How to read

scientific papers
http://violentmetaphors.com/2013/08/25/how-to-rea
d-and-understand-a-scientific-paper-2
/

http://
www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/top_sci
ence-fair_how_to_read_a_scientific_paper.shtml

http://blogs.ulethbridge.ca/roussel/2014/02/07/how-
to-read-a-scientific-paper/

http://www.digitaljournal.com/science/why-some-
science-is-actually-bad-science/article/
455538#ixzz3y65GqB7O
• How to read a scientific paper
• How to write a research proposal
• Data Analysis Statistics
 Lab Report
The report must include (in this order):
Descriptive Title + Authors (NO TITLE PAGE!)
Abstract
Introduction
Materials & Methods
Results
Discussion
References
Appendix (statistics calculations)
Title
• scientific titles are usually long and descriptive…
Example:
Diet composition and preference of juvenile Murray cod, trout cod and Macquarie
perch (Percichthyidae) reared in fertilised earthen ponds

Abstract
• A summary of your ENTIRE paper in 100-150 words
• represents ~1-2 sentences per section of the paper… you can include means +/- std err
• this is the first section to appear in the paper, but the last section to write up
 Introduction
• Start with the broader study topic and progressively focus on your specific
experiment
• The following questions will help organize your introduction:
1) What is the general topic of my study?
2) How does my experiment fit in the general topic of study?
3) What other work has been done on this topic? (i.e. what do “we” already know?)
4) Based on what we know, what is my hypothesis (general)?
5) Based on the hypothesis, what is my prediction of the experiment?
6) How will my experiment serve to advance what we already know?

IMPORTANT: Any information obtained from a reference source should be cited at the end of the
sentence/paragraph using parenthetical referencing (see Parenthetical Referencing on slide #)
Introduction
1) What is the general topic of my study?
A: The phototactic behaviour of zooplankton
2) How does my experiment fit in the general topic of study?
A: We are examining whether the freshwater zooplankton,
Daphnia magna, exhibit positive or negative phototaxis
3) What other work has been done on this topic? (i.e. what do “we”
already know?)
A: Use books, journals, and the internet to find out more on the
phototactic behaviour of zooplankton, including Daphnia. Also,
what do we know about Daphnia magna as an organism? and
what is the larger ecological & evolutionary context of this
behaviour?
 Introduction

4) Based on what we know, what is my hypothesis (general)?

A: Zooplankton exhibit ________ (+ or -) phototaxis
5) Based on the hypothesis, what is my prediction for the experiment?
A: There will be a greater percentage of Daphnia on the left side of a Petri dish when it is
covered than when it is uncovered
6) How will my experiment serve to advance what we already know?
A: If the results agree with the prediction, this will lend support to the hypothesis that
zooplankton are ______ (+ or -) phototactic.
 Materials & Methods
• explain what YOU did in full sentences (be precise but avoid repetition)
• this is where you mention
• any unplanned occurrences (e.g. size inconsistency in Daphnia),
• any noteworthy observations if you think they affected your results (e.g. location of
windows/daylight relative to Petri dish…
• specific ‘rules’ created during the experiment to maintain consistency in data collection
(e.g. how did you count a Daphnia when it was on the midline?)

• Use the past tense Materials:

• -------

• Avoid a recipe format! NO!

•-------

Methods:
--------------------------------------------
--------------------
 Results
Summary Statistics
• Raw data should always be summarized into summary statistics
• Summary statistics include measures such as:
• mean, median, or mode (measures of central tendency)
• standard deviation or variance (measures of dispersion)
• These are generally presented as a figure or table:
Mean Heart Rate (bpm ± std dev)

250
95%
Mean Standard
200 Mean (bpm) Confidence Sample Size
Temperature deviation
Intervals(df=2)
150

100 Room (20˚C) 216 13.5 183 to 250 bpm 3

50

0 3
Room Ice Ice (12˚C) 136 20.0 86 to 185 bpm
Temperature (o C)
Results
Summary statistics are usually presented in a table OR a figure (aka. graph) –
avoid redundancy!
Therefore, for the Daphnia report present your counts as a figure OR a table. In
this experiment a figure would be prefereable.
• Sample figure:
100
Proportion of Daphnia (%)

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Unprotected Protected

Figure 1. Distribution of Daphnia on left side of Petri dish when

protected and unprotected
Data Table
Bar Graphs – You’ll be using this one most.
Broken Line Graph
Histogram
Pie Chart
 Results
IN ADDITION to the figure, the results will include a results paragraph in which you will:
• provide a reference to the figure(s)
• provide the results of your hypothesis test (refer to Hypothesis testing on slide #)
• provide a reference to the appendix (which includes the calculations for your t-test)
Sample results paragraph:
The mean percent of Daphnia on the left side of the Petri dish when this side was covered (86.0%) was
significantly higher than the mean percent of Daphnia on the left side when this side was uncovered (55.4%)
(calculated t = 4.5, critical t0.05(1),2 = 2.1). This difference in means is shown in Figure 1. The full χ2 test
procedure and calculations can be found in Appendix 1.
 Discussion
In the results section, you simply presented a summary of your data. In the discussion,
you interpret your data by putting them in the original context of the introduction.
Your discussion should incorporate all of the following:
• State the Major Findings of the Study
• Relate the Findings to Those of Similar Studies
• Consider Alternative Explanations of the Findings
• Acknowledge the Study’s Limitations
• Make Suggestions for Further Research
• Give the “Take-Home Message” in the Form of a Conclusion
 Parenthetical Referencing
• Any information obtained from a reference source should be cited within/at the end of a
sentence or paragraph using parenthetical referencing
• Parenthetical referencing: author & date (year)

E.g. One author: Larvae and eggs may secrete aggression-inhibiting pheromones that induce care taking
behavior in workers (Smith, 2003).

E.g. Two authors: Walnut trees are known to secrete chemicals that inhibit the growth of surrounding plants
(Wilberg & Larson, 1992).

E.g. Three (or more) authors: Predation is important in structuring communities and may drive evolution in
prey populations, as illustrated by the ubiquitous presence of predator-induced defenses (Tollrian et al. 2005).
 Parenthetical Referencing
E.g. Two sources in one sentence: Studies directly documenting evolution within a natural population are
relatively rare and have involved either long-term field studies (Grant 1986) or elaborate field experiments
comprising transplantation (Reznick et al. 1990).

E.g. Referring to source(s) directly in a sentence: Dumont et al . (1985) and De Meester & Dumont
(1988) found repeatable differences in phototactic response of different clones isolated from natural
populations .

• If all of the information in one paragraph comes from the same source, you only need to put
one parenthetical reference at the end of the last sentence of the paragraph.
• Every parenthetical reference must have a full reference citation in the References section of
the report/article (and vice-versa)
 References

Referring to an Article in Scientific Journal:

Name(s) of author(s), Year. Title of article. Title of the Journal (usually abbreviated), volume number, page
number(s).
e.g.
De Meester, L . & H. J. Dumont, 1989 . Phototaxis in Daphnia : interaction of hunger and genotype . Limnology &
Oceanography. 34 : 1322-1325 .

Referring to Book:
Name(s) of author(s) (Last name, Initial.), Year. Title, edition (if applicable), publishing company, city of
publication.
e.g.
Campbell, N. A. & J. B. Reese, 2008. Biology, 8th ed. Pearson/Benjamin Cummings, San Francisco.
 References
Referring to Website:
Name(s) of author(s), Year. Title of article. Title of the Journal (usually abbreviated), volume number, page
number(s).
e.g.
Environment Canada (2010, Dec. 7). Water Quality [Online]. Available: http://www.ec.gc.ca/eau-water/default.asp?
lang=En&n=F2F43FC7-1/ [2011, Feb. 8].

• Order the reference citations in ascending alphabetical order (A→ Z) of the first author’s last
name (or name of organization).
 References

It is YOUR responsibility to use proper referencing format for all references used
For formatting guidelines, refer to the Citing References section in the Styles Manual of
the Online Science Student Handbook (
http://www.place.dawsoncollege.qc.ca/Science%20Student%20Handbook/FOV2-0010A9
83/02-Style%20Manual.pdf
)
It is also posted in the First Class folder
 Appendix
•Should include Excel statistical output.
• label your appendix appropriately (I.e. Appendix 1 – [title])
• refer to your appendix in your results paragraph
Peer reviewed articles
Include scientific journals, government websites and peer-reviewed books,
textbooks.

It’s okay to start with articles from magazines or Wikipedia. They may lead
you to peer reviewed work.

Take lots of notes throughout the process.

 There are two types of Scientific papers
• Review Articles
• Review articles give an
overview of a particular topic
by summarizing data and
conclusions from many studies.
• Often a good starting point for
your research.
• Primary Research Articles
• Contain original data and
conclusions.
• Contains experimental
procedures.
Sections of a scientific paper
• Title
• Abstract
• Introduction
• Materials and Methods
• Results
• Discussion
• Acknowledgement
• Literature cited
Is this the scientific
paper you’re looking
for?
• Reading the title and the abstract should
give you a good idea if you’re reading a
paper that you’re interested in or that you
require for your research. By reading those
two sections you will know what kind of
experiment was being done and what their
findings were.

• The introduction will give you background

on the research you are looking at. Here
you will get a look at what work has been
done in the field and by whom. Depending
on how in depth you are going into your
research, you may want to read some of
the papers cited in the introduction.
Materials and Methods
• This will tell you how the experiments were
done.
• You will need to know how an experiment is
done if you are going to understand the
results.
• What if you read a paper that says that red
meat causes colon cancer, but you find that the
group that ate a lot of red meat also smoked a
lot, exercised little and had a diet low in fiber?
Would that affect your conclusion?
• You may want to look at the material and
methods to put the conclusions made by a
paper into a better context.
• You will want to read this section very
carefully if you are repeating experiments
done in this paper or using similar protocols.
 Results
• The results section of a paper will
summarize the data without interpreting
it.
• It will always contain a written portion as
well as graphs, figures and the statistical
significance of the data obtained.
• Start by looking at the figures and reading
the legends.
• Once you have formed an idea of what
kind of data they have collected see if you
can come up with conclusions about the
data.
• Then read the results text.
Discussion
• The discussion is the author’s perspective on the paper.

• When you read the discussion ask yourself

• What do the authors think their results mean? You’ve seen the results. Do
you agree with them?
• Does the author’s interpretation agree with other research? The authors of
the paper you’re reading may include contradictory studies or they may not. If
ever you need to learn more about the topic, remember the intro is full of
previous studies!
• Does the author identify anything wrong with their own study?
Why are you reading this paper?
1) You’re browsing for information about a
particular topic. At this step in your research, you
may just want to get a general idea about the
field of study and it may be enough to just read
the introduction/discussion/conclusions. Maybe
you just want to know what other people think
about a subject. Skimming one paper may not be
enough, but maybe 2 or 3.

2) You want an answer to a specific question. In

this case reading the abstract and the results
section might be enough.

3) You want to know how to perform a particular

experiment. In which case materials and
methods might be enough for you.
Why are you reading this paper?

• You will probably

always need your
textbook!
When you read a scientific paper
• Take notes!
• The longest part of reading a scientific paper is looking up the words
you don’t understand.
• Keep your textbook handy!
• Use the net to look up terms!
• Take note of who wrote the paper and what institutions they are
affiliated with.
• Some institutions are well respected while others are not. Some research
may even be funded by agenda driven institutions. Eg. Discovery Institute
When you read a scientific paper
• Depending on why you’re reading a paper, you may not want to read
all the parts in order.
• If you are doing an in depth study of a topic and have several papers
to read, you will probably start with the introduction and then read
the abstract last.
• Be on the lookout for agenda driven research! Does the paper seem
biased?
Header

• Read the title.

• Who are the authors of the paper?
• When was the research published?
• In what journal was it published?
• Can you trust this research? Why or why not?
1) Identify the BIG question (1 or 2
sentences)
• The BIG question of a scientific study is the question
that all scientists in the field are trying to answer. It
is the general topic of study.
 1) Identify the BIG question (1 or 2
sentences)
• Once you read the
introduction of your paper,
you will know what work
has been done and why.

• Make a list of words you

don’t understand.

• What is the big question in

this paper?

• What is the field of study?

In other words, what are all
scientists in this field trying
to figure out?
 2) Summarize the background of this
topic(about 5 sentences)
• What do we
know about the
field already?
• What do most
scientists think?
• Is there
controversy?
• How do scientists
study this topic?
3) What question are the authors of this paper
trying to answer specifically?
• The authors
may be
trying to
test several
different
hypotheses
.
 3) What are the authors going to do to answer
their question?
• You should find
this information
in the intro. This
is not the
protocols for the
experiments
they are going
to do, it is the
general
approach to
how they are
going to tackle
their question.
 4) Materials and Methods?

• The materials and methods can often be very technical and may not
make much sense outside of the context of the results. In this paper,
the materials and methods is accessible. Otherwise, you may want to
read the materials and methods after reading the results if you need to
clarify something about the experiment.
• Describe the experiment being carried out by these researchers. Try
and describe what they did in one paragraph (4-6 sentences). What did
they use? What were they measuring?
• What is the dependent variable? What is the independent variable?
(see title of the paper). What control variables do you think are needed
for this experiment.
 5) Results
• What can you conclude from fig
1? Fig 2? Fig 3?
• In describing your conclusions
be sure to explain whether or
not the data shows any
significant differences?
• What kind of statistical test was
used to analyze fig 3?
5) Results
• Why do the authors
monitor vegatation and
the presence of raptors in
their experiment? In your
answer use terminology
we used in class.
6) Read the conclusion/discussion/interpretation section

• What do the authors think the

results mean?
• Do you agree with their
interpretation?
• Can you think of other
interpretations?
6) Read the
conclusion/discussion/interpretation section
• The authors propose 3 mechanisms to account for the relationship
between the presence of large herbivores and the number of hissing
snakes observed. What are they? Which of the mechansims do they
believe is playing a significant role and why?
6) Read the conclusion/discussion/interpretation section

• What are the studies limitations?

• How does this study relate to their specific question?
• How does this study relate to the BIG question?

• The authors conclude by making a statement about the relevance

of their work. What is that statement?
6) Read the
conclusion/discussion/interpretation section
• What do the authors plan to do next? (or
what do they suggest other scientists study
next?)
• Can you propose any experiments you could
do to add to knowledge in this field?
Wrapping up your study!
• Read the abstract again.
• Depending on how deep you are studying this topic, you may want to
see what other papers are most relevant to this study.
• What other authors did the author of this paper cite? Do their findings
contradict these?
• Are there more recent studies. Please note more recent does not mean
“correct”. In fact, older studies that have been repeated more often and
studied for a longer time have more credibility than the latest thing!
 Reading scientific papers is hard!
• Don’t be discouraged if you don’t understand everything right away.
• With experience you will learn how much understanding is enough before you
move on. Don’t spend too much time harping on what you don’t understand.
Sometimes you need to move on and come back to something later.
• Don’t be afraid to ask other people to help you understand something. Ask
questions. Your peers should be your most valuable resource.
• Be clear on what it is you need to get from a paper.
• Just trying to get an answer to a question? Emphasize the results and skim the rest.
• Are you just starting out in the field and need lots of background information? Results are
the place for you! And look for review papers!
• Are you trying to start your own research project? Well, you’re going to want to read the
whole paper, make a list of all the vocabulary and get a good understanding of the
techniques as well. Before you go onto your next paper, read that discussion to see what
needs to be done next.