What are some good practices which help researchers to contextualize their research? From talks and lectures to paper writing, when researchers communicate their research, it is often very important to motivate the reader with some background information about that topic. Some of this background information include mentioning how some problem arose, who were the pioneers of such subject or research area, what are the motivations that led such problems to arise, how did the problem developed as time went by, who did important contributions to the problem/area and how did the problem/area end up in its actual form.
As a young researcher, I think the ability to contextualize my research and provide some general picture of the problem I've been working on is very difficult to develop. When writing a paper, thesis or whatever, the "introduction" part is usually really hard to even start.
I know some papers provide such information which one can learn a lot. But this is not always the case. Some problems may be really known and some of its historical aspects are easily found on the internet, but others (maybe the vast majority?) are not, especially those which are not well developed yet and are hot research material. And even those who are well-known problems sometimes may be difficult to talk about since it became so widespread and its applications are so wide-ranged that it informations about the current or initial status may be difficult to access.
So, with all this being said, my question is: what are some good practices that help researchers (especially those in the beginning of their career) to learn historical aspects and gather relevant information about their research area or problems in order to communicate their research better?
 A: This is quite opinion-based, and there are plenty of relevant strategies for writing good introductions, but I find the question interesting. I will therefore give my advice, and recommendation.
I suggest you tell in the introduction why you decided to work on this question. Certainly enough, you do not work on totally random questions. If someone told you to work on it, then ask them why. If you do not really know or remember why you worked on this question, then spend some time finding out; this is important, and there are no bad reasons. After all, your readers are researchers just like you, so they will probably understand your reasons, and agree.
In the same line, you may ask yourself why you are writing this paper. This is quite different: you may write this paper because you think people will be interested in it (there are applications, the work in technically deep, the results are beautiful, etc); or because you think it will be useful (it may help advancing other questions, be they theoretical or applied); or any other reasons.
I am pretty sure answering these questions makes good introductions; and also I think seeking these answers may make better papers, doesn't it?
