How to Write a PhD thesis for the University Standards Level

1.Understand What a PhD Thesis Is

A PhD thesis must:

• Solve a real research problem
• Add new knowledge (novelty)
• Be systematic, deep, and defendable
• Show you are an independent researcher

Rule: If your work can’t be defended with logic + evidence → it’s not PhD-level.

---

2.Choose a Strong Research Topic

Your topic should be:

• Specific (not broad)
• Researchable (data/tools available)
• Novel (gap exists)
• Relevant to your field

Bad topic:

“Machine Learning in Healthcare”

Good topic:

“A Hybrid Deep Learning Model for Early Detection of Diabetic Retinopathy Using Fundus Images”

---

3.Standard PhD Thesis Structure (Most Universities)

Chapter 1: Introduction

Write:

• Background of the problem
• Problem statement
• Research gap
• Objectives
• Research questions / hypotheses
• Scope & limitations
• Thesis organization

📌 This chapter answers: Why this research?

---

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Write:

• What others have done (last 5–10 years)
• Compare methods, results, limitations
• Tables comparing papers (very important)
• Identify research gap clearly

📌 This chapter answers: What is missing in existing work?

---

Chapter 3: Methodology

Write:

• Research design
• Data sources
• Tools/software
• Algorithms / models / experiments
• Flowcharts, equations
• Validation methods

📌 This chapter answers: How did you solve the problem?

---

Chapter 4: Results & Analysis

Write:

• Experimental results
• Tables, graphs, charts
• Statistical analysis
• Comparison with existing methods
• Interpretation of results

📌 This chapter answers: What did you find?

---

Chapter 5: Discussion

Write:

• Meaning of results
• Why your method works better
• Practical implications
• Limitations of your approach

📌 This chapter answers: Why are your results important?

---

Chapter 6: Conclusion & Future Work

Write:

• Summary of contributions
• Key findings
• Applications
• Future research directions

📌 This chapter answers: What next?

---

References

• Use tools like:
• Zotero
• Mendeley
• EndNote
• Follow APA / IEEE / Springer / Elsevier style (as per university)

---

4.Writing Style (Very Important)

• Formal academic English
• No casual language
• No copy-paste
• Use passive voice mostly
• Cite every idea not yours

Example:
❌ “I tested the model and got good results”
✅ “The proposed model was evaluated and achieved superior performance”

---

5.Daily Writing Plan (Realistic)

• Write 500–800 words/day
• Don’t wait for perfection
• First draft → refine later

📅 Example:

• Month 1–2: Literature Review
• Month 3: Methodology
• Month 4: Experiments
• Month 5: Results & Discussion
• Month 6: Final editing

---

6.Tools You Should Use

• MS Word / LaTeX (LaTeX preferred for tech fields)
• Grammarly (academic mode)
• Turnitin / iThenticate (plagiarism)
• Excel / Python / MATLAB (data)
• Draw.io / Visio (diagrams)

---

7.Common Mistakes to Avoid ❌

• Too much theory, no contribution
• Weak research gap
• Poor figures/tables
• Plagiarism (even self-plagiarism)
• Ignoring supervisor feedback

---

8.Before Submission Checklist ✅

• Novelty clearly stated
• Objectives met
• Figures labeled
• References consistent
• Plagiarism < university limit
• Supervisor approval

 

Research Paper Rejection Checklist (SCI & Scopus)

Before resubmitting a rejected research paper to an SCI or Scopus journal, use this checklist to identify and fix common issues. This checklist helps convert rejection into a stronger resubmission.

---

Journal & Scope Check

☐ Is the paper clearly within the aims and scope of the selected journal?
☐ Have you read recent papers published by the same journal?
☐ Is the journal’s indexing status (SCI/Scopus) verified and current?

---

Novelty & Contribution

☐ Is the research contribution clearly stated in the abstract and introduction?
☐ Does the paper explain what is new compared to existing studies?
☐ Is the contribution highlighted in the conclusion section?

---

Literature Review

☐ Are recent (last 5–7 years) studies included?
☐ Does the literature review clearly identify a research gap?
☐ Are comparisons with previous work properly explained?

---

Methodology & Data

☐ Is the research methodology clear and detailed?
☐ Are datasets, tools, and experimental procedures properly explained?
☐ Are results reproducible and justified?

---

Results & Analysis

☐ Are results presented clearly using tables or figures?
☐ Is there sufficient analysis and interpretation of results?
☐ Are results compared with existing literature?

---

Plagiarism & Ethics

☐ Is the similarity index within acceptable limits (usually <15%)?
☐ Is there zero plagiarism in abstract, results, and conclusion?
☐ Are ethical approvals or declarations included (if required)?

---

Language & Presentation

☐ Is the paper written in clear academic English?
☐ Are grammar, spelling, and sentence flow corrected?
☐ Are figures, tables, and captions properly formatted?

---

Formatting & Guidelines

☐ Is the journal’s official template used?
☐ Are citation and reference styles followed correctly?
☐ Are word limits, figure limits, and file formats respected?

---

Reviewer Comments (If Available)

☐ Have all reviewer comments been fully addressed?
☐ Is there a point-by-point response document?
☐ Are responses polite, clear, and professional?

---

Resubmission Strategy

☐ Is the same journal suitable after revision, or should a new journal be chosen?
☐ Is the revised paper significantly improved compared to the rejected version?
☐ Has the paper been rechecked before resubmission?

---

Final Confidence Check

☐ Does the paper clearly communicate its value to readers?
☐ Is the research contribution easy to understand?
☐ Would you confidently explain the novelty to a reviewer?

 

Ways to Convert Research Paper Rejection into Acceptance

Rejection from SCI or Scopus journals can be discouraging, but it does not mean the research is poor or useless. Many high-quality papers are rejected in the first attempt. The key is to understand the reasons for rejection and use them as guidance to improve the manuscript.

Read the Reviewer Comments Carefully

The first step after rejection is to calmly read the editor and reviewer comments. Avoid reacting emotionally. Reviewer feedback usually highlights weaknesses in the paper, such as methodology issues, unclear explanations, or lack of novelty. These comments are valuable inputs for improvement.

Identify the Type of Rejection

Not all rejections are the same. A desk rejection usually means the paper does not match the journal scope or basic quality standards. A peer-review rejection indicates that the research has potential but needs improvement. Understanding the rejection type helps decide the next steps.

Improve the Research Contribution

If reviewers mention lack of novelty, refine the contribution section. Clearly explain what is new in your work, how it differs from existing studies, and why it is important. Even small improvements can be acceptable if justified properly.

Strengthen the Methodology and Analysis

Many papers are rejected due to weak or unclear methodology. Recheck your experimental design, data collection, and analysis methods. Add missing details, improve explanations, and include additional experiments or validation if required.

Enhance the Literature Review

Update the literature review with recent and relevant studies. Compare your results with previous work and clearly highlight the research gap your paper addresses. A strong literature review improves the credibility of the manuscript.

Improve Language and Presentation

Poor language quality can negatively impact reviewer perception. Rewrite unclear sections, correct grammar, and improve flow. Well-labeled figures, clear tables, and consistent formatting make the paper easier to understand and review.

Reduce Plagiarism and Improve Paraphrasing

If similarity was a concern, rewrite the highlighted sections carefully and cite sources properly. Avoid copying sentence structures and ensure originality throughout the manuscript.

Choose a More Suitable Journal

Sometimes rejection occurs simply because the journal is too competitive or not the best fit. After revision, consider submitting to another SCI or Scopus journal with a similar scope but more suitable acceptance criteria.

Prepare a Strong Revision or Resubmission

When resubmitting, ensure all reviewer concerns are addressed. If resubmitting to the same journal, provide a clear, point-by-point response explaining how each comment was handled. Polite and professional responses leave a positive impression.

Stay Patient and Persistent

Rejection is a normal part of academic publishing. Many successful researchers have faced multiple rejections before acceptance. Persistence, continuous improvement, and learning from feedback are key to success.

Conclusion

Converting rejection into acceptance requires a positive mindset, careful revision, and strategic resubmission. By addressing reviewer comments, improving research quality, and selecting the right journal, authors can significantly increase their chances of publishing in SCI or Scopus journals.

 

Why Are Research Papers Rejected by SCI or Scopus Journals?

Rejection is a common part of academic publishing, especially in SCI and Scopus journals, which maintain high quality standards. Understanding the reasons for rejection helps researchers improve their manuscripts and increase acceptance chances in future submissions.

Mismatch With Journal Scope

One of the most common reasons for rejection is submitting a paper that does not align with the journal’s aims and scope. Even a well-written paper may be rejected if its topic is outside the journal’s focus area. Editors often perform an initial screening and reject unsuitable manuscripts without peer review.

Lack of Originality or Novelty

SCI and Scopus journals expect original research that contributes new knowledge to the field. Papers that present minor modifications, repeated studies without justification, or already well-established results are often rejected due to insufficient novelty.

Poor Quality of Research Methodology

Weak or inappropriate research methods can lead to rejection. If the methodology is unclear, data is insufficient, or experimental design is flawed, reviewers may question the validity of the results. Strong methodology is essential for acceptance.

High Plagiarism or Self-Plagiarism

Plagiarism is strictly prohibited. Papers with high similarity scores, copied text, or reused content from the author’s previous work without citation are often rejected. Even well-cited papers may be rejected if paraphrasing is poor.

Weak Literature Review

A literature review that lacks depth, ignores recent studies, or fails to identify research gaps can weaken the paper. SCI and Scopus journals expect a critical and up-to-date review of relevant work.

Poor Language and Presentation

Manuscripts with grammatical errors, unclear sentences, or poor structure may be rejected even if the research idea is strong. Clear academic language and proper formatting are essential for effective communication.

Inadequate Results or Analysis

If results are unclear, poorly explained, or unsupported by data, reviewers may reject the paper. Incomplete analysis or lack of discussion comparing results with existing studies also affects acceptance.

Ethical Issues and Data Concerns

Ethical violations, such as missing approvals, manipulated data, or unclear data sources, can lead to immediate rejection. Journals take research ethics very seriously.

Failure to Follow Journal Guidelines

Ignoring journal-specific guidelines related to formatting, citation style, word limits, or submission requirements often results in desk rejection.

Poor Response to Reviewer Comments

If authors do not properly address reviewer comments during revision or respond unprofessionally, the paper may be rejected in later review rounds.

Conclusion

Rejection in SCI and Scopus journals is usually due to quality, relevance, or ethical issues rather than personal reasons. By selecting the right journal, improving originality, strengthening methodology, and following guidelines carefully, researchers can significantly improve their chances of acceptance.

 

Guidelines for Writing a Scopus Research Paper

Writing a research paper for Scopus-indexed journals requires a balance of originality, clarity, and adherence to journal standards. Scopus journals maintain quality through a structured peer-review process, so following proper guidelines greatly improves the chances of acceptance.

Understand the Journal Scope and Indexing

Before writing the paper, carefully review the aims and scope of the selected Scopus journal. Submitting a manuscript that does not align with the journal’s focus often leads to immediate rejection. Also, verify that the journal is currently indexed in Scopus, as indexing status may change.

Select a Relevant and Researchable Topic

A Scopus paper should address a relevant research problem with clear objectives. The topic may be theoretical, experimental, or applied, but it should contribute new insights or improvements to existing work. Practical relevance and current research trends are highly valued in Scopus journals.

Follow the Standard Scopus Paper Structure

Most Scopus journals follow a common structure:

·       Title – Precise and informative

·       Abstract – Concise summary of objectives, methodology, results, and conclusions

·       Keywords – Important terms for indexing

·       Introduction – Background, motivation, and research gap

·       Literature Review – Critical analysis of related work

·       Methodology – Detailed description of methods and materials

·       Results – Clear presentation of findings

·       Discussion – Interpretation and comparison with previous studies

·       Conclusion – Key outcomes and future scope

·       References – Properly formatted citations

Following this structure helps reviewers understand the contribution of your research.

Maintain Originality and Avoid Plagiarism

Scopus journals strictly check for plagiarism. Similarity should usually be below 15–20%, excluding references, but this depends on the journal. All sources must be cited properly, and self-plagiarism should be avoided unless clearly referenced.

Use Clear and Academic Language

Good language quality is essential. Scopus journals expect clear, formal, and grammatically correct English. Avoid informal wording, ambiguous sentences, and unnecessary repetition. Well-designed tables and figures enhance readability and presentation.

Use Quality and Recent References

References should primarily include:

·       Scopus or SCI indexed journals

·       Recent publications (last 5–7 years where possible)

·       Relevant and authoritative sources

Strong references improve the credibility of the manuscript.

Follow Journal Formatting and Submission Rules

Each Scopus journal has its own formatting requirements, including citation style, page limits, figure formats, and templates. Always use the journal’s official template and follow submission instructions carefully.

Respond Professionally to Reviewer Comments

If revisions are requested, respond to reviewers politely and clearly. Address each comment point-by-point and explain the changes made. A well-prepared revision response significantly increases acceptance chances.

Be Patient with the Review Process

The review process in Scopus journals may take several weeks or months. Multiple rounds of revision are common. Patience and careful revision are key to successful publication.

Conclusion

Writing a Scopus research paper requires originality, proper structure, ethical writing practices, and strict adherence to journal guidelines. By selecting the right journal, maintaining research quality, and responding positively to reviewer feedback, researchers can successfully publish in Scopus-indexed journals.

 

Guidelines for Writing an SCI Research Paper

Writing a research paper for SCI (Science Citation Index) journals requires strong academic quality, originality, and strict adherence to journal standards. SCI journals are highly selective, so following proper guidelines significantly improves acceptance chances.

Understand the Journal Scope and Requirements

Before writing the paper, carefully read the aims and scope of the selected SCI journal. Submitting a paper outside the journal’s scope is one of the most common reasons for rejection. Always check author guidelines related to formatting, word limits, citation style, and submission rules.

Choose a Strong and Original Research Problem

SCI journals expect original research that contributes new knowledge to the field. The research problem should be clearly defined, relevant, and supported by a strong motivation. Even incremental improvements are acceptable if the contribution is clearly explained.

Follow the Standard SCI Paper Structure

Most SCI papers follow a well-defined structure:

·       Title – Clear, concise, and specific

·       Abstract – Brief summary of objectives, methods, results, and conclusions

·       Keywords – Relevant terms for indexing

·       Introduction – Background, research gap, and objectives

·       Literature Review – Critical analysis of existing studies

·       Methodology – Detailed explanation of methods and data

·       Results – Clear presentation of findings

·       Discussion – Interpretation and comparison with previous work

·       Conclusion – Summary and future scope

·       References – Properly formatted citations

Maintaining this structure helps reviewers evaluate the paper efficiently.

Maintain High Language and Presentation Quality

SCI journals expect clear, formal, and error-free English. Poor language quality can lead to rejection even if the research is strong. Avoid informal expressions and grammatical mistakes. Tables and figures should be clear, properly labeled, and referenced in the text.

Ensure Ethical and Plagiarism-Free Content

Plagiarism is strictly not allowed in SCI journals. Similarity should be within the journal’s acceptable limit, usually below 10–15%, excluding references. Always cite sources properly and avoid self-plagiarism by reusing previous work without acknowledgment.

Use Strong References from Reputed Sources

SCI journals prefer references from:

·       SCI or Scopus indexed journals

·       Recent and relevant publications

·       Reputed publishers

Using quality references improves the credibility of your paper.

Respond Carefully to Reviewer Comments

If revisions are requested, address every reviewer comment clearly and politely. Provide a point-by-point response explaining changes made in the manuscript. A professional revision response increases the chance of acceptance.

Be Patient with the Review Process

SCI journals follow a strict peer review process, which may take several months. Multiple revision rounds are common. Patience and continuous improvement are key to successful publication.

Conclusion

Writing an SCI paper requires careful planning, originality, and strict adherence to journal guidelines. By choosing the right topic, following a proper structure, maintaining ethical standards, and responding positively to reviewer feedback, researchers can improve their chances of publishing in SCI journals.

How to Choose a Research Topic for PhD

Choosing the right research topic is one of the most important decisions in a PhD journey. A well-chosen topic not only determines the success of your doctoral research but also impacts your academic and professional career. The topic should be meaningful, feasible, and aligned with your long-term goals.

Understand Your Area of Interest

The first step in selecting a PhD research topic is identifying your genuine interest. A PhD requires several years of dedicated work, so choosing a topic that excites you will help maintain motivation throughout the journey. Select a broad subject area that you enjoy and gradually narrow it down into a specific research problem.

Review Existing Literature

Conducting an in-depth literature review helps you understand what has already been researched and where gaps exist. Reading recent journal articles, conference papers, and review studies will expose unanswered questions, limitations, and emerging trends. These gaps often lead to strong research topics.

Identify Research Gaps and Problems

A good PhD topic should address a clear research gap or problem. Look for areas where:

• Results are inconsistent

• Methods can be improved

• New technologies or theories can be applied

A topic that solves a real academic or practical problem is more valuable.

Ensure Feasibility of the Topic

Before finalizing a topic, evaluate whether it is feasible in terms of time, data availability, resources, and technical expertise. Overly ambitious topics can be difficult to complete within the PhD timeframe. A focused and manageable topic increases the chances of timely completion.

Align With Supervisor Expertise

Choosing a topic aligned with your supervisor’s expertise is crucial. A knowledgeable supervisor can provide proper guidance, resources, and research direction. Discuss potential topics with your supervisor and refine them based on their feedback.

Consider Future Career Goals

Your PhD topic should support your long-term career plans. If you aim for an academic career, select a topic with strong publication potential. If industry is your goal, focus on applied research with real-world relevance.

Check Originality and Contribution

Originality is a key requirement for PhD research. Ensure your topic contributes new knowledge, methods, or insights to the field. Even small improvements or novel applications can be considered original if clearly justified.

Refine and Finalize the Topic

Once a topic is selected, refine it into a clear research question or objective. The final topic should be specific, researchable, and well-defined. Continuous refinement during the initial PhD phase is normal and expected.

Conclusion

Choosing a PhD research topic is a strategic process that requires careful planning, literature analysis, and guidance. By selecting a topic that aligns with your interest, expertise, and career goals, you can build a strong foundation for a successful PhD journey.

How to Cite an Article in a Research Paper

Citing an article in a research paper is essential to give credit to the original author and to avoid plagiarism. Proper citation also helps readers locate the original source and strengthens the credibility of your research.

What Is a Citation?

A citation is a reference to a source from which information, ideas, or data have been taken. Citations usually appear in two places:

• In-text citation within the paper

• Reference list at the end of the paper

The citation format depends on the style required by the journal or institution.

Common Citation Styles

Different journals follow different citation styles. The most commonly used styles are APA, IEEE, MLA, and Chicago.

APA Style (Common in Science & Social Sciences)

In-text citation:

(Author, Year)

Example:

(Smith, 2022)

Reference list format:

Smith, J. (2022). Title of the article. Journal Name, 10(2), 45–55.

IEEE Style (Common in Engineering)

In-text citation:

[1]

Reference list format:

[1] J. Smith, “Title of the article,” Journal Name, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 45–55, 2022.

MLA Style (Common in Humanities)

In-text citation:

(Smith 45)

Reference list format:

Smith, John. “Title of the Article.” Journal Name, vol. 10, no. 2, 2022, pp. 45–55.

Steps to Cite an Article Correctly

First, collect all the required details of the article, including author name, year of publication, article title, journal name, volume, issue number, and page numbers. Then choose the citation style specified by the journal. Insert the in-text citation at the point where the information is used and add the full reference in the reference list.

Online Articles and DOIs

If the article is accessed online, include the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) or the official URL. DOIs are preferred because they provide permanent access to the article.

Common Citation Mistakes to Avoid

Many authors forget to cite paraphrased content, which can still be considered plagiarism. Using inconsistent citation styles or missing reference details can also lead to paper rejection. Always double-check citations before submission.

Conclusion

Correctly citing articles is a fundamental part of academic writing. By following the required citation style and maintaining accurate references, researchers can avoid plagiarism and improve the acceptance chances of their papers.

Why Do SCI and Scopus Journals Take So Much Time to Publish?

SCI and Scopus journals are known for their high academic standards and global recognition. One common concern among researchers is the long time these journals take to review and publish articles. This delay is not intentional but is part of a structured quality-control process.

Strict Peer Review Process

SCI and Scopus journals follow a rigorous peer review system. Each submitted paper is evaluated by subject experts who carefully check the originality, methodology, results, and relevance of the research. Reviewers may suggest multiple revisions, which increases the overall publication time.

High Volume of Submissions

Top-ranked journals receive thousands of submissions every year from researchers worldwide. Since only a limited number of papers can be published in each issue, editors must carefully screen and prioritize submissions, leading to longer waiting periods.

Quality and Ethical Checks

Before acceptance, journals conduct plagiarism checks, ethical reviews, and data verification. These checks ensure research integrity but also add extra time to the publication process.

Multiple Revision Rounds

Authors are often asked to revise their manuscripts based on reviewer comments. Each revision must be re-evaluated, and sometimes additional review rounds are required, extending the timeline further.

Scheduled Publication Cycles

Many SCI and Scopus journals publish articles only in specific issues or volumes. Even after acceptance, papers may wait in a publication queue until the next scheduled issue.

Conclusion

The long publication time of SCI and Scopus journals reflects their commitment to quality, accuracy, and ethical research practices. Although the process requires patience, publishing in these journals adds significant value and credibility to a researcher’s work.