WRT333

Methods and Results

Syllabus | Table of Pages | Assignment "Structure and Content ..."

The scientific method, and indeed the integrity of modern science, relies on the openness and (if possible) the replicability of the means used to make observations needed to answer questions (or to accept or reject an experimental hypothesis). The Methods section presents those means as fully as necessary for the reader to understand what you did. The Results section corresponds to the methods, telling the reader what you then observed by following your methods. Not all scientific work is done by laboratory experiments, but even in the case of observations gathered from the field, and therefore not strictly replicable, the reader needs to know how you saw what you saw, where and when you saw it, and under what conditions.

Methods (and Materials)

Day (1998) says that the Methods section must provide the complete details that may have been hinted at in the Introduction. Journal articles prize brevity, and rely on an assumption that the reader is versed in the standard experimental, observational, and analytical procedures of the day. When these are common knowledge (e.g., statistical measures such as means and standard deviations, regression analysis, or analysis of variance), there is no need to explain. When techniques should be familiar, a simple reference to prior publication should suffice. Otherwise, Methods should include sufficient detail that a reasonably trained specialist in the field could understand or repeat what was done.

Methods should be complete. If there are proprietary procedures, these may be reserved and the reader referred to a patented process and given a means to license the procedure. There should be no steps left out, otherwise, no secrets so that no one else can follow in your steps. Reporting must be thorough and honest. Day suggests that a test of the adequacy of a Methods section would be for an author to hand it to a colleague, competent and versed in the subject matter of the paper, and to ask whether that scientist could reproduce results with the information presented.

Methods typically present three aspects of the work covered in the article:

  1. Preparations. This includes a list of all materials and specialized equipment used. If the methods are particularly dependent upon laboratory chemicals or special biological cultures, the section may be labeled Methods and Materials. This section would, for example, describe specialized equipment or means used to extract or prepare specimens used as objects of study (e.g., extraction of RNA from a cell). If standard techniques are followed, any exceptions to normal procedures are clarified.
  2. Experiments or Observations. Here you describe what you did to the objects of study, if this is experimental. That is, what treatments were used, what conditions were monitored or held constant (temperature? ph? soil moisture?), etc.
  3. Analysis. This section would describe methods used to examine the data, including special procedures ("ridge" regression), weightings ("logarithmic transforms"), etc.

Although it may be rare for scientists to actually repeat previous work by other scientists, the methods should at least serve to satisfy a reader's belief that were the methods followed, the results reported would be credible. It should be kept in mind, too, that some readers of scientific articles may be just as interested in the approaches used to attain scientific insight as others might be in the insight itself.

Results

Davies (1971) reminds us, " to the biologist, computation is always a means to an end, the real objective being some greater insight into a biological problem." The Results section presents observations, mixed with analysis, as a means to effect that insight. Results are chosen and analyzed so as to answer questions posed in the introduction. Results depend on the Methods of the previous section, so that methods are not repeated in Results. However, to aid the reader, there should be strict parallelism, effected throug means of Headings (Centered, or lead-in, italicized or underlined, etc., so as to create a visually distinctive demarcation of both sections, making it easy for the reader to switch back and forth between Medhods and Results).

While Introduction and Methods tend to lend themselves to formulaic suggestions for content, Results are more difficult. Typically, here is the goal for the results section:

  1. Present what you saw. You need to be open and honest again. If an unexpected result (an "outlier") is observed and cannot be dismissed through reason ("we saw it but can't explain it), it can be included in presentation of observations but, with full disclosure, excluded from analysis ("the curve does not include the outlier").
  2. Point out limits to your observations ("this works under the conditions of the experiment")
  3. Remember that the Results are going to be used to support or reject a scientific claim.
  4. Stay within what you saw; don't make claims that are not supported.

References