How to read a scientific paper: Methods, Results, Introduction, Conclusion, Discussion Counterintuitive, but it is by far the best thing you can do
-
-
Results next, because you want to know the facts that the experiment produced This is because facts come before theories!
Show this thread -
Then the intro, to understand the background to the research, and finally the conclusion/discussion because you want to see how it fits in with emerging theories and practice
Show this thread -
With this structure, you'll get the most out of any research paper, because you'll form an unbiased view on what the research was before you read about the theories that underlie it
Show this thread -
You also won't waste your time reading 10 pages of theory in an introduction when the experiment itself was basically a waste of time
Show this thread -
(As a general rule, the longer the introduction, the worse the actual research is)
Show this thread -
P.s. as some people have noted, it can be useful to read the last couple of lines of the introduction first to make sure you know what the paper is about
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What would be your recommendation for writing a scientific paper? Same order?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Interesting take, although I would question the order. In my mind, one’s choice of methods (e.g. study design and consequent analytical approach) is conditional on the hypothesis one sets out to investigate. Maybe this isn’t generalisable to every discipline but it‘s true in mine
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.