Even the most rigorous research can be undermined by common writing and structural mistakes in a manuscript. At Helix Editing, we specialize in refining research papers before submission to academic journals. Based on our experience, here are the top five mistakes we see most often—and how to avoid them.

1. Neglecting a Comprehensive Yet Concise Abstract

‍The abstract is often the only section reviewers or editors read before deciding whether to continue. Yet many researchers either include too many details or too few. An effective abstract should concisely summarize the background, objectives, methods, results, and implications—without overwhelming the reader. Think of it as the gateway to your study: make it informative, accurate, and easy to follow.

2. Providing Insufficient Background Information‍

Another common oversight is assuming the reader shares the same depth of knowledge as the authors. Failing to clearly explain the rationale for your study—why it matters, what gap it fills, and how it builds on prior work—can make even the most groundbreaking research feel disconnected or underdeveloped. A well-written introduction grounds the reader and strengthens the impact of your findings.

3. Choosing the Wrong Target Journal‍

Submissions are often rejected not because of poor science, but because the article isn’t a good fit for the journal. Before submitting, make sure your study’s goals align with the journal’s aims and scope. For example, a clinical trial with practical implications may not suit a theoretical journal, and vice versa. Tailoring your submission increases your chances of acceptance and visibility within your target audience.

4. Failing to Disclose All Limitations‍

Every study has limitations—acknowledging them doesn’t weaken your work, it strengthens your credibility. Yet many authors omit or downplay them, fearing this will harm their chances of acceptance. Editors and reviewers appreciate transparency. A thoughtful limitations section demonstrates critical thinking and an understanding of your study’s boundaries, which is essential for ethical and scholarly integrity.

5. Weak Discussion of Real-World Implications‍

Finally, many papers fall short in connecting their findings to broader psychological or clinical applications. The discussion section should not only summarize results, but also explain why they matter. How might your findings inform treatment, influence policy, or shape future research? Making these connections can elevate your paper from a routine study to one that contributes meaningfully to the field.

At Helix Editing, our comprehensive Editor’s Report is designed to catch these pitfalls before your manuscript reaches peer reviewers. In addition to detailed comments on the strengths and weaknesses of your paper, we address each of these five issues to ensure your article is clear, well-positioned, and publication-ready.

Let your research speak for itself—clearly, confidently, and with impact. Contact us today to learn how our editing services can support your next submission.

‍