research paper in tense

Using the right tense

In your scientific paper, use verb tenses (past, present, and future) exactly as you would in ordinary writing. Use the past tense to report what happened in the past: what you did, what someone reported, what happened in an experiment, and so on. Use the present tense to express general truths, such as conclusions (drawn by you or by others) and atemporal facts (including information about what the paper does or covers). Reserve the future tense for perspectives: what you will do in the coming months or years. Typically, most of your sentences will be in the past tense, some will be in the present tense, and very few, if any, will be in the future tense.

Work done We collected blood samples from . . . Groves et al. determined the growth rate of . . . Consequently, astronomers decided to rename . . . Work reported Jankowsky reported a similar growth rate . . . In 2009, Chu published an alternative method to . . . Irarrázaval observed the opposite behavior in . . . Observations The mice in Group A developed , on average, twice as much . . . The number of defects increased sharply . . . The conversion rate was close to 95% . . .

Present tense

General truths Microbes in the human gut have a profound influence on . . . The Reynolds number provides a measure of . . . Smoking increases the risk of coronary heart disease . . . Atemporal facts This paper presents the results of . . . Section 3.1 explains the difference between . . . Behbood's 1969 paper provides a framework for . . .

Future tense

Perspectives In a follow-up experiment, we will study the role of . . . The influence of temperature will be the object of future research . . .

Note the difference in scope between a statement in the past tense and the same statement in the present tense: "The temperature increased linearly over time" refers to a specific experiment, whereas "The temperature increases linearly over time" generalizes the experimental observation, suggesting that the temperature always increases linearly over time in such circumstances.

In complex sentences, you may have to combine two different tenses — for example, "In 1905, Albert Einstein postulated that the speed of light is constant . . . . " In this sentence, postulated refers to something that happened in the past (in 1905) and is therefore in the past tense, whereas is expresses a general truth and is in the present tense.

Choosing between active and passive voice

In English, verbs can express an action in one of two voices. The active voice focuses on the agent: "John measured the temperature." (Here, the agent — John — is the grammatical subject of the sentence.) In contrast, the passive voice focuses on the object that is acted upon: "The temperature was measured by John." (Here, the temperature, not John, is the grammatical subject of the sentence.)

To choose between active and passive voice, consider above all what you are discussing (your topic) and place it in the subject position. For example, should you write "The preprocessor sorts the two arrays" or "The two arrays are sorted by the preprocessor"? If you are discussing the preprocessor, the first sentence is the better option. In contrast, if you are discussing the arrays, the second sentence is better. If you are unsure what you are discussing, consider the surrounding sentences: Are they about the preprocessor or the two arrays?

The desire to be objective in scientific writing has led to an overuse of the passive voice, often accompanied by the exclusion of agents: "The temperature was measured " (with the verb at the end of the sentence). Admittedly, the agent is often irrelevant: No matter who measured the temperature, we would expect its value to be the same. However, a systematic preference for the passive voice is by no means optimal, for at least two reasons.

For one, sentences written in the passive voice are often less interesting or more difficult to read than those written in the active voice. A verb in the active voice does not require a person as the agent; an inanimate object is often appropriate. For example, the rather uninteresting sentence "The temperature was measured . . . " may be replaced by the more interesting "The measured temperature of 253°C suggests a secondary reaction in . . . ." In the second sentence, the subject is still temperature (so the focus remains the same), but the verb suggests is in the active voice. Similarly, the hard-to-read sentence "In this section, a discussion of the influence of the recirculating-water temperature on the conversion rate of . . . is presented " (long subject, verb at the end) can be turned into "This section discusses the influence of . . . . " The subject is now section , which is what this sentence is really about, yet the focus on the discussion has been maintained through the active-voice verb discusses .

As a second argument against a systematic preference for the passive voice, readers sometimes need people to be mentioned. A sentence such as "The temperature is believed to be the cause for . . . " is ambiguous. Readers will want to know who believes this — the authors of the paper, or the scientific community as a whole? To clarify the sentence, use the active voice and set the appropriate people as the subject, in either the third or the first person, as in the examples below.

Biologists believe the temperature to be . . . Keustermans et al. (1997) believe the temperature to be . . . The authors believe the temperature to be . . . We believe the temperature to be . . .

Avoiding dangling verb forms

A verb form needs a subject, either expressed or implied. When the verb is in a non-finite form, such as an infinitive ( to do ) or a participle ( doing ), its subject is implied to be the subject of the clause, or sometimes the closest noun phrase. In such cases, construct your sentences carefully to avoid suggesting nonsense. Consider the following two examples.

To dissect its brain, the affected fly was mounted on a . . . After aging for 72 hours at 50°C, we observed a shift in . . .

Here, the first sentence implies that the affected fly dissected its own brain, and the second implies that the authors of the paper needed to age for 72 hours at 50°C in order to observe the shift. To restore the intended meaning while keeping the infinitive to dissect or the participle aging , change the subject of each sentence as appropriate:

To dissect its brain, we mounted the affected fly on a . . . After aging for 72 hours at 50°C, the samples exhibited a shift in . . .

Alternatively, you can change or remove the infinitive or participle to restore the intended meaning:

To have its brain dissected , the affected fly was mounted on a . . . After the samples aged for 72 hours at 50°C, we observed a shift in . . .

In communication, every detail counts. Although your focus should be on conveying your message through an appropriate structure at all levels, you should also save some time to attend to the more mechanical aspects of writing in English, such as using abbreviations, writing numbers, capitalizing words, using hyphens when needed, and punctuating your text correctly.

Using abbreviations

Beware of overusing abbreviations, especially acronyms — such as GNP for gold nanoparticles . Abbreviations help keep a text concise, but they can also render it cryptic. Many acronyms also have several possible extensions ( GNP also stands for gross national product ).

Write acronyms (and only acronyms) in all uppercase ( GNP , not gnp ).

Introduce acronyms systematically the first time they are used in a document. First write the full expression, then provide the acronym in parentheses. In the full expression, and unless the journal to which you submit your paper uses a different convention, capitalize the letters that form the acronym: "we prepared Gold NanoParticles (GNP) by . . . " These capitals help readers quickly recognize what the acronym designates.

• Do not use capitals in the full expression when you are not introducing an acronym: "we prepared gold nanoparticles by… "
• As a more general rule, use first what readers know or can understand best, then put in parentheses what may be new to them. If the acronym is better known than the full expression, as may be the case for techniques such as SEM or projects such as FALCON, consider placing the acronym first: "The FALCON (Fission-Activated Laser Concept) program at…"
• In the rare case that an acronym is commonly known, you might not need to introduce it. One example is DNA in the life sciences. When in doubt, however, introduce the acronym.

In papers, consider the abstract as a stand-alone document. Therefore, if you use an acronym in both the abstract and the corresponding full paper, introduce that acronym twice: the first time you use it in the abstract and the first time you use it in the full paper. However, if you find that you use an acronym only once or twice after introducing it in your abstract, the benefit of it is limited — consider avoiding the acronym and using the full expression each time (unless you think some readers know the acronym better than the full expression).

Writing numbers

In general, write single-digit numbers (zero to nine) in words, as in three hours , and multidigit numbers (10 and above) in numerals, as in 24 hours . This rule has many exceptions, but most of them are reasonably intuitive, as shown hereafter.

Use numerals for numbers from zero to nine

• when using them with abbreviated units ( 3 mV );
• in dates and times ( 3 October , 3 pm );
• to identify figures and other items ( Figure 3 );
• for consistency when these numbers are mixed with larger numbers ( series of 3, 7, and 24 experiments ).

Use words for numbers above 10 if these numbers come at the beginning of a sentence or heading ("Two thousand eight was a challenging year for . . . "). As an alternative, rephrase the sentence to avoid this issue altogether ("The year 2008 was challenging for . . . " ) .

Capitalizing words

Capitals are often overused. In English, use initial capitals

• at beginnings: the start of a sentence, of a heading, etc.;
• for proper nouns, including nouns describing groups (compare physics and the Physics Department );
• for items identified by their number (compare in the next figure and in Figure 2 ), unless the journal to which you submit your paper uses a different convention;
• for specific words: names of days ( Monday ) and months ( April ), adjectives of nationality ( Algerian ), etc.

In contrast, do not use initial capitals for common nouns: Resist the temptation to glorify a concept, technique, or compound with capitals. For example, write finite-element method (not Finite-Element Method ), mass spectrometry (not Mass Spectrometry ), carbon dioxide (not Carbon Dioxide ), and so on, unless you are introducing an acronym (see Mechanics: Using abbreviations ).

Using hyphens

Punctuating text.

Punctuation has many rules in English; here are three that are often a challenge for non-native speakers.

As a rule, insert a comma between the subject of the main clause and whatever comes in front of it, no matter how short, as in "Surprisingly, the temperature did not increase." This comma is not always required, but it often helps and never hurts the meaning of a sentence, so it is good practice.

In series of three or more items, separate items with commas ( red, white, and blue ; yesterday, today, or tomorrow ). Do not use a comma for a series of two items ( black and white ).

In displayed lists, use the same punctuation as you would in normal text (but consider dropping the and ).

The system is fast, flexible, and reliable.

The system is fast, flexible, reliable.

This page appears in the following eBook

Topic rooms within Scientific Communication

Within this Subject (22)

• Communicating as a Scientist (3)
• Papers (4)
• Correspondence (5)
• Presentations (4)
• Conferences (3)
• Classrooms (3)

Other Topic Rooms

• Gene Inheritance and Transmission
• Gene Expression and Regulation
• Nucleic Acid Structure and Function
• Chromosomes and Cytogenetics
• Evolutionary Genetics
• Population and Quantitative Genetics
• Genes and Disease
• Genetics and Society
• Cell Origins and Metabolism
• Proteins and Gene Expression
• Subcellular Compartments
• Cell Communication
• Cell Cycle and Cell Division

© 2014 Nature Education

• Press Room |
• Terms of Use |
• Privacy Notice |

Visual Browse

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Academic writing

Tense tendencies in academic texts

Published on September 30, 2014 by Shane Bryson . Revised on July 23, 2023.

Different sections of academic papers ( theses , dissertations and essays ) tend to use different tenses .  The following is a breakdown of these tendencies by section.  Please note that while it is useful to keep these tendencies in mind, there may be exceptions.  The breakdown below should help guide your writing, but keep in mind that you may have to shift tenses in any given section, depending on your topic matter.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Abstract or summary, introduction, theoretical framework, literature review, methods and results, conclusions or discussion, limitations, recommendations and implications, other interesting articles, present simple: for facts and general truisms; to say what the paper does.

This thesis examines the ways that ecological poetry relates to political activism.

Our research suggests better economic policies.

Present perfect: for past events or research still relevant to the present

Thinkers have examined how ecological poetry relates to political activism.

Other economists have suggested different economic policies.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Present simple: to say what the paper does and why it is important.

This research is relevant to how we understand the role of poetry.

Effective economic policies help societies to prosper.

Past simple: to provide historical background

In his time, Thoreau concerned himself with living in harmony with nature.

Ronald Reagan’s policies changed America’s political landscape.  

Present simple: to describe theories and provide definitions

In lyric poetry, the speaker presents his perspective on a given situation.

“Reaganomics” refers to the economic policies of Reagan administration.

Present perfect: for past research still relevant to the paper’s current research

Past simple: to describe specific steps or actions of past researchers, past simple: for events that began and ended in the past, such as an experiment.

We conducted semi-structured interviews with the participants.

We found that participants had much to say about their workplaces.

A multivariate linear regression was used.

Present simple: to describe a tool’s function (which does not change over time)

Multivariate linear regressions are  relevant to use for sets of correlated random variables.

Present simple: for interpretations of data

The results indicate a steady increase in net gain for x and y companies.

We cannot conclude that this growth will continue on the basis of this study.

Past simple: for details about how the study happened

The sample size was adequate for a qualitative analysis, but it was not big enough to provide good grounds for predictions.

Modal auxiliary to indicate lack of a certain outcome or simple future with hedging word: for thoughts on what future studies might focus on, and for careful predictions

Modal auxiliary : Responses to the survey suggest that many more people in this profession may be unsatisfied with their vacation time.

Modal auxiliary : Future research should conduct more sustained investigations of this phenomenon.

Simple future with hedging word : The results of the study indicate that the glaciers will likely continue to melt.

If you want to know more about AI for academic writing, AI tools, or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

• Begging the question fallacy
• Hasty generalization fallacy
• Equivocation fallacy
• False cause fallacy
• Sunk cost fallacy
• Deep learning
• Generative AI
• Machine learning
• Reinforcement learning
• Supervised vs. unsupervised learning

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Bryson, S. (2023, July 23). Tense tendencies in academic texts. Scribbr. Retrieved June 24, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-writing/tense-tendencies/

Is this article helpful?

Shane Bryson

Shane finished his master's degree in English literature in 2013 and has been working as a writing tutor and editor since 2009. He began proofreading and editing essays with Scribbr in early summer, 2014.

"I thought AI Proofreading was useless but.."

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

• Jun 24, 2021

Using Tenses In Research Articles

Updated: Jul 10, 2021

When you write an experimental report, or draft a thesis chapter, you need to choose which tense, or tenses, to use.

This flyer provides advice intended to help you become more conscious of what the choice of verb tense involves, and to become better able to notice the tense choices that writers in your particular field have made.

From your chosen tense, your reader receives two kinds of information. One concerns time: it is about ‘when’ (past, present or future). The other relates to whether an event or process is open or closed.

The examples below illustrate the distinction between ‘open’ and ‘closed’ events:

How long were you at Melbourne Uni?

Simple past / closed event: the other person has already graduated.

How long have you been at Melbourne Uni?

Present perfect / open event: the other person is still engaged on his / her course.

What do tenses do?

Verb tenses present a relationship between.

• the present moment (now), and,

• another moment or period in time (which may be long or short).

These moments or periods may be in the past, present or future.

Tenses manage time by placing them within particular relationships or ‘time frameworks’.

As a generalization: in various types of scientific writing, some time frameworks are more commonly used than others. Their frequency varies from one section of a paper or report to another, and they can also vary between one scientific discipline and another.

The next section gives some advice about the various tenses.

This usually refers to your unpublished results and uses the past tense.

Introduction

Your introduction needs to include background information which is generally accepted as fact in a discipline. You also need to explain why the research you are reporting is important. It is usually presented in the present tense. Example:

Genomics provides crucial information for rational drug design.

You will need to refer to existing research relevant to your work, and you can indicate your opinion of the research you are writing about by careful tense selection.

For example, when you use the present tense you are indicating to the reader that you believe that the research findings are still true and relevant, even though the original research may have been conducted some time ago. Example:

Many of the lakes and wetlands in the region are located in craters or valleys blocked by early Pliocene lava flows (Ollier & Joyce, 1964).

Present perfect tense to report research

If you use present perfect tense in your introduction when you refer to previous research, you communicate ‘recency’ or ‘currency’. Currency may be positive (asserting that previous studies have established a firm research foundation) or negative (asserting that not enough relevant or valid work has yet been done).

Positive and negative currency can even be asserted in the same sentence, as in the example below (which uses the passive voice): Example:

A great deal of research has been conducted on the basic techniques of nuclear transfer, but few experiments have been carried out to discover the most appropriate age of the cytoplasm to support nuclear transfer most effectively.

Past tense to describe what was done

In your methods section it is customary to use a form of the simple past tense to describe what you did in your study. Passive voice is often used. Examples:

Total phosphorous (TP) and total nitrogen (TN) were measured in the laboratory using standard procedures.

The standard protocol was followed for the preparation of the media from stock solutions.

The two previous examples are in the past tense, but in the passive voice. Have a look at the following examples in the past passive and past active voice.

Past passive

Three 2 liter samples were taken at a depth of between

0.1 and 0.5 m at the down-wind end of each wetland.

Past active

Each of the three groups took 2 liter samples at a depth of between 0.1 and 0.5m at the down-wind end of each wetland.

From your reading, which voice do you think is most often used in your scientific discipline – active, or passive?

Present tense for diagrams and figures

If you use figures or diagrams to help explain what you did, refer to the figure or diagram using the present tense. Examples:

Table 1 above demonstrates the success of cloning in various animal species.

Figure 2 below shows methylation in mouse 2-cell embryos.

Past tense for results obtained

In the results section, use the past tense to detail the results you obtained. Examples:

Overall, more than 70% of the insects collected were non-phytophagous.

Results indicated that prolonged exposure to ultra-violet radiation had a positive correlation with the development of melanomas.

Following activation of NT oocytes with strontium, the cell cycle resumed in both groups.

Present tense to refer to figures, tables and graphs

As in the previous sections, use the present tense

when you refer to figures, tables and graphs

Examples: Figure 1 displays the comparative variation in the morphology of donor chromatin in both age groups of oocytes.

Table 1 below shows the stream flows calculated for each stream using Equation 1.

Present tense to explain significance of results

In your discussion section, you will explain the significance of the results. The present tense is normally used for this. Example:

Removal of vegetation for agricultural purposes appears

to negatively affect the water quality of streams.

Past tense to summarize findings, with present tense to interpret results

Writers may use the past tense to summarize their findings, in combination with the present tense to explain or interpret what the results mean. Examples:

As the maxima and minima did not correspond to high and low tides, it is possible that the patterns observed may not be the result of mixing of waters with different concentrations.

Leaf carbon and phenolic content did not differ across sites, indicating that the response of secondary plant chemicals such as phenolics to water is complex.

In Example 1, the phrases ‘it is possible that’ and ‘may not be’ are used to indicate that other explanations are possible. This is an example of the use of limiting words to discuss findings in an academically tentative way.

Example 2 is less tentative. If you make a statement such as this, you are completely confident that your results and conclusion are correct.

A combination of tenses to highlight past research and future directions

In the final section of your thesis or report you summarize the main findings and the major implications of the study, point out any limitations, and offer suggestions for future research. To do these things you may use a combination of tenses. Example:

Although the study found evidence of tillage and irrigation within the study area, from the data collected it was not possible to determine if the effects of agriculture upstream cause (or caused) higher levels of total nitrogen downstream. Further studies are therefore necessary to determine the effects of agriculture on the health of Stringybark Creek.

Further Resources

Swales, J. M. & Feak, C. B. (2004). Academic Writing for Graduate Students. (2nd ed.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. (Pages 254-256).

Recent Posts

Using Numbers

How to Use Abbreviations

Harvard Style of Referencing

Dissertations & projects: Tenses

• Research questions
• The process of reviewing
• Project management
• Literature-based projects

On this page:

“You will use a range of tenses depending on what you are writing about . ” Elizabeth M Fisher, Richard C Thompson, and Daniel Holtom,   Enjoy Writing Your Science Thesis Or Dissertation!

Tenses can be tricky to master. Even well respected journals differ in the guidance they give their authors for their use. However, their are some general conventions about what tenses are used in different parts of the report/dissertation. This page gives some advice on standard practice.

What tenses will you use?

There are exceptions however, most notably in the literature review where you will use a mixture of past , present and present perfect tenses (don't worry, that is explained below), when discussing the implications of your findings when the present tense is appropriate and in the recommendations where you are likely to use the future tense.

The tenses used as standard practice in each of these sections of your report are given and explained below.

In your abstract

You have some leeway with tense use in your abstract and guidance does vary which can sometimes be confusing. We recommend the following:

Describing the current situation and reason for your study

Mostly use the present tense,  i.e. "This is the current state of affairs and this is why this study is needed."

Occasionally, you may find the need to use something called the present perfect tense when you are describing things that happened in the past but are still relevant. The present perfect tense uses have/has and then the past participle of the verb i.e. Previous research on this topic has focused on... 

Describing the aims of your study

Here you have a choice. It is perfectly acceptable to use either the present or past tense,  i.e. "This study aims to..." or "This study aimed to..." 

Describing your methodology

Use the past tense to describe what you did, i.e. "A qualitative approach was used." "A survey was undertaken to ...". "The blood sample was analysed by..."

Describing your findings

Use the past tense to describe what you found as it is specific to your study, i.e. "The results showed that...", "The analysis indicated that..."

Suggesting the implications of your study

Use the present tense as even though your study took place in the past, your implications remain relevant in the present, i.e. Results revealed x which indicates that..."

Example abstract 

An example abstract with reasoning for the tenses chosen can be found at the bottom of this excellent blog post: 

Using the Present Tense and Past Tense When Writing an Abstract

In your methodology

The methodology is one of the easiest sections when it comes to tenses as you are explaining to your reader what you did. This is therefore almost exclusively written in the past tense.

Blood specimens were frozen at -80 o C.

A survey was designed using the Jisc Surveys tool.

Participants were purposefully selected.

The following search strategy was used to search the literature:

Very occasionally you may use the present tense if you are justifying a decision you have taken (as the justification is still valid, not just at the time you made the decision). For example: 

Purposeful sampling was used to ensure that a range of views were included. This sampling method maximises efficiency and validity as it identifies information-rich cases and ... (Morse & Niehaus, 2009).

In your discussion/conclusion

This will primarily be written in the present tense as you are generally discussing or making conclusions about the relevance of your findings at the present time. So you may write:

The findings of this research suggest that.../are potentially important because.../could open a new avenue for further research...

There will also be times when you use the past tense , especially when referring to part of your own research or previous published research research - but this is usually followed by something in the present tense to indicate the current relevance or the future tense to indicate possible future directions:

Analysis of the survey results found most respondents were not concerned with the processes, just the outcome. This suggests that managers should focus on...

These findings mirrored those of Cheung (2020), who also found that ESL pupils failed to understand some basic yet fundamental instructions. Addressing this will help ensure...

In your introduction

The introduction generally introduces what is in the rest of your document as is therefore describing the present situation and so uses the present tense :

Chapter 3  describes  the research methodology.

Depending on your discipline, your introduction may also review the literature so please also see that section below.

In your literature review

The findings of some literature may only be applicable in the specific circumstances that the research was undertaken and so need grounding to that study. Conversely, the findings of other literature may now be accepted as established knowledge. Also, you may consider the findings of older literature to be still relevant and relatively recent literature be already superseded. The tenses you write in will help to indicate a lot of this to the reader. In other words, you will use a mix of tenses in your review depending on what you are implying.

Findings only applicable in the specific circumstances

Use the past tense . For example: 

In an early study, Sharkey et al. (1991)  found  that isoprene emissions  were doubled  in leaves on sunnier sides of oak and aspen trees. 

Using the past tense indicates that you are not implying that isoprene emissions are always doubled on the sunnier side of the trees, just that is what was found in the Sharkey et al. study.

Findings that are still relevant or now established knowledge

Mostly use the present tense , unless the study is not recent and the authors are the subject of the sentence (which you should use very sparingly in a literature review) when you may need to use a mixture of the past and present. For example:

A narrowing of what 'graduateness' represents damages students’ abilities to thrive as they move through what will almost certainly be complex career pathways (Holmes, 2001).

Holmes (2001) argued strongly that a narrowing of what 'graduateness' represents damages  students’ abilities to thrive as they move through what will almost certainly be complex career pathways

Both of these imply that you think this is still the case (although it is perhaps more strongly implied in the first example). You may also want to use some academic caution too - such as writing 'may damage' rather than the more definite 'damages'.

Presenting your results

As with your methodology, your results section should be written in the past tense . This indicates that you are accepting that the results are specific to your research. Whilst they may have current implications, that part will not be considered until your discussion/conclusions section(s).

Four main themes were identified from the interview data.

There was a significant change in oxygen levels.

Like with the methodology, you will occasionally switch to present tense to write things like "Table 3.4 shows that ..." but generally, stick to the past tense.

In your recommendations

Not everyone will need to include recommendations and some may have them as part of the conclusions chapter. Recommendations are written in a mixture of the present tense and  future tense :

It is recommended that ward layout is adapted, where possible, to provide low-sensory bays for patients with autism. These will still be useable by all patients but...

Useful links

• Verb tenses in scientific manuscripts From International Science Editing
• Which Verb Tenses Should I Use in a Research Paper? Blog from WordVice
• << Previous: Writing style
• Next: Voice >>
• Last Updated: Apr 24, 2024 1:09 PM
• URL: https://libguides.hull.ac.uk/dissertations
• Login to LibApps
• Library websites Privacy Policy
• University of Hull privacy policy & cookies
• Website terms and conditions
• Accessibility
• Report a problem

Verb tenses in scientific writing: Which tense should you use?

If you’re fluent in English, using tenses in scientific writing should come naturally to you. You shouldn’t need to flip through a grammar book, ask a freelance editor, or search online for “methods tense” or “literature review tense”.

But verb tenses may start to haunt you if you’re writing an article for a top peer-reviewed journal and you know you have to get every detail right. For example, you may wonder, What tense should be used in methodology sections? Should the introduction or literature review be written in the present tense or past tense?

In this post I’m going to answer these and other questions on verb tenses in scientific writing to make it easier for you to understand which tenses to use in a research paper.

Past or present tense in a cademic writing? It depends.

There’s  no consensus on how authors should be using verb tenses in scientific writing. Here is a summary of the main recommendations of academic writing experts on tenses in scientific writing.

Literature review verb tense

For the literature review, most academic editors recommend using the past simple or present perfect when talking about past research.

Use the past simple to discuss what was done in the past (the authors collected, investigated, analyzed, etc.).

Use present perfect to talk about findings from previous studies that are still valid today (the author has shown, has demonstrated, etc.).

If you don’t want to use the past simple or present perfect tense in literature review sections, your other option is the present simple tense. This is the so-called literary present.

Writing the literature review in the present simple tense helps simulate an ongoing academic conversation , to which you’re contributing (“Author et al. (2021) find…, discuss…, examine… imply…”).

In summary, what tense should the introduction be written in?

• Past simple or present perfect tense for past research
• Present simple for general truths or for the entire literature review section

Verb tenses in the methodology and results sections

For the methodology, almost all academic writing resources agree that the past simple tense is the logical choice. You are discussing what you did (collected data, analyzed them, and derived your results)—and all of that happened in the past.

However, you may also need to use the present simple tense to refer to figures and tables.

In summary, what tense should methods be written in?

For the methodology section, use these tenses:

• the past simple tense to explain your methods
• the present simple tense to refer to figures or tables

What tense should a discussion be written in?

Tenses for the discussion are similar to those for the introduction:

• past simple or present perfect tense when referring to what you did (past research)
• present simple for general truths or for interpretations of your data

Verb tenses in the conclusion section

For the conclusion, you may need to use several tenses. Again, when referring to general truths or implications of your results, use the present simple. When referring to what you did, use the past simple or present perfect tense.

Use the simple past when discussing the research you completed and is no longer continuing. Use the present perfect when discussing an action that started in the past and is still happening now, or an action that happens regularly.

So, for the conclusion, use these tenses:

• present simple for things that are true at the time of writing, the conclusions of your study, and its implications
• past simple or present perfect tense for past work

Knowing how to use verb tenses in scientific writing is better than imitating other authors

In scientific writing, using verb tenses inconsistently or unnecessarily shifting tenses means sloppy writing. A poorly written manuscript submitted to a peer-reviewed journal will come back with a long list of revisions—if it’s accepted for publication. Hiring a freelance editor for research papers can help you polish your writing style and improve the likelihood that your manuscript will be accepted the second time.

If you don’t want to hire a freelance editor, you may need to edit your own research paper . Mastering verb tenses in scientific writing will help you make the right choice for each section of your paper.

Try to resist the temptation to imitate others’ writing style. It’s common for new authors to learn academic writing the same way they learned to speak: by imitation. They peruse some articles published in their target journal to see what verb tenses other authors used and then make the same choices.

However, this is not such a great idea, because not all published articles are examples of good writing. You risk imitating an author that didn’t pay much attention to verb tenses in scientific writing, or whose work was edited by someone with little experience.

How to choose the right verb tenses for a research paper

If emulating others’ writing style comes with the risk of picking up bad habits, how do you choose the right verb tense to use in a scholarly paper?

Unfortunately, style guides, academic writing books, and academic editors give conflicting advice. A solution to this problem is to follow the recommendations of your university’s writing center if you’re writing a PhD thesis or dissertation. If, however, you’re writing a research paper for a journal, follow its guidelines.

Some publishers may let you choose any style guide as long as you’re consistent. In that case, go with the style popular in your academic field (for example, APA Style in social sciences).

Example: Verb tenses in APA Style

If you need to follow the APA Style, it has precise instructions on using verb tenses in research papers:

• Introduction and literature review: To talk about previous studies, use the past simple or present perfect; for findings that continue to be true, use the present simple.
• Methodology and results: To talk about your methods or results, use the past simple or present perfect.
• Conclusions: Write the conclusions of your research and implications of your findings in the present simple.

Here are some examples to help you understand how to use verb tenses in APA:

• Past simple tense to discuss past work:

Author A (2017) showed that varied populations display similar patterns, but Author B demonstrated that patterns vary wildly

• Present perfect to discuss findings from previous studies that are still valid today:

Other researchers have described similar processes in other environments

• Present simple to express general truths, facts, or ideas accepted today:

Most researchers agree that our species appeared in Africa

• Present perfect or past simple tense to describe your methods and results:

We have observed no variation in the economic growth rate, but found it depends on several factors

• Present simple tense to describe the conclusions and implications of your study:

Our results indicate a strong correlation between A and B, but we need further research in this area

Use the right tenses in scientific writing for clarity

The goal of using the right verb tenses in scientific writing is clarity. So, whether you follow your instincts, your advisor’s suggestions, an editor’s recommendations, or a style guide, aim at clarity and logic. A well-written manuscript will have a better chance of being accepted for publication. Also, it won’t require several rounds of revision to improve its language, meaning you save time and can focus on your science.

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

Related posts:

• Write your research paper outline
• Should I edit my own research paper?
• Academic editing tips I wish I knew as a research scientist

Last revised on 23 June 2022

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.

Why your grammar checker can’t make documents perfect

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

• 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

Verb Tenses to Use in a Research Paper

Why Using the Correct Verb Tense is Important

When writing an academic paper, writers should follow the accepted grammar and style conventions: not only to abide by the institutional and domain standards, but to communicate clearly to readers what was studied, when it took place, and from what perspective you are discussing your research (and that of others) in your paper. One crucial writing element that you must consider when composing your paper is  verb tense . Which tense you use will determine the flow and coherency of your paper.

You might have found yourself thinking along these lines: “Everything in this study has already been completed, so shouldn’t I simply write everything in the simple past tense?”

The answer is no–at least not in a strict sense. The verb tense you use for a given sentence or phrase depends on your position as the author to the material you are discussing. As the author, you look at each element mentioned in your text from a distance in terms of your role: as a participant, critic, or messenger, among others. You must also take into account the chronological reasons for choosing between present and past tenses in a given instance.

Knowing which tense to use requires both knowledge of the exact guidelines set out for you in whichever formatting style you are following ( APA , AMA , etc.), as well as some discretion and savvy in choosing the tense that makes the most sense for a given statement in the paper.

While new authors should certainly familiarize themselves with the specific guidelines of the formatting style they are applying, this article will focus on the  most common rules of verb tense applied to research papers in journals and at academic institutions, reflecting basic verb usage rules in academic English and encompassing  all  formatting styles.

Bear in mind that these grammar and verb-tense issues will largely be corrected by any competent proofreading service or research paper editing service , and thus professional revision of all academic documents is recommended before submission to journals or conferences.

Rules for Present, Past, and Perfect Tense Verbs

First, there are three basic verb tenses used in research papers:  present  (simple present),  simple   past , and  present perfect . We will talk about how research paper sections determine verb tense in a minute, but first, let’s review when each tense should be used in general throughout the paper.

PRESENT TENSE VERBS

The present tense is used to talk about general facts, discuss current meanings and implications, and suggest future applications .

General facts are constant and do not change throughout time (the ultimate evolution of scientific progress notwithstanding). Always use the present when discussing general scientific facts.

Example: “Insulin and glucagon regulates blood glucose levels.” 

Implications are closely related to general facts and thus the same rule is applied.

Example: “An elevated glucose level indicates a lack of glucagon hormones in the pancreas.”

Further research is called for or stressed as important through a phrase in the present tense.

Example: “Further studies about glucagon receptors are needed.”

SIMPLE PAST TENSE VERBS

The simple past is generally used to discuss events that have been c ompleted in the past at some distinct time and/or place . It is most often applied to discrete events such as studies, experiments, or observed phenomena.

Example: “Scientists in Wales discovered a new enzyme in the liver.” Example: “Protocol X was used to analyze the data.”

PRESENT PERFECT TENSE VERBS

The present perfect tense (or simply “perfect tense”) is used in research papers to refer to  events or actions that have taken place at some unidentified time in the past or have started but are still ongoing or only recently completed . It often establishes a general background in the Introduction section , adding a backdrop on which you can explain the motivations for and purpose of your study.

Note that it is the least frequently used tense in most research papers and should not be over-employed–focus more on detailed actions by using the simple past.

Example:  “Many studies have focused on glucagon as an important regulating hormone.” Example:  “Until recently, researchers have analyzed this kind of data using Chi-Square Statistics.” Example:  “Efforts have been made to understand more about this process.”  (passive)

Appropriate Verb Tenses by Research Paper Section

It bears repeating that the “best” tense to use is the one that is recommended (or demanded) by whichever formatting manual you are using. However, there is a high degree of continuity between the common styles, and the following rules for usage in each section will likely apply to your research paper no matter where it will be published.

Abstract verb tenses

In general, use the simple past for the abstract of your manuscript; for a concise introductory sentence, use the present perfect. To establish a need for your study—–for instance, by explaining the current circumstances of the world or the specific area in which you are working—–you can also use the present tense.

Example of introductory sentence (present perfect): “Recent studies of glucagon and insulin production have led to breakthroughs in medicine.” Example of establishing background/circumstances/purpose (present): “Diabetes  accounts for a higher number of deaths in the US than previously calculated.”

For general statements and facts, the paper itself, or analysis of findings, use the present tense.

Example of a statement of fact: “In the US, diabetes is the most common endocrine disease.”

If you are stating a fact or finding from an earlier specified time or place, use the simple past:

Example: “In 2016, diabetes was the most common endocrine disease.” Have a look at our more in-depth instruction to writing an abstract for a research paper or at these do’s and don’ts of abstract writing if you need additional input.

Introduction section verb tenses

Use a mixture of present and past tense in the introduction section .

The present tense is applied when discussing something that is always true; the simple past tense is used for earlier research efforts, either your own or those reported by another group.

Example of earlier research efforts (simple past): “This same research team discovered a similar enzyme in their 2012 study.”

If the time or location of the demonstration is unknown or not important, use the present perfect.

Example: “Prior research has indicated a correlation between X and Y.”

For the concluding statements of your introduction, use the simple past or present perfect.

Example of concluding statement (simple past): “The CalTech glucagon studies were inconclusive.” Example of concluding statement (present perfect): “Prior research in this area has been inconclusive.”

Use the past perfect when you talk about something that happened or was found to be the case in the past, but which has since been revised. Example of revised information (past perfect): “The Dublonsky study had determined that X was Y, but a 2012 study found this to be incorrect.”

Literature review verb tenses

Knowing which tenses to use for a literature review (either as part of a research paper or as a stand-alone article) can be a bit tricky, as your usage depends both on which style manual you are using (APA, AMA, MLA , or others) and on how you are discussing the literature.

The simple past is usually applied when using the researcher’s name as the subject of the sentence and discussing the methods or results of that study itself

Example of describing researcher’s actions: “Pearson (1997) discovered a new enzyme using similar methods.”

Other verbs commonly found in this usage context: investigated, compared, studied, analyzed, investigated, found, confirmed, performed, etc.

When giving your opinion on another researcher’s work or bringing up the results, discussion, and conclusions they make in their work, use the present tense.

Example of discussing another’s work: “Ryuku (2005) concludes that there are no additional enzymes present in the liver, a finding this current study directly refutes.” Other verbs commonly found in this usage context: stresses, advocates, remarks, argues, claims, posits. etc.

Methods section verb tenses

The Methods section fairly clearly delineates between sections written in past and those written in present tense.

Use the simple past tense to talk about what you did. (Note that you will generally find the passive voice used when describing the actions of the researchers. This puts more focus on the actions being completed and less on the agents completing the action. Passive voice has become the general standard for research papers in recent decades, but it is okay to mix passive and active voice in order to make your paper clearer and more readable.)

Example of methods of study: “A glucose molecule was added to the mixture to see how the peptide would respond.” Example of methods of analysis: “The results were analyzed using Bayesian inference.”

Use the present tense to refer to or explain diagrams, figures, tables, and charts.

Example: “Table 5 shows the results of this first isolated test.” Example: “The results of this first isolated test are displayed in Table 5.”

Results section verb tenses

The verb tense rules for the Results section are quite similar to those applied to the Methods section.

Use the past tense to discuss actual results.

Example: “The addition of 0.02 μg of glycogen activated receptor cells.” Example: “Receptor cells were activated by the addition of 0.02 μg of glycogen.”

Use the simple present tense to explain diagrams/figures/tables. Again, sentences may use both the active and passive voice.

Discussion section verb tenses

The Discussion section consists of an analysis of the findings and a kind of translation of the meanings and implications of these findings.

Use the simple past to summarize your own findings.

Example of summarizing own findings: “The experiment yielded a number of results associated with the processing of glucose.”

Use the present tense to interpret and discuss the significance of your findings.

Example: “[This study confirms that] synthetic glucagon is two-thirds as effective at decreasing fatty acid synthesis.”

Conclusions and further work

The conclusion and call for further work to be done are either provided in the last sentence or two of your paper or in a separate (but short) section at the end of the main text (check the target journal’s author instructions to be sure you follow the journal style) and summarize or emphasize the new insights your work offers.

Use the present perfect tense to clarify that your statements still hold true at the time of reading.

Example: “Results from this study have led to a deeper understanding about how different peptides interact in this enzyme.”

Use the present tense to apply findings, state implications, and suggest further research.

Example of wider implications: “This study confirms that endogenous glucagon is even more essential in metabolism than previously thought.”

When discussing further research that is either needed or intended to be carried out, the future or present tense (or subjunctive mood) can also be used, in addition to the present tense passive voice.

Example of call for future research: “Further clinical studies are needed/will be needed/must be carried out/should be carried out to isolate the cause of this reaction.”

Follow these general rules about tenses and your paper will be clearer, more chronologically correct, and generally easier to read—meaning the important implications of your study will be more easily understood. You can always go back and edit verb tenses—the more you practice, and the more papers you read, the easier it will be to identify which tense should be used for which kind of information.

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.

In what tense (present/past) should papers be written?

That is, should it be present tense or past tense?

Should there be a difference between the abstract, main body and the conclusion?

Does the field of publication have any impact?

• publications
• writing-style

• 6 I suggest reading a copy of How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper by Robert A. Day. You could also get a copy of The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White. –  user244795 Commented Dec 3, 2012 at 17:24
• 5 Don't forget about the future tense (for discussion and open problems). :-) –  Anonymous Mathematician Commented Dec 3, 2012 at 17:55
• @user244795 +1 for Strunk and E.B. White. So much valuable information in such a small book. –  user4383 Commented Apr 19, 2013 at 4:06

2 Answers 2

The rules of thumb are:

• Established facts are reported in the present tense (“ The path of light follows Fermat's principle of least time ”). However, you should use the past tense when you refer to previous work in the field (“ Maxwell et al. demonstrated clearly in a laser cavity experiment that no mirror is perfect ”).
• The experiments, simulations or calculations you performed are narrated in the past tense (“ We dissolved the remaining solid in a 5:1 solution of acetone and benzonitrile, and heated to 200°C for three hours. ”)
• Discussion of the data presented in the paper uses the present tense (“ The results obtained, shown in Fig. 3, clearly emphasize that the cell colonies grew faster on pink toothbrushes than green ones. We attribute this to the color-sensitivity, or kawai factor. ”)
• Mathematical proofs are written using the present tense, because going through the proof occurs at the time of reading (“ From Eqn. 1, we derive the following system of inequalities ”).

Overall, the choice of tenses is actually pretty logical.

• 4 I'm not sure if I agree with the third example. If the result can be generalised, surely the results show that the cell colonies grow faster, not grew faster, on pink toothbrushes? –  gerrit Commented Oct 5, 2012 at 19:21
• 2 @gerrit I agree: here, as written , it is meant to be a specific statement about the experiment (it is “ the cell colonies grew faster”, not “cell colonies grow faster”). Both are of course possible, but have different meanings… –  F'x Commented Oct 5, 2012 at 20:23
• 14 A trickier case is describing mathematical proofs from older papers. It's "Thurston [4] claimed that 3-manifolds are ..." but "Thurston's argument [4] implies that 3-manifolds are ...". –  JeffE Commented Oct 5, 2012 at 20:42
• 2 This is a nice succinct description of tense. In the lab report guidelines I wrote for my students, I took two pages. –  Ben Norris Commented Oct 5, 2012 at 22:51
• 6 @Suresh: The subject of the first sentence is a person, who made his claim at a specific time in the past. The subject of the second sentence is an argument, which implies what it always has and always will, and oh by the way it was first articulated by Thurston. Platonism FTW! –  JeffE Commented Oct 6, 2012 at 3:15

There are two distinct general cases that bring up the question of, "Which tense should I use?", each of which follows different principles.

First, are you describing research itself and ideas from research? (This is what you are doing probably 99% of the time.) In this case, the principle that I follow is simple, regardless of whether I am describing what other people have done or describing my own work:

• Historical occurrences should be in past tense. "Historical" means anything that actually happened in the past, whether a procedure, an article publication, a statement made by anyone, or anything else that has actually happened.
• Enduring truths should be in present tense. "Enduring truth" in this context only means that the authors present such statements as ongoing facts in the past, present and future; it doesn't mean anything more than that. (In particular, even if you disagree with what some authors consider to be true, it is still an "enduring truth" in their minds, and so should be presented in present tense.)

The second case where tense is involved is trickier: are you describing your own writing process as you are writing the article? (Although you only do this 1% or less of the time, it leads to perhaps 80% of the confusion of the question as to which tense to use, so it is important to understand this.) The basic idea here is to anticipate your reader's expected or intended path of reading, which is what makes it so tricky. Here is the principle I follow here:

• When describing anything you write in the current paragraph or any paragraph below, use present tense. Future tense could also be correctly used for most things in paragraphs below, but not always. In particular, when referring to elements outside the main body of the text (such as appendices, references, footnotes, acknowledgements, etc.), you should always use present tense, since the reader should refer to such ancilliary sections simultaneously with reading the text. I find this a bit confusing, so it is simpler for me to only use present tense and never use future tense, which is perfectly acceptable.
• When describing any thing you write in preceding paragraphs, use past tense. The only exception is that when writing in appendices, you should refer to the main body of the text in present tense. (Technically, you should probably also use present tense if referring to the main body in other ancillary sections [references, footnotes, acknowledgements, etc.], but I never need to refer to the main body of the text in such sections.)

I now follow with several annotated examples to illustrate these points. Some of them are straightforward applications of the principles I have summarized above, though some could be argued as either present or past tense.

Literature review AuthorA and AuthorB (Year) studied an interesting topic. They applied a cool methodology and found that certain surprising outcomes are what actually happen.

• "AuthorA and AuthorB (Year) studied an interesting topic": The study occurred in the past, and so is in past tense.
• "They applied a cool methodology": The authors actually did some analysis in the past, and so it is in past tense.
• "and found that": The authors arrived at their results at a certain point in time in the past, when they made their conclusions; this is thus in past tense.
• "certain surprising outcomes are what actually happen": The authors concluded that their findings not only applied to their study, but indicate some general truths that would continue to apply in the future. Thus, as a description of ongoing reality, it is in present tense.

Methodology Section of My Own Article We gathered and analyzed certain pertinent data in various stages. First, we conducted an extensive survey. The respondents of the survey reported that they only partially agreed with most of the statements in the survey instrument. Second, we interviewed other relevant respondents. The interviewees enlightened us as to some of the responses on the prior survey. Third, we collected biometric data from the brain electrodes attached to the interviewees during the interviews, which was generally consistent with what they were actually saying (except for some notable discrepancies, which we discuss in more detail below). Finally, we applied some cutting-edge combined quantitative-qualitative analyses to bring everything together and make sense of it all.

• "We gathered and analyzed ", "we conducted ", "we interviewed ", "we collected ", "we applied ": Statements of research methods or procedures that we actually did are past events; hence, they are in past tense.
• "The respondents of the survey reported ", "The interviewees enlightened us", "biometric data ... was generally consistent with": Responses and results (whether by people, animals, plants, or inanimate objects) are reports of historical facts: they actually happened in the past. Thus, they should be in past tense.
• "The respondents of the survey ... only partially agreed with most of the statements in the survey instrument", "what they were actually saying ": These are tricky. But even when you are reporting what people said to be enduringly true about themselves, their saying such things is a past historical statement. That is, if you were to ask them again today, they might have changed their minds. You can only report what they said as a statement made in the past. This is probably the trickiest point, and might be argued to rather be in present tense, though I personally don't think so.
• "notable discrepancies, which we discuss in more detail below": Here you are describing what you have written in the present article, that is, part of your own writing process. This should be in present tense.

Discussion Section of My Own Article The respondents of our surveys and interviews gave us valuable responses that generally confirmed our hypotheses. We conclude from our analyses that the kind of people in our study generally act in the way that our hypotheses claim . However, the brain electrode readings give us a more nuanced understanding of our findings. They indicate that people act in that way only in certain circumstances. The appendix of this article provides more details on all this.

Here it gets quite tricky, with cases that might be argued either way. Comments:

• "respondents of our surveys and interviews gave us valuable responses": The respondents responded in the past.
• "generally confirmed our hypotheses": we conducted the tests of our hypotheses in the past. However, it could be argued to be "generally confirm our hypotheses", since the hypotheses remain confirmed eventoday and in the future by those historical tests.
• "We conclude from our analyses": Not only in the past, but now and in the future, each time we reassess our analyses, we continue to arrive at the same conclusions.
• "our hypotheses claim ": Our hypotheses have not changed; they continue to make the same claims.
• "people in our study generally act in the way", "people act in that way": We extrapolate our findings not only to the people who responded in our study, but as a general finding concerning how that type of person continues to act.
• "the brain electrode readings give us a more nuanced understanding of our findings", "They indicate that": We are referring here not to the past fact of taking the readings, but to the ongoing fact of our interpretation of those readings.
• "The appendix of this article provides more details": This refers to a supplementary section of my own writing.

Appendix of My Own Article In this appendix we provide more details about the analyses from the study. We conducted even fancier and more experimental analyses to better understand the results. Our supplementary analyses revealed some cases where the general trend did not apply. We explain our interpretation of these supplementary findings in the Discussion section of the article.

• "In this appendix we provide more details": This is the writing process of the current section of the article.
• "We conducted even fancier and more experimental analyses", "Our supplementary analyses revealed some cases": These are procedures conducted in the past.
• "the general trend did not apply: This is a past finding from a past analyses. It might be argued to be an interpretation, in which case it should be in present tense.
• "We explain our interpretation of these supplementary findings in the Discussion section": This reference to the main body of the article should always be in present tense, since it is written in an appendix.

• 1 What if in the Methods section I want to describe a procedure to calculate something, (maybe depicted in a diagram)?. Should I use past tenses because I did it or present tenses because it's something that I did but the procedure always true? For example We calculate the exposure time by taking ... and then we divide.... –  skan Commented Dec 12, 2018 at 20:40
• @skan, this would be past tense according to the principles I proposed. You said, "the procedure [is] always true", but that is not the case. In fact, if you were to repeat the study, you would not do exactly the same procedure because the data might change, the subjects might change, and you might use better procedures as you gain more experience. So, whenever you are documenting procedures, you are recording historical information of how you actually did things that one time. That should be reported in past tense. –  Tripartio Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 8:49
• @skan, you need to provide an actual concrete example otherwise I cannot tell for sure. –  Tripartio Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 11:36
• Imagine the procedure explains how to compute the minimum value of some example data and the user can also follow the procedure on a diagram. The minimum is always calculated in the same way. Would it be wrong to use the present time? I'll try to elaborate an example. –  skan Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 11:40
• 1 @skan, in your example, you are not describing the procedure you followed. You are explaining how to carry out the procedure, which is not the same thing. That should be in present tense. –  Tripartio Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 11:54

You must log in to answer this question.

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

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

Hot Network Questions

• How are "pursed" and "rounded" synonymous?
• Is it legal to discriminate on marital status for car insurance/pensions etc.?
• How to join two PCBs with a very small separation?
• GND plane between tracks or tracks closer enough to remove the GND tracks
• Would a spaceport on Ceres make sense?
• Should mail addresses for logins be stored hashed to minimize impact of data loss?
• Why can't I conserve mass instead of moles and apply ratio in this problem?
• Is Légal’s reported “psychological trick” considered fair play or unacceptable conduct under FIDE rules?
• Could space habitats have large transparent roofs?
• Co-authors with little contribution
• Brakes not going back on their own
• How to check if part of a symlink goes outside a directory in posix shell
• What is this weapon used in The Peacemaker?
• What exactly is beef bone extract, beef extract, beef fat (all powdered form) and where can I find it?
• Entering the US with a hotel reservation booked under my brother's name
• Why is the "where are all the Xs?" argument considered strong when X = "time travelers" but weak when X = "aliens"?
• Have there been any scholarly attempts and/or consensus as regards the missing lines of "The Ruin"?
• Can a planet have a warm, tropical climate both at the poles and at the equator?
• Trying to determine what this item is
• What stops a plane from rolling when the ailerons are returned to their neutral position?
• What kind of sequence is between an arithmetic and geometric sequence?
• Sets of algebraic integers whose differences are units
• Do countries at war always treat each other's diplomats as personae non gratae?
• Why is polling data for Northern Ireland so differently displayed on national polling sites?

• 56.2k views
• Title, Abstract & keywords

Q: Which tense should be used in the abstract of a paper?

Asked by Scherezade Mansukhani on 12 Jun, 2019

While writing your abstract, you can use several tenses depending on the subject of your sentence. You can keep in mind the general rules regarding tense usage while you write your Abstract:

• Use present tense while stating general facts
• Use past tense when writing about prior research
• Use past tense when stating results or observations
• Use present tense when stating the conclusion or interpretations
• Use present tense when referring to your study/paper

You can refer these articles to better understand how you should use tense in scientific writing:

• INFOGRAPHIC: The secret to using tenses in scientific writing
• Using past and present tenses in research writing
• Getting the tenses right: Materials and methods section
• Is it acceptable to use first person pronouns in scientific writing?

Answered by Editage Insights on 18 Jun, 2019

• Upvote this Answer

This content belongs to the Manuscript Writing Stage

Translate your research into a publication-worthy manuscript by understanding the nuances of academic writing. Subscribe and get curated reads that will help you write an excellent manuscript.

Confirm that you would also like to sign up for free personalized email coaching for this stage.

Trending Searches

• Statement of the problem
• Background of study
• Scope of the study
• Types of qualitative research
• Rationale of the study
• Concept paper
• Literature review
• Introduction in research
• Under "Editor Evaluation"
• Ethics in research

Recent Searches

• Review paper
• Responding to reviewer comments
• Predatory publishers
• Scope and delimitations
• Open access
• Plagiarism in research
• Journal selection tips
• Editor assigned
• Types of articles
• "Reject and Resubmit" status
• Decision in process
• Conflict of interest

Present and Past Tenses Used in Research Papers

• First Online: 30 June 2022

Cite this chapter

• Adrian Wallwork 3  

Part of the book series: English for Academic Research ((EAR))

1329 Accesses

Below are some guidelines on the use of the three most common tenses in research papers: present simple , present perfect , past simple . These guidelines are NOT grammatical rules. The guidelines can be broken. They vary depending on the author, the discipline, and the journal.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

English for Academics, Pisa, Italy

Adrian Wallwork

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Wallwork, A. (2022). Present and Past Tenses Used in Research Papers. In: Essential English Grammar and Communication Strategies. English for Academic Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95612-7_11

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95612-7_11

Published : 30 June 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-95611-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-95612-7

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Tenses in writing

Verb tenses.

The present tense is used to express anything that is happening now or occurring in the present moment. The present also communicates actions that are ongoing, constant, or habitual. For example:

Use the past tense to indicate past events, prior conditions, or completed processes. For example:

The future tense indicates actions or events that will happen in the future. For example:

Aspect allows you to be more precise in your selection of verbs. Aspect falls into two categories: continuous and perfect. To indicate the continuous aspect, add a form of the verb "to be" and a present participle to your main verb. The perfect aspect is created with a form of the verb "to have" and a past participle. The following chart shows twelve forms of the verb "to write" that result from combining time with aspect.

( aspect summary )

A participle is a verb form that can be used as an adjective.

Aspect in Detail

The continuous aspect is created with a form of "to be" and a present participle ( about participles ). For example:

The perfect aspect is created with a form of the verb "to have" and a past participle. For example:

The perfect aspect is often the most challenging to understand, so here's a brief overview.

Past Perfect describes a past action completed before another. For example, the next two sentences describe one action followed by another, but each achieves a different rhetorical effect by using different verb forms.

"Wrote" and "reread" sound equally important in the first sentence. In the second, the past perfect form "had written" emphasizes the action "reread."

Present Perfect refers to completed actions which endure to the present or whose effects are still relevant.

Future Perfect refers to an action that will be completed in the future.

One final note: the terms used to describe aspect have changed over time, and different terms are often used to describe the same aspect. It may help to know that the following terms are equivalent:

• "simple present" (or) "present indefinite"
• "past continuous" (or) "past progressive" (or) "past imperfect"
• "past complete" (or) "past perfect"
• "past perfect continuous" (or) "past perfect progressive"

Verb Tenses in Context

Conventions governing the use of tenses in academic writing differ somewhat from ordinary usage. Below we cover the guidelines for verb tenses in a variety of genres.

Academic Writing

• Books, Plays, Poems, Movies, etc.

Historical Contrast

Research proposals, resumes and cover letters, stories/narrative prose.

1. Academic writing generally concerns writing about research. As such, your tense choices can indicate to readers the status of the research you're citing. You have several options for communicating research findings, and each has a different rhetorical effect. For example:

• 1.3 According to McMillan (1996), the most common cause of death was car accidents.

If you choose the present tense, as in Example 1.1, you're implying that the findings of the research are generally accepted, whereas the present perfect tense in 1.2 implies not only general acceptance but also current relevance and, possibly, the continuity of the findings as an authoritative statement on the causes of death. On the other hand, the past tense in Example 1.3 emphasizes the finding at the time the research was conducted, rather than its current acceptance.

However, if you are writing about specific research methods, the process of research and data collection, or what happened during the research process, you will more commonly use the past tense, as you would normally use in conversation. The reason is that, in this instance, you are not emphasizing the findings of the research or its significance, but talking about events that occurred in the past. Here is an example:

• 1.4 During the data collection process, Quirk conducted 27 interviews with students in his class. Prior to the interviews, the students responded to a brief questionnaire.

Books, Poems, Plays, Movies

2. When you are discussing a book, poem, movie, play, or song the convention in disciplines within the humanities is to use the present tense, as in:

• 2.1 In An Introduction to English Grammar (2006), Noam Chomsky discusses several types of syntactic structures.
• 2.2 In Paradise Lost , Milton sets up Satan as a hero who changes the course of history.

3. In cases where it is useful to contrast different ideas that originate from different periods , you can use the past and the present or present perfect tense to do so. The past tense implies that an idea or a theory has lost its currency or validity, while the present tense conveys relevance or the current state of acceptance.

For example, when you want to discuss the fact that a theory or interpretation has been supplanted by new perspectives on the subject:

• 3.1 Stanley Fish (1993) maintained a reader-response stance in his analysis of Milton's L'Allegro and Il Penseroso . However, recent literary critics consider/have considered this stance to be inappropriate for the two poems.

The verb tenses used above emphasize the contrast between the old view (by Stanley Fish), which is indicated by the past tense, and the new view (by "recent literary critics"), which is indicated by the present tense or the present perfect tense. The difference between the present tense and the present perfect (i.e. between consider and have considered ) is that the present perfect suggests that the current view has been held for some time.

4. The future tense is standard in research proposals because they largely focus on plans for the future. However, when writing your research paper, use the past tense to discuss the data collection processes, since the development of ideas or experiments— the process of researching that brings the reader to your ultimate findings—occurred in the past.

5. In a resume, the past tense is used for reporting past experience and responsibilities. However, in a statement of purpose, a personal statement, or a cover letter, the present perfect tense is commonly used to relate past experience to present abilities, e.g., "I have managed fourteen employees."

6. The past tense is commonly used when writing a narrative or a story , as in:

• 6.1 Once upon a time, there was a peaceful kingdom in the heart of a jungle . . .

Some writers use the present tense in telling stories, a technique called the "historical present" that creates an air of vividness and immediacy. For example:

• 6.2 Yesterday when I was walking around downtown, the craziest thing happened. This guy in a suit comes up to me, and says , "If you know what's good for you . . . "

In this example, the speaker switches from the past tense in giving context for the story to the present tense in relating the events themselves.

Back to Grammar in College Writing

One Cohort at a Time: A New Perspective on the Declining Gender Pay Gap

This paper studies the interaction between the decrease in the gender pay gap and the stagnation in the careers of younger workers, analyzing data from the United States, Italy, Canada, and the United Kingdom. We propose a model of the labor market in which a larger supply of older workers can crowd out younger workers from top-paying positions. These negative career spillovers disproportionately affect the career trajectories of younger men because they are more likely than younger women to hold higher-paying jobs at baseline. The data strongly support this cohort-driven interpretation of the shrinking gender pay gap. The whole decline in the gap originates from (i) newer worker cohorts who enter the labor market with smaller-than-average gender pay gaps and (ii) older worker cohorts who exit with higher-than-average gender pay gaps. As predicted by the model, the gender pay convergence at labor-market entry stems from younger men's larger positional losses in the wage distribution. Younger men experience the largest positional losses within higher-paying firms, in which they become less represented over time at a faster rate than younger women. Finally, we document that labor-market exit is the sole contributor to the decline in the gender pay gap after the mid-1990s, which implies no full gender pay convergence for the foreseeable future. Consistent with our framework, we find evidence that most of the remaining gender pay gap at entry depends on predetermined educational choices.

We thank Patricia Cortés, Gordon Dahl, Fabian Lange, Claudia Olivetti, Michael Powell, Uta Schönberg, as well as participants at various seminars and conferences for helpful comments. We thank Sergey Abramenko, Thomas Barden, Carolina Bussotti, Sean Chen, and Chengmou Lei for outstanding research assistance. The realization of this article was possible thanks to the sponsorship of the “VisitINPS Scholars” program. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors only and should not be attributed to the Bank of Italy, the Eurosystem, or the National Bureau of Economic Research.

MARC RIS BibTeΧ

Download Citation Data

Working Groups

More from nber.

In addition to working papers , the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter , the NBER Digest , the Bulletin on Retirement and Disability , the Bulletin on Health , and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship  — as well as online conference reports , video lectures , and interviews .

• Share full article

A 2022 Supreme Court opinion.

Supported by

The Gun Lobby’s Hidden Hand in the 2nd Amendment Battle

In the battle to dismantle gun restrictions, raging in America’s courts even as mass shootings become commonplace, one name keeps turning up in the legal briefs and judges’ rulings: William English, Ph.D.

A little-known political economist at Georgetown University, Dr. English conducted a largest-of-its-kind national survey that found gun owners frequently used their weapons for self-defense. That finding has been deployed by gun rights activists to notch legal victories with far-reaching consequences.

He has been cited in a landmark Supreme Court case that invalidated many restrictions on guns, and in scores of lawsuits around the country to overturn limits on assault weapons, high-capacity magazines and the carrying of firearms. His findings were also offered in another Supreme Court case this term, with a decision expected this month.

Dr. English seems at first glance to be an impartial researcher interested in data-driven insights. He has said his “scholarly arc” focuses on good public policy, and his lack of apparent ties to the gun lobby has lent credibility to his work.

But Dr. English’s interest in firearms is more than academic: He has received tens of thousands of dollars as a paid expert for gun rights advocates, and his survey work, which he says was part of a book project, originated as research for a National Rifle Association-backed lawsuit, The New York Times has found.

He has also increasingly drawn scrutiny in some courts over the reliability and integrity of his unpublished survey, which is the core of his research, and his refusal to disclose who paid for it. Other researchers say that the wording of some questions could elicit answers overstating defensive gun use, and that he cherry-picked pro-gun responses.

The Bruen decision in 2022 upended Second Amendment law by sweeping away any modern-day gun restrictions that could not be tied to a historical antecedent. The ruling led to a surge in firearms cases — to an annual average of 680 today compared with 122 in the decade before. Pro-gun rulings have also risen: The 74 issued last year make up a quarter of all such rulings since 2000, according to researchers at the University of Southern California. Courts have struck down restrictions on high-capacity magazines in Oregon, handgun purchases in Maryland and assault weapons in California.

Dr. English’s brief in the Bruen case.

Here’s an example of that missing context.

The paper quotes a survey question, omitting the setup to it, which is highlighted below in blue.

Many policymakers recognize that a large number of people participate in shooting sports but question how often guns are used for self-defense. Have you ever defended yourself or your property with a firearm, even if it was not fired or displayed? Please do not include military service, police work, or work as a security guard.

Other questions followed the same pattern of omission. This one, about AR-15-style rifles, included text before and after the question in the version respondents saw, but not in the paper.

Some have argued that few gun owners actually want or use guns that are commonly classified as ‘assault weapons.’ Have you ever owned an AR-15 or similarly styled rifle? You can include any rifles of this style that have been modified or moved to be compliant with local law. Answering this will help us establish how popular these types of firearms are.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Advertisement

Suggestions or feedback?

MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

• Machine learning
• Social justice
• Black holes
• Classes and programs

Departments

• Aeronautics and Astronautics
• Brain and Cognitive Sciences
• Architecture
• Political Science
• Mechanical Engineering

Centers, Labs, & Programs

• Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL)
• Picower Institute for Learning and Memory
• Lincoln Laboratory
• School of Architecture + Planning
• School of Engineering
• School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences
• Sloan School of Management
• School of Science
• MIT Schwarzman College of Computing

CHARMed collaboration creates a potent therapy candidate for fatal prion diseases

Press contact :.

Previous image Next image

Drug development is typically slow: The pipeline from basic research discoveries that provide the basis for a new drug to clinical trials and then production of a widely available medicine can take decades. But decades can feel impossibly far off to someone who currently has a fatal disease. Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard Senior Group Leader Sonia Vallabh is acutely aware of that race against time, because the topic of her research is a neurodegenerative and ultimately fatal disease — fatal familial insomnia, a type of prion disease — that she will almost certainly develop as she ages. 

Vallabh and her husband, Eric Minikel, switched careers and became researchers after they learned that Vallabh carries a disease-causing version of the prion protein gene and that there is no effective therapy for fatal prion diseases. The two now run a lab at the Broad Institute, where they are working to develop drugs that can prevent and treat these diseases, and their deadline for success is not based on grant cycles or academic expectations but on the ticking time bomb in Vallabh’s genetic code.

That is why Vallabh was excited to discover, when she entered into a collaboration with Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research member Jonathan Weissman, that Weissman’s group likes to work at full throttle. In less than two years, Weissman, Vallabh, and their collaborators have developed a set of molecular tools called CHARMs that can turn off disease-causing genes such as the prion protein gene — as well as, potentially, genes coding for many other proteins implicated in neurodegenerative and other diseases — and they are refining those tools to be good candidates for use in human patients. Although the tools still have many hurdles to pass before the researchers will know if they work as therapeutics, the team is encouraged by the speed with which they have developed the technology thus far.

“The spirit of the collaboration since the beginning has been that there was no waiting on formality,” Vallabh says. “As soon as we realized our mutual excitement to do this, everything was off to the races.”

Co-corresponding authors Weissman and Vallabh and co-first authors Edwin Neumann, a graduate student in Weissman’s lab, and Tessa Bertozzi, a postdoc in Weissman’s lab, describe CHARM — which stands for Coupled Histone tail for Autoinhibition Release of Methyltransferase — in a paper published today in the journal Science .

“With the Whitehead and Broad Institutes right next door to each other, I don’t think there’s any better place than this for a group of motivated people to move quickly and flexibly in the pursuit of academic science and medical technology,” says Weissman, who is also a professor of biology at MIT and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator. “CHARMs are an elegant solution to the problem of silencing disease genes, and they have the potential to have an important position in the future of genetic medicines.”

To treat a genetic disease, target the gene

Prion disease, which leads to swift neurodegeneration and death, is caused by the presence of misshapen versions of the prion protein. These cause a cascade effect in the brain: the faulty prion proteins deform other proteins, and together these proteins not only stop functioning properly but also form toxic aggregates that kill neurons. The most famous type of prion disease, known colloquially as mad cow disease, is infectious, but other forms of prion disease can occur spontaneously or be caused by faulty prion protein genes.

Most conventional drugs work by targeting a protein. CHARMs, however, work further upstream, turning off the gene that codes for the faulty protein so that the protein never gets made in the first place. CHARMs do this by epigenetic editing, in which a chemical tag gets added to DNA in order to turn off or silence a target gene. Unlike gene editing, epigenetic editing does not modify the underlying DNA — the gene itself remains intact. However, like gene editing, epigenetic editing is stable, meaning that a gene switched off by CHARM should remain off. This would mean patients would only have to take CHARM once, as opposed to protein-targeting medications that must be taken regularly as the cells’ protein levels replenish.

Research in animals suggests that the prion protein isn’t necessary in a healthy adult, and that in cases of disease, removing the protein improves or even eliminates disease symptoms. In a person who hasn’t yet developed symptoms, removing the protein should prevent disease altogether. In other words, epigenetic editing could be an effective approach for treating genetic diseases such as inherited prion diseases. The challenge is creating a new type of therapy.

Fortunately, the team had a good template for CHARM: a research tool called CRISPRoff that Weissman’s group previously developed for silencing genes. CRISPRoff uses building blocks from CRISPR gene editing technology, including the guide protein Cas9 that directs the tool to the target gene. CRISPRoff silences the targeted gene by adding methyl groups, chemical tags that prevent the gene from being transcribed, or read into RNA, and so from being expressed as protein. When the researchers tested CRISPRoff’s ability to silence the prion protein gene, they found that it was effective and stable.

Several of its properties, though, prevented CRISPRoff from being a good candidate for a therapy. The researchers’ goal was to create a tool based on CRISPRoff that was just as potent but also safe for use in humans, small enough to deliver to the brain, and designed to minimize the risk of silencing the wrong genes or causing side effects.

From research tool to drug candidate

Led by Neumann and Bertozzi, the researchers began engineering and applying their new epigenome editor. The first problem that they had to tackle was size, because the editor needs to be small enough to be packaged and delivered to specific cells in the body. Delivering genes into the human brain is challenging; many clinical trials have used adeno-associated viruses (AAVs) as gene-delivery vehicles, but these are small and can only contain a small amount of genetic code. CRISPRoff is way too big; the code for Cas9 alone takes up most of the available space.

The Weissman lab researchers decided to replace Cas9 with a much smaller zinc finger protein (ZFP). Like Cas9, ZFPs can serve as guide proteins to direct the tool to a target site in DNA. ZFPs are also common in human cells, meaning they are less likely to trigger an immune response against themselves than the bacterial Cas9.

Next, the researchers had to design the part of the tool that would silence the prion protein gene. At first, they used part of a methyltransferase, a molecule that adds methyl groups to DNA, called DNMT3A. However, in the particular configuration needed for the tool, the molecule was toxic to the cell. The researchers focused on a different solution: Instead of delivering outside DNMT3A as part of the therapy, the tool is able to recruit the cell’s own DNMT3A to the prion protein gene. This freed up precious space inside of the AAV vector and prevented toxicity.

The researchers also needed to activate DNMT3A. In the cell, DNMT3A is usually inactive until it interacts with certain partner molecules. This default inactivity prevents accidental methylation of genes that need to remain turned on. Neumann came up with an ingenious way around this by combining sections of DNMT3A’s partner molecules and connecting these to ZFPs that bring them to the prion protein gene. When the cell’s DNMT3A comes across this combination of parts, it activates, silencing the gene.

“From the perspectives of both toxicity and size, it made sense to recruit the machinery that the cell already has; it was a much simpler, more elegant solution,” Neumann says. “Cells are already using methyltransferases all of the time, and we’re essentially just tricking them into turning off a gene that they would normally leave turned on.”

Testing in mice showed that ZFP-guided CHARMs could eliminate more than 80 percent of the prion protein in the brain, while previous research has shown that as little as 21 percent elimination can improve symptoms.

Once the researchers knew that they had a potent gene silencer, they turned to the problem of off-target effects. The genetic code for a CHARM that gets delivered to a cell will keep producing copies of the CHARM indefinitely. However, after the prion protein gene is switched off, there is no benefit to this, only more time for side effects to develop, so they tweaked the tool so that after it turns off the prion protein gene, it then turns itself off.

Meanwhile, a complementary project from Broad Institute scientist and collaborator Benjamin Deverman’s lab, focused on brain-wide gene delivery and published in Science on May 17, has brought the CHARM technology one step closer to being ready for clinical trials. Although naturally occurring types of AAV have been used for gene therapy in humans before, they do not enter the adult brain efficiently, making it impossible to treat a whole-brain disease like prion disease. Tackling the delivery problem, Deverman’s group has designed an AAV vector that can get into the brain more efficiently by leveraging a pathway that naturally shuttles iron into the brain. Engineered vectors like this one make a therapy like CHARM one step closer to reality.

Thanks to these creative solutions, the researchers now have a highly effective epigenetic editor that is small enough to deliver to the brain, and that appears in cell culture and animal testing to have low toxicity and limited off-target effects.

“It’s been a privilege to be part of this; it’s pretty rare to go from basic research to therapeutic application in such a short amount of time,” Bertozzi says. “I think the key was forming a collaboration that took advantage of the Weissman lab’s tool-building experience, the Vallabh and Minikel lab’s deep knowledge of the disease, and the Deverman lab’s expertise in gene delivery.”

Looking ahead

With the major elements of the CHARM technology solved, the team is now fine-tuning their tool to make it more effective, safer, and easier to produce at scale, as will be necessary for clinical trials. They have already made the tool modular, so that its various pieces can be swapped out and future CHARMs won’t have to be programmed from scratch. CHARMs are also currently being tested as therapeutics in mice. 

The path from basic research to clinical trials is a long and winding one, and the researchers know that CHARMs still have a way to go before they might become a viable medical option for people with prion diseases, including Vallabh, or other diseases with similar genetic components. However, with a strong therapy design and promising laboratory results in hand, the researchers have good reason to be hopeful. They continue to work at full throttle, intent on developing their technology so that it can save patients’ lives not someday, but as soon as possible.

Share this news article on:

Related links.

• Sonia Vallabh
• Jonathan Weissman
• Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research
• The Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard
• Department of Biology

Related Topics

• Broad Institute
• Whitehead Institute
• Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI)
• Health sciences and technology
• Drug development

Related Articles

An on-off switch for gene editing

Epigenomic map reveals circuitry of 30,000 human disease regions

Eleven from MIT named to the 2016 TR35

Previous item Next item

More MIT News

Study reveals why AI models that analyze medical images can be biased

Read full story →

Leaning into the immune system’s complexity

Scientists use computational modeling to guide a difficult chemical synthesis

Two MIT films nominated for New England Emmy Awards

Fotini Christia named director of the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society

Wireless receiver blocks interference for better mobile device performance

• More news on MIT News homepage →

Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, USA

• Map (opens in new window)
• Events (opens in new window)
• People (opens in new window)
• Careers (opens in new window)
• Accessibility
• Social Media Hub
• MIT on Facebook
• MIT on YouTube
• MIT on Instagram

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

University of Reading Cookie Policy

We use cookies on reading.ac.uk to improve your experience. Find out more about our cookie policy . By continuing to use our site you accept these terms, and are happy for us to use cookies to improve your browsing experience.

Continue using the University of Reading website

AI generated exam answers undetected in real world test

27 June 2024

Experienced exam markers may struggle to spot answers generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI), researchers have found.

The study was conducted at the University of Reading, UK, where university leaders are working to identify potential risks and opportunities of AI for research, teaching, learning, and assessment, with updated advice already issued to staff and students as a result of their findings.

The researchers are calling for the global education sector to follow the example of Reading, and others who are also forming new policies and guidance and do more to address this emerging issue.

In a rigorous blind test of a real-life university examinations system, published today (26 June) in PLOS ONE , ChatGPT generated exam answers, submitted for several undergraduate psychology modules, went undetected in 94% of cases and, on average, attained higher grades than real student submissions.  

This was the largest and most robust blind study of its kind, to date, to challenge human educators to detect AI-generated content.

Associate Professor Peter Scarfe and Professor Etienne Roesch, who led the study at Reading's School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences, said their findings should provide a “wakeup call” for educators across the world. A recent UNESCO survey of 450 schools and universities found that less than 10% had policies or guidance on the use of generative AI.

Dr Scarfe said: “Many institutions have moved away from traditional exams to make assessment more inclusive. Our research shows it is of international importance to understand how AI will affect the integrity of educational assessments.

“We won’t necessarily go back fully to hand-written exams, but global education sector will need to evolve in the face of AI.

“It is testament to the candid academic rigour and commitment to research integrity at Reading that we have turned the microscope on ourselves to lead in this.”

Professor Roesch said: “As a sector, we need to agree how we expect students to use and acknowledge the role of AI in their work. The same is true of the wider use of AI in other areas of life to prevent a crisis of trust across society.

“Our study highlights the responsibility we have as producers and consumers of information. We need to double down on our commitment to academic and research integrity.”

Professor Elizabeth McCrum, Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Education and Student Experience at the University of Reading, said: “It is clear that AI will have a transformative effect in many aspects of our lives, including how we teach students and assess their learning.

“At Reading, we have undertaken a huge programme of work to consider all aspects of our teaching, including making greater use of technology to enhance student experience and boost graduate employability skills.

“Solutions include moving away from outmoded ideas of assessment and towards those that are more aligned with the skills that students will need in the workplace, including making use of AI. Sharing alternative approaches that enable students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills, with colleagues across disciplines, is vitally important.

“I am confident that through Reading’s already established detailed review of all our courses, we are in a strong position to help our current and future students to learn about, and benefit from, the rapid developments in AI.”

IMAGE: Created using AI text to image tool, DALL-E .

Subjects A-B

• Agriculture
• Ancient History
• Anthropology
• Archaeology
• Architecture
• Biochemistry
• Biological Sciences
• Biomedical Engineering
• Biomedical Sciences
• Bioveterinary Sciences
• Building and Surveying
• Business and Management

Subjects C-E

• Classics and Classical Studies
• Climate Science
• Computer Science
• Construction Management
• Consumer Behaviour and Marketing
• Creative Writing
• Criminology
• Engineering
• English Language and Applied Linguistics
• English Literature
• Environment

Subjects F-G

• Film & Television
• Foundation programmes
• Graphic Communication and Design

Subjects H-M

• International Development
• International Foundation Programme (IFP)
• International Relations
• Languages and Cultures
• Linguistics
• Mathematics
• Medical Sciences
• Meteorology and Climate
• Microbiology
• Museum Studies

Subjects N-T

• Pharmacology
• Physician Associate Studies
• Politics and International Relations
• Real Estate and Planning
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Surveying and Construction
• Theatre & Performance

Subjects U-Z

• Wildlife Conservation

Subjects A-C

• Business (Post-Experience)
• Business and Management (Pre-Experience)
• Classics and Ancient History
• Construction Management and Engineering
• Consumer Behaviour
• Creative Enterprise

Subjects D-G

• Data Science
• Energy and Environmental Engineering
• Environmental Sciences
• Film, Theatre and Television
• Food and Nutritional Sciences
• Geography and Environmental Science
• Graphic Design

Subjects H-P

• Information Management and Digital Business
• Information Technology
• International Development and Applied Economics
• Physician Associate
• Project Management
• Public Policy

Subjects Q-Z

• Social Policy
• Strategic Studies
• Teacher training
• Typography and Graphic Communication
• War and Peace Studies
• Architectural Engineering

We are in the process of finalising our postgraduate taught courses for 2025/26 entry. In the meantime, you can view our 2024/25 courses.

Now Receiving Submissions for CBTS General Research Request for Proposals!

Proposal deadline is Friday, July 26, 2024 at 10 PM CST.

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content

Cross-Border Threat Screening and Supply Chain Defense

A Department of Homeland Security Center of Excellence

Call for White Papers and Workshop Participation: Supply Chain Resilience Research Needs for Homeland Security 

The Center for Accelerating Operational Efficiency (CAOE) at Arizona State University, a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Center of Excellence, will host a Workshop entitled SCRIPS: Supply Chain Resilience Issues, Problems and Solutions for the Homeland Security Enterprise in Washington D.C. October 1-2, 2024. SCRIPS will bring together leaders from academia, government and industry to identify research needs to ensure the resiliency of critical supply chains. In particular, the workshop will focus on three areas: Ag/Food industry ; Semiconductor Manufacturing ; and Maritime/Port Operations . In preparation for that event, CAOE is soliciting the research community for white papers covering innovative supply chain resilience research ideas and solution methods as they relate to Homeland Security.   

Individuals and research groups with relevant interest and expertise are invited to provide white papers as described below. A limited number of respondents will be invited to attend the workshop to further develop prioritized research problem statements and solution approaches. The workshop’s results are anticipated to be used in the development of a Request For Research Proposals (RFP) to be distributed in Spring 2025. Travel expenses will be provided for a limited number of invited participants from accredited academic institutions in the United States.  

Submissions will be evaluated based on demonstrated expertise, importance of the problem addressed and the scientific merit and applicability of the solution methodology proposed. Research agendas should have a maximum three-year horizon. Selected contributors will be invited to participate in the October 1-2 workshop.  

White Paper Requirements and Acknowledgements: 

• White Papers are limited to at most two (2) pages in at least 11 pt font; 
• White Paper format should follow the Research Needs/Models/Tools/Solution Template; 
• White Papers must be submitted by 11:59pm EDT July 12, 2024 here .
• Submissions must be available for distribution to workshop attendees, publication on workshop website, use in final workshop report and summarization in subsequent RFP. Submission implies such consent. 
• Workshop attendance will be by invitation only. Invited participants will be notified by July 31, 2024.