|
 
- 积分
- 416
- 威望
- 416
- 包包
- 1859
|
How to Read a Scientific Paper
5 c* s/ j# Z* nFive Helpful Questions
# @; Y' e* R& t" W: r: S1. WHY did they do this set of experiments?
- _" Q3 G" C" n3 \1 s1 aA. What are the authors trying to settle, prove or demolish?
* Q( n) V' T; m+ ]# S. f0 BB. How did this issue come up?
. i G; H+ K' [0 }) [# fC. Why is it worth the effort to settle this issue? 4 L: d( f4 Q9 A- j( w
* f v8 b1 D* P- Z p. x( O0 R2. HOW were the experiments actually done? , r7 w3 a- V0 X# L0 J" l7 T
A. What number or quantity was actually measured?
, a! Z9 x' _/ y, TB. How was the number in A obtained, i.e. what did they actually do? A flow diagram of g R% w8 _3 w& `- m
their procedure is usually helpful.
2 y6 f+ w. M/ S- P" pC. What numbers are really wanted, i.e., must be calculated?
) K) C+ q- \+ p+ z% g8 @D. What information is necessary to calculate the numbers in C, and where did they get & \: J' R' Y6 y, ^* O5 W/ F
this information (from a table, experimental control, or “common knowledge?’). + p7 \' k' T% }% e- Q3 K- l
N/ P# t! U' ^! s0 E3. WHAT are the results?
/ c7 l' U+ j' u% [What is the translation into English of the data in their figures, tables and/or pictures?
- \$ N/ v2 D! `( a+ iThe additional Q “How do you actually calculate the numbers wanted in C?’ is implicit in the
- b& x k$ u0 ?: O9 b {# Xone. You may want to make this into a separate, explicit Q (2E). 8 w. Z( `, |# a; X# V. a
(This is really a translation of the conclusions and not the results.) For now overlook the
* V9 J# x( B1 B4 O' w9 D4 ?; fdistinction between the results and the (obvious) conclusions in the answer to this question 1 @; }5 c* ~" D2 P; L$ x% L6 @
because we have found that it is not worthwhile to stress this issue at the beginning of the 6 \) x# [6 V$ Z: S k
term while the students are still struggling with Q 1 and 2. Q 4, which is specifically $ r! n( Z7 V1 M
designed to emphasize this issue is introduced as soon as the students learn how to answer 3 G) V' C. ~, _$ r' P
Q 1-3.
* B! `8 d2 w( U9 l4. WHAT can conclude from the results? (Assume for the time being, that you can take the # O$ x2 ^! u" n& m
results at face value – in other words, assume they did both the experiments and + z. x5 R% |! d/ d6 K
calculations correctly. Whether or not they really “did it right” is Q5.).
0 S8 e0 X7 |" H. lA. Do the results support the stated conclusion or interpretation of the authors?
* v5 J! d. V: ]B. Do the results prove the stated conclusion, i.e., do they rule out any of the stated or
/ r* A' Q! P7 Y0 @7 zunstated alternatives? To check this point considers what the figures and tables would * x/ a. N* g. J. b4 A8 `
look like if an alternative interpretation were correct. Could you really tell the difference?
9 E$ B' P9 \1 q3 i$ U " J) a! u/ t' u3 h: B5 _
5. (WHETHER) Did they do everything correctly?
$ U2 W2 i7 b5 ?9 U8 f- i: wA. Could anything be wrong with their experimental methods? ) Z6 C; l) B6 n [) w
B. Could anything be wrong with their theoretical methods? 5 o2 ?% V. x; s7 E) ^
(Did they use the right formulas, make reasonable assumptions, etc.?) 8 C) F4 W2 w8 G! c& I7 [. e
- x" @- D, N9 m3 [# \/ } |
|
发表于 2011-8-4 09:30
发表于 2011-8-5 22:51
