How do you paraphrase scientific sources?

I think the first step to read a scientific source is to highlight the main points, arguments, conclusions, and comment on them with your own language, in such a way that the paragraphs, sentences and phrases shrink into your comment. The questionable arguments, data, formulae, and conclusions should also be highlighted or commented in a similar way. Then, based on the findings and answers you found in response to your questions, you simplify the questionable arguments in your language. You should also determine what part you don't agree with, or you see it in contradiction with other parts of the text or other sources. You should review your comments and make sure you understand the points, arguments, and conclusions correctly.

First step is reading and understanding. However, the vast number of resources often makes it impractical to meticulously read and comprehend every single word or paper. In my own approach, I usually begin by the abstract, subsequently expanding my research and reading if the material appears relevant. At this stage, it is about gathering the information and not about writing.

Continuous reading on the subject is key. Analysing different perspectives of available literature will provide vast knowledge of the concept. Learning and unlearning will be part of progress.

I always find that research is exactly like studying for an upcoming exam. One should jot down information as one makes notes for the exam- using flow charts and diagrams and a web of words. All of it can be transferred to publications (with some tweaking). A researcher's vision of a paper is unique and they can design their publication to mirror it.

Underlining parts of the text is an important part of this process. It is amazing how quickly you can lose something you think is important. I have searched for something in a text and been unconvinced that what I found was really the sentences that originally 'struck' me.

This is wrong. Paraphrasing is changing the words of a text. (If you use the same words of the text you must indicate it is a quotation or you are plagiarizing.) To paraphrase is to change the meaning (and tone) of a text. This is the value of your text. You may try to not distort the original (although even the distortion of a text (is of interest (and value)) (Heidegger's Greeks) but changing the words of a text changes its meaning. Cleanth Brooks described this process as 'heresy'. The sacred literature is defiled by the current articulation. If you are a student your changing the meaning will tell your teacher what you understand of the topic and the writer. What do YOU think the text means? Can you justify/explain the choices you make?

I disagree with keeping the same tone. The tone of the paraphrased text depends on the tone of your report. I also disagree with using different words; one should be careful not to use words that change the meaning of a specialized text. I also think that if any part of the source is still unknown or unclear, you better skip it, or use it as a report (e.g. the authors reported) preferably with a direct quotation.

Now that I've gathered the information from various sources through reading and understanding, it's time to start writing. I take a sentence from the source and tweak it to match my own style, without altering its meaning, and making sure it's properly referenced and cited. While I keep any technical terms, other wording can be changed to fit my style.

Rich sources of understanding will pave the way to this stage. Write and rewrite several times. Read what you have written after taking a short break. Sometimes what you have paraphrased might light a bulb in your mind with an additional idea.. or might totally give you a different picture of what was intended.

I believe this is where the dictionary becomes my best friend. The idea here is to change the entire/ most of the sentence with it still retaining its actual meaning.

In this stage, its better off to have one or two others help cross check your work and give feedback. A plagiarism checker also helps.

I think if you did not copy phrases or sentences, the probability of plagiarism is minimized. Based on my experience, if you write the paraphrased text in your own words, the probability of similarity between your text and other scientific sources is definitely less than a few percent. The comparison of the paraphrased text and the original one also should be performed carefully. Your report is going to be used for a certain purpose. You should not "rewrite" the original text. Instead, you should carefully report the main points and results that are related to your own work/study.

The porridge is not too hot, not too cold. What does that even mean? If you put the ideas as you understand them in your own words, in different words, you are as far away for the original as necessary. 'Have you (inappropriately) distorted the original?' is the question you should ask yourself. Can you re-write you text so that it more accurately describes your source?

This stage is very important. Mostly can turn out to be complicated. Always have a trusted third eye to look into it to provide an assurance. Everyone makes mistakes.

This is very important because your paper might be read/reviewed by one of the authors you cited in your research paper. Misrepresentation of the source has the potential to really put you in a bad light.

Totally agree. The process gets hassle free when citations are appropriate. Check and recheck the same to avoid any trouble.

If a big part of your report is going to be based on a single source, you should start that part with the referencing to the source and continue with reporting what you need to discuss. Moreover, if your work is in continuum to other studies/works you are paraphrasing, you better mention this fact at the start of your report.

It is an obligation to cite a source you use but do not think of it in those terms. You want to 'shout from the roof tops' that you have used a source. It is to your credit that have found and used effectively an appropriate previous work for your subject. Again your use - be it accommodation of, refutation of or somewhere in between - of this work adds value to the discipline.

Citing sources often make a research work look more authentic. It should be cited carefully and orderly so as to look professional.

In brief, if in doubt, cite your source. I suggest compiling a list, in final format (APA, Chicago, whatever you're using) as you go along, as opposed to having to compile after the fact; the difference in efficiency is massive, and your bank of sources is all ready to go!

I always tell my students this: your understanding of any source material is only as good as your ability to explain it. I always use the prompt- " HOW WOULD YOU EXPLAIN THIS TERM TO AN UNSKILLED INDIVIDUAL". If you can explain the basic structure easily, you will find it becomes much easier to paraphrase.

You should strongly be careful not to change the specialized phrases, though they may be replaced by other phrases or words in every day conversations!

The tension between the excellence of the original and your own formulations makes you think about what is important in the original and the subject in general. Ultimately others, be they teachers or peers, will judge your decisions, so re-writing is an important part of the process.

Once one can master the art of paraphrasing without it being too far off from its original, a major problem has been avoided.

My experience is that a lot of researchers aren't really comfortable with English as a medium of publication. And naturally, when one reads international papers, it's the first thing one notices- the difference in vocabulary and ease. After fretting over it for some time, I have realized that the best publications aren't the ones who have a great command of the language (although they read wonderfully), but the ones that are to the point and clear. If a researcher is well versed with their research material, their knowledge will show from the cracks of language- proficiency or no.

I always start my text with my word and my tone, because the paraphrased text usually should be included in a larger report or based on the audiences and the purpose of the main text, the tone and simplifying of the original text better be reconsidered. Then, I repeatedly go back to my notes and comments and add the main points and discussions of the original text in a causal manner to keep the uniformity of my text and the purpose and information provided by the original text.

Paraphrase with Passim: An Overview Paraphrases absolutely should have citations, even if one simply and broadly writes, eg, ‘Foley 2001 passim’. For those who do not know Latin, ‘passim’ is derived from the perfect passive participle (‘passus’) of the verb ‘pandere’ = ‘to scatter.’ Thus ‘passim’ means ‘scattered’: the idea pervades the source. This convenient word is an intellectually honest way of (1) acknowledging your source(s); (2) using correct bibliographic methods; (3) being clear when ideas are to be found throughout a particular source. On the latter point, too many page ranges for a particular citation can look tedious. But if the ideas are not yours, they must be cited - even if, or especially if, you paraphrased someone else.

I believe that you need to do your best to understand the “essence “ of the phrase or topic and then summarize this in an understandable manner.

I expect my work to be fairly airtight, hence I do my utmost to grasp a thorough knowledge and understanding of both sides of a topic/issue/argument before discussing it seriously, as it prevents one from falling into the pitfalls of blind spots, assumptions and projections, etc.... no matter how well-intended.