Academia Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for academics and those enrolled in higher education. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Is it common practise/frowned upon to have a figure in the introduction chapter of a thesis?
The figure is not a 'picture', but a relatively small tree diagram that in my opinion shows the structure I am talking about more effectively than describing it in words.
I ask this question because I do not think it is common practise but also can't think of a good reason not to do it.
If a graphic clearly gets across the message then why not use it? Just check what the regulations specify though,
To elaborate a bit more you need to think about what the introduction is for. If it is intended as an executive summary then a diagram that summarises the work could be very effective. If however it is setting the context of the work then I find it difficult to see how a diagram would help.
Having a figure in an introduction is a common practice, and one that I strongly recommend. Images are very good at conveying some ideas and relationships, and are also good for catching the eye and helping pick out key elements of a document (i.e., the things the author thinks are important enough to illustrate). There is nothing special about an introduction that means it should be image-free, especially in a thesis where there is a whole chapter dedicated to it.
Yes, some people do not put figures in their introductions. Indeed, some people don't put any figures in their scientific writing, and I really hate reading the documents that they produce.
