1. Writing Research Proposals in the Natural and Biomedical Sciences
November 13, 2007
Libby O’Hare
Ph.D. Candidate, Neuroscience
UCLA GWC Writing Consultant
ABSTRACT: This workshop will discuss the basics of writing dissertations in the sciences. Topics to be covered include identifying the type of dissertation you want to write, conducting a literature review, organizational and motivational strategies, and more. There will be ample time for questions.

2. PART 2 Outline 1.) Part 1 Review: -NRSA format -Literature reviews
2.) Writing the Experimental Design & Methods Section:
-tips and strategies for the methods section
3.) Bringing it all together
-four sections that will set your proposal apart
4.) Common Reviewer Complaints
-things to keep in mind

3. Part 1 Review NRSA components The Background & Significance Section (Literature Reviews)

4. NRSA Grant Proposals Have specific and standard format:
Specific Aims and Hypotheses
Background and Significance
Methods and Experimental Design
Conclusions and Interpretations
We will add components to this format slightly to make your proposal even more compelling and hopefully more successful
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

5. (1) Broad Summary Statement of Project
1-2 paragraphs
Place the overall research question in perspective
Attention grabbing
Use lay language and avoid references when possible
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

6. (2) Specific Aims and Hypotheses
Usually 2-5 specific aims are listed
Identify the project goals and main hypotheses to be tested
Should list aims using numbers and simple, specific sentences
Helpful to use different formatting tools (boldface, italics) to identify specific aims and hypotheses
Specific Aims Checklist:
Do the aims address interesting and specific issues?
Are the aims hypothesis-based?
Are the aims and hypotheses clearly described?
Any use of different font styles?
Anything missing?

7. (3) Background and Significance
Review of the current literature relevant to the proposed project
Putting the research question into perspective
Explicit explanation of the potential scientific impact of the project
How does your research question address a hole in the literature (how is your question novel)?
What progression of experiments that led to your project?
Clear and well organized--use subheadings where possible
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

8. (4) Preliminary Data If applicable and available
If included, should be brief
Use images, graphs, tables
Main goal is to demonstrate that you can perform the technique/analysis/procedure you are proposing
Secondary goal is to indicate that your initial data is coming out as expected
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

9. (5) Methods and Experimental Design
Description of research design
Include information on:
-Materials
-Subjects
-Instruments
-data collection procedures
-data analysis methods
How will you address possible experimental confounds in your design?
Look at previous grant proposals from your lab to get a sense of the scope and details needed
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

10. (6) Expected Results and Possible Caveats
What are your expected results?
Given these results, what is your interpretation?
How does this interpretation fit with the concepts you have developed in the background and significance section?
What are potential confounds or caveats in your experimental design?
Discuss alternative approaches that may be used to address this confounds and caveats
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

11. (7) Broad Conclusions and Implications
1-2 paragraphs
Place the overall research question in perspective
Spell out exactly how the proposed research will advance the field
Use lay language and avoid references when possible
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

12. (8) Timeline or Work Plan
Chart format is helpful
Include information on the duration of experiments, activities that will be conducted
Optional for NRSA grants, but extremely helpful to have for yourself
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

13. Functions of Literature Reviews
Placing the current study within the wider disciplinary conversation
Illustrates the novelty and importance of the project
Explains how your research questions and/or research approach is different from those previously published
Justifies your methodology
Demonstrates your familiarity with the topic and your ability to study it successfully

14. Tips and Strategies Categorize your sources into topic clusters
Look for trends and themes and synthesize related information:
Develop the positions that are relevant for your project
Build on conclusions that have led to your project
Identify holes due to flawed assumptions or improper methods
Include a certain amount of simple reporting of previous results, but remember
You are writing discursive prose
Your primary goal is to critique

15. Tips and Strategies (Cont.)
You can’t include every single study that has ever been published on your topic!
Avoid polemics, praise, and blame
Focus on justifying your research questions and methodology

16. Exercise: Literature Review Checklist (getting ready to write)

17. Writing the Background & Significance Section
Critical Questions
1.) why does the proposed research need to be conducted?
2.) how is it different from other studies?
3.) where does the proposed research fit within the current knowledge?
4.) what will the proposed research contribute to the field?
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

18. Part 2 The Methods & Experimental Design Section

19. Writing the Methods and Experimental Design Section
Definitions
Functions
Types/Styles
Tips and Strategies

20. (5) Methods and Experimental Design
Description of research design
Include information on:
Materials
Subjects
Instruments
data collection procedures
data analysis methods
How will you address possible experimental confounds in your design?
Look at previous grant proposals from your lab to get a sense of the scope and details needed

21. Methods and Experimental Design
What is experimental design/methodology?
description of the specific procedures you will use to address your specific aims
Organization and clarity are fundamental!

22. Functions of Methods Sections
Describe the overall methodological approach
Illustration of how methods will answer your research questions
Development of rationale or scientific strategy
Description of specific methods of data collection
Explanation of data analysis methods/strategies
Address potential limitations and interpretations

23. Suggested Format Specific Aim #1 Rationale:
how does this design relate to your overall hypothesis?
Methods:
data collection, data quality control, data management, statistical analysis
Expected Results:
How will you interpret the expected outcome?
What are some different possible outcomes?
How will these be different outcomes be interpreted and addressed?
(repeat for each specific aim)

24. Methods and Experimental Design Checklist
Exercise 1 (10-15 minutes)
Methods and Experimental Design Checklist
Are the methods I chose feasible and within my competence?
Have I made sure my experiment can yield statistically significant results?
Did I address difficulties I may encounter with the proposed approaches, show I can handle them, and propose solutions and alternatives?
Did I consider how the limitations of the approaches may affect my results and data?
Did I discuss methods for gathering and interpreting data?
Did I describe the kinds of results I expect and how they support continuing my project?
Did I show I am aware of the limits to and value of the kinds of results I expect?
Have I convinced will be able to interpret my results?
Did I define the criteria for evaluating the success or failure of each experiment?
Did I state the conditions under which my experimental data would support or contradict my hypothesis?

25. Part 3 Setting Your Proposal Apart

26. 4 Sections to Set Your Proposal Apart
(A) Opening statement
(B) Summary and integration of background literature and preliminary data (if applicable)
(C) Possible caveats and confounds
(D) Final take-home message

27. (A) Broad Summary Statement of Project
1-2 paragraphs
Place the overall research question in perspective
Attention grabbing
This section sets up the reader for why your project is unique and deserves funding
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

28. (B) Expected Results and Possible Caveats
What are your expected results?
Given these results, what is your interpretation?
How does this interpretation fit with the concepts you have developed in the background and significance section?
What are potential confounds or caveats in your experimental design?
Discuss alternative approaches that may be used to address this confounds and caveats
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

29. (C) Summary and Integration of Background Literature and Preliminary Studies
1-2 paragraphs
Place the overall research question in perspective
Spell out exactly how the proposed research will advance the field
You have illustrated how previous research remains insufficient, AND how your preliminary data has positioned you to make the advance that your field needs
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

30. (D) Broad Conclusions and Implications
1-2 paragraphs
Place the overall research question in perspective
Spell out exactly how the proposed research will advance the field
Final message to leave reviewer with should be positive and should reinforce why the project is unique and deserves funding
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Conclusions

31. Part 4 Common Reviewer Complaints

32. Common Reviewer Complaints
Lack of original or novel ideas
Scientific rationale not valid
Project lacks focus, studies are not logically related, experiments do not follow from one another
Proposed studies based on shaky hypotheses
Alternative hypotheses are not considered
Proposed experiments are descriptive and do not test specific hypotheses

33. Common Reviewer Complaints (cont.)
Lack of alternative methodological approaches in case the primary approach does not work out
Insufficient methodological detail to suggesting applicant doesn’t know what she/he are doing
No recognition of potential problems and pitfalls
Proposal lacks critical literature references, reviewers think that applicant does not know the literature

34. Session 2 Summary
1.) Reviewed and discussed experimental methods and design section
2.) Discussed 4 sections that will set your proposal apart
3.) Reviewed common reviewer complaints and how to avoid them
4.) Reviewed the background and significance section (from Part 1)

35. UCLA Grant Writing Resources
Graduate Writing Center (GWC)
Individual Writing Consultation Appointments
Grad Division’s Extramural Fellowship Proposal Consultants
Dr. Chuck Olmstead (physical and life sciences)

36. Acknowledgements UCLA Graduate Writing Center Marilyn Gray
Christine Wilson
UCLA Academic Technology Services
Christine Wells