Internal logic of the Introduction
→ See also: IMRaD sections
A good introduction support a claim: this research matters. This claim is supported by two sub-claims:
- This research addresses an important problem (significance)
- There is lack in our current state of knowledge to address said problem (knowledge gap)
Claim is just a fancy way of stating: I'm saying this is true.
It’s also just a different word for conclusion.
Each of these subclaims must be supported by facts (or by reasoning)— in other words, the literature. For example:
Claim: But we don’t know Y (knowledge + gap)
- Supporting statement: Here’s what we know (e.g., “Smith (2020) showed that protein A increases”)
- Supporting statement: But here’s what’s missing (e.g., “However, Jones (2021) found conflicting results, and no study has tested this in vivo”)
Check your field
What the Introduction actually looks like in a published paper can vary widely. To understand better what I mean with the logic explained here, look at papers in your field and identify how authors support their claims for significance and knowledge gaps.