Editors decide whether to send a paper to review on the first page of the introduction. Reviewers decide whether they trust the author on the same page. Yet the introduction is the section most authors write first, when they know least about what the paper will show, and revise least. This guide explains how to write an introduction and research gap for SCI and SSCI reviewers: the four moves every strong introduction makes, how the gap is stated differently in each index, and the sentence that should end every introduction.
编辑在引言的第一页决定是否送审。审稿人在同一页决定是否信任作者。然而引言却是大多数作者最先写、对论文结果了解最少、修改也最少的部分。本指南解释如何为 SCI 和 SSCI 审稿人撰写引言和研究空白：每篇强引言都会完成的四个动作，两个索引中空白的不同陈述方式，以及每篇引言都应以之结尾的那句话。
The four moves
Strong introductions in both indexes make the same four moves, usually in four to six paragraphs. The proportions differ by index, but the sequence does not.
- Establish the territory.What the field is and why the problem matters, in one paragraph, with two or three recent citations. Not a history of the discipline.
- Summarise what is known.The findings that lead directly to your question. In SCI papers this is one paragraph; in SSCI papers it may be two or three, organised by theory or debate.
- State the gap.What remains unknown, contested or untested, and why that matters. This is the pivot of the introduction and the sentence reviewers look for.
- State what this paper does and contributes.The question or hypotheses, the approach in one sentence, and an explicit contribution statement. End the introduction here.
Our post on the four-paragraph introduction structure gives a template, and how to write an introduction that hooks the editor covers the opening in depth.
四个动作
两个索引中的强引言都完成同样的四个动作，通常在四到六段内。各部分比例因索引而异，但顺序不变。
- 确立领域。领域是什么、问题为何重要，一段，附两三条近期引用。不是学科史。
- 概述已知。直接导向您研究问题的发现。SCI 论文中为一段；SSCI 论文中可能是两三段，按理论或争论组织。
- 陈述空白。什么仍然未知、有争议或未经检验，以及为什么重要。这是引言的转折点，也是审稿人寻找的那句话。
- 陈述本文做什么、贡献什么。研究问题或假设，一句话概括方法，以及明确的贡献陈述。引言到此结束。
《四段式引言结构》提供了模板，《如何写出吸引编辑的引言》深入讲解了开头。
Stating the gap: what "gap" actually means
A research gap is not "no one has studied X in country Y". Reviewers call that a geographic replication and often reject it as insufficient novelty. A gap is a specific limitation in current knowledge that has consequences: a conflict between findings, an untested assumption, a mechanism inferred but not measured, a population where the theory may not hold for a stated reason, a method that has never been applied where it would resolve a question.
| Weak gap statement | Why reviewers reject it | Stronger version |
|---|---|---|
| "Few studies have examined X in China." | Replication without a reason | "Findings on X come from individualist cultures; theory Z predicts the effect reverses in collectivist settings, which has not been tested." |
| "There is a lack of research on X and Y together." | Combination is not contribution | "Studies of X assume Y is constant; when Y varies, as it does in [context], the predicted relationship may not hold." |
| "Previous studies used small samples." | Size alone is not a gap | "Prior estimates conflict (positive in A, null in B); a sample powered to detect the smaller effect can resolve which is correct." |
| "No study has used method M for X." | Method without motivation | "Existing designs cannot separate mechanism P from Q; method M can, because..." |
The pattern in the stronger versions is the same: known finding, reason to doubt it, what resolving the doubt would change. Our post on how to identify and state your research gap works through more examples.
陈述空白："空白"到底是什么
研究空白不是"没有人在 Y 国研究过 X"。审稿人称之为地域性重复，常以新意不足为由拒稿。空白是当前知识中一个有后果的具体局限：发现之间的冲突、未经检验的假设、被推断但未被测量的机制、理论因某个明确原因可能不成立的群体、从未被用于本可解决某个问题之处的方法。
| 薄弱的空白陈述 | 审稿人为何拒绝 | 更强的版本 |
|---|---|---|
| "很少有研究在中国考察 X。" | 没有理由的重复 | "关于 X 的发现来自个人主义文化；理论 Z 预测该效应在集体主义环境中反转，这尚未被检验。" |
| "缺少同时研究 X 和 Y 的文献。" | 组合不等于贡献 | "对 X 的研究假定 Y 恒定；当 Y 变化时（如在[情境]中），预测的关系可能不成立。" |
| "以往研究样本较小。" | 样本量本身不是空白 | "先前的估计相互冲突（A 中为正，B 中为零）；一个足以检测较小效应的样本可以判定哪个正确。" |
| "没有研究将方法 M 用于 X。" | 没有动机的方法 | "现有设计无法区分机制 P 和 Q；方法 M 可以，因为……" |
更强版本的模式相同：已知发现、怀疑的理由、解决怀疑会改变什么。《如何识别并陈述研究空白》给出了更多示例。
SCI and SSCI: how the proportions change
SCI introduction
- Usually 400 to 800 words, four paragraphs
- Territory and known findings compressed
- Gap stated technically: unmeasured, unresolved, unreproduced
- Contribution is a result or a method; hypotheses often implicit
SSCI introduction
- Often 800 to 1,500 words, sometimes with a separate literature review section
- Known findings organised by theory and debate
- Gap stated theoretically: what the theory cannot yet explain
- Contribution is theoretical and practical; hypotheses or research questions explicit
In SSCI papers the theoretical framework usually follows the introduction as its own section, and the introduction previews it. In SCI papers the introduction carries all the framing there is. See how to find your theoretical framework from the literature for the SSCI case and SCI versus SSCI expectations for the wider comparison.
SCI 与 SSCI：比例如何变化
SCI 引言
- 通常 400 至 800 词，四段
- 领域和已知发现压缩
- 空白以技术方式陈述：未测量、未解决、未复现
- 贡献是一个结果或方法；假设常为隐含
SSCI 引言
- 常为 800 至 1,500 词，有时另有独立的文献综述部分
- 已知发现按理论和争论组织
- 空白以理论方式陈述：理论尚不能解释什么
- 贡献既是理论的也是实践的；假设或研究问题明确
SSCI 论文中，理论框架通常紧接引言作为独立部分，引言对其做预告。SCI 论文中，引言承载全部的框架。SSCI 的情况参见《如何从文献中找到理论框架》，更广泛的比较参见《SCI 与 SSCI 的期望差异》。
The last paragraph: the contribution statement
Every introduction should end with a paragraph a reviewer could quote in their report. It has three parts: what the study does (one sentence), how (one sentence), and what it contributes (one to three sentences, each beginning with a verb: extends, tests, resolves, provides, demonstrates). Avoid "this study aims to explore". Aims are not contributions.
"This study examines [relationship] in [context] using [design and sample]. It contributes in three ways. First, it [extends theory / provides the first measurement of...]. Second, it [tests the assumption that... / resolves the conflict between...]. Third, it [offers practical guidance for... / provides a benchmark for...]." Adjust the number of contributions to what you actually have; two real contributions beat three padded ones.
Our post on how to state your research contribution gives worked examples, and framing your contribution so reviewers cannot ignore it goes further for Q1 targets.
Common mistakes, and how reviewers describe them
Introduction faults reviewers report
- "The introduction reads as a textbook overview." Territory paragraph too long.
- "The research gap is not convincing." Gap is a replication or a combination, not a limitation with consequences.
- "The contribution is unclear." No explicit statement, or aims presented as contributions.
- "The introduction promises more than the study delivers." Written before results and never revised.
- Gap stated as a specific, consequential limitation of current knowledge
- Contribution stated in verbs, matched to what the results actually show
- Length proportionate to the index and the journal's recent articles
Write the introduction last, or at least revise it last, so that it promises exactly what the results deliver. The complete SCI and SSCI writing roadmap explains the reverse-order method. A higher education team that worked with us on framing took their concept to acceptance in Scientific Reports in under five months. Read the case study → For help positioning a paper from the start, see our Manuscript Preparation Support.
最后一段：贡献陈述
每篇引言都应以一段审稿人可以在报告中直接引用的话结尾。它有三部分：本研究做什么（一句）、怎么做（一句）、贡献什么（一到三句，每句以动词开头：扩展、检验、解决、提供、证明）。避免"本研究旨在探索"。目标不是贡献。
"本研究使用[设计与样本]考察[情境]中的[关系]。它有三方面贡献。第一，它[扩展理论 / 首次测量了……]。第二，它[检验了……的假设 / 解决了……之间的冲突]。第三，它[为……提供实践指导 / 为……提供基准]。"按实际情况调整贡献数量；两个真实贡献胜过三个凑数的。
《如何陈述研究贡献》给出了实例，《如何框定贡献使审稿人无法忽视》针对 Q1 目标更进一步。
常见错误，以及审稿人如何描述它们
审稿人报告的引言问题
- "引言读起来像教科书综述。"领域段落太长。
- "研究空白缺乏说服力。"空白是重复或组合，而不是有后果的局限。
- "贡献不清楚。"没有明确陈述，或把目标当成贡献。
- "引言承诺的超过研究交付的。"在结果出来前写好且从未修改。
- 空白被陈述为当前知识中具体、有后果的局限
- 贡献用动词陈述，与结果实际显示的内容相符
- 篇幅与索引和期刊近期文章相称
最后写引言，或者至少最后修改引言，使它承诺的正是结果所交付的。《SCI 与 SSCI 写作完整路线图》解释了倒序写作法。一个与我们合作进行框架定位的高等教育团队，在不到五个月内将概念变成了 Scientific Reports 的录用论文。阅读案例 → 如需从一开始就定位论文，请见稿件准备支持。
A worked example: one gap, two introductions
Suppose the study tests whether flexible working reduces turnover intention among nurses in Chinese public hospitals, and finds it does, but only where supervisors support it.
SCI framing (health services research journal): two paragraphs on nurse turnover costs and known predictors; one paragraph stating that flexible working has been evaluated mainly in Western private hospitals with mixed results, and that supervisor support has not been tested as a moderator in public systems; one paragraph stating the design (cross-sectional survey of 1,204 nurses in 14 hospitals), the hypotheses and the contribution (the first estimate of the moderated effect in a public system, with practical thresholds for supervisor support).
SSCI framing (management or human resource journal): the same opening, then two to three paragraphs on job demands-resources theory and what it predicts about flexibility as a resource; a paragraph arguing that the theory cannot explain the mixed findings without a boundary condition, and proposing supervisor support as that condition; then the design, hypotheses and a contribution paragraph that names the theoretical extension first and the practical implication second.
Same data, same finding, two introductions. The difference is which reader you are promising something to.
一个实例：同一个空白，两种引言
假设研究检验弹性工作是否降低中国公立医院护士的离职意向，结果是有效，但仅在主管支持的情况下。
SCI 框架（卫生服务研究期刊）：两段讲护士离职成本和已知预测因素；一段说明弹性工作主要在西方私立医院被评估且结果不一，主管支持在公立体系中尚未作为调节变量检验；一段说明设计（14 家医院 1,204 名护士的横断面问卷）、假设和贡献（公立体系中调节效应的首个估计，附主管支持的实践阈值）。
SSCI 框架（管理或人力资源期刊）：同样的开头，然后两到三段讲工作要求资源理论及其对弹性作为一种资源的预测；一段论证该理论若无边界条件便无法解释不一致的发现，并提出主管支持作为该条件；然后是设计、假设和贡献段，先点明理论扩展，再讲实践启示。
同样的数据，同样的发现，两种引言。区别在于您在向哪一类读者做出承诺。
Add us on WeChat
Scan the QR code to reach the Research Ramp team directly on WeChat.
Scan to add as friend添加我们的微信
扫描二维码，直接联系 Research Ramp 团队。
扫码添加好友Check your introduction and contribution score
Upload your draft to the free Manuscript Health Checker and see how clearly the gap and contribution come through.
Upload your draft freeNeed help positioning a paper? Book a free consultation or add us on WeChat检查您的引言与贡献得分
将初稿上传到免费的稿件健康检查工具，看看空白和贡献表达得有多清楚。
免费上传初稿需要帮助定位论文？预约免费咨询或添加微信