Writing, Reading, Reviewing C344

Types of Literature Not all literature is the same Letters and Notes differ from Articles – Short, quick announcements (one figure) – Keys are timeliness and brevity – Tend to follow IMRAD, but not formal – Abstract may be replaced by first paragraph – Less data, less review – Journalistic in style: “announcement”

Poster Even more timely than a note Often more preliminary Oral component is essential Scientists are salesmen too!

Reading Papers Use knowledge of conventions to read faster Don’t read in order Depends on degree of background knowledge Titles, headings, abstracts Figures and Tables Read critically

Evaluation Peer review Revision process Must be suitable for audience Importance of research, originality, analysis of previous literature, approach to experimental design, sound conclusions and interpretations, relevance, clarity of presentation, reproducibility Writing in the Sciences, Penrose and Katz

Writing Papers Practical tips as you start to write: – Order of writing? – Decisions of inclusion Brevity Completeness – Clarity Watch assumptions!

Pointers for Success BE ON TIME!!! Abstract – Make sure you have one – Follow IMRAD Introductions – Proper citations, “3 moves,” etc. – Take it up to the next level by incorporating the most recent literature

Pointers for Success Results and Discussion – Make good choices with Tables and Figures – Avoid lists of data Experimental – General procedures section – Data format Conclusions Supplemental

Pointers for Success References – Formatting! – Citation of webpages is not wrong, but does not count as a citation of primary literature – MUST USE JOURNALS TO WHICH WE HAVE ACCESS, or include in supplemental – Plagiarism revisited

Ethics Academic Misconduct – Fabrication – Falsification – Plagiarism Types of Plagiarism—Figure 3.4 in Writing in the Sciences – Direct plagiarism of words without quotes and citation – Mosaic—taking ideas and scattered words without credit – Paraphrase—restating ideas in own words without citation – Insufficient acknowledgment—unclear citation that does not allow reader to know what is original and what is borrowed