used in scientific papers but, at times, the format can be difficult. We use indefinite pronouns to refer back to the subject but must avoid using masculine or feminine terminology. For example:

A researcher must ensure that he has enough material for his experiment. The nurse must ensure that she has a large enough blood sample for her assay.

Many authors attempt to resolve this issue by using “he or she” or “him or her,” but this gets cumbersome and too many of these can distract the reader. For example:

A researcher must ensure that he or she has enough material for his or her experiment. The nurse must ensure that he or she has a large enough blood sample for his or her assay.

These issues can easily be resolved by making the subjects plural as follows:

Researchers must ensure that they have enough material for their experiment. Nurses must ensure that they have large enough blood samples for their assay.

Exceptions to the Rules

As mentioned earlier, the third person is generally used in scientific writing, but the rules are not quite as stringent anymore. It is now acceptable to use both the first and third person pronouns  in some contexts, but this is still under controversy.  

In a February 2011 blog on Eloquent Science , Professor David M. Schultz presented several opinions on whether the author viewpoints differed. However, there appeared to be no consensus. Some believed that the old rules should stand to avoid subjectivity, while others believed that if the facts were valid, it didn’t matter which point of view was used.

First or Third Person: What Do The Journals Say

In general, it is acceptable in to use the first person point of view in abstracts, introductions, discussions, and conclusions, in some journals. Even then, avoid using “I” in these sections. Instead, use “we” to refer to the group of researchers that were part of the study. The third person point of view is used for writing methods and results sections. Consistency is the key and switching from one point of view to another within sections of a manuscript can be distracting and is discouraged. It is best to always check your author guidelines for that particular journal. Once that is done, make sure your manuscript is free from the above-mentioned or any other grammatical error.

You are the only researcher involved in your thesis project. You want to avoid using the first person point of view throughout, but there are no other researchers on the project so the pronoun “we” would not be appropriate. What do you do and why? Please let us know your thoughts in the comments section below.

I am writing the history of an engineering company for which I worked. How do I relate a significant incident that involved me?

Hi Roger, Thank you for your question. If you are narrating the history for the company that you worked at, you would have to refer to it from an employee’s perspective (third person). If you are writing the history as an account of your experiences with the company (including the significant incident), you could refer to yourself as ”I” or ”My.” (first person) You could go through other articles related to language and grammar on Enago Academy’s website https://enago.com/academy/ to help you with your document drafting. Did you get a chance to install our free Mobile App? https://www.enago.com/academy/mobile-app/ . Make sure you subscribe to our weekly newsletter: https://www.enago.com/academy/subscribe-now/ .

Good day , i am writing a research paper and m y setting is a company . is it ethical to put the name of the company in the research paper . i the management has allowed me to conduct my research in thir company .

thanks docarlene diaz

Generally authors do not mention the names of the organization separately within the research paper. The name of the educational institution the researcher or the PhD student is working in needs to be mentioned along with the name in the list of authors. However, if the research has been carried out in a company, it might not be mandatory to mention the name after the name in the list of authors. You can check with the author guidelines of your target journal and if needed confirm with the editor of the journal. Also check with the mangement of the company whether they want the name of the company to be mentioned in the research paper.

Finishing up my dissertation the information is clear and concise.

How to write the right first person pronoun if there is a single researcher? Thanks

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What would be most effective in reducing research misconduct?

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

Choice of personal pronoun in single-author papers

Which personal pronoun is appropriate in single-author papers - 'I' or 'we'? Could the use of 'I' be considered egotistical? Or will the use of 'we' be considered to be grammatically incorrect?

• publications
• writing-style

• see also hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/2002/… –  GEdgar Commented Apr 30, 2016 at 21:15
• 1 Your question is similar to academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11659/… –  Richard Erickson Commented Dec 14, 2017 at 17:04
• 15 Easy solution: get a co-author. It wouldn't be the first time –  Davidmh Commented Dec 14, 2017 at 17:22

7 Answers 7

Very rarely is 'I' used in scholarly writing (at least in math and the sciences). A much more common choice is 'we', as in "the author and the reader". For example: "We examine the case when..."

One exception to this rule is if you're writing a memoir or some other sort of "personal piece" for which the identity of the author is particularly relevant.

Now let me quote Paul Halmos (Section 12 of "How to Write Mathematics"):

One aspect of expository style that frequently bothers beginning authors is the use of the editorial "we", as opposed to the singular "I", or the neutral "one". It is in matters like this that common sense is most important. For what it's worth, I present here my recommendation. Since the best expository style is the least obtrusive one, I tend nowadays to prefer the neutral approach. That does not mean using "one" often, or ever; sentences like "one has thus proved that..." are awful. It does mean the complete avoidance of the first person pronouns in either singular or plural. "Since p , it follows that q ." "This implies p ." "An application of p to q yields r ." Most (all ?) mathematical writing is (should be ?) factual; simple declarative statements are the best for communicating facts. A frequently effective time-saving device is the use of the imperative. "To find p , multiply q by r ." "Given p , put q equal to r ."... There is nothing wrong with the editorial "we", but if you like it, do not misuse it. Let "we" mean "the author and the reader" (or "the lecturer and the audience"). Thus, it is fine to say "Using Lemma 2 we can generalize Theorem 1", or "Lemma 3 gives us a technique for proving Theorem 4". It is not good to say "Our work on this result was done in 1969" (unless the voice is that of two authors, or more, speaking in unison), and "We thank our wife for her help with the typing" is always bad. The use of "I", and especially its overuse, sometimes has a repellent effect, as arrogance or ex-cathedra preaching, and, for that reason, I like to avoid it whenever possible. In short notes, obviously in personal historical remarks, and perhaps, in essays such as this, it has its place.

You can download the pdf of Halmos' complete essay .

• 6 +1 for the Halmos quote. Your example ("we let...") is certainly a place where I wouldn't use a pronoun at all! –  David Ketcheson Commented Aug 23, 2012 at 6:04
• 2 @scaaahu Without reading the specific example, I can't be sure, but... I would liken "We call something X" to saying "this is how it's done" descriptive of those in the know and prescriptive for those new to the area. –  Dan C Commented Aug 23, 2012 at 6:57
• 19 I can see the value of Halmos' advice in the specific field of mathematics, where the entire content of a paper is composed of incontrovertible facts. However, in the natural sciences things are rarely so clear-cut, and in the end what most papers express are not facts but opinions. These are highly informed opinions based on evidence, but they are opinions nevertheless. In my view it's counterproductive and misleading to try and avoid any mention of whose opinions they are, so I think it's very appropriate to introduce such a paper with "I argue that...". –  N. Virgo Commented Aug 26, 2012 at 10:28
• 22 Additionally, outside of mathematics you have to deal with descriptions of experiments. It's a question of style whether to say "a device was constructed", "we constructed a device", "I constructed a device". Personally, I find the first incredibly awkward (constructed by whom?), the second a bit jarring (wait, was there someone else involved?) and the third perfectly fine. –  N. Virgo Commented Aug 26, 2012 at 10:32
• 6 I, for one, find the idea of using 'we' in a single-author essay to be utterly bizarre. Authors should take responsibility for their own work and leave the readers out of it. –  Ubiquitous Commented May 12, 2015 at 15:06

Authorial "we" is quite common, even in single author papers (at least in math and related fields). The explanation I've heard is that it should be read as both the writer and the reader (as in "we now prove...", meaning that we two shall now prove it together). Some people find it awkward, and insist on "I", but this is unusual (and I've heard of referees demanding "we"). In cases where "we" is truly nonsensical (for instance, introducing a list of people being thanked), people who avoid "I" either find an alternate phrasing or refer to themselves in the third person ("The author would like to thank...").

In single-author papers, I think consistency trumps any particular rule or style. As the Haimos essay suggests, you can achieve whatever style you choose; you just need to make sure that it makes sense.

For instance, don't switch back and forth between "I" and "we," or between active and passive constructions too close to one another. Make the use of "I" and "we" clear to indicate active participation in the project (for instance, for assumptions or approximations made, you choose that—unless it's something everybody does).

• 21 I agree with "don't switch back and forth between 'I' and 'we'", but I disagree with your comparison of that with "[don't switch back and forth between] active and passive constructions". There are contexts where habitual use of I makes sense. I know of no analogous contexts for repeated use of passive constructions . As a general rule, writing extensively in the passive voice is just bad writing . –  Dan C Commented Aug 23, 2012 at 15:20
• +1, "I" or "We", it's your call, but be consistent (and also use the present tense, but this is another story). –  Sylvain Peyronnet Commented Aug 23, 2012 at 17:08
• The passive voice is useful for switching the emphasis. But what I meant was don't go "We modeled X. This was done to study Y. We will not look at Z further. Z was not modeled because A." and so on. –  aeismail Commented Aug 23, 2012 at 20:15
• 2 "We modeled X to study Y. We did not model Z because A." –  JeffE Commented Aug 24, 2012 at 12:53
• 7 @aeismail: I honestly can't find anything objectionable in your proposed counterexample! –  Aant Commented Aug 26, 2012 at 23:49

When not faced with a journal/publisher specific style, my go to style guide is APA. I really like the APA style blog. In this post they explain:

If you’re writing a paper alone, use I as your pronoun. If you have coauthors, use we.

They go on to lash out against the editorial we

However, avoid using we to refer to broader sets of people—researchers, students, psychologists, Americans, people in general, or even all of humanity—without specifying who you mean (a practice called using the editorial “we”). This can introduce ambiguity into your writing.

There is also another related post about using we and avoiding ambiguity.

• 3 The context is important, though. If you are writing a scientific/mathematical paper, writing "I" will come across as odd and unprofessional, so this would be pretty bad advice. –  Rob Commented Sep 18, 2021 at 19:45

There are already two good answers for this entry, one is also accepted. But I'm going to give my two cent answer anyway...

This is what I learned from a workshop on writing scientific texts. Basically, my suggestion would be avoid using either "we" or "I" in the whole paper, except the "Experiment and results" section 1 . The idea is that by using passive form in the text, you avoid both issues related to being egotistical or ungrammatical.

Then in the "Experiment and results" you use "We" 2 . Why not using passive form in "Experiment" section? Well, you could but the idea here is that these results can be produced by everyone, including readers. So "we" is not referring to author(s), but to author(s) and readers. 1. This might not be the case in fields that papers do not have an experimental section. 2. Once could object that this will result in inconstancy in paper which is a valid objection.

• 1 Why the factually incorrect "we" in the experiments and results sections? This is nonsense. The "we" should be used iff it can refer to author and reader . –  Walter Commented Jul 6, 2017 at 9:25

The " royal we " works

The " royal we " suggests a hypothetical population of peers who hold some position. This hypothetical population may-or-may-not include the reader, at the reader's option. And since it's a hypothetical population with a subjective number of members, " we " is appropriate.

Even if you're talking about a real-world action that you did to perform a specific experimental step, it's still accurate to describe the hypothetical population as having performed that action.

This approach has a few advantages:

It's easier for readers to put themselves into your shoes as a member of the population engaging in the study.

It avoids distracting the reader with inconsistent pronouns for the authors across papers.

It's field-dependent. English teachers told me the following:

In STEM you use "we" for "the reader and the author(s)", regardless of how many authors you have. (Note that the "royal we" would be the wrong term, since the authors don't wish to sound as ostentatious in "we, the king of ...".)

In languages, you use "I" if you are the sole author.

• 2 That really is bad advice. "We studied X" does not mean that the reader studied it. –  aeismail Commented Jan 6, 2018 at 22:57
• 11 @aeismail That really is a bad comment. In STEM, "we studied X" in the conclusion of a paper does mean that the reader studied X while reading the paper. In languages, "we" may mean sound pompous, may or may not involve the reader, or be completely misunderstood. –  user85520 Commented Jan 6, 2018 at 23:43
• 1 And what does It mean in the introduction? It shouldn’t mean one thing in the introduction and another somewhere else. –  aeismail Commented Jan 7, 2018 at 1:21
• 4 Sorry, "we" does not universally mean "reader and the author." There are too many usages where that definition simply doesn't work: "We added reagent X." "We measured the growth of species Y." "We observed that Y grew with temperature." The reader did none of those. –  aeismail Commented Jan 7, 2018 at 2:14
• 4 It would be more accurate to say that in mathematics (and related areas like theoretical computer science), one uses "we" for "the author and the reader(s)". There is no such area as "STEM". –  JeffE Commented Jan 7, 2018 at 4:27

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged publications writing writing-style grammar ..

• Featured on Meta
• Upcoming sign-up experiments related to tags

Hot Network Questions

• Does "my grades suffered" mean "my grades became worse" or "my grades were bad"?
• Homebrew spell to improve familiar link before combat
• Can a planet have a warm, tropical climate both at the poles and at the equator?
• Are both vocal cord and vocal chord correct?
• if people are bred like dogs, what can be achieved?
• Why do many philosophers consider a past-eternal universe to be self-explanatory but not a universe that began with no cause?
• Why did Geordi have his visor replaced with ocular implants between Generations and First Contact?
• What's the best way to line up equals on a line of text?
• Can God transcend human logic and reasoning?
• Do the decoupling capacitors act as capacitive load to the opamp which is used to make a virtual gorund?
• Exception handling: is one exception type sufficient?
• Diagnosing tripped breaker on the dishwasher circuit?
• Is it legal to initialize an array via a functor which takes the array itself as a parameter by reference?
• How to color only the chapter, section and subsection numbers in Table of Contents?
• Can a unique position be deduced if pieces are replaced by checkers (can see piece color but not type)
• Is FDISK /MBR really undocumented, and why?
• Is Good and Evil relative or absolute?
• How do I pour *just* the right amount of plaster into these molds?
• What does "the figure has to be in a vector scale" mean?
• Why can Ethernet NICs bridge to VirtualBox and most Wi-Fi NICs don't?
• A chess engine in Java: generating white pawn moves
• What is the translation of lawfare in French?
• Can I replace a GFCI outlet in a bathroom with an outlet having USB ports?
• Is this professor being unnecessarily harsh or did I actually make a mistake?

• Walden University
• Faculty Portal

Scholarly Voice: First-Person Point of View

First-person point of view.

Since 2007, Walden academic leadership has endorsed the APA manual guidance on appropriate use of the first-person singular pronoun "I," allowing the use of this pronoun in all Walden academic writing except doctoral capstone abstracts, which should not contain first person pronouns.

In addition to the pointers below, APA 7, Section 4.16 provides information on the appropriate use of first person in scholarly writing.

Inappropriate Uses:   I feel that eating white bread causes cancer. The author feels that eating white bread causes cancer. I found several sources (Marks, 2011; Isaac, 2006; Stuart, in press) that showed a link between white bread consumption and cancer.   Appropriate Use:   I surveyed 2,900 adults who consumed white bread regularly. In this chapter, I present a literature review on research about how seasonal light changes affect depression.

Confusing Sentence:   The researcher found that the authors had been accurate in their study of helium, which the researcher had hypothesized from the beginning of their project.   Revision:   I found that Johnson et al. (2011) had been accurate in their study of helium, which I had hypothesized since I began my project.

Passive voice:   The surveys were distributed and the results were compiled after they were collected.   Revision:   I distributed the surveys, and then I collected and compiled the results.

Appropriate use of first person we and our :   Two other nurses and I worked together to create a qualitative survey to measure patient satisfaction. Upon completion, we presented the results to our supervisor.

Make assumptions about your readers by putting them in a group to which they may not belong by using first person plural pronouns. Inappropriate use of first person "we" and "our":

• We can stop obesity in our society by changing our lifestyles.
• We need to help our patients recover faster.

In the first sentence above, the readers would not necessarily know who "we" are, and using a phrase such as "our society " can immediately exclude readers from outside your social group. In the second sentence, the author assumes that the reader is a nurse or medical professional, which may not be the case, and the sentence expresses the opinion of the author.

To write with more precision and clarity, hallmarks of scholarly writing, revise these sentences without the use of "we" and "our."

• Moderate activity can reduce the risk of obesity (Hu et al., 2003).
• Staff members in the health care industry can help improve the recovery rate for patients (Matthews, 2013).

Pronouns Video

• APA Formatting & Style: Pronouns (video transcript)

Related Resources

Didn't find what you need? Email us at [email protected] .

• Previous Page: Point of View
• Next Page: Second-Person Point of View
• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

Single author scientific paper, 'we' or 'I'?

I am authoring a single author paper. Usually when referring to oneself in a paper, 'we' is used. In single author papers I found both 'we' and 'I' (e.g., 'here we/I report xyz').

Which one is stylistically better? To me 'we' seems odd when I read a single author paper.

• scientific-publishing

• 5 Already answered here: academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2945/… –  Dan Romik Commented Nov 23, 2016 at 16:58
• I think your question has more to do with the fact that it's a scientific paper than the appropriateness of writing style. –  user6035379 Commented Nov 23, 2016 at 19:17
• @DanRomik thank you for that link, this basically answered my question. –  Dahlai Commented Nov 24, 2016 at 10:28
• What did you use finally? We or I? I think I am encountering the same problem here. –  Lin Cheng Commented Aug 3, 2020 at 21:27
• I followed @DanRomik's and Monical Cellio's suggestions –  Dahlai Commented Aug 5, 2020 at 7:55

5 Answers 5

The convention in scientific writing, at least in the hard sciences, is to avoid "I" even for single-author papers. I suspect (but can't prove) that this is why you see so much passive voice in such papers ("the doohickey was then frobitzed to induce a somethingorother reaction").

According to this well-received answer on Academia , you can view use of "we" as an editorial "we" or "we, as in the author and the readers". The latter approach works better for descriptive writing ("we see the following results...") than reporting ("we did X").

Ultimately you should base your decision on the submission requirements of the institution where you intend to publish the paper. But in general, "I" is uncommon, "we" is used even for single-author papers, and you can use "we" in a way that doesn't have to seem weird.

If it's a single author, use I. I is for singular, and if you are doing the research and all that stuff by yourself, then take credit, unless someone's helped you. If you use "we", then there must be more people other than you doing the research, or someone has been helping you.

Check here for more information.

If you are the only one behind the research and the writing behind the paper, I is a singular term and should therefore should be used instead of we. There is no "we" behind the paper if there was only one person masterminding the project. Although, If this was a formal Scientific paper, It Usually is incorrect to refer to ones self during the script; the point is to present your point, not the fact that you found it(although if you found something completely unique and incredibly interesting, by all means, announce the fact of your hand behind the discovery-outside of the paper.)

I would like to add to this debate (and maybe introduce some updated information) by pointing out that the American Psychological Association (APA) appears to recommend the first-person singular for works authored by a single person.

Furthermore, they problematize the use of third-person constructions (e.g., "The author ...").

https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/grammar/first-person-pronouns

So most scientific papers are written with multiple voices. In the introduction the problem is discussed and the writing will refer to "This Study" or "This experiment" if it must refer to narrative person.

The second part describes the steps taken to get the results which will be discussed further in the paper. As this section is written as a set of instructions, the second person imperative voice is used, often with an implied "you" as the subject of the sentance (you do not write "you" but skip the subject and write the imperative verb.).

The next section is the results which is written in the form of a third person objective voice. In Third Person Objective, the writer should describe only the information that can be observed with the sense. This is often refered to as "Third Person Roving Camera" as most audio-visual media rely on Third Person Objective.

Finally, the conclusion should return to the same voice as the introduction. The conclusion should refer to the conclusion of the experiment and rely soley on the results as the basis of any statements made. The narrator should not speculate but merely states that the result sets do not support a conclusion to any questions or that the question asked is outside of the scope of the experiment or study.

Your Answer

Reminder: Answers generated by artificial intelligence tools are not allowed on Writing Stack Exchange. Learn more

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest.

Required, but never shown

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy .

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged style scientific-publishing or ask your own question .

• Featured on Meta
• Upcoming sign-up experiments related to tags

Hot Network Questions

• How exactly does a seashell make the humming sound?
• Why did Geordi have his visor replaced with ocular implants between Generations and First Contact?
• Are both vocal cord and vocal chord correct?
• How to merge two videos with openshot?
• Exception handling: 'catch' without explicit 'try'
• Why can't I conserve mass instead of moles and apply ratio in this problem?
• Synthesis of racemic nicotine
• What is this weapon used in The Peacemaker?
• Is there a non-perfect field in which polynomials of large degree are reducible?
• Poor performance in ListPlot[] Mathematica 14
• What is a quarter in 19th-century England converted to contemporary pints?
• Exception handling: is one exception type sufficient?
• How does the router know to send packets to a VM on bridge mode?
• Cancellation of the Deutschlandticket
• Can a planet have a warm, tropical climate both at the poles and at the equator?
• Why can Ethernet NICs bridge to VirtualBox and most Wi-Fi NICs don't?
• What is the best way to set a class value to a variable in Python if it exists in a dictionary?
• Is this professor being unnecessarily harsh or did I actually make a mistake?
• Is the OP_PUSHBYTES_X opcode always required after OP_RETURN?
• Writing a generic makefile for C projects
• Could Kessler Syndrome be used to control the temperature of the Earth?
• Trying to determine what this item is
• When was the last time a chess rule was modified?
• What rights does an employee retain, if any, who does not consent to being monitored on a work IT system?

Is it acceptable to use “we” in scientific papers?

Some of us were taught in school that the use of first-person personal pronouns makes scientific writing subjective. But it’s not true. Using we or I in a research paper does not always shift the spotlight away from the research. And writing in the third person or using passive voice does not make a piece of research writing objective. So, if a reviewer or thesis advisor tells you to remove all first-person references from your manuscript, know that it is not incorrect to use I or we in a paper, despite what many people believe.

So, the short answer to the question in the title is yes. It is acceptable to use we in your paper to refer to you and your co-authors. Whether you use first person pronouns or not is a writing style choice.

Of course, if your publisher’s guidelines for authors say “don’t use I or we in your manuscript”, avoid using I or we when there are valid alternatives. When the publication of your paper is at stake, don’t argue with the journal editor on matters of writing style. It’s not worth the candle. The good news is that most peer-reviewed journals allow the use of first-person pronouns.

The authorial we (or I ) in scientific papers is not only acceptable but also effective in some cases—for example, when passive voice may introduce ambiguity . For example, compare these two sentences:

Three analyses were conducted by the researchers.

We conducted three analyses.

In the first sentence, it is not clear who the researchers are. Are they the authors of the study or other researchers? However, there is no ambiguity in the second sentence.

Also, it’s natural to write in the first person about a research you and your co-authors personally conducted. Compare

We found an old manuscript

The authors of this paper found an old manuscript

an old manuscript was found .

Finally, writing in the first person is more persuasive than writing impersonal prose, as Helen Sword says in Stylish Academic Writing :

“When we muzzle the personal voice, we risk subverting our whole purpose as researchers, which is to foster change by communicating new knowledge to our intended audience in the most effective and persuasive way possible.”

If you’re not sure whether you should use we in scientific writing, write in a way you’re comfortable with. But avoid awkward expressions such as to the best knowledge of the authors of this paper or the analysis conducted by the authors of this study . Sometimes there is no better option than using first-person pronouns in academic writing. Finally, if you still have doubts, get other people’s opinion.

Do you need a freelance editor for a scientific paper? Send me a message at [email protected].

About Cristina N.

A freelance editor and writer with a keen interest in science, nature, and communication, I love to craft articles that help and inspire people.

How do you refer to a company in third person: it or they?

Aim: help and inspire people to improve their written communications.

Neagu Raluca-Cristina | VAT Registration Number: IT04535070264

© 2015–2024 Neagu Raluca-Cristina

• PROOFREADING
• TERMS OF SERVICE
• PRIVACY POLICY
• TESTIMONIALS

• Tips & Guides

How To Avoid Using “We,” “You,” And “I” in an Essay

• Posted on October 27, 2022 October 27, 2022

Maintaining a formal voice while writing academic essays and papers is essential to sound objective. 

One of the main rules of academic or formal writing is to avoid first-person pronouns like “we,” “you,” and “I.” These words pull focus away from the topic and shift it to the speaker – the opposite of your goal.

While it may seem difficult at first, some tricks can help you avoid personal language and keep a professional tone.

Let’s learn how to avoid using “we” in an essay.

What Is a Personal Pronoun?

Pronouns are words used to refer to a noun indirectly. Examples include “he,” “his,” “her,” and “hers.” Any time you refer to a noun – whether a person, object, or animal – without using its name, you use a pronoun.

Personal pronouns are a type of pronoun. A personal pronoun is a pronoun you use whenever you directly refer to the subject of the sentence. 

Take the following short paragraph as an example:

“Mr. Smith told the class yesterday to work on our essays. Mr. Smith also said that Mr. Smith lost Mr. Smith’s laptop in the lunchroom.”

The above sentence contains no pronouns at all. There are three places where you would insert a pronoun, but only two where you would put a personal pronoun. See the revised sentence below:

“Mr. Smith told the class yesterday to work on our essays. He also said that he lost his laptop in the lunchroom.”

“He” is a personal pronoun because we are talking directly about Mr. Smith. “His” is not a personal pronoun (it’s a possessive pronoun) because we are not speaking directly about Mr. Smith. Rather, we are talking about Mr. Smith’s laptop.

If later on you talk about Mr. Smith’s laptop, you may say:

“Mr. Smith found it in his car, not the lunchroom!” 

In this case, “it” is a personal pronoun because in this point of view we are making a reference to the laptop directly and not as something owned by Mr. Smith.

Why Avoid Personal Pronouns in Essay Writing

We’re teaching you how to avoid using “I” in writing, but why is this necessary? Academic writing aims to focus on a clear topic, sound objective, and paint the writer as a source of authority. Word choice can significantly impact your success in achieving these goals.

Writing that uses personal pronouns can unintentionally shift the reader’s focus onto the writer, pulling their focus away from the topic at hand.

Personal pronouns may also make your work seem less objective. 

One of the most challenging parts of essay writing is learning which words to avoid and how to avoid them. Fortunately, following a few simple tricks, you can master the English Language and write like a pro in no time.

Alternatives To Using Personal Pronouns

How to not use “I” in a paper? What are the alternatives? There are many ways to avoid the use of personal pronouns in academic writing. By shifting your word choice and sentence structure, you can keep the overall meaning of your sentences while re-shaping your tone.

Utilize Passive Voice

In conventional writing, students are taught to avoid the passive voice as much as possible, but it can be an excellent way to avoid first-person pronouns in academic writing.

You can use the passive voice to avoid using pronouns. Take this sentence, for example:

“ We used 150 ml of HCl for the experiment.”

Instead of using “we” and the active voice, you can use a passive voice without a pronoun. The sentence above becomes:

“150 ml of HCl were used for the experiment.” 

Using the passive voice removes your team from the experiment and makes your work sound more objective.

Take a Third-Person Perspective

Another answer to “how to avoid using ‘we’ in an essay?” is the use of a third-person perspective. Changing the perspective is a good way to take first-person pronouns out of a sentence. A third-person point of view will not use any first-person pronouns because the information is not given from the speaker’s perspective.

A third-person sentence is spoken entirely about the subject where the speaker is outside of the sentence.

Take a look at the sentence below:

“In this article you will learn about formal writing.”

The perspective in that sentence is second person, and it uses the personal pronoun “you.” You can change this sentence to sound more objective by using third-person pronouns:

“In this article the reader will learn about formal writing.”

The use of a third-person point of view makes the second sentence sound more academic and confident. Second-person pronouns, like those used in the first sentence, sound less formal and objective.

Be Specific With Word Choice

You can avoid first-personal pronouns by choosing your words carefully. Often, you may find that you are inserting unnecessary nouns into your work. 

Take the following sentence as an example:

“ My research shows the students did poorly on the test.”

In this case, the first-person pronoun ‘my’ can be entirely cut out from the sentence. It then becomes:

“Research shows the students did poorly on the test.”

The second sentence is more succinct and sounds more authoritative without changing the sentence structure.

You should also make sure to watch out for the improper use of adverbs and nouns. Being careful with your word choice regarding nouns, adverbs, verbs, and adjectives can help mitigate your use of personal pronouns. 

“They bravely started the French revolution in 1789.” 

While this sentence might be fine in a story about the revolution, an essay or academic piece should only focus on the facts. The world ‘bravely’ is a good indicator that you are inserting unnecessary personal pronouns into your work.

We can revise this sentence into:

“The French revolution started in 1789.” 

Avoid adverbs (adjectives that describe verbs), and you will find that you avoid personal pronouns by default.

Closing Thoughts

In academic writing, It is crucial to sound objective and focus on the topic. Using personal pronouns pulls the focus away from the subject and makes writing sound subjective.

Hopefully, this article has helped you learn how to avoid using “we” in an essay.

When working on any formal writing assignment, avoid personal pronouns and informal language as much as possible.

While getting the hang of academic writing, you will likely make some mistakes, so revising is vital. Always double-check for personal pronouns, plagiarism , spelling mistakes, and correctly cited pieces. 

 You can prevent and correct mistakes using a plagiarism checker at any time, completely for free.

Quetext is a platform that helps you with all those tasks. Check out all resources that are available to you today.

Sign Up for Quetext Today!

Click below to find a pricing plan that fits your needs.

You May Also Like

How to Summarize a Paper, a Story, a Book, a Report or an Essay

• Posted on June 25, 2024 June 25, 2024

How to Use AI to Enhance Your Storytelling Process

• Posted on June 12, 2024

Essential Comma Rules for Business Emails

• Posted on June 7, 2024

How to Write Polished, Professional Emails With AI

• Posted on May 30, 2024

A Safer Learning Environment: The Impact of AI Detection on School Security

• Posted on May 17, 2024

Rethinking Academic Integrity Policies in the AI Era

• Posted on May 10, 2024 May 10, 2024

Jargon Phrases to Avoid in Business Writing

• Posted on May 3, 2024 May 3, 2024

Comparing Two Documents for Plagiarism: Everything You Need to Know

• Posted on April 26, 2024 April 26, 2024

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

Can You Use “We” in a Research Paper?

W ould you be confused if you saw the personal pronouns in a formal article?

Using “we” in research papers is always a concern for students who are working on their thesis. Can we use it, actually?

This question often confuses students and scholars alike as they complete the particulars of their academic writing.

As you know, Academic articles are known for their formal and objective tone, and for many, the use of first and third pronouns like “I” and “we” might seem contradictory to these standards.

In this section, we will discover the guidelines and considerations related to this question: “Can you  use “We” in our research papers?”

Hopefully, you’ll have a clearer understanding of when, why, and how first and third pronouns can be correctly used in your scholarly work in a way that maintains the competence expected in academic writing.

Table of Contents

Using “We” in Academic Writings

We have three different writing formats known as APA, MLA, and CMS:

1.       APA:  American Psychological Association

2.       MLA:  Modern Language Association

3.       CMS:  Chicago/Turabian

In an APA format article, you can use “I” and “We,” and it is formal and generally acceptable. It is only related to the number of authors; if you are conducting the article by yourself, you can use “I” as the pronoun, but if you work in pairs or with other authors, you can write “We” to explain the work clearly.  

This also comes true for MLA and CMS formats. In all, you can use these pronouns under the same conditions. However, make sure to follow the style guide’s recommendations for using the first-person plural pronoun.

Other than these three formats, the style guides have different rules about the use of “we” in research papers.

For instance, in some scientific articles, it is common to use the passive voice instead of “We.” This helps to describe a research action without directly mentioning the author(s).

Again, if you have second thoughts about using personal pronouns, you can consult your instructor or the specific style guide required for your paper. You can find guidance on how to use “we” appropriately in your research paper.

When not to use “We” or personal pronouns in an article?

Despite being acceptable, using the first and third pronouns might get you in trouble sometimes. You should be aware of using them in their right position and not overuse them. In that case, your article might seem artificial.

·         Do not overuse “We” & “I”

It’s important to avoid overusing “we” in all writing formats. Unnecessary use of the first-person plural can make your article less concise and less objective. To achieve great results for your paper and maintain competency, you need to keep striking a balance in the way you use pronouns.

·         Consider your audience & the article’s Purpose.

In some cases, the appropriateness of “we” in a research paper also depends on your target audience and the Purpose of your paper. In some cases, you can use the passive voice or third-person constructions so you can have a more formal and objective tone.

·         Be mindful of the result & conclusion section

“Based on my results, I found that…”

Only reading this example makes you laugh, and it is not formal and acceptable. While you are conducting a formal science article and reaching the result section, you have to acknowledge that these results are based on the work that you did.

In fields like science and math, using “we or I,” especially in the conclusion, isn’t common because it can seem self-centered.

It’s key to keep in mind that when you’re reporting your research, it’s about the research and the results itself, not about the authors behind it. If you want to convince your readers, it’s smart to skip personal pronouns in scientific writing, even when you’re sharing your own opinions as the author.

Besides coming off as a bit boastful, it could make your findings seem less strong than they actually are.

As you saw in the example, you can receive in that type of sentence the findings are undertaken, and the “I” is bold! While reporting the results, you need to write in a way that shows the findings.

“Based on the results, findings show that…”

In this example, the research is focusing on the results and not the author(s). it shows that the results are generated from the experiment. You can refer to the results in this way and make sure that everyone’s focus is on the findings and the final data.

This was a guideline for using the first person in research papers, and I hope it cleared all the vague points in your head. If so, let’s end the conversation.

Read More: Literature Review Introduction Example

As a final speech

Whether you can use “we” in a research paper is not a simple yes or no. It’s a matter of context, style, and the norms of the academic discipline in which you are writing. Using “we” is acceptable in some style guidelines like APA.

You have to choose to write “we” more thoughtfully to stop overusing. It is a matter of clarity and nothing more. Now you tell us, do you use “we” in a research paper?

Yes, in certain circumstances. The acceptability of using “we” depends on the style guide you are following (e.g., APA, MLA, CMS) and the number of authors involved. Generally, it is acceptable in APA, MLA, and CMS formats, but guidelines may vary.

Yes, it’s crucial to avoid overusing “we” or “I” to maintain conciseness and objectivity. Overuse can make your paper seem less formal. Additionally, consider your audience and the paper’s purpose; in certain cases, a more formal and objective tone may be achieved by using passive voice or third-person constructions.

To strike a balance, avoid unnecessary overuse of “we” and consider the context, audience, and purpose of your paper. In the results and conclusion sections, focus on presenting the findings rather than emphasizing the authorship. Consult your instructor or style guide for specific recommendations based on your paper’s requirements.

Literature Review Introduction Example

Chicago manual of style in text citation, related articles.

How To Mention Corresponding Author in Paper?

What Is Article Number in Journal?

What Is Affiliation in Research Paper?

Independent researcher affiliation

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

Do I have to use "I" or "we" when orally presenting my scientific thesis written by a single author? [closed]

I know that in a scientific paper or thesis made by a single author, it is common to use we . (This is also recommended at our university.)

But what about when you alone are presenting a thesis work orally?

At first glance, it is quite odd to use we when the work is written only by you yourself and you are presenting it alone.

For example, saying:

We will present you my machine learning model...

while at the same time you stand alone in front of the examiners seems very strange to me.

Is this style of presentation expected, tolerated, or forbidden?

• scientific-language

• 1 If there's only one of you on stage, I would find "We will present..." a little odd but whether it's "my machine learning model..." or "our machine learning model..." will depend on who is being represented. –  KillingTime Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 9:41
• Is it the product of a single researcher or a group? –  zeroone Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 11:30
• I'd say it depends on how many authors there are. "We" if there are multiple, even if you are presenting on your own. Alternatively it can be "I'll now present OUR machine learning model" to point out that you are presenting results of a group. –  M i ech Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 11:40
• I used “I” in my Oxford D Phil thesis, and that was 50 years ago! When you write “it is recommended”, you are avoiding telling us who advocated this antiquated convention. More to the point, you present your model to someone, and in English-speaking countries they are examiners, not a jury. –  David Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 19:51
• 1 Note that you may get a more suitable audience for your question on Academia . Just make sure to distinguish it from this one . –  Wrzlprmft Commented Jun 22, 2019 at 15:56

2 Answers 2

We will be presenting my machine learning model,

is completely wrong. When you are writing a thesis, you would use we instead of I and our instead of my . The we combined with the my doesn't work. Similarly, this combination doesn't work when giving an single-presenter oral presentation. It implies that several people are speaking, but somehow that only one person came up with the machine learning model.

In an oral presentation, you should use I when you want to refer to yourself as the person giving the presentation. For your work, you can either use I/me/my or we/us/our . If it was joint work with somebody else, definitely use we/us/our . If it's your own single-authored work, I think using I/me/my is more common, but I don't think anything is wrong with using the scientific we/us/our .

So in an oral presentation, you should say one of:

I will be presenting my machine learning model, I will be presenting our machine learning model.

I suspect you are getting up on the rule that, traditionally, scientific theses were written in the passive voice and avoided any kind of personal pronoun.

For example:

The results of experiment X are compared to the results from experiment Y.

Not " I compared the results from experiment X..... "

Apparently though, thoughts on this have changed in more recent times and it is more common to use personal pronouns in research writing.

This article by Professor of Statistics and Head of the Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics at Monash University Rob J Hyndman suggests:

• Write in the most natural way. It is ok if that means using “I”.
• Use “we” if you mean “the reader and I”, or if you are writing a co-authored paper.
• Don’t use “we” if you only mean yourself.

Not only does it seems logical that you would use the same approach when presenting a thesis as when writing it, but it would also be very odd to present something orally in the passive voice. At the very least it would be very dry and un-engaging.

• 2 Has there ever been a time when oral scientific presentations (which is what the OP is asking about) were delivered in the passive voice? –  Peter Shor Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 10:39
• @PeterShor No, good point - I got a bit lost making my point halfway through. I have edited to try and make that stand out. –  Astralbee Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 11:31
• Using passive voice is an option, thank you for your suggestion. Although it sounds "boring" to me to use it constantly. Also, it is not recommended by my university to use passive voice for the same reason, but that applies only when writing a thesis, for a presentation, no guidelines were given. If I understand correctly, you advise in this situation to use "I" since this is a product of one author? –  user3183052 Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 21:31

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged speech academia register scientific-language or ask your own question .

• Featured on Meta
• Upcoming sign-up experiments related to tags

Hot Network Questions

• Familiar senses outside of a turn order
• What is the best way to set a class value to a variable in Python if it exists in a dictionary?
• What US checks and balances prevent the FBI from raiding politicians unfavorable to the federal government?
• Is this professor being unnecessarily harsh or did I actually make a mistake?
• Can God transcend human logic and reasoning?
• Is the OP_PUSHBYTES_X opcode always required after OP_RETURN?
• How to turn a desert into a fertile farmland with engineering?
• Diagnosing tripped breaker on the dishwasher circuit?
• Styling histograms
• sample size in chi-squared test
• Binary Slashes Display
• Poor performance in ListPlot[] Mathematica 14
• Homebrew spell to improve familiar link before combat
• Fancy bibliography items
• What actual purpose do accent characters in ISO-8859-1 and Windows 1252 serve?
• What's the meaning of "nai gar"?
• New faculty position – expectation to change research direction
• Can a unique position be deduced if pieces are replaced by checkers (can see piece color but not type)
• Is the fibration in algebraic geometry a fibration in topology?
• Cut and replace every Nth character on every row
• In By His Bootstraps (Heinlein) why is Hitler's name Schickelgruber?
• Are 1/20 undocumented immigrants married to American citizens?
• Is it legal to initialize an array via a functor which takes the array itself as a parameter by reference?
• Did James Madison say or write that the 10 Commandments are critical to the US nation?

Get the Reddit app

This subreddit is for discussing academic life, and for asking questions directed towards people involved in academia, (both science and humanities).

Is it best to use "we" or "I" in the PhD thesis?

I am close to being finished with my PhD thesis, but i have been struggling with this issue lately.

My thesis is based on 4 manuscript of which there are multiple co-authors (with me being first author). In those, we use "we" to describe all our actions and thoughts. No problem.

In my PhD thesis, my supervisor is encouraging me to use "I" instead of "we" in the discussion/conclusion. This feels very unnatural to me as all the findings are based on the results that "we" found in the manuscripts.

This has led me to balance the use of we/I, where I use "I" whenever i describe something only I did (e.g. experiments). And "we" when referring to conclusions. However, i am a bit at loss about what to do.

Any seasoned academics that can offer some advice? (My supervisor is out of office, hence why i post the question here and not to my supervisor directly)

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Research paper

How to Write a Research Paper | A Beginner's Guide

A research paper is a piece of academic writing that provides analysis, interpretation, and argument based on in-depth independent research.

Research papers are similar to academic essays , but they are usually longer and more detailed assignments, designed to assess not only your writing skills but also your skills in scholarly research. Writing a research paper requires you to demonstrate a strong knowledge of your topic, engage with a variety of sources, and make an original contribution to the debate.

This step-by-step guide takes you through the entire writing process, from understanding your assignment to proofreading your final draft.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Understand the assignment, choose a research paper topic, conduct preliminary research, develop a thesis statement, create a research paper outline, write a first draft of the research paper, write the introduction, write a compelling body of text, write the conclusion, the second draft, the revision process, research paper checklist, free lecture slides.

Completing a research paper successfully means accomplishing the specific tasks set out for you. Before you start, make sure you thoroughly understanding the assignment task sheet:

• Read it carefully, looking for anything confusing you might need to clarify with your professor.
• Identify the assignment goal, deadline, length specifications, formatting, and submission method.
• Make a bulleted list of the key points, then go back and cross completed items off as you’re writing.

Carefully consider your timeframe and word limit: be realistic, and plan enough time to research, write, and edit.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

There are many ways to generate an idea for a research paper, from brainstorming with pen and paper to talking it through with a fellow student or professor.

You can try free writing, which involves taking a broad topic and writing continuously for two or three minutes to identify absolutely anything relevant that could be interesting.

You can also gain inspiration from other research. The discussion or recommendations sections of research papers often include ideas for other specific topics that require further examination.

Once you have a broad subject area, narrow it down to choose a topic that interests you, m eets the criteria of your assignment, and i s possible to research. Aim for ideas that are both original and specific:

• A paper following the chronology of World War II would not be original or specific enough.
• A paper on the experience of Danish citizens living close to the German border during World War II would be specific and could be original enough.

Note any discussions that seem important to the topic, and try to find an issue that you can focus your paper around. Use a variety of sources , including journals, books, and reliable websites, to ensure you do not miss anything glaring.

Do not only verify the ideas you have in mind, but look for sources that contradict your point of view.

• Is there anything people seem to overlook in the sources you research?
• Are there any heated debates you can address?
• Do you have a unique take on your topic?
• Have there been some recent developments that build on the extant research?

In this stage, you might find it helpful to formulate some research questions to help guide you. To write research questions, try to finish the following sentence: “I want to know how/what/why…”

A thesis statement is a statement of your central argument — it establishes the purpose and position of your paper. If you started with a research question, the thesis statement should answer it. It should also show what evidence and reasoning you’ll use to support that answer.

The thesis statement should be concise, contentious, and coherent. That means it should briefly summarize your argument in a sentence or two, make a claim that requires further evidence or analysis, and make a coherent point that relates to every part of the paper.

You will probably revise and refine the thesis statement as you do more research, but it can serve as a guide throughout the writing process. Every paragraph should aim to support and develop this central claim.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

A research paper outline is essentially a list of the key topics, arguments, and evidence you want to include, divided into sections with headings so that you know roughly what the paper will look like before you start writing.

A structure outline can help make the writing process much more efficient, so it’s worth dedicating some time to create one.

Your first draft won’t be perfect — you can polish later on. Your priorities at this stage are as follows:

• Maintaining forward momentum — write now, perfect later.
• Paying attention to clear organization and logical ordering of paragraphs and sentences, which will help when you come to the second draft.
• Expressing your ideas as clearly as possible, so you know what you were trying to say when you come back to the text.

You do not need to start by writing the introduction. Begin where it feels most natural for you — some prefer to finish the most difficult sections first, while others choose to start with the easiest part. If you created an outline, use it as a map while you work.

Do not delete large sections of text. If you begin to dislike something you have written or find it doesn’t quite fit, move it to a different document, but don’t lose it completely — you never know if it might come in useful later.

Paragraph structure

Paragraphs are the basic building blocks of research papers. Each one should focus on a single claim or idea that helps to establish the overall argument or purpose of the paper.

Example paragraph

George Orwell’s 1946 essay “Politics and the English Language” has had an enduring impact on thought about the relationship between politics and language. This impact is particularly obvious in light of the various critical review articles that have recently referenced the essay. For example, consider Mark Falcoff’s 2009 article in The National Review Online, “The Perversion of Language; or, Orwell Revisited,” in which he analyzes several common words (“activist,” “civil-rights leader,” “diversity,” and more). Falcoff’s close analysis of the ambiguity built into political language intentionally mirrors Orwell’s own point-by-point analysis of the political language of his day. Even 63 years after its publication, Orwell’s essay is emulated by contemporary thinkers.

Citing sources

It’s also important to keep track of citations at this stage to avoid accidental plagiarism . Each time you use a source, make sure to take note of where the information came from.

You can use our free citation generators to automatically create citations and save your reference list as you go.

APA Citation Generator MLA Citation Generator

The research paper introduction should address three questions: What, why, and how? After finishing the introduction, the reader should know what the paper is about, why it is worth reading, and how you’ll build your arguments.

What? Be specific about the topic of the paper, introduce the background, and define key terms or concepts.

Why? This is the most important, but also the most difficult, part of the introduction. Try to provide brief answers to the following questions: What new material or insight are you offering? What important issues does your essay help define or answer?

How? To let the reader know what to expect from the rest of the paper, the introduction should include a “map” of what will be discussed, briefly presenting the key elements of the paper in chronological order.

The major struggle faced by most writers is how to organize the information presented in the paper, which is one reason an outline is so useful. However, remember that the outline is only a guide and, when writing, you can be flexible with the order in which the information and arguments are presented.

One way to stay on track is to use your thesis statement and topic sentences . Check:

• topic sentences against the thesis statement;
• topic sentences against each other, for similarities and logical ordering;
• and each sentence against the topic sentence of that paragraph.

Be aware of paragraphs that seem to cover the same things. If two paragraphs discuss something similar, they must approach that topic in different ways. Aim to create smooth transitions between sentences, paragraphs, and sections.

The research paper conclusion is designed to help your reader out of the paper’s argument, giving them a sense of finality.

Trace the course of the paper, emphasizing how it all comes together to prove your thesis statement. Give the paper a sense of finality by making sure the reader understands how you’ve settled the issues raised in the introduction.

You might also discuss the more general consequences of the argument, outline what the paper offers to future students of the topic, and suggest any questions the paper’s argument raises but cannot or does not try to answer.

You should not :

• Offer new arguments or essential information
• Take up any more space than necessary
• Begin with stock phrases that signal you are ending the paper (e.g. “In conclusion”)

There are four main considerations when it comes to the second draft.

• Check how your vision of the paper lines up with the first draft and, more importantly, that your paper still answers the assignment.
• Identify any assumptions that might require (more substantial) justification, keeping your reader’s perspective foremost in mind. Remove these points if you cannot substantiate them further.
• Be open to rearranging your ideas. Check whether any sections feel out of place and whether your ideas could be better organized.
• If you find that old ideas do not fit as well as you anticipated, you should cut them out or condense them. You might also find that new and well-suited ideas occurred to you during the writing of the first draft — now is the time to make them part of the paper.

The goal during the revision and proofreading process is to ensure you have completed all the necessary tasks and that the paper is as well-articulated as possible. You can speed up the proofreading process by using the AI proofreader .

Global concerns

• Confirm that your paper completes every task specified in your assignment sheet.
• Check for logical organization and flow of paragraphs.
• Check paragraphs against the introduction and thesis statement.

Fine-grained details

Check the content of each paragraph, making sure that:

• each sentence helps support the topic sentence.
• no unnecessary or irrelevant information is present.
• all technical terms your audience might not know are identified.

Next, think about sentence structure , grammatical errors, and formatting . Check that you have correctly used transition words and phrases to show the connections between your ideas. Look for typos, cut unnecessary words, and check for consistency in aspects such as heading formatting and spellings .

Finally, you need to make sure your paper is correctly formatted according to the rules of the citation style you are using. For example, you might need to include an MLA heading  or create an APA title page .

Scribbr’s professional editors can help with the revision process with our award-winning proofreading services.

Discover our paper editing service

Checklist: Research paper

I have followed all instructions in the assignment sheet.

My introduction presents my topic in an engaging way and provides necessary background information.

My introduction presents a clear, focused research problem and/or thesis statement .

My paper is logically organized using paragraphs and (if relevant) section headings .

Each paragraph is clearly focused on one central idea, expressed in a clear topic sentence .

Each paragraph is relevant to my research problem or thesis statement.

I have used appropriate transitions  to clarify the connections between sections, paragraphs, and sentences.

My conclusion provides a concise answer to the research question or emphasizes how the thesis has been supported.

My conclusion shows how my research has contributed to knowledge or understanding of my topic.

My conclusion does not present any new points or information essential to my argument.

I have provided an in-text citation every time I refer to ideas or information from a source.

I have included a reference list at the end of my paper, consistently formatted according to a specific citation style .

I have thoroughly revised my paper and addressed any feedback from my professor or supervisor.

I have followed all formatting guidelines (page numbers, headers, spacing, etc.).

You've written a great paper. Make sure it's perfect with the help of a Scribbr editor!

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

Is this article helpful?

Other students also liked.

• Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide
• Writing a Research Paper Conclusion | Step-by-Step Guide
• Research Paper Format | APA, MLA, & Chicago Templates

More interesting articles

• Academic Paragraph Structure | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples
• Checklist: Writing a Great Research Paper
• How to Create a Structured Research Paper Outline | Example
• How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples
• How to Write Recommendations in Research | Examples & Tips
• How to Write Topic Sentences | 4 Steps, Examples & Purpose
• Research Paper Appendix | Example & Templates
• Research Paper Damage Control | Managing a Broken Argument
• What Is a Theoretical Framework? | Guide to Organizing

Get unlimited documents corrected

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Research Paper

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

The Research Paper

There will come a time in most students' careers when they are assigned a research paper. Such an assignment often creates a great deal of unneeded anxiety in the student, which may result in procrastination and a feeling of confusion and inadequacy. This anxiety frequently stems from the fact that many students are unfamiliar and inexperienced with this genre of writing. Never fear—inexperience and unfamiliarity are situations you can change through practice! Writing a research paper is an essential aspect of academics and should not be avoided on account of one's anxiety. In fact, the process of writing a research paper can be one of the more rewarding experiences one may encounter in academics. What is more, many students will continue to do research throughout their careers, which is one of the reasons this topic is so important.

Becoming an experienced researcher and writer in any field or discipline takes a great deal of practice. There are few individuals for whom this process comes naturally. Remember, even the most seasoned academic veterans have had to learn how to write a research paper at some point in their career. Therefore, with diligence, organization, practice, a willingness to learn (and to make mistakes!), and, perhaps most important of all, patience, students will find that they can achieve great things through their research and writing.

The pages in this section cover the following topic areas related to the process of writing a research paper:

• Genre - This section will provide an overview for understanding the difference between an analytical and argumentative research paper.
• Choosing a Topic - This section will guide the student through the process of choosing topics, whether the topic be one that is assigned or one that the student chooses themselves.
• Identifying an Audience - This section will help the student understand the often times confusing topic of audience by offering some basic guidelines for the process.
• Where Do I Begin - This section concludes the handout by offering several links to resources at Purdue, and also provides an overview of the final stages of writing a research paper.

Together we are beating cancer

• Cancer types
• Breast cancer
• Bowel cancer
• Lung cancer
• Prostate cancer
• Cancers in general
• Clinical trials
• Causes of cancer
• Coping with cancer
• Managing symptoms and side effects
• Mental health and cancer
• Money and travel
• Death and dying
• Cancer Chat forum
• Health Professionals
• Cancer Statistics
• Cancer Screening
• Learning and Support
• NICE suspected cancer referral guidelines
• Make a donation
• By cancer type
• Leave a legacy gift
• Donate in Memory
• Find an event
• Race for Life
• Charity runs
• Charity walks
• Search events
• Relay for Life
• Volunteer in our shops
• Help at an event
• Help us raise money
• Campaign for us
• Do your own fundraising
• Fundraising ideas
• Get a fundraising pack
• Return fundraising money
• Fundraise by cancer type
• Set up a Cancer Research UK Giving Page
• Find a shop or superstore
• Become a partner
• Cancer Research UK for Children & Young People
• Our Play Your Part campaign
• Brain tumours
• Skin cancer
• All cancer types
• By cancer topic
• New treatments
• Cancer biology
• Cancer drugs
• All cancer subjects
• All locations
• By Researcher
• Professor Duncan Baird
• Professor Fran Balkwill
• Professor Andrew Biankin
• See all researchers
• Our achievements timeline
• Our research strategy
• Involving animals in research
• Research opportunities
• For discovery researchers
• For clinical researchers
• For population researchers
• In drug discovery & development
• In early detection & diagnosis
• For students & postdocs
• Our funding schemes
• Career Development Fellowship
• Discovery Programme Awards
• Clinical Trial Award
• Biology to Prevention Award
• View all schemes and deadlines
• Applying for funding
• Start your application online
• How to make a successful applicant
• Funding committees
• Successful applicant case studies
• How we deliver research
• Our research infrastructure
• Events and conferences
• Our research partnerships
• Facts & figures about our funding
• Develop your research career
• Recently funded awards
• Manage your research grant
• Notify us of new publications
• Find a shop
• Volunteer in a shop
• Donate goods to a shop
• Our superstores
• Shop online
• Wedding favours
• Cancer Care
• Flower Shop
• Our eBay store
• Shoes and boots
• Bags and purses
• We beat cancer
• We fundraise
• We develop policy
• Our global role
• Our organisation
• Our strategy
• Our Trustees
• CEO and Executive Board
• How we spend your money
• Early careers
• Your development

Cancer News

• For Researchers
• For Supporters
• Press office
• Publications
• Update your contact preferences
• About cancer
• Get involved
• Our research
• Funding for researchers

The latest news, analysis and opinion from Cancer Research UK

• Science & Technology
• Health & Medicine
• Personal Stories
• Policy & Insight
• Charity News

Research with integrity – GenAi, paper mills and inclusivity

27 June 2024

As the global research integrity community came together for the 8 th World Conference on Research Integrity, we asked: what are the big issues and what can we do to tackle them? Andrew Porter and the team give us the low-down from the front line of research integrity…

Climbing one of the hills near the Acropolis on the first evening of the 8 th World Conference on Research Integrity (WCRI) , I was treated to a wonderful view of Athens. Having taken the Metro from the airport, I’d only seen Athens at street level, but here it was… the whole city spread out.

This fresh perspective – seeing the big picture – made me think about the opportunities a conference like this offers to do the same. The space it can afford to think about what makes research tick, the different roles and activities supporting good research, and some of the bad practices affecting the quality of science.

The field of metascience, or research on research, is rapidly growing, evidenced by many presentations at this year’s conference about how to measure research integrity.

It may strike you as unusual that there are conferences on research integrity, but over the years it has become an active area of research in its own right. The field of metascience, or research on research, is rapidly growing, evidenced by many presentations at this year’s conference about how to measure research integrity. How can we know if a new training actually works? What data do we have on equality and diversity that could help us understand whose voices are not being heard in research, academia and publishing? How many publications contain fabricated, falsified or plagiarised data?

These and many other questions were discussed over 4 days in sessions ranging from the philosophical to the highly specific and practical.

The conferences began as a joint U.S. – European venture , expanding from a relatively small meeting in 2007 in Lisbon to this gathering of 800 attendees.  Along the way the conferences have produced various statements – co-created by attendees – which have helped shape research practices worldwide.  These include the 2010 Singapore Statement , which set out a values-based definition of research integrity, and forms the basis for the UK Concordat to Support Research Integrity and the recent Cape Town Statement on fairness, equity and diversity in research. For more on the WCRI, see Catherine’s earlier blog .

Intelligent approaches to Gen AI

Some of the big areas covered at the conference included paper mills and fake clinical trials ; the implications of generative AI; and equity, diversity and inclusion.  It’s clear, however, these aspects are deeply interwoven.

For instance, generative AI tools (many of which are now embedded in commercial software such as Photoshop 24 ) can be used to create fake text and data for paper mills, but might also help screen for fraudulent activity, support researchers writing in English as a second language, and require good training and education for ethical use.

Much of the conversation around gen AI is focussed on creating guidelines that are flexible and values-based; the field is moving so fast that making them too specific risks guidance going out of date. Addressing gen AI through the lens of existing research integrity structures however makes for more generalisable support, as discussed previously .

Fake it ‘till you break it…

Paper mills were a recurring theme across many different topic areas. I came away with a strong sense that we need to raise awareness amongst researchers – there is a real risk that fake research is polluting the literature.

Paper mills produce fake research publications for profit. Whole networks exist purely to sell authorship online, creating fake data and text, using fake email addresses and creating fake academics – even taking over the whole editorial and peer review process to completely bypass scrutiny. It’s a shocking concept, but   evidence of the scale of the problem keeps accumulating. For instance, over 8000 papers were retracted last year from Hindawi journals , a subsidiary of Wiley, primarily due to paper mill activity.

The pollution of scientific literature by fake studies leads to miscalculation of the size and importance of whole fields of research, meaning we can come to wrong conclusions on safety and efficacy

However, the research integrity community is stepping up to counter this. Sleuths, like Elisabeth Bik and Jana Christopher , work to detect these activities, along with academics developing tools to screen publications, such as Jack Wilkinson from the University of Manchester who presented the INSPECT-SR tool aimed at weeding out fake clinical trials.

Research integrity teams at publishers try to verify authorship, screen papers , obtain raw data, and use tools like iThenticate to spot plagiarism and image alteration . However, those wily paper mills will often submit manuscripts to multiple journals at the same time, and so the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and STM , the trade body for academic publishers, are working on ways for publishers to spot these multiple submissions .

But this is, clearly, not just harmless cat-and-mouse antics. The very real dangers of this fraudulent activity were brought home in a number of sessions. One speaker reported raising concerns about more than 900 articles related to studies about women’s health, and while this has led to 151 retractions and 75 expressions of concern, a large volume of problematic literature persists – and it can take an average of 3 years for journals to address concerns.

The pollution of scientific literature by fake studies leads to miscalculation of the size and importance of whole fields of research, meaning we can come to wrong conclusions on safety and efficacy, even from systematic reviews (the gold standard for evidence-based medicine, influencing medical practice and government decision-making processes), and drive researchers down wasteful and frustrating dead ends.

Solution suggestions

How to address these problems? Suggestions included more people screening for issues already in the literature (like Jennifer Byrne whose team recently identified fake cell lines entering the literature), more research on the scale of the problem ( such as from the new voluntary body United2Act ), awareness raising for researchers and editors, and pre-screening manuscripts and verifying authenticity of data at an institutional level.

Attendees also advocated for deeper reform of academic publishing and reward models, for slower science (and the publication of fewer papers) and to move away from researchers being judged primarily on the number and type of papers they publish – something many institutions and funders have signed up to, but which still persists in research culture.

Some suggestions to address fraud – such requiring authors to have academic email addresses – could have unintended consequences, as researchers in low- and middle-income countries are often not provided with these. This reflected the ‘world’ part of the conference; funds are provided to support attendance from low- and middle-income countries, and it was encouraging to hear a diverse range of perspectives. A strong case was made that bringing in under-represented voices, making research truly global, representative and fair, is important for all those involved in research.

If we were to zoom out of the specific details of the conference, and try to get an overview, it might look something like: Bring in, Build up, and Keep out.

Bring in diverse and previously excluded voices. Build up good research practices, including for those researchers who are trying their best to act with integrity. Keep out fraudulent research, disinformation and fake data.

This framing might help us determine which kinds of initiatives, driven by which parts of the research community, are most effective and impactful for supporting integrity. WCRI has shown us much of what we have to do, and we have a decent map of the routes. The next step is to get back down to street level and implement some of them.

Take-home thoughts

Several CRUK research professionals attended WCRI – here’s what they think you should know…

Catherine Winchester, Head of the Research Integrity Service at the CRUK Scotland Institute

“It was clear that whatever role we have in a research organisation, we all have a part to play in collectively improving research quality and reproducibility, and that research integrity advisers are key partners in this endeavour. “Plan – do – act – check”, the take home message from Anja Gilis, director of preclinical quality planning and strategy at Johnson & Johnson, struck a chord with me and epitomises the iterative approach we have been implementing at the CRUK Scotland Institute.

One ‘doing’ initiative I learned about at the conference is the RoSiE project to foster reproducible open science in Europe, which is developing guidelines and training materials on open and FAIR science. And falling under ‘checking’, benchmarking surveys on culture, research integrity barriers and incentives were a popular theme at the conference. Looking forward it will be interesting to see how their information is used to act to change behaviour and practices. Indeed, the UK Committee on Research Integrity has undertaken a project to explore indicators of research integrity , which was presented by Jane Alfred.”

Sue Russell, Senior Policy and Governance Manager at CRUK

“It always pays to see what resources already exist to help you achieve your integrity goals. For example, we learned about SOPs4RI which helps research organisations and funders develop their own Research Integrity Promotion Plans.

How funders can then translate these into adaptive funding policies and help embed into broader practices will be important. Noesk’s Strategy for Culture Change – shared more than once at WCRI – was useful reminder of the foundations and levels needed.

But it will take collective, cross-sector collaboration – researchers, research integrity teams, research organisations, publishers, sector bodies, and funders coming together – to discuss and resolve issues. Great examples of fruitful collaborations were showcased at the conference from Only Good Antibodies to improve biomedical research and CRUK’s own Registered Reports Funding Partnership pilot – our consortium between us a funder, research organisation and publishers working together to improve research quality.

Our Research Integrity Advisors at CRUK Institutes have built very strong foundations – both within their institutions and more broadly – on this culture change journey, which WCRI made me appreciate even more.”

All sessions of the 8 th World Conference on Research Integrity were recorded, and recordings will be made publicly available 2 months after the conference.

Check out some of the posters presented by the CRUK integrity team at the 8th World Conference on Research Integrity

Dr andrew porter.

Andrew is Research Integrity and Training Adviser at Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute

Tell us what you think

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Read our comment policy .

Highlighted content

70 years of progress in cervical cancer research, what do the manifestos mean for cancer, our researchers light up prostate cancer cells to help surgeons cut them out, new scan technique gives children the right medulloblastoma diagnosis in minutes, not weeks, cervical screening awareness week: four women share their cervical cancer stories, thousands of nhs patients to access trials of personalised cancer 'vaccines', sarah harding's legacy: finding women who may have higher breast cancer risks, skin cancer cases reach all-time high, an animal's guide to staying safe in the sun.

What you need to know about the DJI drone ban in the U.S.

The future of DJI (Da Jiang Innovations) drones is metaphorically up in the air as the Countering CCP Drones Act, introduced by Representative Elise Stefanik (R-NY), gains more support in Congress, raising the possibility of a nationwide ban in the U.S.

Proponents of the bill cite national security concerns, alleging DJI drones are providing data on critical infrastructure in the United States to the Chinese Communist Party. If passed, the bill could significantly impact the drone industry in the U.S. and potentially affect consumers who rely on DJI drones for recreation, commercial applications and public safety initiatives like search and rescue missions. DJI is fighting the ban through lobbying efforts and more.

In a nutshell:

• The U.S. government may ban DJI drones, concerned that China is collecting information through them.
• This would impact several areas of the consumer market and commercial drone market.

The legislative effort to ban DJI drones

Following unanimous approval by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the bill is making its way through Congress and could later land on President Joe Biden’s desk. The legislation proposes adding DJI to a list maintained by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019. This would block DJI’s drones from running on communications infrastructure in the U.S., according to “ The New York Times ,” effectively rendering them unusable. While the bill has received wide bipartisan support, DJI has vehemently voiced its opposition.

DJI’s opposition

In a blog post titled “ Get the Facts ,” DJI denounced what it calls “inaccurate and unsubstantiated allegations” against its operations. The company argues that such measures not only stifle competition but also perpetuate xenophobic narratives while hindering innovation in the drone industry. The company claims users can opt out of a feature that allows DJI drones to collect flight logs, photos or videos. It also suggests operators turn on a Local Data Mode feature, disconnecting the flight app from the internet.

DJI has also insisted it “follows the rules and regulations in the markets it operates in,” adding that it’s “not a military company." “We remain one of the few drone companies to clearly denounce and actively discourage use of our drones in combat. DJI does not manufacture military-grade equipment, nor does it pursue business opportunities for combat use or operations.”

DJI’s dominance of consumer and commercial markets

Over the past decade, DJI has solidified its position as the leading global manufacturer of consumer drones, boasting an estimated 58% market share as of 2022, according to “The New York Times.” The brand’s ascent to prominence can be attributed to a strategic blend of affordability, accessibility and cutting-edge features, making it easy for beginners to learn how to fly a drone . This combination has empowered DJI users to capture breathtaking aerial perspectives in both photography and videography. Consequently, DJI drones have become the go-to choice for travelers, event organizers and real estate agents, offering an experience you can’t get from even the best mirrorless cameras .

Beyond the consumer market, DJI has become indispensable in industries like construction, energy and agriculture. Their drones, equipped with some of the best professional cameras available, enable faster and safer assessments of buildings, infrastructure and crops. These drones are also routinely employed to help generate detailed maps and surveys of land, buildings and construction sites, providing invaluable data for urban planning and environmental monitoring initiatives.

Additionally, search and rescue operations benefit from the capabilities of DJI’s drones, enabling teams to cover large areas and navigate challenging terrain when locating missing persons.

Concerns about data security

Despite their popularity among consumers and in commercial sectors, DJI is still considered a security threat. According to Irina Tsukerman, a geopolitical analyst and president of Scarab Rising, Inc. , DJI drones may be used for espionage.

“Recent intelligence reports point to a high possibility that Chinese technology in UAVs, automotive technology and other types of widely used tech could be used for espionage,” says Tsukerman. “Collection of private and public data could assist Chinese efforts in achieving technological and military dominance against the U.S. and could also be used to target American citizens and industries in various areas, ranging from more advanced intelligence gathering, profiling for recruitment purposes and industrial espionage or sabotage.”

Previous legislation regarding DJI drones

DJI has come under increasing scrutiny from the U.S. government in recent years. In 2020, the Department of Commerce added DJI to its Entity List, preventing U.S.-based companies from exporting technology to DJI. The following year, the Department of Treasury raised concerns that DJI drones were being used to surveil China’s Uyghur Muslim minority. Most recently, in 2022, the Department of Defense added DJI to its own blacklist, further limiting the company’s ability to do business with the U.S. government.

Modern drones are critically dependent on communication infrastructure for core functionalities like GPS navigation, control signal transmission and a real-time video feed. Denial of access to this infrastructure for DJI drones would effectively sever their ability to receive the continuous flow of data and instructions necessary for stable flight, precise control and real-time visual feedback. This critical connection serves as the lifeblood of these drones, and its severance would render them largely inert.

DJI isn’t the only Chinese company raising concerns in Washington, of course. President Biden recently signed a bill that would ban TikTok from operating in the U.S. unless its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, sells the app entirely within a year.

DJI’s efforts to avoid the ban

To counter attempts to prohibit its products, DJI has invested heavily in lobbying efforts and has sought grass roots support from drone operators. The company has financed the Drone Advocacy Alliance website, which aims to collaborate with industry players and lawmakers, while empowering end-users to select the drone of their choice. Additionally, the website offers resources for contacting elected officials to further advocate for these goals.

The pros and cons of a DJI drone ban

“Simply banning Chinese-made drones is not enough,” says Tsukerman. “The U.S. still remains helpless if a portion of its tech industry and UAV ownership sinks with the ship. An economic sinkhole would serve China's geopolitical strategy just as much as handicapping or controlling U.S. businesses and entire sectors of technology through active surveillance.”

DJI’s dominance in the drone market means a ban could potentially stifle innovation. With less competition, there may be less pressure for companies to develop new features and improve existing technology. A ban could also make it harder for U.S. companies to access DJI’s advanced drone technology, hindering their ability to develop new products or improve upon existing ones. Conversely, a ban could push companies to invest more heavily in developing advanced alternatives.

Ultimately, a ban will mean fewer drone options for consumers overall — at least in the beginning. This could potentially limit a customer’s ability to find a drone that meets their needs and budget. With fewer options available, companies might have less incentive to offer competitive prices, potentially leading to higher costs for consumers. Meanwhile, a ban could disrupt several businesses and organizations that rely on DJI drones for agriculture, construction and search and rescue.

There are those who believe otherwise, of course: Representative John Moolenaar (R-MI) argues that a DJI drone ban will foster a more robust and competitive drone industry. Skydio, an American company based in California, is one of the strongest alternatives to DJI and makes some of the best drones on the market. The company’s products are designed, assembled and supported in the U.S., according to its About Us page.

DJI drone alternatives

The AP Buyline roundup:

The U.S. government has introduced a law that would ban DJI drones to prevent data collection by China, but could have an impact on public safety initiatives, commercial applications and more.

Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

Are dji drones getting banned.

While nothing is concrete yet, DJI drones may be banned in the future. A bill named the Countering CCP Drones Act is making its way through Congress, which would effectively ban the use of the company’s drones in the U.S. moving forward. The bill previously passed a committee vote and could be voted on by the House of Representatives this summer. If it passes there, it would then go to the Senate and could eventually be signed by the president.

How probable is a U.S. ban on DJI drones?

The future of DJI drones in the U.S. remains uncertain. While the Countering CCP Drones Act, which proposes a ban on these drones, has gained significant support from lawmakers, it faces several hurdles before becoming law. The bill must pass through both the House of Representatives and the Senate before reaching the president’s desk. If enacted, the legislation would likely include a transition period, potentially lasting three years or more, to allow for adjustments before the ban fully takes effect.

How will a ban affect consumers outside the U.S.?

It’s unclear what the larger implications will be on consumers outside the U.S. A ban in the U.S. is unlikely to directly restrict consumers across the globe from buying DJI drones due to existing drone laws in their own countries.

However, the ban could have some indirect effects: The global supply and demand might be disrupted, leading to price fluctuations. It could also impact DJI’s ability to innovate without revenue from the U.S. market, although this could create an opportunity for alternative brands to fill the gap.The bigger question is whether a U.S. ban will inspire similar bans in other countries, since a U.S. ban could set a precedent and influence other countries to consider similar restrictions.

Has DJI faced other government bans in the U.S.?

As mentioned above, the U.S. government has previously taken steps to restrict DJI. In 2020, the Department of Commerce placed DJI on its Entity List. While it doesn’t completely ban DJI products, it restricts U.S.-based companies from exporting certain technologies to DJI without a license. This limits DJI’s access to potentially sensitive U.S. technology. The following year, the Department of Treasury added DJI to its “Chinese Military-Industrial Complex Companies List.” This list restricts U.S. investment in entities it deems to be involved in human rights abuses. Finally, in 2022, the Department of Defense implemented other internal restrictions on DJI. These actions highlight a cautious and layered approach by the U.S. government.

Read article:

• 10 best drones to turn your dreams of flying into reality
• Drone laws in the US: What you need to know before taking flight
• Best professional cameras for quality photos in every situation
• Best mirrorless cameras for capturing anything and everything

• Ethics & Leadership
• Fact-Checking
• Media Literacy
• The Craig Newmark Center
• Reporting & Editing
• Ethics & Trust
• Tech & Tools
• Business & Work
• Educators & Students
• Training Catalog
• Custom Teaching
• For ACES Members
• All Categories
• Broadcast & Visual Journalism
• Fact-Checking & Media Literacy
• In-newsroom
• Memphis, Tenn.
• Minneapolis, Minn.
• St. Petersburg, Fla.
• Washington, D.C.
• Poynter ACES Introductory Certificate in Editing
• Poynter ACES Intermediate Certificate in Editing
• Ethics & Trust Articles
• Get Ethics Advice
• Fact-Checking Articles
• IFCN Grants
• International Fact-Checking Day
• Teen Fact-Checking Network
• International
• Media Literacy Training
• MediaWise Resources
• Ambassadors
• MediaWise in the News

Support responsible news and fact-based information today!

We asked people about using AI to make the news. They’re anxious and annoyed

Focus group research from Poynter and the University of Minnesota reveals attitudes on disclosure, trust, deception among news consumers

Sometimes, when it comes to using artificial intelligence in journalism, people think of a calculator, an accepted tool that makes work faster and easier.

Sometimes, they think it’s flat-out cheating, passing off the work of a robot for a human journalist.

Sometimes, they don’t know what to think at all — and it makes them anxious.

All of those attitudes emerged from new focus group research from the University of Minnesota commissioned by the Poynter Institute about news consumers’ attitudes toward AI in journalism.

The research , conducted by Benjamin Toff , director of the Minnesota Journalism Center and associate professor of Minnesota’s Hubbard School of Journalism & Mass Communication, was unveiled to participants at Poynter’s Summit on AI, Ethics and Journalism on June 11. The summit brought together dozens of journalists and technologists to discuss the ethical implications for journalists using AI tools in their work. 

“I think it’s a good reminder of not getting too far ahead of the public,” Toff said, in terms of key takeaways for newsrooms. “However much there might be usefulness around using these tools … you need to be able to communicate about it in ways that are not going to be alienating to large segments of the public who are really concerned about what these developments will mean for society at large.”

The focus groups, conducted in late May, involved 26 average news consumers, some who knew a fair amount about AI’s use in journalism, and some who knew little. 

Toff discussed three key findings from the focus groups:

• A background context of anxiety and annoyance: People are often anxious about AI — whether it’s concern about the unknown, that it will affect their own jobs or industries, or that it will make it harder to identify trustworthy news. They are also annoyed about the explosion of AI offerings they are seeing in the media they consume.
• Desire for disclosure: News consumers are clear they want disclosure from journalists about how they are using AI — but there is less consensus on what that disclosure should be, when it should be used and whether it can sometimes be too much.
• Increasing isolation: They fear that increased use of AI in journalism will worsen societal isolation among people and will hurt the humans who produce our current news coverage. 

Anxious and annoyed

While some participants saw AI as part of an age-old cycle where a disruptive technology changes an industry, or a society, others had bigger concerns.

“Because I’ve done some computer security work, I do believe in the intrinsic evil of people to do bad things, using any tool they can lay their hands on, including AI,” said a participant named Stewart. “And that’s what I think we’ve got to protect ourselves against, you know?”

Others felt besieged by AI offerings online.

“I’ve noticed it more on social media, like it’s there. ‘Do you want to use this AI function?’ and it’s right there. And it wasn’t there that long ago. … It’s almost like, no, I don’t want to use it! So it’s kind of forced on you,” said a participant named Sheila.

Most participants already expressed a distrust of the news media , and felt the introduction of AI could make things worse. 

All of that was a concern for Alex Mahadevan , director of Poynter’s MediaWise media literacy program, who helped organize the summit and the research.

“Are we going to make a mistake and start rolling out all the AI things we’re doing, and instead of sparking wonder in our audiences, we’re going to annoy them?” he asked. Mahadevan is a proponent of using AI ethically to improve the ways journalists can serve their audience, such as finding new ways to personalize news or creating more Instagram Reels to supplement more stories, rather than the smaller amount a human team could produce. 

Is it cheating?

A notable finding of the focus groups was that many participants felt certain AI use in creating journalism — especially when it came to using large language models to write content — seemed like cheating.

“I think it’s interesting if they’re trying to pass this off as a writer, and it’s not. So then I honestly feel deceived. Because yeah, it’s not having somebody physically even proofing it,” said focus group member Kelly.

Most participants said they wanted to know when AI was used in news reports — and disclosure is a part of many newsroom AI ethics policies. 

But some said it didn’t matter for simple, “low stakes” content. Others said they wanted extensive citations, like “a scholarly paper,” whether they engaged with them or not. Yet others worried about “labeling fatigue,” with so much disclosure raising questions about the sources of their news that they might not have time to digest it all.

“People really felt strongly about the need for it, and wanting to avoid being deceived,” said Toff, a former journalist whose academic research has often focused on news audiences and the public’s relationship with news. “But at the same time, there was not a lot of consensus around how much or precisely what the disclosure should look like.” 

Previous research Toff conducted with Felix Simon of the Reuters Institute actually showed a paradox where the audience wanted news organizations to disclose their use of AI, but then viewed them more negatively knowing they had used it.

Benjamin Toff of the University of Minnesota (right) speaks at Poynter’s Summit on AI, Journalism and Ethics, on a panel with (l-r) Alex Mahadevan of MediaWise, Joy Mayer of Trusting News and Phoebe Connelly of The Washington Post. Credit: Alex Smyntyna/Poynter

Some of the focus group participants made a similar point, Toff said. “They didn’t actually believe (newsrooms) would be disclosing, however much they had editorial guidelines insisting they do. They didn’t believe there would be any internal procedures to enforce that.”

It will be vitally important how journalists tell their audiences what they are doing with AI, said Kelly McBride , Poynter’s senior vice president and chair of the Craig Newmark Center for Ethics and Leadership . And they probably shouldn’t even use the term AI, she said, but instead more precise descriptions of the program or technology they used and for what.

For example, she said, explain that you used an AI tool to examine thousands of satellite images of a city or region and tell the journalists what had changed over time so they could do further reporting.

“There’s just no doubt in my mind that over the next five to 10 years, AI is going to dramatically change how we do journalism and how we deliver journalism to the audience,” McBride said. “And if we don’t … educate the audience, then for sure they are going to be very suspicious and not trust things they should trust. And possibly trust things they shouldn’t trust.“

The human factor

A number of participants expressed concern that a growing use of AI would lead to the loss of jobs for human journalists. And many were unnerved by the example Toff’s team showed them of an AI-generated anchor reading the news. 

“I would encourage (news organizations) to think of how they can use this as a tool to take better care of the human employees that they have. So, whether it’s to, you know, use this as a tool to actually give their human employees … the chance to do something they’re not getting enough time to do …  or to grow in new and different ways,” said participant Lyle, who added that he could see management “using this tool to find ways to replace or get rid of the human employees that they have.” 

“If everybody is using AI, then all the news sounds the same,” said participant Debra. 

McBride agreed.

“The internet and social media and AI all drive things toward the middle — which can be a really mediocre place to be,” she said. “I think about this with writing a lot. There is a lot of just uninspired, boring writing out there on the internet, and I haven’t seen anything created by AI that I would consider to be a joy to read or absolutely compelling.” 

Mahadevan also said it is difficult for many people to get past the “uncanny valley” effect of AI avatars and voices; they appear human, but consumers know something is off. 

“It still feels very strange to me to hear an AI woman reading a New York Times article. She makes mistakes in the intonation of her voice and the way she speaks,” he said. “I can get people’s hesitation because it feels very alienating to have a robot talking to you.”

Said focus group member Tony: “That’s my main concern globally about what we’re talking about. The human element. Hopefully, that isn’t taken over by artificial intelligence, or it becomes so powerful that it doesn’t do a lot of these tasks, human tasks, you know? I think a lot of things have to remain human, whether it be error or perfection. The human element has to remain.” 

Helping newsrooms move forward

Poynter has been focusing on the ethical issues for journalists using AI in their work. In March, Poynter published a “starter kit” framework for newsrooms that needed to create an ethics policy around their AI use that was written by McBride, Mahadevan and faculty member Tony Elkins. After the recent AI summit, Poynter experts will be updating and adding to that framework.

Those changes are likely to include addressing data privacy, which was a theme at the summit, though not as prevalent in the focus groups. 

KELLY McBRIDE SVP, Chair, Craig Newmark Center for Ethics and Leadership

“AI is likely to create an exchange of information between the news provider and the news consumer in ways that allow the news to be personalized,” McBride said. “But we’re going to have to be very clear in the way we’re going to guard people’s privacy and not abuse that data.”

Mahadevan said he would like to spend more time helping newsrooms address disclosure.

“I think what I’d like to work on is a more universal disclosure based on some of the feedback we got from the audience — some more guidance on how to craft a non-fatigue-inducing disclosure.”

Toff still has more to glean from the focus group results. But the consumers’ attitudes may hold some important insights for the future of financially struggling news organizations. 

As AI advances, it seems highly likely to deliver news and information directly to consumers while reducing their connection to news organizations that produced the information in the first place. 

“People did talk about some of the ways they could see these tools making it easier to keep up with news, but that meant keeping up with the news in ways they already were aware they weren’t paying attention to who reported what,” Toff said.

Still, somewhat hopefully for journalists, several focus group members expressed great concern for the important human role in producing good journalism.

“A number of people raised questions about the limitations of these technologies and whether there were aspects of journalism that you really shouldn’t replace with a machine,” Toff said. “Connecting the dots and uncovering information — there’s a recognition there’s a real need for on-the-ground human reporters in ways there is a lot of skepticism these tools could ever produce.”

Fact-checkers urge collaboration, caution in using artificial intelligence tools

‘When dealing with this new, and yet to grow, devil of AI, we need to be together’

FULL TEXT: Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Ressa empowers fact-checkers, warns of inflection point for democracy at GlobalFact 11

Philippine journalist calls tech companies "frenemies" with fact-checkers and urges them to act to stop the spread of misinformation

Opinion | How PolitiFact and others are preparing for tonight’s presidential debate

27 staffers from PolitiFact will fact-check the candidates in real time and publish their findings in two languages

Nobel laureate Maria Ressa tells tech companies: Now is the time to ‘do something’

Philippine journalist calls on sponsors of GlobalFact 11 fact-checking summit to protect democracy, stop spread of misinformation

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Start your day informed and inspired.

Get the Poynter newsletter that's right for you.

Innovation Under Resource Constraints: Supercomputing in Scientific Research

52 Pages Posted: 25 Jun 2024

John McKeon

Boston University

Justine Boudou

Harvard Business School

Date Written: June 17, 2024

Resource constraints significantly shape innovation by influencing both the rate and direction of output. In this paper, we study how constraints of a key input to innovation, computing power, impact innovative output. Our empirical setting is an NSF-funded initiative called XSEDE, which allows researchers to apply for access to a distributed network of high-performance computing resources, or "supercomputers," across the United States. Leveraging the unique resource allocation process of XSEDE, we are able to isolate the impact of computing resources on scientific production. We find that an increase in the share of computing resources allocated to a researcher leads to an increase in the number of papers published and alters the research direction. Specifically, additional computing resources lead researchers to study less popular and newer topics as well as to broaden the scope of their projects. Our findings underscore the intricate relationship between resources and innovative output, with consequences for optimizing resource allocation strategies and fostering innovation.

Keywords: Computing Resources, Constraints, Science, Innovation, Allocation

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

John McKeon (Contact Author)

Boston university ( email ).

595 Commonwealth Avenue Boston, MA 02215 United States

Harvard Business School ( email )

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on ssrn, paper statistics, related ejournals, innovation & management science ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Fall 2024 Semester

Undergraduate courses.

Composition courses that offer many sections (ENGL 101, 201, 277 and 379) are not listed on this schedule unless they are tailored to specific thematic content or particularly appropriate for specific programs and majors.

• 100-200 level

ENGL 151.S01: Introduction to English Studies

Tuesday and Thursday, 11 a.m.-12:15 p.m.

Sharon Smith

ENGL 151 serves as an introduction to both the English major and the discipline of English studies. In this class, you will develop the thinking, reading, writing and research practices that define both the major and the discipline. Much of the semester will be devoted to honing your literary analysis skills, and we will study and discuss texts from several different genres—poetry, short fiction, the novel, drama and film—as well as some literary criticism. As we do so, we will explore the language of the discipline, and you will learn a variety of key literary terms and concepts. In addition, you will develop your skills as both a writer and researcher within the discipline of English.

ENGL 201.ST1 Composition II: The Mind/Body Connection

In this section of English 201, students will use research and writing to learn more about problems that are important to them and articulate ways to address those problems. The course will focus specifically on issues related to the mind, the body and the relationship between them. The topics we will discuss during the course will include the correlation between social media and body image; the efficacy of sex education programs; the degree to which beliefs about race and gender influence school dress codes; and the unique mental and physical challenges faced by college students today. In this course, you will be learning about different approaches to argumentation, analyzing the arguments of others and constructing your own arguments. At the same time, you will be honing your skills as a researcher and developing your abilities as a persuasive and effective writer.

ENGL 201.S10 Composition II: Environmental Writing   

Monday/Wednesday/Friday 1-1:50 p.m.

Gwen Horsley

English 201 will help students develop the ability to think critically and analytically and to write effectively for other university courses and careers. This course will provide opportunities to develop analytical skills that will help students become critical readers and effective writers. Specifically, in this class, students will:

• Focus on the relationships between world environments, land, animals and humankind.
• Read various essays by environmental, conservational and regional authors.
• Produce student writings. 

Students will improve their writing skills by reading essays and applying techniques they witness in others’ work and those learned in class. This class is also a course in logical and creative thought. Students will write about humankind’s place in the world and our influence on the land and animals, places that hold special meaning to them or have influenced their lives and stories of their own families and their places and passions in the world. Students will practice writing in an informed and persuasive manner, in language that engages and enlivens readers by using vivid verbs and avoiding unnecessary passives, nominalizations and expletive constructions.

Students will prepare writing assignments based on readings and discussions of essays included in "Literature and the Environment " and other sources. They may use "The St. Martin’s Handbook," as well as other sources, to review grammar, punctuation, mechanics and usage as needed.

ENGL 201.13 Composition II: Writing the Environment

Tuesday and Thursday 9:30-10:45 a.m.

Paul Baggett

For generations, environmentalists have relied on the power of prose to change the minds and habits of their contemporaries. In the wake of fires, floods, storms and droughts, environmental writing has gained a new sense of urgency, with authors joining activists in their efforts to educate the public about the grim realities of climate change. But do they make a difference? Have reports of present and future disasters so saturated our airwaves that we no longer hear them? How do writers make us care about the planet amidst all the noise? In this course, students will examine the various rhetorical strategies employed by some of today’s leading environmental writers and filmmakers. And while analyzing their different arguments, students also will strengthen their own strategies of argumentation as they research and develop essays that explore a range of environmental concerns.

ENGL 201 Composition II: Food Writing

S17 Tuesday and Thursday 12:30-1:45 p.m.

S18 Tuesday and Thursday 2-3:15 p.m.

Jodi Andrews

In this composition class, students will critically analyze essays about food, food systems and environments, food cultures, the intersections of personal choice, market forces and policy and the values underneath these forces. Students will learn to better read like writers, noting authors’ purpose, audience organizational moves, sentence-level punctuation and diction. We will read a variety of essays including research-intensive arguments and personal narratives which intersect with one of our most primal needs as humans: food consumption. Students will rhetorically analyze texts, conduct advanced research, reflect on the writing process and write essays utilizing intentional rhetorical strategies. Through doing this work, students will practice the writing moves valued in every discipline: argument, evidence, concision, engaging prose and the essential research skills for the 21st century.

ENGL 221.S01 British Literature I

Michael S. Nagy

English 221 is a survey of early British literature from its inception in the Old English period with works such as "Beowulf" and the “Battle of Maldon,” through the Middle Ages and the incomparable writings of Geoffrey Chaucer and the Gawain - poet, to the Renaissance and beyond. Students will explore the historical and cultural contexts in which all assigned reading materials were written, and they will bring that information to bear on class discussion. Likely themes that this class will cover include heroism, humor, honor, religion, heresy and moral relativity. Students will write one research paper in this class and sit for two formal exams: a midterm covering everything up to that point in the semester, and a comprehensive final. Probable texts include the following:

• The Norton Anthology of English Literature: The Middle Ages. Ed. Alfred David, M. H. Abrams, and Stephen Greenblatt. 9th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2012.
• The Norton Anthology of English Literature: The Sixteenth Century and Early Seventeenth Century. Ed. George M. Logan, Stephen Greenblatt, Barbara K Lewalski, and M. H. Abrams. 9th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2012.
• The Norton Anthology of English Literature: The Restoration and the Eighteenth Century. Ed. George M. Logan, Stephen Greenblatt, Barbara K Lewalski, and M. H. Abrams. 9th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2012.
• Gibaldi, Joseph. The MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers. 6th ed. New York: The Modern Language Association of America, 2003.
• Any Standard College Dictionary.

ENGL 240.S01 Juvenile Literature Elementary-5th Grade

Monday, Wednesday and Friday noon-12:50 p.m.

April Myrick

A survey of the history of literature written for children and adolescents, and a consideration of the various types of juvenile literature. Text selection will focus on the themes of imagination and breaking boundaries.

ENGL 240.ST1 Juvenile Literature Elementary-5th Grade

Randi Anderson

In English 240 students will develop the skills to interpret and evaluate various genres of literature for juvenile readers. This particular section will focus on various works of literature at approximately the K-5 grade level. We will read a large range of works that fall into this category, as well as information on the history, development and genre of juvenile literature.

Readings for this course include classical works such as "Hatchet," "Little Women", "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" and "Brown Girl Dreaming," as well as newer works like "Storm in the Barn," "Anne Frank’s Diary: A Graphic Adaptation," "Lumberjanes," and a variety of picture books. These readings will be paired with chapters from "Reading Children’s Literature: A Critical Introduction " to help develop understanding of various genres, themes and concepts that are both related to juvenile literature and also present in our readings.

In addition to exposing students to various genres of writing (poetry, historical fiction, non-fiction, fantasy, picture books, graphic novels, etc.) this course will also allow students to engage in a discussion of larger themes present in these works such as censorship, race and gender. Students’ understanding of these works and concepts will be developed through readings, research, discussion posts, exams and writing assignments designed to get students to practice analyzing poetry, picture books, informational books and transitional/easy readers.

ENGL 241.S01: American Literature I

Tuesday and Thursday 12:30-1:45 p.m.

This course provides a broad, historical survey of American literature from the early colonial period to the Civil War. Ranging across historical periods and literary genres—including early accounts of contact and discovery, narratives of captivity and slavery, poetry of revolution, essays on gender equality and stories of industrial exploitation—this class examines how subjects such as colonialism, nationhood, religion, slavery, westward expansion, race, gender and democracy continue to influence how Americans see themselves and their society.

Required Texts

• The Norton Anthology of American Literature: Package 1, Volumes A and B Beginnings to 1865, Ninth Edition. (ISBN 978-0-393-26454-8)

ENGL 283.S01 Introduction to Creative Writing

Steven Wingate

Students will explore the various forms of creative writing (fiction, nonfiction and poetry) not one at a time in a survey format—as if there were decisive walls of separation between then—but as intensely related genres that share much of their creative DNA. Through close reading and work on personal texts, students will address the decisions that writers in any genre must face on voice, rhetorical position, relationship to audience, etc. Students will produce and revise portfolios of original creative work developed from prompts and research. This course fulfills the same SGR #2 requirements ENGL 201; note that the course will involve a research project. Successful completion of ENGL 101 (including by test or dual credit) is a prerequisite.

ENGL 283.S02 Introduction to Creative Writing

Jodilyn Andrews

This course introduces students to the craft of writing, with readings and practice in at least two genres (including fiction, poetry and drama).

ENGL 283.ST1 Introduction to Creative Writing

Amber Jensen, M.A., M.F.A.

This course explores creative writing as a way of encountering the world, research as a component of the creative writing process, elements of craft and their rhetorical effect and drafting, workshop and revision as integral parts of writing polished literary creative work. Student writers will engage in the research practices that inform the writing of literature and in the composing strategies and writing process writers use to create literary texts. Through their reading and writing of fiction, poetry and creative nonfiction, students will learn about craft elements, find examples of those craft elements in published works and apply these elements in their own creative work, developed through weekly writing activities, small group and large group workshop and conferences with the instructor. Work will be submitted, along with a learning reflection and revision plan in each genre and will then be revised and submitted as a final portfolio at the end of the semester to demonstrate continued growth in the creation of polished literary writing.

• 300-400 level

ENGL 424.S01 Language Arts Methods grades 7-12  

Tuesday 6-8:50 p.m.

Danielle Harms

Techniques, materials and resources for teaching English language and literature to middle and secondary school students. Required of students in the English education option.

AIS/ENGL 447.S01: American Indian Literature of the Present 

Thursdays 3-6 p.m.

This course introduces students to contemporary works by authors from various Indigenous nations. Students examine these works to enhance their historical understanding of Indigenous peoples, discover the variety of literary forms used by those who identify as Indigenous writers, and consider the cultural and political significance of these varieties of expression. Topics and questions to be explored include:

• Genre: What makes Indigenous literature indigenous?
• Political and Cultural Sovereignty: Why have an emphasis on tribal specificity and calls for “literary separatism” emerged in recent decades, and what are some of the critical conversations surrounding such particularized perspectives?
• Gender and Sexuality: What are the intersecting concerns of Indigenous Studies and Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies, and how might these research fields inform one another?
• Trans-Indigeneity: What might we learn by comparing works across different Indigenous traditions, and what challenges do such comparisons present?
• Aesthetics: How do Indigenous writers understand the dynamics between tradition and creativity?
• Visual Forms: What questions or concerns do visual representations (television and film) by or about Indigenous peoples present?

Possible Texts

• Akiwenzie-Damm, Kateri and Josie Douglas (eds), Skins: Contemporary Indigenous Writing. IAD Press, 2000. (978-1864650327)
• Erdrich, Louise, The Sentence. Harper, 2021 (978-0062671127)
• Harjo, Joy, Poet Warrior: A Memoir. Norton, 2021 (978-0393248524)
• Harjo, Sterlin and Taika Waititi, Reservation Dogs (selected episodes)
• Talty, Morgan. Night of the Living Rez, 2022, Tin House (978-1953534187)
• Wall Kimmerer, Robin. Braiding Sweet Grass, Milkweed Editions (978-1571313560)
• Wilson, Diane. The Seed Keeper: A Novel. Milkweed Editions (978-1571311375)
• Critical essays by Alexie, Allen, Cohen, Cox, King, Kroeber, Ortiz, Piatote, Ross and Sexton, Smith, Taylor, Teuton, Treuer, Vizenor, and Womack.

ENGL 472.S01: Film Criticism

Tuesdays 2-4:50 p.m.

Jason McEntee

Do you have an appreciation for, and enjoy watching, movies? Do you want to study movies in a genre-oriented format (such as those we typically call the Western, the screwball comedy, the science fiction or the crime/gangster, to name a few)? Do you want to explore the different critical approaches for talking and writing about movies (such as auteur, feminist, genre or reception)?

In this class, you will examine movies through viewing and defining different genres while, at the same time, studying and utilizing different styles of film criticism. You will share your discoveries in both class discussions and short writings. The final project will be a formal written piece of film criticism based on our work throughout the semester. The course satisfies requirements and electives for all English majors and minors, including both the Film Studies and Professional Writing minors. (Note: Viewing of movies outside of class required and may require rental and/or streaming service fees.)

ENGL 476.ST1: Fiction

In this workshop-based creative writing course, students will develop original fiction based on strong attention to the fundamentals of literary storytelling: full-bodied characters, robust story lines, palpable environments and unique voices. We will pay particular attention to process awareness, to the integrity of the sentence, and to authors' commitments to their characters and the places in which their stories unfold. Some workshop experience is helpful, as student peer critique will be an important element of the class.

ENGL 479.01 Capstone: The Gothic

Wednesday 3-5:50 p.m.

With the publication of Horace Walpole’s "The Castle of Otranto " in 1764, the Gothic officially came into being. Dark tales of physical violence and psychological terror, the Gothic incorporates elements such as distressed heroes and heroines pursued by tyrannical villains; gloomy estates with dark corridors, secret passageways and mysterious chambers; haunting dreams, troubling prophecies and disturbing premonitions; abduction, imprisonment and murder; and a varied assortment of corpses, apparitions and “monsters.” In this course, we will trace the development of Gothic literature—and some film—from the eighteenth-century to the present time. As we do so, we will consider how the Gothic engages philosophical beliefs about the beautiful and sublime; shapes psychological understandings of human beings’ encounters with horror, terror, the fantastic and the uncanny; and intervenes in the social and historical contexts in which it was written. We’ll consider, for example, how the Gothic undermines ideals related to domesticity and marriage through representations of domestic abuse, toxicity and gaslighting. In addition, we’ll discuss Gothic texts that center the injustices of slavery and racism. As many Gothic texts suggest, the true horrors of human existence often have less to do with inexplicable supernatural phenomena than with the realities of the world in which we live. 

ENGL 485.S01: Undergraduate Writing Center Learning Assistants 

Flexible Scheduling

Nathan Serfling

Since their beginnings in the 1920s and 30s, writing centers have come to serve numerous functions: as hubs for writing across the curriculum initiatives, sites to develop and deliver workshops and resource centers for faculty as well as students, among other functions. But the primary function of writing centers has necessarily and rightfully remained the tutoring of student writers. This course will immerse you in that function in two parts. During the first four weeks, you will explore writing center praxis—that is, the dialogic interplay of theory and practice related to writing center work. This part of the course will orient you to writing center history, key theoretical tenets and practical aspects of writing center tutoring. Once we have developed and practiced this foundation, you will begin work in the writing center as a tutor, responsible for assisting a wide variety of student clients with numerous writing tasks. Through this work, you will learn to actively engage with student clients in the revision of a text, respond to different student needs and abilities, work with a variety of writing tasks and rhetorical situations, and develop a richer sense of writing as a complex and negotiated social process.

Graduate Courses

Engl 572.s01: film criticism, engl 576.st1 fiction.

In this workshop-based creative writing course, students will develop original fiction based on strong attention to the fundamentals of literary storytelling: full-bodied characters, robust story lines, palpable environments and unique voices. We will pay particular attention to process awareness, to the integrity of the sentence and to authors' commitments to their characters and the places in which their stories unfold. Some workshop experience is helpful, as student peer critique will be an important element of the class.

ENGL 605.S01 Seminar in Teaching Composition

Thursdays 1-3:50 p.m.

This course will provide you with a foundation in the pedagogies and theories (and their attendant histories) of writing instruction, a foundation that will prepare you to teach your own writing courses at SDSU and elsewhere. As you will discover through our course, though, writing instruction does not come with any prescribed set of “best” practices. Rather, writing pedagogies stem from and continue to evolve because of various and largely unsettled conversations about what constitutes effective writing and effective writing instruction. Part of becoming a practicing writing instructor, then, is studying these conversations to develop a sense of what “good writing” and “effective writing instruction” might mean for you in our particular program and how you might adapt that understanding to different programs and contexts.

As we read about, discuss and research writing instruction, we will address a variety of practical and theoretical topics. The practical focus will allow us to attend to topics relevant to your immediate classroom practices: designing a curriculum and various types of assignments, delivering the course content and assessing student work, among others. Our theoretical topics will begin to reveal the underpinnings of these various practical matters, including their historical, rhetorical, social and political contexts. In other words, we will investigate the praxis—the dialogic interaction of practice and theory—of writing pedagogy. As a result, this course aims to prepare you not only as a writing teacher but also as a nascent writing studies/writing pedagogy scholar.

At the end of this course, you should be able to engage effectively in the classroom practices described above and participate in academic conversations about writing pedagogy, both orally and in writing. Assessment of these outcomes will be based primarily on the various writing assignments you submit and to a smaller degree on your participation in class discussions and activities.

ENGL 726.S01: The New Woman, 1880–1900s 

Thursdays 3–5:50 p.m.

Katherine Malone

This course explores the rise of the New Woman at the end of the nineteenth century. The label New Woman referred to independent women who rebelled against social conventions. Often depicted riding bicycles, smoking cigarettes and wearing masculine clothing, these early feminists challenged gender roles and sought broader opportunities for women’s employment and self-determination. We will read provocative fiction and nonfiction by New Women writers and their critics, including authors such as Sarah Grand, Mona Caird, George Egerton, Amy Levy, Ella Hepworth Dixon, Grant Allen and George Gissing. We will analyze these exciting texts through a range of critical lenses and within the historical context of imperialism, scientific and technological innovation, the growth of the periodical press and discourse about race, class and gender. In addition to writing an argumentative seminar paper, students will complete short research assignments and lead discussion.

ENGL 792.ST1 Women in War: Female Authors and Characters in Contemporary War Lit

In this course, we will explore the voices of female authors and characters in contemporary literature of war. Drawing from various literary theories, our readings and discussion will explore the contributions of these voices to the evolving literature of war through archetypal and feminist criticism. We will read a variety of short works (both theoretical and creative) and complete works such as (selections subject to change): "Eyes Right" by Tracy Crow, "Plenty of Time When We Get Home" by Kayla Williams, "You Know When the Men are Gone" by Siobhan Fallon, "Still, Come Home" by Katie Schultz and "The Fine Art of Camouflage" by Lauren Johnson.