IMRaD, or Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion (and Conclusion) has become something of a Gold Standard for scientific, peer-reviewed writing. Because of this 'standardization' of science writing structure, IMRaD can be taken for granted, meaning that students might not receive enough information on when and why to use IMRaD.
So why do we use IMRaD? How much flexibility is there in the IMRaD structure? What if I don't have explicitly research methods? Are there any alternatives to IMRaD, and if so, what are they and when should I use alternative structures?
If you have ever wanted an answer to such questions, you've come to the right place.
A fifty-year study of IMRaD (Article Clay cites in the episode): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC442179/
Visual resource of IMRaD construction: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257616774_Improving_the_writing_of_research_papers_IMRAD_and_beyond/figures?lo=1
Writing a Research Paper in the Natural Sciences: http://ctl.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Schultz_ResearchPaper_NaturalSciences_formatted.pdf
Research Guide for Writing in the Social Sciences (Use the Left side Menu to access resources on the page): https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/purpose