Independent reference site · not affiliated with Clarivate, Elsevier, or any publisher Why trust this site →
Guide · Where to Publish

How to Write a Research Paper Introduction

On this page

Short answer: Knowing how to write research paper introduction sections involves creating a funnel structure: starting with the broader research problem, narrowing down through prior literature, explicitly identifying the knowledge gap, and concluding with your study’s objective.

Editorial note: External guidance checked 18 September 2026. Journal and publisher policies can change, so readers should verify the target journal’s current author instructions before submission.

An Introduction should move from the broader research problem toward the specific question addressed by the paper. It is not a full literature review and it should not become a collection of unrelated citations. Its job is to establish why the study was needed and what the paper set out to do.

1. Start with the research problem

Open by establishing the subject and why it matters to the relevant research community. Use enough background to orient readers without spending paragraphs on information that is already obvious to the target audience.

The level of background should match the journal and audience. A specialized journal may require less general explanation than a multidisciplinary publication.

2. Narrow the context using relevant evidence

Move from established knowledge to the specific issue your study addresses. Prior literature should support the statements you make, but citations should not be added merely to increase the reference count.

Use primary research and authoritative sources where appropriate. Make sure citations actually support the proposition for which they are used.

3. Identify the gap carefully

The “gap” is the part of existing knowledge that remains uncertain, insufficiently studied, inconsistent, or unanswered. Do not claim that “no studies exist” unless you have conducted a search capable of supporting that statement.

A gap can be empirical, methodological, population-specific, theoretical, or contextual. Explain what remains unresolved rather than simply announcing that a gap exists.

4. State the objective or research question

The objective should follow naturally from the gap. It should be specific enough that a reader can predict what the Methods and Results will contain.

Where appropriate, state the hypothesis, primary outcome, or research question. Avoid introducing objectives in the Introduction that are not addressed later in the paper.

5. End with a clear transition to the study

The final paragraph can briefly state the study purpose, design, or principal question. It should prepare the reader for the Methods section without duplicating it.

ICMJE describes the Introduction as part of the standard structure for original research and distinguishes its role from Methods, Results, and Discussion.

Common Introduction problems

A weak Introduction may be too broad, overly historical, citation-heavy, repetitive, or disconnected from the actual study. Another common problem is a dramatic “gap” statement followed by a study that does not directly address it.

During revision, underline the problem, evidence, gap, and objective. If any of those four elements is missing or difficult to identify, revise the structure before polishing sentences.

Practical checklist

  • Establish the research problem.
  • Provide only the background needed for the target audience.
  • Use relevant and accurate citations.
  • Identify a specific knowledge gap or unresolved question.
  • State the objective or research question clearly.
  • Ensure the Methods and Results actually answer the stated objective.
  • Avoid unsupported “no studies exist” claims.
  • End with a logical transition into the study.
  • How to Write an Academic Research Paper
  • Where to Publish
  • How to Read Journal Aims and Scope
  • ICMJE — Preparing a Manuscript
  • ICMJE Recommendations

Topic Hubs & Interactive Tools

Related Practical Guides

Next Steps in Publishing Workflow

Reviewed by Umair Abbasi

AI Engineer & Data Scientist | PhD Candidate, Artificial Intelligence

Umair Abbasi is an AI Engineer and Data Scientist with a background in machine learning, AI agents, and MLOps, currently pursuing a PhD in Artificial Intelligence and holding a completed M.S. in Data Science. He leads the data architecture and tooling behind the journal metrics database and comparison tools. As an active researcher navigating journal selection and citation metrics in his own academic work, he brings a practitioner's perspective to how impact factor, CiteScore, and related metrics are actually used — not just how they're defined.

Credentials & Expertise:
- M.S., Data Science (completed) - PhD Candidate, Artificial Intelligence (in progress) - Machine Learning Specialization — Stanford University (Coursera) - Google Data Analytics Professional Certificate

This article is reviewed for accuracy on a rolling basis. Data on individual journal metrics changes annually with each Clarivate JCR release (typically June) and Scopus CiteScore update (typically June). See our Data Sources & Methodology page for sourcing details.

Written and reviewed by named authors Every page is bylined with real credentials, linked to ORCID or Google Scholar — no anonymous “Team” posts.
Every figure sourced and dated No metric is published without a visible primary source and a “last reviewed” date.