Workshop 2: The Scientific Literature and Learning to Read Between the Lines��Wednesday June 5, 2024�RTX 2024�Scarlette Hsia

What was your favorite book, author or thing to read when you were a “kid?”

In Books and Film:

Abstract/Summary

• Brief background of subject
• Purpose for the study
• Major findings of the study
• Relationship between these findings and the field

This is what you see when you do a Google Scholar search. You can decide if the paper is worth reading based upon this.

Introduction

• Presents the background information for a fellow scientist (possibly in another field) to understand why the findings of this paper are significant.
• Structure is usually:
• Accepted state of knowledge in the field
• Focus on a particular aspect of the field, often the set(s) of data that led directly to the work of this paper
• Hypothesis being tested
• Conclusions (scientists don’t really like surprise endings!)

Materials and Methods

• Should be detailed enough for another scientist to replicate the work (volumes, times, company material was purchased from etc.)
• In reality, often compressed and you may need to look up another paper that is referenced for more detail.

Results

• While the introduction poses the questions being asked, the results describes the outcome of the experiments that were done to answer the questions.
• Results are often simply stated with interpretation of them coming later in the discussion.
• Figures and tables allow the reader to see the outcomes of the experiments for themselves!

Discussion

• Data is analyzed to show what the authors believe the data show. (You don’t have to agree with their interpretations!)
• Findings are related to other findings in the field (contribute to knowledge, correct errors, etc.)– How is this work significant?

References

• Papers cited in the text
• What parts of the paper cite other papers?
• Introduction
• Materials and Methods
• Discussion
• (Maybe a few in Results)

Question: How should we READ a scientific paper?

Answer: not necessarily in order!

A four-step method based on: Ann McNeal, School of Natural Science, Hampshire College, Amherst MA

http://hampshire.edu/~apmNS/design/RESOURCES/HOW_READ.html

​

Step 1: Skim the entire paper

Elsevier eye-tracking study (source: https://www.elsevier.com/connect/designing-the-article-of-the-future)

Step 1: Skim the entire paper

• Look at the major headings (do they follow the “anatomy” we just described?)
• How many figures are there, what kinds of figures are they (maps, graphs, microscopic images?)
• What is the conclusion of the paper?
• (It may not make sense to you at the moment, but note what it is.)

Step 2: Vocabulary

• Go through the paper as a whole simply underlining words and phrases you do not understand.
• You are not reading the paper for comprehension of the whole paper yet, just making sure you have understanding of the words to then comprehend it.

what does ooid mean

Step 2: Vocabulary continued

• Look up words and phrases, where?
• Geology, Remote-sensing, Data visualization, Python textbooks
• Stackexchange
• Look up methods that you are not familiar with

(i.e. what is U-Th dating or Carbon Capture?)

​

• Note important phrases that are part of a major concept and are bigger than just vocabulary (i.e. “risk reduction”). You will come back to them in context while reading for comprehension.

​

Step 3: Read for comprehension, section by section �(as already mentioned)

• Introduction
• What is the accepted state of knowledge in the field (take notes and even draw your own figures)?
• What data led directly to this work?
• What question are they answering? (Is there a clear hypothesis?)
• What are their conclusions?

​

Step 3: Read for comprehension, section by section

• Materials and Methods and Results:
• Read the methods first or read them as you read the results
• With each experiment/figure you should be able to explain
• 1) the basic procedure
• 2) the question it sought to answer
• 3) the results
• 4) the conclusion

​

• You should be able to explain all of these (1-4) to another classmate clearly!

Step 3: Read for comprehension, section by section

• Discussion
• What conclusions do the authors draw? Be sure to separate fact from their opinion/interpretation?
• Describe for yourself why these data are significant. (Does it contribute to knowledge or correct errors?)

Step 4: Reflection and criticism

• Do you agree with the authors’ rationale for setting up the experiments as they did?
• Did they perform the experiments appropriately? (Good enough sample size? Low uncertainties? Considered all possible outcomes?)
• Were there enough experiments to support the one major finding they are claiming?
• Do you see patterns/trends in their data that are problems that were not mentioned?
• Do you agree with the authors’ conclusions from these data? Are they over-generalized or too grand?
• What further questions do you have? What might you suggest they do next?

​

Tips for success:

• Spend a lot of time on each paper NOW look up every detail that you are unsure of. (Time you invest now will payoff in the long run). Discovering the answers for yourself is one of the best ways to learn and have the information be retained.
• Imagine yourself teaching the paper or figures to classmates—teaching something to others is also another great way to learn.

Tips for success:

• Start a database of procedures that you take the time to look up and teach to yourself. What are some of the common procedures that are used in various papers?
• Ask people in your lab and field questions about words you don’t understand

Tips for success:

• Read papers when you are awake and interested in reading. If you are going to break up a paper and read it over several days be sure to summarize before continuing each day.