The scientific method: dull, dry, and dead?

I have nightmares about the scientific method… 😵 When it was first taught to me, it seemed dull, dry, and dead. But then, I heard we could blow stuff up… wait… back up… What?

I love these toys!
 

Why are we told that the methodology section in a research paper is the "easiest" to write?

If you have done the experiments, and repeated them, you know how to do them. But would you be able to teach them? 😯 Explain them to your colleague in the lab? 😔

The methodology section of the research paper is the first that peer reviewers will prod and test. For them, it's the most important. 😧 Why?

 

If the design of a study is not sound, 
then you can not trust the results, 
discussion, or conclusions.

 

 So, the main characteristics of adequate methodology are:

  1. Validity 

    Make sure your technique enables you to measure what you intend to measure.

    This seems trivial... but how many times did you run a Western blot without a loading control when you were first starting out? 😕

  2. Reliability

    This is your method's ability to measure consistently.

    All else being equal, how big is the variation in galactose yield between the yeast culture started on Monday, and the Thursday batch? 😕

  3. Reproducibility

    This is the characteristic that enables an entire experiment to be duplicated.

    If you run the bacterial culture in a different lab, will the percentage of apoptotic cells in response to the same antibiotic stress differ? 😕

    This was slightly edited after I thought some more on reproducibility and attended a bunch of conferences.

     

While reproducibility is tricky to ensure, and a lot of studies on reproducibility of clinical trial findings have been attempted, I'll not talk about that for now.  

👉 The link on point 3 is to a guest blog post I wrote for ReviewerCredits, months after this original post.

 

Next time, I'll explore validity, appropriateness, and bias.

Comments

Post a Comment

Leave a comment!

London Book Fair 2024: challenges for publishers

Image
I went to London with a purpose. It’s always good to meet collaborators and friends, but I had other goals with my visit. You see, it’s never good when the decisions that impact us are arrived at without our input. I wanted to bring awareness of my new peer review standards project to those in the publishing industry that can benefit from them. I'm comfortable researching and reviewing, even editing and managing the peer review process, but hearing editors and publishers speak of the big picture issue was an eye-opener. Change is ever present The publishing industry fancies itself as having evolved to explore the heritage and lived experience of minorities, by more frequently placing a spotlight on hidden and undervalued communities. Jonathan Karp, who spoke on the current model of employee ownership that underpins his role as CEO at Simon & Schuster , perfectly exemplified this—with profits now being reinvested in the company, there’s a new collaborative...
Read more

How to spot fake reviewers: a beginner's guide

Image
For those unfamiliar with or new to academic publishing, peer review manipulation is hard to spot. This is mainly because most peer review reports are still confidential documents that stay buried deep in academic journal's editorial offices. As long as this continues to be the default, recognising good and bad peer reviews is difficult enough... now we have to worry about fake peer review as well?! 😒 Well, yes. Yes, we do. The peer review process in academic publishing is unlike any other. The style and content of a manuscript are criticized, as are the thought processes that birthed it. Everything from word choice to significance of the research focus is under scrutiny. In traditional peer review formats, reviewers recommend that manuscripts be accepted or rejected. This much power may make some less scrupulous people guiddy... or yearning to rig the system. The refereeing work that is supposed to be one of the garantors of research integrity is itself highly susceptible to ma...
Read more

London Book Fair 2024: OA and AI

Image
In a survey on the trends of academic publishing conducted in 2023, reflecting on the need to reformulate the current business model was front of mind. The need to optimize operational efficiencies may stem from the increased adoption of open access (OA) policies. For those not in the know, OA is a practice that enables research outputs to be distributed online, free of access charges or other barriers, including the ability for copy or reuse, by applying an open license for copyright. The mandates  advocated by the Holdren Memo in the US, the Nelson Memo in the UK, and Plan S for the EU consolidated the view that unrestricted access to research publications is part of an integral right for transparency—we want to view the outcomes of taxpayer-funded research. However, many publishers follow a gold OA model and charge an article processing charge (APC), which is typically paid through institutional or grant funding. This means that readers don't pay, because t...
Read more