Writing a Scientific Paper
Adapted from Cox (1990)
Although reviewing the scientific literature and writing a research paper is hard work, if well done the experience may be one of the most satisfying accomplishments that you have as a biology student. A well written scientific paper must fulfill two objectives. First, it must clearly and completely describe the procedures that were followed and the results that were obtained. Second, it must place these results in perspective by relating them to the existing state of knowledge and by interpreting their significance for future study. To place your research in perspective requires:
While you need to do all of this, you also need to write clearly and as concisely as possible. Superfluous verbiage is a hindrance to the reader. Some examples of unclear and excessive writing include "The rats, numbering six, were...", "It can be noted that fewer...", or "The tapeworm, when in adulthood, can,...". These should simply be "Six rats were...", "Fewer...", or "The adult tapeworm can....". When editing, read your paper out loud, making sure your grammar is complete and your statements make sense!
PAPER FORMAT
Scientific papers usually include the following major sections, each clearly labeled:
This is not an absolute structure as some papers will be variations of this model. A brief outline of each section is given below.
Title: Use the fewest possible words to adequately describe the contents of the paper.
Introduction: explain exactly what the objectives of the study are, and why it's a worthwhile effort. In the end you should be able to defend each sentence if I ask "why did you include this information?" The introduction should address the following questions:
Procedure or Materials and Methods: answers all basic questions about how the study was done so that another scientist could repeat your experiment. Basically answer the questions where, when, and how. Be as specific and as concise as possible. I don't need to know you used a #2 pencil, but I do need to know if (for example) you made observations of some animal behavior, or where you obtained your test organisms. Be careful with terms. If you say you randomly sampled a site, make sure it was, in fact, a random sample and not a subjectively selected sample. Any statistical methods used to analyze your data should also be described here, citing a source for the use of the statistical tests, perhaps a statistics book.
Results: should clearly describe what was found, and not require the reader to interpret data from figures and tables. Generally, results include only summarized data and observations obtained in the study. Do not present raw data. If you want to include actual data sheets these are an appendix to the paper. In addition, all figures and tables included in your paper must be cited in the results description. Most importantly, the results section should be free of interpretation of the data. If a figure can be used to show the data, use the figure (e.g. a graph) instead of a table. Most people understand graphs more quickly than tables. Don't present the same data in several ways, choose the one best way. While tables are good for presenting some kinds of data, consider the options. Do not present tables in text form! Both tables and figures should be clearly labeled Figure 1 or Table 1 in order of being referred to in the text, and should include a descriptive caption so they "stand alone" without needing reference to the text of the results section. Table captions are always above a table, while figure captions are placed below a graph, picture, or sketch. Each table or figure should be on a separate page, inserted in order immediately following the text page it is first cited on. Combine statements about the significance of differences examined by statistical tests with a precise indication of the test used and the probability level chosen. For example "the difference between the means was highly significant (t-test; t = 4.5; d.f. = 12; P < 0.01). Means (averages) should always be followed by an indication of the variation around that mean (25.4 ± 2.7, n=5), and the number of data points used to determine the mean should also be included.
Discussion: is the interpretation of the data in relation to the original objectives or hypotheses. Relate your findings to the present state of knowledge and future needs for research. Make sure this is genuinely interpretive, not just a restatement of the introduction or results sections.
In your discussion, address the following:
1) reach conclusions about the initial hypotheses and/or objectives
2) compare how your conclusions agree or contrast with previously published work
3) identify sources of error and inadequacies of your research
4) speculate upon broader meaning of the conclusions
5) identify needed next steps in research on the problem
Literature Cited: contains, in alphabetical order, only those items specifically referred to within the text. Items you read but did not specifically cite in the text of your paper should not be included. The following format should be used:
To cite a journal article with one author:
If there are more than two authors of a source, cite the reference by the first author name and et al. along with the date. For example:
Scientific writing involves lots of peer review and constructive criticism. The attached scientific paper evaluation form will be used to help determine your grade for this project. Take red marks as opportunities, not personal attacks. Therefore, an opportunity may be given on this assignment to rewrite your paper if you so desire and the final grade for the assignment will be an average of the two grades.
Bibliography
Cox, G.W. 1990. Laboratory Manual of General Ecology, sixth edition. Wm. C. Brown Publishers, Dubuque, Iowa
Name _______________________________
Scientific Paper Evaluation Form
Score (2 = always, 1 = sometimes, 0 = rarely or never)
| Score | Title: | Comments |
| descriptive and appropriate | ||
| Introduction: | ||
| sufficient background information so purpose of study is clear? | ||
| hypothesis and/or objective(s) of study clearly stated | ||
| Procedure or Materials and Methods: | ||
| are methods clearly described? | ||
| research design is appropriate | ||
| Results: | ||
| clear text description of results | ||
| figures and/or tables referred to in text | ||
| figures and/or tables are essential, proper format, and "stand alone" with clear captions | ||
| all relevant data is presented? | ||
|
are results adequately analyzed by ppropriate statistical methods? |
||
| Discussion: | ||
| all relevant data discussed? | ||
| data justifies conclusions/interpretations? | ||
| facts, calculations, and interpretations correct? | ||
| interpretations/conclusions compared with published works? | ||
| Literature Cited: | ||
| sufficient and appropriate (related) for scope of study? | ||
| correct citation methodology in body of text (author date format)? | ||
| correct bibliographic format? | ||
| Overall: | ||
| report is clearly written and logically organized? | ||
| understanding of content clearly demonstrated by author? | ||
| spelling and grammar OK, easy to read? | ||
| Total Grading Score: ___/40 = ___% | ||