How to read a scientific paper

2024-08-30 Fri

Rick Gilmore

Overview

Announcements

• If plan to vote by mail or absentee in Pennsylvania, make sure that you sign and date the envelope that contains your ballot.
• Don’t wait too late to vote.
• No class Monday: Labor Day
• Fascinating site with interesting data: https://ourworldindata.org

Recap…

• Among other things, Merton (1973) says science is a set of ______ values.
• Oreskes (2019) argues that scientists earn trust about their expertise in a given area by their _________ _________ with the world.
• Feynman (1974) says the most important principle scientists should follow is…
  • Don’t ____ ______!
  • What else should scientists bend over backward to do?

Recap…

• Among other things, Merton (1973) says science is a set of cultural values.
• Oreskes (2019) argues that scientists earn trust about their expertise in a given area by their sustained engagement with the world.
• Feynman (1974)] say is the most important principle scientists should follow?
  • Don’t fool yourself!
  • What else should scientists bend over backward to do?

Today

• Brief discussion of Survey 01

How to read a scientific paper

• Read
  • (Carey, Steiner, & Petri, 2020)
  • (Ruben, 2016) (for fun)
• Assignment
  • Exercise 01: Reading a scientific paper

Survey 01

Aims

• Replicate data from (Krumrei-Mancuso & Rouse, 2016; Nadelson et al., 2014; Plohl & Musil, 2023)
• Create open, transparent, reproducible work flow for cleaning and visualizing these data
• Provoke thought about the relationship between the questions and the constructs
• Learn more about your views on these topics
• Demonstrate a possible final project topic
• Survey 01 link

Survey 01 results

How to read a scientific paper

Suggestions from (Carey et al., 2020)

• Pick your reading goal
• Understand the author(s) goal

Suggestions from (Carey et al., 2020)

• Ask six questions:
  1. What do the author(s) want to know?
  2. What did they do?
  3. Why was it done that way?
  4. What do the results show?
  5. How did the author(s) interpret the results?
  6. What should be done next?

Suggestions from (Carey et al., 2020)

• Unpack each figure and table
• Understand the formatting intentions
• Be critical
• Be kind
• Be ready to go the extra mile
• Talk about it
• Build on it

Gilmore’s “inside-out” suggestions

• Abstract
• Then methods
• Then results, especially figures
• Highlight/look up jargon
• Conclusion, then introduction

Other thoughts

• Claims
  • Causal or descriptive
• Evidence for
  • Argument/logic
  • Statistical tests
  • Figures or tables
• Read more than once

Next time

Wednesday, September 04

• Wednesday not Monday!

How science works (or should)

• Read
  • (Ritchie, 2020), Chapter 1. Alternate link to PDF on Canvas.
  • (Nosek & Bar-Anan, 2012). Alternate link to PDF on Canvas
• Assignment
  • Complete (anonymous, extra credit) survey on scientific norms and counter-norms. No write-up.

Resources

References

Carey, M. A., Steiner, K. L., & Petri, W. A., Jr. (2020). Ten simple rules for reading a scientific paper. PLoS Computational Biology, 16(7), e1008032. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008032

Feynman, R. P. (1974). Cargo cult science. https://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm. Retrieved from https://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm

Krumrei-Mancuso, E. J., & Rouse, S. V. (2016). The development and validation of the comprehensive intellectual humility scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(2), 209–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2015.1068174

Merton, R. W. (1973). The normative structure of science. In R. K. Merton & N. W. Storer (Eds.), The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations (pp. 267–278). The University of Chicago Press.

Nadelson, L., Jorcyk, C., Yang, D., Jarratt Smith, M., Matson, S., Cornell, K., & Husting, V. (2014). I just don’t trust them: The development and validation of an assessment instrument to measure trust in science and scientists. School Science and Mathematics, 114(2), 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12051

Nosek, B. A., & Bar-Anan, Y. (2012). Scientific utopia i: Opening scientific communication. Psychological Inquiry, 23(3), 217–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2012.692215

Oreskes, N. (2019). Why Trust Science. Princeton University Press.

Plohl, N., & Musil, B. (2023). Assessing the incremental value of intellectual humility and cognitive reflection in predicting trust in science. Personality and Individual Differences, 214, 112340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2023.112340

Ritchie, S. (2020). Science fictions: Exposing fraud, bias, negligence and hype in science (1st ed.). Penguin Random House. Retrieved from https://www.amazon.com/Science-Fictions/dp/1847925669

Ruben, A. (2016). How to read a scientific paper. Science| AAAS [Internet], 20. Retrieved from https://www.science.org/content/article/how-read-scientific-paper-rev2