How To Find Non Research Articles

To form a truly educated opinion on a scientific subject, you need to become familiar with current research in that field. And to exist able to distinguish between good and bad interpretations of research, you have to be willing and able to read the primary research literature for yourself. Reading and understanding research papers is a skill that every single doctor and scientist has had to learn during graduate schoolhouse. Yous tin larn it too, but like any skill it takes patience and practice.

Reading a scientific paper is a completely different process from reading an commodity about science in a web log or paper. Not only do you lot read the sections in a unlike gild than they're presented, but y'all as well accept to take notes, read it multiple times, and probably go look up other papers in order to sympathise some of the details. Reading a unmarried paper may take you lot a very long time at first, but be patient with yourself. The procedure volition go much faster as yous proceeds experience.

The type of scientific paper I'm discussing here is referred to as a main research article. Information technology's a peer-reviewed written report of new inquiry on a specific question (or questions). Most articles will be divided into the following sections: abstract, introduction, methods, results, and conclusions/interpretations/word.

Before you brainstorm reading a paper, take note of the authors and their institutional affiliations. Some institutions (e.g., Academy of Texas) are well-respected; others may appear to be legitimate research institutions only are really agenda-driven. Also have note of the journal in which it'due south published. Exist cautious of articles from questionable journals, or sites like Natural News, that might resemble peer-reviewed scientific journals only aren't.

Stride-by-Stride Instructions for Reading a Principal Research Article

one. Begin by reading the introduction, non the abstract.

The abstruse is that dense showtime paragraph at the very beginning of a paper. In fact, that's often the only part of a newspaper that many non-scientists read when they're trying to build a scientific argument. (This is a terrible practice. Don't do it.) I always read the abstract last, considering it contains a succinct summary of the entire paper, and I'chiliad concerned about inadvertently becoming biased past the authors' estimation of the results.

2. Identify the large question.

Non "What is this paper about?" but "What problem is this unabridged field trying to solve?" This helps y'all focus on why this research is existence washed. Look closely for evidence of agenda-motivated inquiry.

three. Summarize the groundwork in five sentences or less.

What work has been done before in this field to answer the big question? What are the limitations of that work? What, according to the authors, needs to be done next? You need to exist able to succinctly explain why this enquiry has been washed in order to understand information technology.

four. Identify the specific question(s).

What exactly are the authors trying to answer with their enquiry? There may be multiple questions, or just one. Write them downwardly. If information technology's the kind of research that tests one or more than null hypotheses, identify it/them.

5. Identify the approach.

What are the authors going to do to reply the specific question(s)?

vi. Read the methods section.

Depict a diagram for each experiment, showing exactly what the authors did. Include as much detail as yous need to fully understand the piece of work.

7. Read the results section.

Write one or more paragraphs to summarize the results for each experiment, each figure, and each table. Don't yet try to decide what the results mean; just write down what they are. Yous'll often find that results are summarized in the figures and tables. Pay careful attention to them! You may as well need to go to supplementary online data files to find some of the results. Besides pay attending to:

The words "significant" and "non-meaning." These take precise statistical meanings. Read more about this hither.

Graphs. Do they have error bars on them? For certain types of studies, a lack of conviction intervals is a major red flag.

The sample size. Has the written report been conducted on ten people, or x,000 people? For some research purposes a sample size of 10 is sufficient, but for about studies larger is meliorate.

8. Determine whether the results answer the specific question(s).

What do you think they mean? Don't move on until you take thought nearly this. It'due south OK to change your mind in lite of the authors' interpretation -- in fact, you probably will if you're still a beginner at this kind of analysis -- but it's a really good habit to get-go forming your ain interpretations before you read those of others.

9. Read the determination/discussion/interpretation section.

What exercise the authors think the results mean? Do you hold with them? Tin you come up with any alternative way of interpreting them? Do the authors identify any weaknesses in their own study? Do you see whatsoever that the authors missed? (Don't presume they're infallible!) What do they propose to practise as a next step? Practice you concord with that?

10. Go back to the showtime and read the abstract.

Does it friction match what the authors said in the paper? Does it fit with your interpretation of the newspaper?

11. Find out what other researchers say about the newspaper.

Who are the (best-selling or self-proclaimed) experts in this particular field? Practise they have criticisms of the study that you oasis't thought of, or do they generally back up information technology? Don't fail to do this! Here'due south a place where I do recommend y'all use Google! Just practise information technology last, then you are ameliorate prepared to think critically almost what other people say.

A full-length version of this mail originally appeared on the author'southward personal web log.