Scientific vs. Popular Science Article — What’s the Difference and When to Choose Each?

Both scientific and popular science articles play an important role in knowledge communication. But although they both deal with science, they differ in almost every respect: purpose, style, audience, and even how the truthfulness of the information is verified. In this guide, we break down these differences in detail.

What Defines a Scientific Article?

It is a form of publication intended for the academic community. It is written when the author wants to contribute new knowledge to their field — for example, by publishing the results of empirical research, theoretical analysis, or technical models.

It is characterized by:

• Always being peer-reviewed (most often through a double-blind process) (1).

• Having a strictly defined structure (the IMRaD format): title, authors, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, conclusion, bibliography.

• Using specialized terminology and scientific style.

• Including full scholarly apparatus — footnotes, citations, bibliography, and often a DOI and ORCID (2).

• Although there are no strict regulations regarding minimum length in Poland, many institutions and publishers require at least 20,000 characters with spaces (half a publishing sheet) for the article to count in scientific evaluations.

• Being the basis for earning ministerial points and influencing the scientific rating of institutions.

What Is a Popular Science Article?

It is a text aimed at non-specialist readers who are curious about the world but may not have formal education in a given field. Its role is to make research results accessible and engaging.

It is characterized by:

• A goal not of presenting “scientific novelty,” but translating results into understandable language.

• Undergoing editorial fact-checking, not formal peer review.

• Being written in a lively style full of examples, metaphors, and storytelling.

• Including a lead under the title, short subheadings, and simplified explanations.

• Often featuring graphics, illustrations, and infographics — which matter more than footnotes.

• Not requiring a formal source apparatus, though sources should still be provided (even in the form of links).

• Having no standardized length, but typically ranging from 9,000 to 15,000 characters — sometimes less for short-form content.

How to Choose the Right Format?

Before you start writing, ask yourself a few questions:

• Are your findings original and unpublished? If yes — write a scientific article.

• Do you want your text to be understandable to a high school student or your grandmother? If yes — create a popular science version.

• Do you plan to cite exact data, code, or methodology step-by-step? That sounds like a scientific article.

• Would you rather show an infographic or add a photo from your research than use footnotes? Then a popular science article might be a better fit.

What Should You Keep in Mind?

• Don't mix styles. Popular language in a scientific article (or vice versa) undermines credibility. Pick one style and stick to it.

• Accuracy is key. Popular science does not mean unprofessional. Write accessibly, but don’t trivialize.

• Respect copyright. It’s easy to fall into the “free internet” trap in popular texts — but graphics, data, and quotes still need legal sources.

• Adjust the length. A popular science article shouldn't bore; a scientific article shouldn't be vague. Each format has its limits.

In Summary…

Scientific article: serves science, documents original research, undergoes rigorous peer review, and expands knowledge.

Popular science article: explains science to a broader audience, educates, inspires, and builds trust in research.

Both are essential. One builds the foundation of science — the other makes it visible and understandable.

---

Footnoes: Footnotes: (1) This means that the author usually doesn’t know who the reviewers are, and vice versa. The system is designed to minimize bias or favoritism, protect anonymity, and ensure an objective assessment of the text’s scientific value. Reviewers assess, among other things, the originality of the research, methodological soundness, and consistency of conclusions — regardless of the author’s name, affiliation, or reputation.

(2) DOI (Digital Object Identifier) is a unique digital identifier assigned to scientific publications (e.g., articles, reports, books). It functions like a digital “social security number” for a text — enabling it to be found online regardless of where it’s moved. Example DOI: 10.1000/j.jmb.2023.04.001. Entering: https://doi.org/10.1000/j.jmb.2023.04.001 takes you directly to the document. Thanks to DOIs, there’s no need to list the full bibliography — a link suffices. ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) is an international researcher identifier. ORCID is assigned to a specific person and enables clear identification regardless of name changes, institutions, or name spellings. Example ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1825-0097. ORCID helps editors, universities, and grant agencies track an author’s work without errors.