|
Section of Paper |
The Role of This
Section in the... |
|
|
...Biochemical
Tradition |
...Organismal
Tradition |
|
|
Abstract |
Brief summary |
Brief summary |
|
Introduction |
Brief description of the
relevant issues, with a brief
literature review, bringing readers up to date on the problem under
investigation, followed by a statement of precisely what the researchers
investigated, and the questions answered by the investigation. |
Brief description of the
relevant issues, with a brief literature review, followed by a detailed description
of the hypothesis to be tested by the work, and a careful listing of the
predictions made by the hypothesis. |
|
Materials and
Methods |
Details of how each
experiment was done, specifying concentrations of each chemical in the
solutions used, suppliers of reagents, times and temperatures of reactions,
etc. --but with no mention of the logic behind any of the experimental
designs because this will be in the Results section. Some of the details may be repeated
cursorily in the Results section for variables that are central to the design
and interpretation of particular experiments. It is assumed that
no one needs to read this section to follow the paper, and that most readers will ignore it
entirely. This section is merely
the details of performance, to ensure that others can reproduce the
experiments. This section is
often last, and in a smaller font size. |
All of the information
pertaining to how the experiments were set up--logic of experimental design,
technical details, etc. Because
this is the only place that experimental design is mentioned, this is one of
the most important parts of the paper. |
|
Results |
Brief introduction to the
first experiment, outlining the question it asks, the approach used, and its
overall design and critical variables.
This is followed by a quick guide to the results of this experiment,
followed by a brief consideration of alternative interpretations of the
results, and identification of factors that may preclude an unambiguous
conclusion. This leads into the
setup of the next experiment, designed to distinguish among these
alternatives. Essentially, the
paper continues in this manner until the relevant issues have been addressed,
and the complete set of data lead to only one reasonable conclusion--and a
statement of what that conclusion is. |
Straightforward guide to
the findings, which may be as simple as "the result of Experiment 1 is
shown in Figure 1; the result of Experiment 2 is shown in Figure
2." There is no description
of experimental design or setup, because that is in the Methods section. There is no discussion of the interpretation of results,
because that is in the Discussion. |
|
Discussion |
A return to the literature
review, in order to put the new findings into the larger context of the
field. |
Interpretation of the
results, and comparison of the findings to the predictions stated in the
Introduction, with a conclusion of whether the original hypothesis is
supported or ruled out. |
|
References |
List of other papers cited
in the report |
List of other papers cited
in the report |
|
Overall Summary |
Starts with a Question,
then describes the experiments, then reasons from the data to develop an
overall interpretation, often called a "model" of how the system
under investigation works.
"Model" is a synonym for "hypothesis." |
Starts by reasoning from
existing data to develop an hypothesis (synonym: "working model")
for how the system under investigation works. Then describes the experiments, and assesses whether the
model remains valid or must be discarded. |
|
In both formats, the
fundamental process is the same:
reason from data to build a model of how things work. The difference is that in one format,
the model is presented at the end of the paper to show how the data lead to
that particular model. In the
other format, the model is presented at the beginning to set up the
"formal test" of the model. |
||