How to Write an Abstract

What is an abstract?

An abstract is a short and straightforward description of a larger work.

 

An abstract is NOT a review, or an evaluation of the work being described. While it contains main words found in the larger work, the abstract is an original, self-contained document rather than an excerpted passage.

 

Why should I write an abstract?

Abstracts may be written for different reasons. The two most important reasons for writing abstracts are selection and indexing. Abstracts allow readers to quickly decide whether it is worth their time to read your larger work. Abstracts may be required for different kinds of selection such as grants and funding, journal submission, book pitch, and application to a conference, workshop or training. Also, many online databases use abstracts to catalog larger works, and categorize them under a particular specialization or discipline. That’s why abstracts should contain keywords and phrases that allow for easy searching.

 

A good abstract increases your chances of interesting the readers and/or evaluators in your larger work. A bad abstract may be a reason for a quick dismissal of your application, submission or proposal.

 

What are the types of abstracts?

There are two types of abstracts: descriptive and informative. Descriptive abstracts include the purpose, methods, and scope of your research, but leave out the results. These are usually short – only  100-200 words. Informative abstracts give an overview of everything in your research: the purpose, methods, scope, and results. These are much longer than descriptive abstracts, and can be anywhere from one paragraph to a whole page long. In general, an informative abstract is rarely more than 10% of the length of the entire work. In the case of a longer work, it may be much less. Always check the submission guidelines before writing your abstract.

 

No matter what type of abstract you write, your text should not be a summary with headings, sub-headings, or references. Your abstract should flow smoothly in complete sentences, usually as one or two continuous paragraphs, not more.

 

Descriptive abstracts include:

 

Informative abstracts include:

 

What should I include in an abstract?

Abstracts vary from discipline to discipline, and sometimes within disciplines. An abstract of a social science work, for example, may contain the scope, purpose, results, and contents of the work. But even though abstracts vary, every abstract should include four main types of information:

 

 

• Always include your paper’s title, name, affiliation, and contact information.
• Put the most important information first.
• Present your research question concisely.
• Specify exactly what your paper aims to address and how.
• Demonstrate the importance or relevance of your work.
• Think of search phrases and keywords that people might use to look for your work, and use them in your abstract.
• Use short and direct sentences.
• Use clear, concise, and powerful language.
• Use active verbs whenever possible.
• If there are major restrictions or limitations on your results, use terms that indicate possibility or uncertainty such as “might,” “could,” and “may,” and “seem.”
• If your abstract is too long, remove unnecessary adjectives or other modifiers that do not directly contribute to a reader’s understanding of your project. Cut out repetitions and unnecessary information.   
• Revise your abstract carefully for errors and typos.
• Meet the required word count.

• Don't use too much jargon; instead, use terms that are clear and familiar to a wide audience.
• Don't cite sources, figures, or tables.
• Don't include long quotations.
• Don't use headings of any kind.
• Don't add information not contained in the original work.
• Don't define terms, unless redefining or reconceptualizing terms is the purpose of the longer work.

 

Examples of successful abstracts

 

“Remaking Religion: Minority Claims Against the Egyptian State”

- Mona Oraby

 

Observers suggest that religious minorities in the Middle East and North Africa are facing greater risk of persecution and displacement, and yet there is little understanding of the legal conditions that shape their precarious existence in the region. At the same time, few scholars inquire into the claim making practices of individuals who do not fit neatly into state-authorized religious categories. This paper considers the unintended effects of the Ottoman millet system on citizen-state relations in twentieth and twenty-first century Egypt. It also addresses how extremely marginalized religious minorities in the contemporary period use the law to circumvent official religious discrimination. By investigating the ways in which Egyptian Bahá’ís, Muslim converts to Coptic Orthodoxy (mutanaṣerūn), and Coptic reconverts (‘a’idūn li al-misiḥiyya) advance legal claims against the state, I argue that vulnerable religious populations formulate their religious identities through their interactions with the state bureaucracy and the administrative judiciary. I show how in so doing, members of these communities also actively remake the conditions for political membership.

 

My methodology consists of historical evidence, content analysis of legal documents, and ethnographic data. The paper is based on participant observation, semi-structured and open-ended interviews, and legal and administrative texts collected over twelve months of field research in Cairo, Egypt between 2012 and 2014. These include administrative court cases, legal correspondence between litigating attorneys and the administrative judiciary, and petitioners’ written testimonies. The interviews were conducted with attorneys and legal practitioners, as well as Bahá’ís, Muslim converts, and Coptic reconverts. I also observed attorneys’ interactions with clients, as I accompanied them to government meetings.

 

“Development Interventions into Yemeni ‘Urf (Tribal Customary Law)”

- Asil Sidahmed

 

International development actors have, until recently, turned a blind eye to the prevailing justice norms in Yemen, which are heavily informed by tribal customary legal practices (Dawsari, 2012). Tribal customary law, ‘urf, in Yemen can be described as a moral code that seeks to order public life amongst tribes in cases of land disputes, war, and murder. The legal “space” for tribal custom has historically been distinct from sharia which is intended to govern personal affairs such as family law and inheritance. Although a number of works have addressed the interconnected relationship between state law and tribal law as well as legal pluralism between sharia, state law and custom (Dupret, 2003; al-Zawaini, 2009); none have as yet addressed the disparities in access to justice that the continuation of tribal custom has resulted in for Yemenis.

 

This paper discusses inequalities in access to justice amongst Yemenis given the prevalence of tribal customary laws (‘urf). The paper contextualises contemporary uses of tribal custom within development interventions that seek to adapt tribal customs for conflict resolution programs. It argues that although development interventions rightly seek to balance the principles prevalent in state driven “rule of law orthodoxies” with the community driven and democratic aspects of tribal custom, there remains a disparity in access to justice across the country as tribal customs have ceased to practice codification and standardisation as they once did. Furthermore, where previously, tribal customs were relevant to a distinct “class” within society, qab’ail, tribesmen, they have spread since the 1970s to become adopted across different tiers within society largely as a result of the former regimes policy of “tribalisation”. The paper seeks to demonstrate that although tribal customs have some areas that are compatible with the growth of Yemeni society; many others are not compatible with notions of “equality” in modern rule of law.