CBS Writing Enriched Curriculum

CBS Writing Enriched Curriculum

Desired writing abilities
 Desired writing abilities

Desired writing abilities

How to read a scientific paper

Modified from Kelly Hogan’s “How to read a scientific paper”

 Typical anatomy of a paper
• Title & authors
• Abstract (or summary)
• Introduction
• Methods (or Materials & Methods)
• Results (including figures/tables)
• Discussion (or Conclusions)
• Acknowledgements
• References
 Title
• Very descriptive
• May state the main finding right in the title
• Is not about being creative and “catchy”
(usually)

Examples
The evolution of social monogamy in mammals.

mTORC1 phosphorylation sites encode their

sensitivity to starvation and rapamycin.
 Authors
• Order of authors is important
• What can you tell from the order?
• You can often associate the work with the lab
(the PI’s lab)

Example
The evolution of social monogamy in mammals.

D. Lukas and T. H. Clutton-Brock

 Abstract
• Purpose of the study
• Major findings
• Relationship between findings & the field
overall
• Gives you the highlights of the whole paper
 Introduction
• Presents background information
• Sets the stage so the reader can see why the
work described in this paper is significant
• Written for a fellow scientist (but possibly a
scientist in another field – needs to be
understandable)
 Introduction
• Structure is usually:
– Accepted state of knowledge in the field
– Focus on a particular aspect of the field,
sometimes on the set(s) of data that lead directly
to the work of this paper
– Statement of research problem/question &
hypothesis
– Conclusions (authors will sometimes put a spoiler
at the end of the introduction)
 Reading the Introduction
• If you’re using a paper for a research project,
you should jot these things down as you take
notes:
– What knowledge gap or data set led to the work
of this paper?
– What is the research question/problem?
– What is the hypothesis being tested?
– What are the basic conclusions stated at the end
of the introduction?
Methods (or Materials & Methods)
• Should be detailed enough for someone else
to replicate the work (volumes,
concentrations, times, etc.)
• Author assumes the reader is scientifically
literate and understands the basics (e.g., how
gel electrophoresis works)
• In reality, methods are often compressed and
a citation may be included. You may need to
look up the cited paper for more detail.
 Should you read the methods at all?

• For your first assignment in this class…Yes!

• When doing a literature search, you can often
just skim the methods
• When you’re reading the results, you will likely
have to flip back to the methods a few times
to clarify how the experiment was done
 Results
• Describes the outcome of the experiments
that were done to answer the research
question posed in the introduction
• Results often simply stated without any
interpretation (interpretation comes in the
Discussion)
• Figures & tables show the reader the
outcomes of the experiments
 Reading the Results
• Read the through the text, and examine the figures as
they are referred to within the text
• With each experiment/figure you should take note of:
– The basic procedure
– The question they were trying to answer
– The results
– The conclusion you can draw from that experiment/figure
– Criticisms
• You might need to look up methods you’re not
familiar with to fully understand the results
(Wikipedia is handy for this)
 Discussion
• Data is analyzed/interpreted. The authors explain
to the reader what they think the data show (You
don’t have to agree with their interpretations!)
• Findings are related to other findings in the field.
These findings might:
– Contribute to knowledge in the field
– Correct errors about the topic
– Etc.
• The authors tell the reader how/why the work is
significant
 Reading the Discussion
• When you’re taking notes, try to answer these
questions:
– What conclusions do the authors draw?
– Make note of what is fact and what is their
opinion/interpretation
– Describe why these data are significant to the field
 Overall Reflection & Criticism
• You read the whole paper! Hang on, don’t put it
down yet. Spend a little time on the big picture.
• Do you agree with the authors’ rationale for setting
up the experiments the way they did?
• Is it clear that their experiments support the major
finding they are claiming?
• Do you see patterns/trends in their data that are
problems that weren’t mentioned?
• Do you agree with their conclusions? Are they over-
generalized or too grand?
• What further questions do you have? What would
you suggest they do next?
 Tips for success when reading papers
• Spend time with each paper initially. If you are
using this paper to research/write something for
a class, your time investment now will pay off
later.
– Look up details/methods you’re unsure of
– Summarize things for yourself by taking good notes
– Imagine you have to teach this paper to a classmate.
This will help you make sure you understand it.
 References
• Kang SA, Pacold ME, Cervantes CL, Lim D, Lou
HJ, Ottina K, Gray NS, Turk BE, Yaffe MB,
Sabatini DM. 2013. mTORC1 phosphorylation
sites encode their sensitivity to starvation and
rapamycin. Science 341: 364.
• Lukas D, Clutton-Brock TH. 2013. The
evolution of social monogamy in mammals.
Science 341: 526-530.