|
 
- 积分
- 416
- 威望
- 416
- 包包
- 1859
|
How to Read a Scientific Paper
. ?* ?/ }3 u* s6 ^Five Helpful Questions 8 Z% E6 S1 Q3 X$ c, c
1. WHY did they do this set of experiments? 2 x/ r6 Y( b* \5 v) G3 |8 o! |" D
A. What are the authors trying to settle, prove or demolish?
; F0 H+ D/ L/ K( d" W2 uB. How did this issue come up?
* y8 S/ u; x7 ^C. Why is it worth the effort to settle this issue? & M9 C& `0 b Q( x; T7 N, c3 w
% U" N, y% r4 U6 V6 Q0 v7 z2. HOW were the experiments actually done? 4 k9 E- r) S h! F3 y7 ~, A
A. What number or quantity was actually measured? 8 t# l6 F7 F Y( D: j' C( v
B. How was the number in A obtained, i.e. what did they actually do? A flow diagram of
' K1 s7 J/ L% W" o% c6 Q: Btheir procedure is usually helpful. z) x" t9 B S3 B, a
C. What numbers are really wanted, i.e., must be calculated? 1 j. R, a* N: S. A0 s2 c! y3 ~
D. What information is necessary to calculate the numbers in C, and where did they get
4 l. Q& Q, ?4 e3 t$ v1 fthis information (from a table, experimental control, or “common knowledge?’). 9 F: i! o1 ` B4 r2 c* `, X1 h8 v
3 ?0 e5 P Q' ]$ n3 f3. WHAT are the results? N. g o! F" S6 r Q {
What is the translation into English of the data in their figures, tables and/or pictures? " B7 S6 L: Y: {# I, p! ~
The additional Q “How do you actually calculate the numbers wanted in C?’ is implicit in the - ~5 Z; ]# a. N
one. You may want to make this into a separate, explicit Q (2E).
9 H8 F: r# D- Y2 W% C; q(This is really a translation of the conclusions and not the results.) For now overlook the " ]$ {) [0 }7 Q& `
distinction between the results and the (obvious) conclusions in the answer to this question 7 Y, D( h+ f3 m$ r% m
because we have found that it is not worthwhile to stress this issue at the beginning of the
6 X9 G' n) f2 Y1 H2 A Q( Kterm while the students are still struggling with Q 1 and 2. Q 4, which is specifically * ?( [! P s1 E7 p; Y
designed to emphasize this issue is introduced as soon as the students learn how to answer
?5 L" W$ n+ m, x+ o6 fQ 1-3. / b( j& ]& N8 u
4. WHAT can conclude from the results? (Assume for the time being, that you can take the
# P' K6 z/ ]) `3 L' P- {results at face value – in other words, assume they did both the experiments and
: ?6 B% X- T) pcalculations correctly. Whether or not they really “did it right” is Q5.). 7 d9 {( T: v5 h+ v% {
A. Do the results support the stated conclusion or interpretation of the authors?
. r- k) L$ e9 k3 sB. Do the results prove the stated conclusion, i.e., do they rule out any of the stated or ; b/ W2 [! Y' P' N
unstated alternatives? To check this point considers what the figures and tables would / f$ C, v2 ?- }: l+ u
look like if an alternative interpretation were correct. Could you really tell the difference?
- ]% {& G- B% r1 } + {8 N# ]) ] e
5. (WHETHER) Did they do everything correctly? & I6 U9 |; Y( \ H
A. Could anything be wrong with their experimental methods?
% u8 S& i" z9 I h* b/ M" L" bB. Could anything be wrong with their theoretical methods? * T3 \* R+ Z3 D9 P0 O* k
(Did they use the right formulas, make reasonable assumptions, etc.?) $ z; p4 s- E4 Z
$ o8 G+ n5 d0 y/ m B |
|
发表于 2011-8-4 09:30
发表于 2011-8-5 22:51
