Does Standardized Manuscript Structure Aid Publishing? Evidence from IMRD on Acceptance, Visibility, and Impact

The adoption of standardized manuscript structures has become widespread in scholarly publishing, with the IMRD format (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) promoted to improve clarity and transparency. Despite its prevalence, empirical evidence on its effects on publication outcomes remains limited. This study examines the impact of IMRD structure on editorial acceptance, citation impact, and article downloads using a longitudinal dataset of 716 manuscripts (2016–2025). Logistic regression and zero-inflated models are employed to account for different outcome types and data characteristics. Results show that IMRD is strongly associated with higher editorial acceptance rates, suggesting that standardized formats facilitate evaluation. However, no significant effect is found on citation counts once overdispersion and excess zeros are considered. In contrast, IMRD reduces the likelihood of zero downloads, indicating improved initial visibility. Overall, manuscript structure influences editorial decisions and early dissemination but does not directly affect long-term scientific impact. These findings highlight the importance of distinguishing between acceptance, visibility, and influence, and suggest that while IMRD improves accessibility, it does not substitute for research quality.