Q. I’m reviewing an academic research paper in which the authors describe their process and their findings in the present tense. “We evaluate . . . We analyze . . . We review.” Obviously, these actions have already taken place, so I lean toward changing the sentences to past tense. But perhaps it’s acceptable to use the present tense in academic research, similar to the use of historical present tense in literature. Please help!
A. The historical present can be a reasonable choice for things that can be consulted by others, starting with the paper itself. For example, “In this report, we evaluate three different theories of . . .” Other sources can likewise be referred to in this way: “Smith (2021) argues that . . .”
But for actions as opposed to text, a form of past tense is usually best: “We reviewed the flight logs at five major international airports . . .” The past tense is also usually best when referring to something as predating something else: “In a previous paper, Smith (2020) argued for . . .” Or, “In previous papers, Smith (2018, 2020) has argued for . . .”
If in doubt, default to a form of the past tense, which would work well in any of the examples in this answer except for the first (though you could switch to past if, for example, you were to change “In” to “For”: “For this report, we evaluated . . .”). But if the paper is going to be published in a journal or with a specific publisher, ask that journal or publisher about any preferences related to verb tenses; also look at recently published articles in your field.