Scientific Writing & the Scientific Method: PARALLEL “HOURG 7 Structure in Form & Content cientific Article The writing of a scientific article offersa sharp divergence from the standard essay paper familiar to most students from English class. In marked conirast 10 Faulkner, punctuation and brevity are sought and clarity is a primary virtue Supporting documentation is embedded in the sc entific prose, not foomared along the bottom of Yet not all rules of construction rach page (CEA. ScAULIE, PLD. 6 (n the Department of Biology at Georgio Southern University, Statesboro, GA 30450-8042; «mail chulee@gasou.etu Bruce A. SCHULTE are abandoned. Paragraphs begin with atopic. sentence, 3s build the case ensuing | and the summarizes and provides transition. Nevertheless, instructing students in the art of scientific writing can be truly challenging After years of stockpiling adj tivesand adverbs, the writer learns that reduction is the norm and levels of modification are mini mized. The thesaurus is largely forsaken and repetition cof key terms preferred. Along with the alteration in sty and content, scientific writing supplies its own approach, a parallel process known as the scientific method, The similarity in structure of these ‘wo processes, scientific wniting and the scientific method SCIENTIFICWRITING. 591TABLE 1. Stages in the scientific method and the corresponding components of a scientific article. Scienriric merwo ) (SCIENTIFIC WRITING Observation introduction | Hypothesis Objectives Experimentation ethods/Resuits Conclusion Discusion New thoughts and ‘obserrations, repeat New thoughts, whereto gonext | erative process Further publication of each, can facilitate the understand Scientific Method Figure 1).1) ob: although the scientist must be aware of a wide range of information to ensure the answer has not already been elucidated. For example, n phant communication via chemical signals. A tremen: dous numberof be on elephants but relatively few explicitly explore their communication pauerns, ancl fewer yet their use of chemi nypothesis in writing requite he individual study in the broad ‘ent objectives to those published finding introduction is not an exhaustive review of the litera sure, but a documentation of the critical supporting ideas and results of the study at hand. In general, the scientific anicle introduces the broader concept firs pically, a relaiively limited number o vations stimulate the particular hypo own research examines cle es andl articles have been published al signals. Similarly, the presentation of the hat the scientist couch context, relating cur The wri The scientific method sets science apart (TAUTA MONS ALUIAM |The ital pose of tesdentic method draws the hypotesis rom the steps and general outline of the scientific ais Rien Rea Misiata ty method are unclerstood by most post-clemen- AER emere rater ent taneiegeatere ayant? tary students and, increasingly, even among J elementary school children. The scientific method has four main steps that can be repeated, namely observation, hypothests, experimentation, and conclusions (Table 1), Similarly, most scientific articles contain four major sections, generally referred to as intro- duction, methods, results, and discussion. The parallel structure of these two processes is strikingly similar. In some cases, sctentific results are presented orally as well as in writ- ing and again, their presentation follows a standard format similar to the written form. In this article, the steps in the scientific method will be desenbed docume writing ion of this process via scientific Observation/ Introduction IF any aspect of the scientific method is embedded in the mind, it 1s the concept of hypothesis, ofien thought of as the main ques tion under study. The research is constructed around the central question or questions, but the hypothesis is not an isolated entity. The I hypothesis is drawn froma obser n articles, discus sions with other scientists, and. first-hand examination of the material under inquiry experimen vations, which include writt 582 THE AMERICAN BIOLOGY TEACHER, VOLUME 65,NO. 8, OCTOBER 2003 Scientific Method Come eo ee erty Scientific Writing lean Mier Mato) By cue anRO saniproviding background to the reader, The ensuing para graphs pose the dil verified. The introduction culminates by staung the research objectives, The reader, like the investigator, rnow knows what is to be examined. The next step is for the scientistauthor to devise and describe how the question(s) will be answered Hypothesis/Objec es. Once formulated, the hypotheses require appro- priate procedures to elucidate their answers. The sci entist must devise methodology to rigorously exam ine the questions without introducing personal bias. Whether assessing an alternate hypothesis to the null or exploring the predictions of multiple simultaneous hypotheses, the questions drive the procedures. Reading the work of other scientists and conducting one’s own studies on related questions can greally facilitate this process, Nevertheless, the methods are not a fixed recipe; they ate crafted to answer the spe cific questions.at hand. This approach personalizes the scientific method to the investigator. In ke fashion, the methods section of a scientifie paper describes the essence of the procedures. Experimentation/Methods & Results Enough information is provided so that the study is understandable and repeatable. Early in the learning process, many students of scientific writing are taught to list their materials and account for the exact steps taken to obtain data Such a style bespeaks of directions, more like a manual. than scientific prose. Scientific writ ing describes, but does nov dictate; the process is clear without being dogmatic. The methods of a scientific arucle can be easier to write than a corresponding English essay. Clear sections of the methods can be set olf by subheadings, such as study site, research proto- col, and analysis, The writer deals with smaller blocks of script, and less transitional writing between subsections is necessary. The scientist and writer have entered the tapered neck of the hourglass and the results emanate from the carefully constructed methodology and pres entation of procecares (Figure 2), The results provide the data that should answer the research question or discriminate among the hypotheses examined, The scientific practitioner must honestly and diligenily assemble the data in ways to examine the stated hypotheses. In much of science ‘oday, especially in biology, this requires some statist cal analysis, essentially co remove doubts of bias on the interpretation of the findings by incorporating the sc rant The personalized process ofthe scientific method and stent eae Tacs lena Tec eee een tien) entific study of data (ie, statistics), In writing about the results, the orderly’ statement of objectives is repeated in the concise and well-documented presen tation of their solution, If the objectives have a tiered organization, then the results are presented in the same order for clarity and parallel structure. However, the order in which the questions were conceived for the experiment may not be the most interesting or rel: evant orcler for presentation. In this case, the written order of the objectives should be reorganized so that the most powerful results ate presented first, main: taining parallel siructure between the introduction and results sections. Novice scientists often wish to write in 4 chronological order (beginning with the findings for the trials that were done first) or in a concepiual order (beginning with the findings for the ideas that were conceived of first). Such approaches fail 1 appreciate the insights provided by the study. As carefully as a sci entist may plan, the results are not known beforehand. This makes the process both exciting and, at times, frustrating, Yet, the reader of the results section does. ot need to be aware of what was “supposed to hap- pen,” but rather what did happen. SCIENTIFIC WRITING. 593,