how to write hypothesis in past tense

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Write a Research Hypothesis: Good & Bad Examples

What is a research hypothesis?

A research hypothesis is an attempt at explaining a phenomenon or the relationships between phenomena/variables in the real world. Hypotheses are sometimes called “educated guesses”, but they are in fact (or let’s say they should be) based on previous observations, existing theories, scientific evidence, and logic. A research hypothesis is also not a prediction—rather, predictions are ( should be) based on clearly formulated hypotheses. For example, “We tested the hypothesis that KLF2 knockout mice would show deficiencies in heart development” is an assumption or prediction, not a hypothesis. 

The research hypothesis at the basis of this prediction is “the product of the KLF2 gene is involved in the development of the cardiovascular system in mice”—and this hypothesis is probably (hopefully) based on a clear observation, such as that mice with low levels of Kruppel-like factor 2 (which KLF2 codes for) seem to have heart problems. From this hypothesis, you can derive the idea that a mouse in which this particular gene does not function cannot develop a normal cardiovascular system, and then make the prediction that we started with. 

What is the difference between a hypothesis and a prediction?

You might think that these are very subtle differences, and you will certainly come across many publications that do not contain an actual hypothesis or do not make these distinctions correctly. But considering that the formulation and testing of hypotheses is an integral part of the scientific method, it is good to be aware of the concepts underlying this approach. The two hallmarks of a scientific hypothesis are falsifiability (an evaluation standard that was introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper in 1934) and testability —if you cannot use experiments or data to decide whether an idea is true or false, then it is not a hypothesis (or at least a very bad one).

So, in a nutshell, you (1) look at existing evidence/theories, (2) come up with a hypothesis, (3) make a prediction that allows you to (4) design an experiment or data analysis to test it, and (5) come to a conclusion. Of course, not all studies have hypotheses (there is also exploratory or hypothesis-generating research), and you do not necessarily have to state your hypothesis as such in your paper. 

But for the sake of understanding the principles of the scientific method, let’s first take a closer look at the different types of hypotheses that research articles refer to and then give you a step-by-step guide for how to formulate a strong hypothesis for your own paper.

Types of Research Hypotheses

Hypotheses can be simple , which means they describe the relationship between one single independent variable (the one you observe variations in or plan to manipulate) and one single dependent variable (the one you expect to be affected by the variations/manipulation). If there are more variables on either side, you are dealing with a complex hypothesis. You can also distinguish hypotheses according to the kind of relationship between the variables you are interested in (e.g., causal or associative ). But apart from these variations, we are usually interested in what is called the “alternative hypothesis” and, in contrast to that, the “null hypothesis”. If you think these two should be listed the other way round, then you are right, logically speaking—the alternative should surely come second. However, since this is the hypothesis we (as researchers) are usually interested in, let’s start from there.

Alternative Hypothesis

If you predict a relationship between two variables in your study, then the research hypothesis that you formulate to describe that relationship is your alternative hypothesis (usually H1 in statistical terms). The goal of your hypothesis testing is thus to demonstrate that there is sufficient evidence that supports the alternative hypothesis, rather than evidence for the possibility that there is no such relationship. The alternative hypothesis is usually the research hypothesis of a study and is based on the literature, previous observations, and widely known theories. 

Null Hypothesis

The hypothesis that describes the other possible outcome, that is, that your variables are not related, is the null hypothesis ( H0 ). Based on your findings, you choose between the two hypotheses—usually that means that if your prediction was correct, you reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative. Make sure, however, that you are not getting lost at this step of the thinking process: If your prediction is that there will be no difference or change, then you are trying to find support for the null hypothesis and reject H1. 

Directional Hypothesis

While the null hypothesis is obviously “static”, the alternative hypothesis can specify a direction for the observed relationship between variables—for example, that mice with higher expression levels of a certain protein are more active than those with lower levels. This is then called a one-tailed hypothesis. 

Another example for a directional one-tailed alternative hypothesis would be that 

H1: Attending private classes before important exams has a positive effect on performance. 

Your null hypothesis would then be that

H0: Attending private classes before important exams has no/a negative effect on performance.

Nondirectional Hypothesis

A nondirectional hypothesis does not specify the direction of the potentially observed effect, only that there is a relationship between the studied variables—this is called a two-tailed hypothesis. For instance, if you are studying a new drug that has shown some effects on pathways involved in a certain condition (e.g., anxiety) in vitro in the lab, but you can’t say for sure whether it will have the same effects in an animal model or maybe induce other/side effects that you can’t predict and potentially increase anxiety levels instead, you could state the two hypotheses like this:

H1: The only lab-tested drug (somehow) affects anxiety levels in an anxiety mouse model.

You then test this nondirectional alternative hypothesis against the null hypothesis:

H0: The only lab-tested drug has no effect on anxiety levels in an anxiety mouse model.

How to Write a Hypothesis for a Research Paper

Now that we understand the important distinctions between different kinds of research hypotheses, let’s look at a simple process of how to write a hypothesis.

Writing a Hypothesis Step:1

Ask a question, based on earlier research. Research always starts with a question, but one that takes into account what is already known about a topic or phenomenon. For example, if you are interested in whether people who have pets are happier than those who don’t, do a literature search and find out what has already been demonstrated. You will probably realize that yes, there is quite a bit of research that shows a relationship between happiness and owning a pet—and even studies that show that owning a dog is more beneficial than owning a cat ! Let’s say you are so intrigued by this finding that you wonder: 

What is it that makes dog owners even happier than cat owners? 

Let’s move on to Step 2 and find an answer to that question.

Writing a Hypothesis Step 2:

Formulate a strong hypothesis by answering your own question. Again, you don’t want to make things up, take unicorns into account, or repeat/ignore what has already been done. Looking at the dog-vs-cat papers your literature search returned, you see that most studies are based on self-report questionnaires on personality traits, mental health, and life satisfaction. What you don’t find is any data on actual (mental or physical) health measures, and no experiments. You therefore decide to make a bold claim come up with the carefully thought-through hypothesis that it’s maybe the lifestyle of the dog owners, which includes walking their dog several times per day, engaging in fun and healthy activities such as agility competitions, and taking them on trips, that gives them that extra boost in happiness. You could therefore answer your question in the following way:

Dog owners are happier than cat owners because of the dog-related activities they engage in.

Now you have to verify that your hypothesis fulfills the two requirements we introduced at the beginning of this resource article: falsifiability and testability . If it can’t be wrong and can’t be tested, it’s not a hypothesis. We are lucky, however, because yes, we can test whether owning a dog but not engaging in any of those activities leads to lower levels of happiness or well-being than owning a dog and playing and running around with them or taking them on trips.  

Writing a Hypothesis Step 3:

Make your predictions and define your variables. We have verified that we can test our hypothesis, but now we have to define all the relevant variables, design our experiment or data analysis, and make precise predictions. You could, for example, decide to study dog owners (not surprising at this point), let them fill in questionnaires about their lifestyle as well as their life satisfaction (as other studies did), and then compare two groups of active and inactive dog owners. Alternatively, if you want to go beyond the data that earlier studies produced and analyzed and directly manipulate the activity level of your dog owners to study the effect of that manipulation, you could invite them to your lab, select groups of participants with similar lifestyles, make them change their lifestyle (e.g., couch potato dog owners start agility classes, very active ones have to refrain from any fun activities for a certain period of time) and assess their happiness levels before and after the intervention. In both cases, your independent variable would be “ level of engagement in fun activities with dog” and your dependent variable would be happiness or well-being . 

Examples of a Good and Bad Hypothesis

Let’s look at a few examples of good and bad hypotheses to get you started.

Good Hypothesis Examples

Bad Hypothesis Examples

Tips for Writing a Research Hypothesis

If you understood the distinction between a hypothesis and a prediction we made at the beginning of this article, then you will have no problem formulating your hypotheses and predictions correctly. To refresh your memory: We have to (1) look at existing evidence, (2) come up with a hypothesis, (3) make a prediction, and (4) design an experiment. For example, you could summarize your dog/happiness study like this:

(1) While research suggests that dog owners are happier than cat owners, there are no reports on what factors drive this difference. (2) We hypothesized that it is the fun activities that many dog owners (but very few cat owners) engage in with their pets that increases their happiness levels. (3) We thus predicted that preventing very active dog owners from engaging in such activities for some time and making very inactive dog owners take up such activities would lead to an increase and decrease in their overall self-ratings of happiness, respectively. (4) To test this, we invited dog owners into our lab, assessed their mental and emotional well-being through questionnaires, and then assigned them to an “active” and an “inactive” group, depending on… 

Note that you use “we hypothesize” only for your hypothesis, not for your experimental prediction, and “would” or “if – then” only for your prediction, not your hypothesis. A hypothesis that states that something “would” affect something else sounds as if you don’t have enough confidence to make a clear statement—in which case you can’t expect your readers to believe in your research either. Write in the present tense, don’t use modal verbs that express varying degrees of certainty (such as may, might, or could ), and remember that you are not drawing a conclusion while trying not to exaggerate but making a clear statement that you then, in a way, try to disprove . And if that happens, that is not something to fear but an important part of the scientific process.

Similarly, don’t use “we hypothesize” when you explain the implications of your research or make predictions in the conclusion section of your manuscript, since these are clearly not hypotheses in the true sense of the word. As we said earlier, you will find that many authors of academic articles do not seem to care too much about these rather subtle distinctions, but thinking very clearly about your own research will not only help you write better but also ensure that even that infamous Reviewer 2 will find fewer reasons to nitpick about your manuscript. 

Perfect Your Manuscript With Professional Editing

Now that you know how to write a strong research hypothesis for your research paper, you might be interested in our free AI Proofreader , Wordvice AI, which finds and fixes errors in grammar, punctuation, and word choice in academic texts. Or if you are interested in human proofreading , check out our English editing services , including research paper editing and manuscript editing .

On the Wordvice academic resources website , you can also find many more articles and other resources that can help you with writing the other parts of your research paper , with making a research paper outline before you put everything together, or with writing an effective cover letter once you are ready to submit.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Academic writing
• How to write a lab report

How To Write A Lab Report | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Published on May 20, 2021 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on July 23, 2023.

A lab report conveys the aim, methods, results, and conclusions of a scientific experiment. The main purpose of a lab report is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method by performing and evaluating a hands-on lab experiment. This type of assignment is usually shorter than a research paper .

Lab reports are commonly used in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. This article focuses on how to structure and write a lab report.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Structuring a lab report, introduction, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about lab reports.

The sections of a lab report can vary between scientific fields and course requirements, but they usually contain the purpose, methods, and findings of a lab experiment .

Each section of a lab report has its own purpose.

• Title: expresses the topic of your study
• Abstract : summarizes your research aims, methods, results, and conclusions
• Introduction: establishes the context needed to understand the topic
• Method: describes the materials and procedures used in the experiment
• Results: reports all descriptive and inferential statistical analyses
• Discussion: interprets and evaluates results and identifies limitations
• Conclusion: sums up the main findings of your experiment
• References: list of all sources cited using a specific style (e.g. APA )
• Appendices : contains lengthy materials, procedures, tables or figures

Although most lab reports contain these sections, some sections can be omitted or combined with others. For example, some lab reports contain a brief section on research aims instead of an introduction, and a separate conclusion is not always required.

If you’re not sure, it’s best to check your lab report requirements with your instructor.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Your title provides the first impression of your lab report – effective titles communicate the topic and/or the findings of your study in specific terms.

Create a title that directly conveys the main focus or purpose of your study. It doesn’t need to be creative or thought-provoking, but it should be informative.

• The effects of varying nitrogen levels on tomato plant height.
• Testing the universality of the McGurk effect.
• Comparing the viscosity of common liquids found in kitchens.

An abstract condenses a lab report into a brief overview of about 150–300 words. It should provide readers with a compact version of the research aims, the methods and materials used, the main results, and the final conclusion.

Think of it as a way of giving readers a preview of your full lab report. Write the abstract last, in the past tense, after you’ve drafted all the other sections of your report, so you’ll be able to succinctly summarize each section.

To write a lab report abstract, use these guiding questions:

• What is the wider context of your study?
• What research question were you trying to answer?
• How did you perform the experiment?
• What did your results show?
• How did you interpret your results?
• What is the importance of your findings?

Nitrogen is a necessary nutrient for high quality plants. Tomatoes, one of the most consumed fruits worldwide, rely on nitrogen for healthy leaves and stems to grow fruit. This experiment tested whether nitrogen levels affected tomato plant height in a controlled setting. It was expected that higher levels of nitrogen fertilizer would yield taller tomato plants.

Levels of nitrogen fertilizer were varied between three groups of tomato plants. The control group did not receive any nitrogen fertilizer, while one experimental group received low levels of nitrogen fertilizer, and a second experimental group received high levels of nitrogen fertilizer. All plants were grown from seeds, and heights were measured 50 days into the experiment.

The effects of nitrogen levels on plant height were tested between groups using an ANOVA. The plants with the highest level of nitrogen fertilizer were the tallest, while the plants with low levels of nitrogen exceeded the control group plants in height. In line with expectations and previous findings, the effects of nitrogen levels on plant height were statistically significant. This study strengthens the importance of nitrogen for tomato plants.

Your lab report introduction should set the scene for your experiment. One way to write your introduction is with a funnel (an inverted triangle) structure:

• Start with the broad, general research topic
• Narrow your topic down your specific study focus
• End with a clear research question

Begin by providing background information on your research topic and explaining why it’s important in a broad real-world or theoretical context. Describe relevant previous research on your topic and note how your study may confirm it or expand it, or fill a gap in the research field.

This lab experiment builds on previous research from Haque, Paul, and Sarker (2011), who demonstrated that tomato plant yield increased at higher levels of nitrogen. However, the present research focuses on plant height as a growth indicator and uses a lab-controlled setting instead.

Next, go into detail on the theoretical basis for your study and describe any directly relevant laws or equations that you’ll be using. State your main research aims and expectations by outlining your hypotheses .

Based on the importance of nitrogen for tomato plants, the primary hypothesis was that the plants with the high levels of nitrogen would grow the tallest. The secondary hypothesis was that plants with low levels of nitrogen would grow taller than plants with no nitrogen.

Your introduction doesn’t need to be long, but you may need to organize it into a few paragraphs or with subheadings such as “Research Context” or “Research Aims.”

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

A lab report Method section details the steps you took to gather and analyze data. Give enough detail so that others can follow or evaluate your procedures. Write this section in the past tense. If you need to include any long lists of procedural steps or materials, place them in the Appendices section but refer to them in the text here.

You should describe your experimental design, your subjects, materials, and specific procedures used for data collection and analysis.

Experimental design

Briefly note whether your experiment is a within-subjects  or between-subjects design, and describe how your sample units were assigned to conditions if relevant.

A between-subjects design with three groups of tomato plants was used. The control group did not receive any nitrogen fertilizer. The first experimental group received a low level of nitrogen fertilizer, while the second experimental group received a high level of nitrogen fertilizer.

Describe human subjects in terms of demographic characteristics, and animal or plant subjects in terms of genetic background. Note the total number of subjects as well as the number of subjects per condition or per group. You should also state how you recruited subjects for your study.

List the equipment or materials you used to gather data and state the model names for any specialized equipment.

List of materials

35 Tomato seeds

15 plant pots (15 cm tall)

Light lamps (50,000 lux)

Nitrogen fertilizer

Measuring tape

Describe your experimental settings and conditions in detail. You can provide labelled diagrams or images of the exact set-up necessary for experimental equipment. State how extraneous variables were controlled through restriction or by fixing them at a certain level (e.g., keeping the lab at room temperature).

Light levels were fixed throughout the experiment, and the plants were exposed to 12 hours of light a day. Temperature was restricted to between 23 and 25℃. The pH and carbon levels of the soil were also held constant throughout the experiment as these variables could influence plant height. The plants were grown in rooms free of insects or other pests, and they were spaced out adequately.

Your experimental procedure should describe the exact steps you took to gather data in chronological order. You’ll need to provide enough information so that someone else can replicate your procedure, but you should also be concise. Place detailed information in the appendices where appropriate.

In a lab experiment, you’ll often closely follow a lab manual to gather data. Some instructors will allow you to simply reference the manual and state whether you changed any steps based on practical considerations. Other instructors may want you to rewrite the lab manual procedures as complete sentences in coherent paragraphs, while noting any changes to the steps that you applied in practice.

If you’re performing extensive data analysis, be sure to state your planned analysis methods as well. This includes the types of tests you’ll perform and any programs or software you’ll use for calculations (if relevant).

First, tomato seeds were sown in wooden flats containing soil about 2 cm below the surface. Each seed was kept 3-5 cm apart. The flats were covered to keep the soil moist until germination. The seedlings were removed and transplanted to pots 8 days later, with a maximum of 2 plants to a pot. Each pot was watered once a day to keep the soil moist.

The nitrogen fertilizer treatment was applied to the plant pots 12 days after transplantation. The control group received no treatment, while the first experimental group received a low concentration, and the second experimental group received a high concentration. There were 5 pots in each group, and each plant pot was labelled to indicate the group the plants belonged to.

50 days after the start of the experiment, plant height was measured for all plants. A measuring tape was used to record the length of the plant from ground level to the top of the tallest leaf.

In your results section, you should report the results of any statistical analysis procedures that you undertook. You should clearly state how the results of statistical tests support or refute your initial hypotheses.

The main results to report include:

• any descriptive statistics
• statistical test results
• the significance of the test results
• estimates of standard error or confidence intervals

The mean heights of the plants in the control group, low nitrogen group, and high nitrogen groups were 20.3, 25.1, and 29.6 cm respectively. A one-way ANOVA was applied to calculate the effect of nitrogen fertilizer level on plant height. The results demonstrated statistically significant ( p = .03) height differences between groups.

Next, post-hoc tests were performed to assess the primary and secondary hypotheses. In support of the primary hypothesis, the high nitrogen group plants were significantly taller than the low nitrogen group and the control group plants. Similarly, the results supported the secondary hypothesis: the low nitrogen plants were taller than the control group plants.

These results can be reported in the text or in tables and figures. Use text for highlighting a few key results, but present large sets of numbers in tables, or show relationships between variables with graphs.

You should also include sample calculations in the Results section for complex experiments. For each sample calculation, provide a brief description of what it does and use clear symbols. Present your raw data in the Appendices section and refer to it to highlight any outliers or trends.

The Discussion section will help demonstrate your understanding of the experimental process and your critical thinking skills.

In this section, you can:

• Interpret your results
• Compare your findings with your expectations
• Identify any sources of experimental error
• Explain any unexpected results
• Suggest possible improvements for further studies

Interpreting your results involves clarifying how your results help you answer your main research question. Report whether your results support your hypotheses.

• Did you measure what you sought out to measure?
• Were your analysis procedures appropriate for this type of data?

Compare your findings with other research and explain any key differences in findings.

• Are your results in line with those from previous studies or your classmates’ results? Why or why not?

An effective Discussion section will also highlight the strengths and limitations of a study.

• Did you have high internal validity or reliability?
• How did you establish these aspects of your study?

When describing limitations, use specific examples. For example, if random error contributed substantially to the measurements in your study, state the particular sources of error (e.g., imprecise apparatus) and explain ways to improve them.

The results support the hypothesis that nitrogen levels affect plant height, with increasing levels producing taller plants. These statistically significant results are taken together with previous research to support the importance of nitrogen as a nutrient for tomato plant growth.

However, unlike previous studies, this study focused on plant height as an indicator of plant growth in the present experiment. Importantly, plant height may not always reflect plant health or fruit yield, so measuring other indicators would have strengthened the study findings.

Another limitation of the study is the plant height measurement technique, as the measuring tape was not suitable for plants with extreme curvature. Future studies may focus on measuring plant height in different ways.

The main strengths of this study were the controls for extraneous variables, such as pH and carbon levels of the soil. All other factors that could affect plant height were tightly controlled to isolate the effects of nitrogen levels, resulting in high internal validity for this study.

Your conclusion should be the final section of your lab report. Here, you’ll summarize the findings of your experiment, with a brief overview of the strengths and limitations, and implications of your study for further research.

Some lab reports may omit a Conclusion section because it overlaps with the Discussion section, but you should check with your instructor before doing so.

If you want to know more about AI for academic writing, AI tools, or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

• Ad hominem fallacy
• Post hoc fallacy
• Appeal to authority fallacy
• False cause fallacy
• Sunk cost fallacy
• Deep learning
• Generative AI
• Machine learning
• Reinforcement learning
• Supervised vs. unsupervised learning

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

A lab report conveys the aim, methods, results, and conclusions of a scientific experiment . Lab reports are commonly assigned in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields.

The purpose of a lab report is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method with a hands-on lab experiment. Course instructors will often provide you with an experimental design and procedure. Your task is to write up how you actually performed the experiment and evaluate the outcome.

In contrast, a research paper requires you to independently develop an original argument. It involves more in-depth research and interpretation of sources and data.

A lab report is usually shorter than a research paper.

The sections of a lab report can vary between scientific fields and course requirements, but it usually contains the following:

• Abstract: summarizes your research aims, methods, results, and conclusions
• References: list of all sources cited using a specific style (e.g. APA)
• Appendices: contains lengthy materials, procedures, tables or figures

The results chapter or section simply and objectively reports what you found, without speculating on why you found these results. The discussion interprets the meaning of the results, puts them in context, and explains why they matter.

In qualitative research , results and discussion are sometimes combined. But in quantitative research , it’s considered important to separate the objective results from your interpretation of them.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Bhandari, P. (2023, July 23). How To Write A Lab Report | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 26, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-writing/lab-report/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, guide to experimental design | overview, steps, & examples, how to write an apa methods section, how to write an apa results section, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Scientific Reports

What this handout is about.

This handout provides a general guide to writing reports about scientific research you’ve performed. In addition to describing the conventional rules about the format and content of a lab report, we’ll also attempt to convey why these rules exist, so you’ll get a clearer, more dependable idea of how to approach this writing situation. Readers of this handout may also find our handout on writing in the sciences useful.

Background and pre-writing

Why do we write research reports.

You did an experiment or study for your science class, and now you have to write it up for your teacher to review. You feel that you understood the background sufficiently, designed and completed the study effectively, obtained useful data, and can use those data to draw conclusions about a scientific process or principle. But how exactly do you write all that? What is your teacher expecting to see?

To take some of the guesswork out of answering these questions, try to think beyond the classroom setting. In fact, you and your teacher are both part of a scientific community, and the people who participate in this community tend to share the same values. As long as you understand and respect these values, your writing will likely meet the expectations of your audience—including your teacher.

So why are you writing this research report? The practical answer is “Because the teacher assigned it,” but that’s classroom thinking. Generally speaking, people investigating some scientific hypothesis have a responsibility to the rest of the scientific world to report their findings, particularly if these findings add to or contradict previous ideas. The people reading such reports have two primary goals:

• They want to gather the information presented.
• They want to know that the findings are legitimate.

Your job as a writer, then, is to fulfill these two goals.

How do I do that?

Good question. Here is the basic format scientists have designed for research reports:

• Introduction

Methods and Materials

This format, sometimes called “IMRAD,” may take slightly different shapes depending on the discipline or audience; some ask you to include an abstract or separate section for the hypothesis, or call the Discussion section “Conclusions,” or change the order of the sections (some professional and academic journals require the Methods section to appear last). Overall, however, the IMRAD format was devised to represent a textual version of the scientific method.

The scientific method, you’ll probably recall, involves developing a hypothesis, testing it, and deciding whether your findings support the hypothesis. In essence, the format for a research report in the sciences mirrors the scientific method but fleshes out the process a little. Below, you’ll find a table that shows how each written section fits into the scientific method and what additional information it offers the reader.

Thinking of your research report as based on the scientific method, but elaborated in the ways described above, may help you to meet your audience’s expectations successfully. We’re going to proceed by explicitly connecting each section of the lab report to the scientific method, then explaining why and how you need to elaborate that section.

Although this handout takes each section in the order in which it should be presented in the final report, you may for practical reasons decide to compose sections in another order. For example, many writers find that composing their Methods and Results before the other sections helps to clarify their idea of the experiment or study as a whole. You might consider using each assignment to practice different approaches to drafting the report, to find the order that works best for you.

What should I do before drafting the lab report?

The best way to prepare to write the lab report is to make sure that you fully understand everything you need to about the experiment. Obviously, if you don’t quite know what went on during the lab, you’re going to find it difficult to explain the lab satisfactorily to someone else. To make sure you know enough to write the report, complete the following steps:

• What are we going to do in this lab? (That is, what’s the procedure?)
• Why are we going to do it that way?
• What are we hoping to learn from this experiment?
• Why would we benefit from this knowledge?
• Consult your lab supervisor as you perform the lab. If you don’t know how to answer one of the questions above, for example, your lab supervisor will probably be able to explain it to you (or, at least, help you figure it out).
• Plan the steps of the experiment carefully with your lab partners. The less you rush, the more likely it is that you’ll perform the experiment correctly and record your findings accurately. Also, take some time to think about the best way to organize the data before you have to start putting numbers down. If you can design a table to account for the data, that will tend to work much better than jotting results down hurriedly on a scrap piece of paper.
• Record the data carefully so you get them right. You won’t be able to trust your conclusions if you have the wrong data, and your readers will know you messed up if the other three people in your group have “97 degrees” and you have “87.”
• Consult with your lab partners about everything you do. Lab groups often make one of two mistakes: two people do all the work while two have a nice chat, or everybody works together until the group finishes gathering the raw data, then scrams outta there. Collaborate with your partners, even when the experiment is “over.” What trends did you observe? Was the hypothesis supported? Did you all get the same results? What kind of figure should you use to represent your findings? The whole group can work together to answer these questions.
• Consider your audience. You may believe that audience is a non-issue: it’s your lab TA, right? Well, yes—but again, think beyond the classroom. If you write with only your lab instructor in mind, you may omit material that is crucial to a complete understanding of your experiment, because you assume the instructor knows all that stuff already. As a result, you may receive a lower grade, since your TA won’t be sure that you understand all the principles at work. Try to write towards a student in the same course but a different lab section. That student will have a fair degree of scientific expertise but won’t know much about your experiment particularly. Alternatively, you could envision yourself five years from now, after the reading and lectures for this course have faded a bit. What would you remember, and what would you need explained more clearly (as a refresher)?

Once you’ve completed these steps as you perform the experiment, you’ll be in a good position to draft an effective lab report.

Introductions

How do i write a strong introduction.

For the purposes of this handout, we’ll consider the Introduction to contain four basic elements: the purpose, the scientific literature relevant to the subject, the hypothesis, and the reasons you believed your hypothesis viable. Let’s start by going through each element of the Introduction to clarify what it covers and why it’s important. Then we can formulate a logical organizational strategy for the section.

The inclusion of the purpose (sometimes called the objective) of the experiment often confuses writers. The biggest misconception is that the purpose is the same as the hypothesis. Not quite. We’ll get to hypotheses in a minute, but basically they provide some indication of what you expect the experiment to show. The purpose is broader, and deals more with what you expect to gain through the experiment. In a professional setting, the hypothesis might have something to do with how cells react to a certain kind of genetic manipulation, but the purpose of the experiment is to learn more about potential cancer treatments. Undergraduate reports don’t often have this wide-ranging a goal, but you should still try to maintain the distinction between your hypothesis and your purpose. In a solubility experiment, for example, your hypothesis might talk about the relationship between temperature and the rate of solubility, but the purpose is probably to learn more about some specific scientific principle underlying the process of solubility.

For starters, most people say that you should write out your working hypothesis before you perform the experiment or study. Many beginning science students neglect to do so and find themselves struggling to remember precisely which variables were involved in the process or in what way the researchers felt that they were related. Write your hypothesis down as you develop it—you’ll be glad you did.

As for the form a hypothesis should take, it’s best not to be too fancy or complicated; an inventive style isn’t nearly so important as clarity here. There’s nothing wrong with beginning your hypothesis with the phrase, “It was hypothesized that . . .” Be as specific as you can about the relationship between the different objects of your study. In other words, explain that when term A changes, term B changes in this particular way. Readers of scientific writing are rarely content with the idea that a relationship between two terms exists—they want to know what that relationship entails.

Not a hypothesis:

“It was hypothesized that there is a significant relationship between the temperature of a solvent and the rate at which a solute dissolves.”

Hypothesis:

“It was hypothesized that as the temperature of a solvent increases, the rate at which a solute will dissolve in that solvent increases.”

Put more technically, most hypotheses contain both an independent and a dependent variable. The independent variable is what you manipulate to test the reaction; the dependent variable is what changes as a result of your manipulation. In the example above, the independent variable is the temperature of the solvent, and the dependent variable is the rate of solubility. Be sure that your hypothesis includes both variables.

Justify your hypothesis

You need to do more than tell your readers what your hypothesis is; you also need to assure them that this hypothesis was reasonable, given the circumstances. In other words, use the Introduction to explain that you didn’t just pluck your hypothesis out of thin air. (If you did pluck it out of thin air, your problems with your report will probably extend beyond using the appropriate format.) If you posit that a particular relationship exists between the independent and the dependent variable, what led you to believe your “guess” might be supported by evidence?

Scientists often refer to this type of justification as “motivating” the hypothesis, in the sense that something propelled them to make that prediction. Often, motivation includes what we already know—or rather, what scientists generally accept as true (see “Background/previous research” below). But you can also motivate your hypothesis by relying on logic or on your own observations. If you’re trying to decide which solutes will dissolve more rapidly in a solvent at increased temperatures, you might remember that some solids are meant to dissolve in hot water (e.g., bouillon cubes) and some are used for a function precisely because they withstand higher temperatures (they make saucepans out of something). Or you can think about whether you’ve noticed sugar dissolving more rapidly in your glass of iced tea or in your cup of coffee. Even such basic, outside-the-lab observations can help you justify your hypothesis as reasonable.

Background/previous research

This part of the Introduction demonstrates to the reader your awareness of how you’re building on other scientists’ work. If you think of the scientific community as engaging in a series of conversations about various topics, then you’ll recognize that the relevant background material will alert the reader to which conversation you want to enter.

Generally speaking, authors writing journal articles use the background for slightly different purposes than do students completing assignments. Because readers of academic journals tend to be professionals in the field, authors explain the background in order to permit readers to evaluate the study’s pertinence for their own work. You, on the other hand, write toward a much narrower audience—your peers in the course or your lab instructor—and so you must demonstrate that you understand the context for the (presumably assigned) experiment or study you’ve completed. For example, if your professor has been talking about polarity during lectures, and you’re doing a solubility experiment, you might try to connect the polarity of a solid to its relative solubility in certain solvents. In any event, both professional researchers and undergraduates need to connect the background material overtly to their own work.

Organization of this section

Most of the time, writers begin by stating the purpose or objectives of their own work, which establishes for the reader’s benefit the “nature and scope of the problem investigated” (Day 1994). Once you have expressed your purpose, you should then find it easier to move from the general purpose, to relevant material on the subject, to your hypothesis. In abbreviated form, an Introduction section might look like this:

“The purpose of the experiment was to test conventional ideas about solubility in the laboratory [purpose] . . . According to Whitecoat and Labrat (1999), at higher temperatures the molecules of solvents move more quickly . . . We know from the class lecture that molecules moving at higher rates of speed collide with one another more often and thus break down more easily [background material/motivation] . . . Thus, it was hypothesized that as the temperature of a solvent increases, the rate at which a solute will dissolve in that solvent increases [hypothesis].”

Again—these are guidelines, not commandments. Some writers and readers prefer different structures for the Introduction. The one above merely illustrates a common approach to organizing material.

How do I write a strong Materials and Methods section?

As with any piece of writing, your Methods section will succeed only if it fulfills its readers’ expectations, so you need to be clear in your own mind about the purpose of this section. Let’s review the purpose as we described it above: in this section, you want to describe in detail how you tested the hypothesis you developed and also to clarify the rationale for your procedure. In science, it’s not sufficient merely to design and carry out an experiment. Ultimately, others must be able to verify your findings, so your experiment must be reproducible, to the extent that other researchers can follow the same procedure and obtain the same (or similar) results.

Here’s a real-world example of the importance of reproducibility. In 1989, physicists Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischman announced that they had discovered “cold fusion,” a way of producing excess heat and power without the nuclear radiation that accompanies “hot fusion.” Such a discovery could have great ramifications for the industrial production of energy, so these findings created a great deal of interest. When other scientists tried to duplicate the experiment, however, they didn’t achieve the same results, and as a result many wrote off the conclusions as unjustified (or worse, a hoax). To this day, the viability of cold fusion is debated within the scientific community, even though an increasing number of researchers believe it possible. So when you write your Methods section, keep in mind that you need to describe your experiment well enough to allow others to replicate it exactly.

With these goals in mind, let’s consider how to write an effective Methods section in terms of content, structure, and style.

Sometimes the hardest thing about writing this section isn’t what you should talk about, but what you shouldn’t talk about. Writers often want to include the results of their experiment, because they measured and recorded the results during the course of the experiment. But such data should be reserved for the Results section. In the Methods section, you can write that you recorded the results, or how you recorded the results (e.g., in a table), but you shouldn’t write what the results were—not yet. Here, you’re merely stating exactly how you went about testing your hypothesis. As you draft your Methods section, ask yourself the following questions:

• How much detail? Be precise in providing details, but stay relevant. Ask yourself, “Would it make any difference if this piece were a different size or made from a different material?” If not, you probably don’t need to get too specific. If so, you should give as many details as necessary to prevent this experiment from going awry if someone else tries to carry it out. Probably the most crucial detail is measurement; you should always quantify anything you can, such as time elapsed, temperature, mass, volume, etc.
• Rationale: Be sure that as you’re relating your actions during the experiment, you explain your rationale for the protocol you developed. If you capped a test tube immediately after adding a solute to a solvent, why did you do that? (That’s really two questions: why did you cap it, and why did you cap it immediately?) In a professional setting, writers provide their rationale as a way to explain their thinking to potential critics. On one hand, of course, that’s your motivation for talking about protocol, too. On the other hand, since in practical terms you’re also writing to your teacher (who’s seeking to evaluate how well you comprehend the principles of the experiment), explaining the rationale indicates that you understand the reasons for conducting the experiment in that way, and that you’re not just following orders. Critical thinking is crucial—robots don’t make good scientists.
• Control: Most experiments will include a control, which is a means of comparing experimental results. (Sometimes you’ll need to have more than one control, depending on the number of hypotheses you want to test.) The control is exactly the same as the other items you’re testing, except that you don’t manipulate the independent variable-the condition you’re altering to check the effect on the dependent variable. For example, if you’re testing solubility rates at increased temperatures, your control would be a solution that you didn’t heat at all; that way, you’ll see how quickly the solute dissolves “naturally” (i.e., without manipulation), and you’ll have a point of reference against which to compare the solutions you did heat.

Describe the control in the Methods section. Two things are especially important in writing about the control: identify the control as a control, and explain what you’re controlling for. Here is an example:

“As a control for the temperature change, we placed the same amount of solute in the same amount of solvent, and let the solution stand for five minutes without heating it.”

Structure and style

Organization is especially important in the Methods section of a lab report because readers must understand your experimental procedure completely. Many writers are surprised by the difficulty of conveying what they did during the experiment, since after all they’re only reporting an event, but it’s often tricky to present this information in a coherent way. There’s a fairly standard structure you can use to guide you, and following the conventions for style can help clarify your points.

• Subsections: Occasionally, researchers use subsections to report their procedure when the following circumstances apply: 1) if they’ve used a great many materials; 2) if the procedure is unusually complicated; 3) if they’ve developed a procedure that won’t be familiar to many of their readers. Because these conditions rarely apply to the experiments you’ll perform in class, most undergraduate lab reports won’t require you to use subsections. In fact, many guides to writing lab reports suggest that you try to limit your Methods section to a single paragraph.
• Narrative structure: Think of this section as telling a story about a group of people and the experiment they performed. Describe what you did in the order in which you did it. You may have heard the old joke centered on the line, “Disconnect the red wire, but only after disconnecting the green wire,” where the person reading the directions blows everything to kingdom come because the directions weren’t in order. We’re used to reading about events chronologically, and so your readers will generally understand what you did if you present that information in the same way. Also, since the Methods section does generally appear as a narrative (story), you want to avoid the “recipe” approach: “First, take a clean, dry 100 ml test tube from the rack. Next, add 50 ml of distilled water.” You should be reporting what did happen, not telling the reader how to perform the experiment: “50 ml of distilled water was poured into a clean, dry 100 ml test tube.” Hint: most of the time, the recipe approach comes from copying down the steps of the procedure from your lab manual, so you may want to draft the Methods section initially without consulting your manual. Later, of course, you can go back and fill in any part of the procedure you inadvertently overlooked.
• Past tense: Remember that you’re describing what happened, so you should use past tense to refer to everything you did during the experiment. Writers are often tempted to use the imperative (“Add 5 g of the solid to the solution”) because that’s how their lab manuals are worded; less frequently, they use present tense (“5 g of the solid are added to the solution”). Instead, remember that you’re talking about an event which happened at a particular time in the past, and which has already ended by the time you start writing, so simple past tense will be appropriate in this section (“5 g of the solid were added to the solution” or “We added 5 g of the solid to the solution”).
• Active: We heated the solution to 80°C. (The subject, “we,” performs the action, heating.)
• Passive: The solution was heated to 80°C. (The subject, “solution,” doesn’t do the heating–it is acted upon, not acting.)

Increasingly, especially in the social sciences, using first person and active voice is acceptable in scientific reports. Most readers find that this style of writing conveys information more clearly and concisely. This rhetorical choice thus brings two scientific values into conflict: objectivity versus clarity. Since the scientific community hasn’t reached a consensus about which style it prefers, you may want to ask your lab instructor.

How do I write a strong Results section?

Here’s a paradox for you. The Results section is often both the shortest (yay!) and most important (uh-oh!) part of your report. Your Materials and Methods section shows how you obtained the results, and your Discussion section explores the significance of the results, so clearly the Results section forms the backbone of the lab report. This section provides the most critical information about your experiment: the data that allow you to discuss how your hypothesis was or wasn’t supported. But it doesn’t provide anything else, which explains why this section is generally shorter than the others.

Before you write this section, look at all the data you collected to figure out what relates significantly to your hypothesis. You’ll want to highlight this material in your Results section. Resist the urge to include every bit of data you collected, since perhaps not all are relevant. Also, don’t try to draw conclusions about the results—save them for the Discussion section. In this section, you’re reporting facts. Nothing your readers can dispute should appear in the Results section.

Most Results sections feature three distinct parts: text, tables, and figures. Let’s consider each part one at a time.

This should be a short paragraph, generally just a few lines, that describes the results you obtained from your experiment. In a relatively simple experiment, one that doesn’t produce a lot of data for you to repeat, the text can represent the entire Results section. Don’t feel that you need to include lots of extraneous detail to compensate for a short (but effective) text; your readers appreciate discrimination more than your ability to recite facts. In a more complex experiment, you may want to use tables and/or figures to help guide your readers toward the most important information you gathered. In that event, you’ll need to refer to each table or figure directly, where appropriate:

“Table 1 lists the rates of solubility for each substance”

“Solubility increased as the temperature of the solution increased (see Figure 1).”

If you do use tables or figures, make sure that you don’t present the same material in both the text and the tables/figures, since in essence you’ll just repeat yourself, probably annoying your readers with the redundancy of your statements.

Feel free to describe trends that emerge as you examine the data. Although identifying trends requires some judgment on your part and so may not feel like factual reporting, no one can deny that these trends do exist, and so they properly belong in the Results section. Example:

“Heating the solution increased the rate of solubility of polar solids by 45% but had no effect on the rate of solubility in solutions containing non-polar solids.”

This point isn’t debatable—you’re just pointing out what the data show.

As in the Materials and Methods section, you want to refer to your data in the past tense, because the events you recorded have already occurred and have finished occurring. In the example above, note the use of “increased” and “had,” rather than “increases” and “has.” (You don’t know from your experiment that heating always increases the solubility of polar solids, but it did that time.)

You shouldn’t put information in the table that also appears in the text. You also shouldn’t use a table to present irrelevant data, just to show you did collect these data during the experiment. Tables are good for some purposes and situations, but not others, so whether and how you’ll use tables depends upon what you need them to accomplish.

Tables are useful ways to show variation in data, but not to present a great deal of unchanging measurements. If you’re dealing with a scientific phenomenon that occurs only within a certain range of temperatures, for example, you don’t need to use a table to show that the phenomenon didn’t occur at any of the other temperatures. How useful is this table?

As you can probably see, no solubility was observed until the trial temperature reached 50°C, a fact that the text part of the Results section could easily convey. The table could then be limited to what happened at 50°C and higher, thus better illustrating the differences in solubility rates when solubility did occur.

As a rule, try not to use a table to describe any experimental event you can cover in one sentence of text. Here’s an example of an unnecessary table from How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper , by Robert A. Day:

As Day notes, all the information in this table can be summarized in one sentence: “S. griseus, S. coelicolor, S. everycolor, and S. rainbowenski grew under aerobic conditions, whereas S. nocolor and S. greenicus required anaerobic conditions.” Most readers won’t find the table clearer than that one sentence.

When you do have reason to tabulate material, pay attention to the clarity and readability of the format you use. Here are a few tips:

• Number your table. Then, when you refer to the table in the text, use that number to tell your readers which table they can review to clarify the material.
• Give your table a title. This title should be descriptive enough to communicate the contents of the table, but not so long that it becomes difficult to follow. The titles in the sample tables above are acceptable.
• Arrange your table so that readers read vertically, not horizontally. For the most part, this rule means that you should construct your table so that like elements read down, not across. Think about what you want your readers to compare, and put that information in the column (up and down) rather than in the row (across). Usually, the point of comparison will be the numerical data you collect, so especially make sure you have columns of numbers, not rows.Here’s an example of how drastically this decision affects the readability of your table (from A Short Guide to Writing about Chemistry , by Herbert Beall and John Trimbur). Look at this table, which presents the relevant data in horizontal rows:

It’s a little tough to see the trends that the author presumably wants to present in this table. Compare this table, in which the data appear vertically:

The second table shows how putting like elements in a vertical column makes for easier reading. In this case, the like elements are the measurements of length and height, over five trials–not, as in the first table, the length and height measurements for each trial.

• Make sure to include units of measurement in the tables. Readers might be able to guess that you measured something in millimeters, but don’t make them try.

• Don’t use vertical lines as part of the format for your table. This convention exists because journals prefer not to have to reproduce these lines because the tables then become more expensive to print. Even though it’s fairly unlikely that you’ll be sending your Biology 11 lab report to Science for publication, your readers still have this expectation. Consequently, if you use the table-drawing option in your word-processing software, choose the option that doesn’t rely on a “grid” format (which includes vertical lines).

How do I include figures in my report?

Although tables can be useful ways of showing trends in the results you obtained, figures (i.e., illustrations) can do an even better job of emphasizing such trends. Lab report writers often use graphic representations of the data they collected to provide their readers with a literal picture of how the experiment went.

When should you use a figure?

Remember the circumstances under which you don’t need a table: when you don’t have a great deal of data or when the data you have don’t vary a lot. Under the same conditions, you would probably forgo the figure as well, since the figure would be unlikely to provide your readers with an additional perspective. Scientists really don’t like their time wasted, so they tend not to respond favorably to redundancy.

If you’re trying to decide between using a table and creating a figure to present your material, consider the following a rule of thumb. The strength of a table lies in its ability to supply large amounts of exact data, whereas the strength of a figure is its dramatic illustration of important trends within the experiment. If you feel that your readers won’t get the full impact of the results you obtained just by looking at the numbers, then a figure might be appropriate.

Of course, an undergraduate class may expect you to create a figure for your lab experiment, if only to make sure that you can do so effectively. If this is the case, then don’t worry about whether to use figures or not—concentrate instead on how best to accomplish your task.

Figures can include maps, photographs, pen-and-ink drawings, flow charts, bar graphs, and section graphs (“pie charts”). But the most common figure by far, especially for undergraduates, is the line graph, so we’ll focus on that type in this handout.

At the undergraduate level, you can often draw and label your graphs by hand, provided that the result is clear, legible, and drawn to scale. Computer technology has, however, made creating line graphs a lot easier. Most word-processing software has a number of functions for transferring data into graph form; many scientists have found Microsoft Excel, for example, a helpful tool in graphing results. If you plan on pursuing a career in the sciences, it may be well worth your while to learn to use a similar program.

Computers can’t, however, decide for you how your graph really works; you have to know how to design your graph to meet your readers’ expectations. Here are some of these expectations:

• Keep it as simple as possible. You may be tempted to signal the complexity of the information you gathered by trying to design a graph that accounts for that complexity. But remember the purpose of your graph: to dramatize your results in a manner that’s easy to see and grasp. Try not to make the reader stare at the graph for a half hour to find the important line among the mass of other lines. For maximum effectiveness, limit yourself to three to five lines per graph; if you have more data to demonstrate, use a set of graphs to account for it, rather than trying to cram it all into a single figure.
• Plot the independent variable on the horizontal (x) axis and the dependent variable on the vertical (y) axis. Remember that the independent variable is the condition that you manipulated during the experiment and the dependent variable is the condition that you measured to see if it changed along with the independent variable. Placing the variables along their respective axes is mostly just a convention, but since your readers are accustomed to viewing graphs in this way, you’re better off not challenging the convention in your report.
• Label each axis carefully, and be especially careful to include units of measure. You need to make sure that your readers understand perfectly well what your graph indicates.
• Number and title your graphs. As with tables, the title of the graph should be informative but concise, and you should refer to your graph by number in the text (e.g., “Figure 1 shows the increase in the solubility rate as a function of temperature”).
• Many editors of professional scientific journals prefer that writers distinguish the lines in their graphs by attaching a symbol to them, usually a geometric shape (triangle, square, etc.), and using that symbol throughout the curve of the line. Generally, readers have a hard time distinguishing dotted lines from dot-dash lines from straight lines, so you should consider staying away from this system. Editors don’t usually like different-colored lines within a graph because colors are difficult and expensive to reproduce; colors may, however, be great for your purposes, as long as you’re not planning to submit your paper to Nature. Use your discretion—try to employ whichever technique dramatizes the results most effectively.
• Try to gather data at regular intervals, so the plot points on your graph aren’t too far apart. You can’t be sure of the arc you should draw between the plot points if the points are located at the far corners of the graph; over a fifteen-minute interval, perhaps the change occurred in the first or last thirty seconds of that period (in which case your straight-line connection between the points is misleading).
• If you’re worried that you didn’t collect data at sufficiently regular intervals during your experiment, go ahead and connect the points with a straight line, but you may want to examine this problem as part of your Discussion section.
• Make your graph large enough so that everything is legible and clearly demarcated, but not so large that it either overwhelms the rest of the Results section or provides a far greater range than you need to illustrate your point. If, for example, the seedlings of your plant grew only 15 mm during the trial, you don’t need to construct a graph that accounts for 100 mm of growth. The lines in your graph should more or less fill the space created by the axes; if you see that your data is confined to the lower left portion of the graph, you should probably re-adjust your scale.
• If you create a set of graphs, make them the same size and format, including all the verbal and visual codes (captions, symbols, scale, etc.). You want to be as consistent as possible in your illustrations, so that your readers can easily make the comparisons you’re trying to get them to see.

How do I write a strong Discussion section?

The discussion section is probably the least formalized part of the report, in that you can’t really apply the same structure to every type of experiment. In simple terms, here you tell your readers what to make of the Results you obtained. If you have done the Results part well, your readers should already recognize the trends in the data and have a fairly clear idea of whether your hypothesis was supported. Because the Results can seem so self-explanatory, many students find it difficult to know what material to add in this last section.

Basically, the Discussion contains several parts, in no particular order, but roughly moving from specific (i.e., related to your experiment only) to general (how your findings fit in the larger scientific community). In this section, you will, as a rule, need to:

Explain whether the data support your hypothesis

• Acknowledge any anomalous data or deviations from what you expected

Derive conclusions, based on your findings, about the process you’re studying

• Relate your findings to earlier work in the same area (if you can)

Explore the theoretical and/or practical implications of your findings

Let’s look at some dos and don’ts for each of these objectives.

This statement is usually a good way to begin the Discussion, since you can’t effectively speak about the larger scientific value of your study until you’ve figured out the particulars of this experiment. You might begin this part of the Discussion by explicitly stating the relationships or correlations your data indicate between the independent and dependent variables. Then you can show more clearly why you believe your hypothesis was or was not supported. For example, if you tested solubility at various temperatures, you could start this section by noting that the rates of solubility increased as the temperature increased. If your initial hypothesis surmised that temperature change would not affect solubility, you would then say something like,

“The hypothesis that temperature change would not affect solubility was not supported by the data.”

Note: Students tend to view labs as practical tests of undeniable scientific truths. As a result, you may want to say that the hypothesis was “proved” or “disproved” or that it was “correct” or “incorrect.” These terms, however, reflect a degree of certainty that you as a scientist aren’t supposed to have. Remember, you’re testing a theory with a procedure that lasts only a few hours and relies on only a few trials, which severely compromises your ability to be sure about the “truth” you see. Words like “supported,” “indicated,” and “suggested” are more acceptable ways to evaluate your hypothesis.

Also, recognize that saying whether the data supported your hypothesis or not involves making a claim to be defended. As such, you need to show the readers that this claim is warranted by the evidence. Make sure that you’re very explicit about the relationship between the evidence and the conclusions you draw from it. This process is difficult for many writers because we don’t often justify conclusions in our regular lives. For example, you might nudge your friend at a party and whisper, “That guy’s drunk,” and once your friend lays eyes on the person in question, she might readily agree. In a scientific paper, by contrast, you would need to defend your claim more thoroughly by pointing to data such as slurred words, unsteady gait, and the lampshade-as-hat. In addition to pointing out these details, you would also need to show how (according to previous studies) these signs are consistent with inebriation, especially if they occur in conjunction with one another. To put it another way, tell your readers exactly how you got from point A (was the hypothesis supported?) to point B (yes/no).

Acknowledge any anomalous data, or deviations from what you expected

You need to take these exceptions and divergences into account, so that you qualify your conclusions sufficiently. For obvious reasons, your readers will doubt your authority if you (deliberately or inadvertently) overlook a key piece of data that doesn’t square with your perspective on what occurred. In a more philosophical sense, once you’ve ignored evidence that contradicts your claims, you’ve departed from the scientific method. The urge to “tidy up” the experiment is often strong, but if you give in to it you’re no longer performing good science.

Sometimes after you’ve performed a study or experiment, you realize that some part of the methods you used to test your hypothesis was flawed. In that case, it’s OK to suggest that if you had the chance to conduct your test again, you might change the design in this or that specific way in order to avoid such and such a problem. The key to making this approach work, though, is to be very precise about the weakness in your experiment, why and how you think that weakness might have affected your data, and how you would alter your protocol to eliminate—or limit the effects of—that weakness. Often, inexperienced researchers and writers feel the need to account for “wrong” data (remember, there’s no such animal), and so they speculate wildly about what might have screwed things up. These speculations include such factors as the unusually hot temperature in the room, or the possibility that their lab partners read the meters wrong, or the potentially defective equipment. These explanations are what scientists call “cop-outs,” or “lame”; don’t indicate that the experiment had a weakness unless you’re fairly certain that a) it really occurred and b) you can explain reasonably well how that weakness affected your results.

If, for example, your hypothesis dealt with the changes in solubility at different temperatures, then try to figure out what you can rationally say about the process of solubility more generally. If you’re doing an undergraduate lab, chances are that the lab will connect in some way to the material you’ve been covering either in lecture or in your reading, so you might choose to return to these resources as a way to help you think clearly about the process as a whole.

This part of the Discussion section is another place where you need to make sure that you’re not overreaching. Again, nothing you’ve found in one study would remotely allow you to claim that you now “know” something, or that something isn’t “true,” or that your experiment “confirmed” some principle or other. Hesitate before you go out on a limb—it’s dangerous! Use less absolutely conclusive language, including such words as “suggest,” “indicate,” “correspond,” “possibly,” “challenge,” etc.

Relate your findings to previous work in the field (if possible)

We’ve been talking about how to show that you belong in a particular community (such as biologists or anthropologists) by writing within conventions that they recognize and accept. Another is to try to identify a conversation going on among members of that community, and use your work to contribute to that conversation. In a larger philosophical sense, scientists can’t fully understand the value of their research unless they have some sense of the context that provoked and nourished it. That is, you have to recognize what’s new about your project (potentially, anyway) and how it benefits the wider body of scientific knowledge. On a more pragmatic level, especially for undergraduates, connecting your lab work to previous research will demonstrate to the TA that you see the big picture. You have an opportunity, in the Discussion section, to distinguish yourself from the students in your class who aren’t thinking beyond the barest facts of the study. Capitalize on this opportunity by putting your own work in context.

If you’re just beginning to work in the natural sciences (as a first-year biology or chemistry student, say), most likely the work you’ll be doing has already been performed and re-performed to a satisfactory degree. Hence, you could probably point to a similar experiment or study and compare/contrast your results and conclusions. More advanced work may deal with an issue that is somewhat less “resolved,” and so previous research may take the form of an ongoing debate, and you can use your own work to weigh in on that debate. If, for example, researchers are hotly disputing the value of herbal remedies for the common cold, and the results of your study suggest that Echinacea diminishes the symptoms but not the actual presence of the cold, then you might want to take some time in the Discussion section to recapitulate the specifics of the dispute as it relates to Echinacea as an herbal remedy. (Consider that you have probably already written in the Introduction about this debate as background research.)

This information is often the best way to end your Discussion (and, for all intents and purposes, the report). In argumentative writing generally, you want to use your closing words to convey the main point of your writing. This main point can be primarily theoretical (“Now that you understand this information, you’re in a better position to understand this larger issue”) or primarily practical (“You can use this information to take such and such an action”). In either case, the concluding statements help the reader to comprehend the significance of your project and your decision to write about it.

Since a lab report is argumentative—after all, you’re investigating a claim, and judging the legitimacy of that claim by generating and collecting evidence—it’s often a good idea to end your report with the same technique for establishing your main point. If you want to go the theoretical route, you might talk about the consequences your study has for the field or phenomenon you’re investigating. To return to the examples regarding solubility, you could end by reflecting on what your work on solubility as a function of temperature tells us (potentially) about solubility in general. (Some folks consider this type of exploration “pure” as opposed to “applied” science, although these labels can be problematic.) If you want to go the practical route, you could end by speculating about the medical, institutional, or commercial implications of your findings—in other words, answer the question, “What can this study help people to do?” In either case, you’re going to make your readers’ experience more satisfying, by helping them see why they spent their time learning what you had to teach them.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

American Psychological Association. 2010. Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association . 6th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Beall, Herbert, and John Trimbur. 2001. A Short Guide to Writing About Chemistry , 2nd ed. New York: Longman.

Blum, Deborah, and Mary Knudson. 1997. A Field Guide for Science Writers: The Official Guide of the National Association of Science Writers . New York: Oxford University Press.

Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, Joseph Bizup, and William T. FitzGerald. 2016. The Craft of Research , 4th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Briscoe, Mary Helen. 1996. Preparing Scientific Illustrations: A Guide to Better Posters, Presentations, and Publications , 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Council of Science Editors. 2014. Scientific Style and Format: The CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers , 8th ed. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.

Davis, Martha. 2012. Scientific Papers and Presentations , 3rd ed. London: Academic Press.

Day, Robert A. 1994. How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper , 4th ed. Phoenix: Oryx Press.

Porush, David. 1995. A Short Guide to Writing About Science . New York: Longman.

Williams, Joseph, and Joseph Bizup. 2017. Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace , 12th ed. Boston: Pearson.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Guide & Examples

How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Guide & Examples

Published on 6 May 2022 by Shona McCombes .

A hypothesis is a statement that can be tested by scientific research. If you want to test a relationship between two or more variables, you need to write hypotheses before you start your experiment or data collection.

Table of contents

What is a hypothesis, developing a hypothesis (with example), hypothesis examples, frequently asked questions about writing hypotheses.

A hypothesis states your predictions about what your research will find. It is a tentative answer to your research question that has not yet been tested. For some research projects, you might have to write several hypotheses that address different aspects of your research question.

A hypothesis is not just a guess – it should be based on existing theories and knowledge. It also has to be testable, which means you can support or refute it through scientific research methods (such as experiments, observations, and statistical analysis of data).

Variables in hypotheses

Hypotheses propose a relationship between two or more variables . An independent variable is something the researcher changes or controls. A dependent variable is something the researcher observes and measures.

In this example, the independent variable is exposure to the sun – the assumed cause . The dependent variable is the level of happiness – the assumed effect .

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Step 1: ask a question.

Writing a hypothesis begins with a research question that you want to answer. The question should be focused, specific, and researchable within the constraints of your project.

Step 2: Do some preliminary research

Your initial answer to the question should be based on what is already known about the topic. Look for theories and previous studies to help you form educated assumptions about what your research will find.

At this stage, you might construct a conceptual framework to identify which variables you will study and what you think the relationships are between them. Sometimes, you’ll have to operationalise more complex constructs.

Step 3: Formulate your hypothesis

Now you should have some idea of what you expect to find. Write your initial answer to the question in a clear, concise sentence.

Step 4: Refine your hypothesis

You need to make sure your hypothesis is specific and testable. There are various ways of phrasing a hypothesis, but all the terms you use should have clear definitions, and the hypothesis should contain:

• The relevant variables
• The specific group being studied
• The predicted outcome of the experiment or analysis

Step 5: Phrase your hypothesis in three ways

To identify the variables, you can write a simple prediction in if … then form. The first part of the sentence states the independent variable and the second part states the dependent variable.

In academic research, hypotheses are more commonly phrased in terms of correlations or effects, where you directly state the predicted relationship between variables.

If you are comparing two groups, the hypothesis can state what difference you expect to find between them.

Step 6. Write a null hypothesis

If your research involves statistical hypothesis testing , you will also have to write a null hypothesis. The null hypothesis is the default position that there is no association between the variables. The null hypothesis is written as H 0 , while the alternative hypothesis is H 1 or H a .

Hypothesis testing is a formal procedure for investigating our ideas about the world using statistics. It is used by scientists to test specific predictions, called hypotheses , by calculating how likely it is that a pattern or relationship between variables could have arisen by chance.

A hypothesis is not just a guess. It should be based on existing theories and knowledge. It also has to be testable, which means you can support or refute it through scientific research methods (such as experiments, observations, and statistical analysis of data).

A research hypothesis is your proposed answer to your research question. The research hypothesis usually includes an explanation (‘ x affects y because …’).

A statistical hypothesis, on the other hand, is a mathematical statement about a population parameter. Statistical hypotheses always come in pairs: the null and alternative hypotheses. In a well-designed study , the statistical hypotheses correspond logically to the research hypothesis.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, May 06). How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 26 August 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/hypothesis-writing/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, operationalisation | a guide with examples, pros & cons, what is a conceptual framework | tips & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples.

HOW TO WRITE A HYPOTHESIS

Writing a hypothesis

Frequently, when we hear the word ‘hypothesis’, we immediately think of an investigation in the form of a science experiment. This is not surprising, as science is the subject area where we are usually first introduced to the term.

However, the term hypothesis also applies to investigations and research in many diverse areas and branches of learning, leaving us wondering how to write a hypothesis in statistics and how to write a hypothesis in sociology alongside how to write a hypothesis in a lab report.

We can find hypotheses at work in areas as wide-ranging as history, psychology, technology, engineering, literature, design, and economics. With such a vast array of uses, hypothesis writing is an essential skill for our students to develop.

What Is a Hypothesis?

A hypothesis is a proposed or predicted answer to a question. The purpose of writing a hypothesis is to follow it up by testing that answer. This test can take the form of an investigation, experiment, or writing a research paper that will ideally prove or disprove the hypothesis’s prediction.

Despite this element of the unknown, a hypothesis is not the same thing as a guess. Though the hypothesis writer typically has some uncertainty, the creation of the hypothesis is generally based on some background knowledge and research of the topic. The writer believes in the likelihood of a specific outcome, but further investigation will be required to validate or falsify the claim made in their hypothesis.

In this regard, a hypothesis is more along the lines of an ‘educated guess’ that has been based on observation and/or background knowledge.

A hypothesis should:

• Make a prediction
• Provide reasons for that prediction
• Specifies a relationship between two or more variables
• Be testable
• Be falsifiable
• Be expressed simply and concisely
• Serves as the starting point for an investigation, an experiment, or another form of testing

A COMPLETE TEACHING UNIT ON WRITING PROCEDURAL TEXTS

This HUGE BUNDLE  offers 97 PAGES of hands-on, printable, and digital media resources. Your students will be WRITING procedures with STRUCTURE, INSIGHT AND KNOWLEDGE like never before.

Hypothesis Examples for Students and Teachers

If students listen to classical music while studying, they will retain more information.

Mold growth is affected by the level of moisture in the air.

Students who sleep for longer at night retain more information at school.

Employees who work more than 40 hours per week show higher instances of clinical depression.

Time spent on social media is negatively correlated to the length of the average attention span.

People who spend time exercising regularly are less likely to develop a cardiovascular illness.

If people are shorter, then they are more likely to live longer.

What are Variables in a Hypothesis?

Variables are an essential aspect of any hypothesis. But what exactly do we mean by this term?

Variables are changeable factors or characteristics that may affect the outcome of an investigation. Things like age, weight, the height of participants, length of time, the difficulty of reading material, etc., could all be considered variables.

Usually, an investigation or experiment will focus on how different variables affect each other. So, it is vital to define the variables clearly if you are to measure the effect they have on each other accurately.

There are three main types of variables to consider in a hypothesis. These are:

• Independent Variables
• Dependent Variables

The Independent Variable

The independent variable is unaffected by any of the other variables in the hypothesis. We can think of the independent variable as the assumed cause .

The Dependent Variable

The dependent variable is affected by the other variables in the hypothesis. It is what is being tested or measured. We can think of the dependent variable as the assumed effect .

For example, let’s investigate the correlation between test scores across different age groups. The age groups will be the independent variable, and the test scores will be the dependent variable .

Now that we know what variables are let’s look at how they work in the various types of hypotheses.

Types of Hypotheses

There are many different types of hypotheses, and it is helpful to know the most common of these if the student selects the most suitable tool for their specific job.

The most frequently used types of hypotheses are:

The Simple Hypothesis

The complex hypothesis, the empirical hypothesis, the null hypothesis, the directional hypothesis, the non-directional hypothesis.

This straightforward hypothesis type predicts the relationship between an independent and dependent variable.

Example: Eating too much sugar causes weight gain.

This type of hypothesis is based on the relationship between multiple independent and/or dependent variables.

Example: Overeating sugar causes weight gain and poor cardiovascular health.

Also called a working hypothesis, an empirical hypothesis is tested through observation and experimentation. An empirical hypothesis is produced through investigation and trial and error. As a result, the empirical hypothesis may change its independent variables in the process.

Example: Exposure to sunlight helps lettuces grow faster.

This hypothesis states that there is no significant or meaningful relationship between specific variables.

Example: Exposure to sunlight does not affect the rate of a plant’s growth.

This type of hypothesis predicts the direction of an effect between variables, i.e., positive or negative.

Example: A high-quality education will result in a greater number of career opportunities.

Similar to the directional hypothesis, this type of hypothesis predicts the nature of the effect but not the direction that effect will go in.

Example: A high-quality education will affect the number of available career opportunities.

How to Write a Hypothesis : A STEP-BY-STEP GUIDE

• Ask a Question

The starting point for any hypothesis is asking a question. This is often called the research question . The research question is the student’s jumping-off point to developing their hypothesis. This question should be specific and answerable. The hypothesis will be the point where the research question is transformed into a declarative statement.

Ideally, the questions the students develop should be relational, i.e., they should look at how two or more variables relate to each other as described above. For example, what effect does sunlight have on the growth rate of lettuce?

• Research the Question

The research is an essential part of the process of developing a hypothesis. Students will need to examine the ideas and studies that are out there on the topic already. By examining the literature already out there on their topic, they can begin to refine their questions on the subject and begin to form predictions based on their studies.

Remember, a hypothesis can be defined as an ‘educated’ guess. This is the part of the process where the student educates themself on the subject before making their ‘guess.’

• Define Your Variables

By now, your students should be ready to form their preliminary hypotheses. To do this, they should first focus on defining their independent and dependent variables. Now may be an excellent opportunity to remind students that the independent variables are the only variables that they have complete control over, while dependent variables are what is tested or measured.

• Develop Your Preliminary Hypotheses

With variables defined, students can now work on a draft of their hypothesis. To do this, they can begin by examining their variables and the available data and then making a statement about the relationship between these variables. Students must brainstorm and reflect on what they expect to happen in their investigation before making a prediction upon which to base their hypothesis. It’s worth noting, too, that hypotheses are typically, though not exclusively, written in the present tense.

Students revisit the different types of hypotheses described earlier in this article. Students select three types of hypotheses and frame their preliminary hypotheses according to each criteria. Which works best? Which type is the least suitable for the student’s hypothesis?

• Finalize the Phrasing

By now, students will have made a decision on which type of hypothesis suits their needs best, and it will now be time to finalize the wording of their hypotheses. There are various ways that students can choose to frame their hypothesis, but below, we will examine the three most common ways.

The If/Then Phrasing

This is the most common type of hypothesis and perhaps the easiest to write for students. It follows a simple ‘ If x, then y ’ formula that makes a prediction that forms the basis of a subsequent investigation.

If I eat more calories, then I will gain weight.

Correlation Phrasing

Another way to phrase a hypothesis is to focus on the correlation between the variables. This typically takes the form of a statement that defines that relationship positively or negatively.

The more calories that are eaten beyond the daily recommended requirements, the greater the weight gain will be.

Comparison Phrasing

This form of phrasing is applicable when comparing two groups and focuses on the differences that the investigation is expected to reveal between those two groups.

Those who eat more calories will gain more weight than those who eat fewer calories.

Questions to ask during this process include:

• What tense is the hypothesis written in?
• Does the hypothesis contain both independent and dependent variables?
• Is the hypothesis framed using the if/then, correlation, or comparison framework (or other similar suitable structure)?
• Is the hypothesis worded clearly and concisely?
• Does the hypothesis make a prediction?
• Is the prediction specific?
• Is the hypothesis testable?
• Gather Data to Support/Disprove Your Hypothesis

If the purpose of a hypothesis is to provide a reason to pursue an investigation, then the student will need to gather related information together to fuel that investigation.

While, by definition, a hypothesis leans towards a specific outcome, the student shouldn’t worry if their investigations or experiments ultimately disprove their hypothesis. The hypothesis is the starting point; the destination is not preordained. This is the very essence of the scientific method. Students should trust the results of their investigation to speak for themselves. Either way, the outcome is valuable information.

TOP 10 TIPS FOR WRITING A STRONG HYPOTHESIS

• Begin by asking a clear and compelling question. Your hypothesis is a response to the inquiry you are eager to explore.
• Keep it simple and straightforward. Avoid using complex phrases or making multiple predictions in one hypothesis.
• Use the right format. A strong hypothesis is often written in the form of an “if-then” statement.
• Ensure that your hypothesis is testable. Your hypothesis should be something that can be verified through experimentation or observation.
• Stay objective. Your hypothesis should be based on facts and evidence, not personal opinions or prejudices.
• Examine different possibilities. Don’t limit yourself to just one hypothesis. Consider alternative explanations for your observations.
• Stay open to the possibility of being wrong. Your hypothesis is just a prediction, and it may not always be correct.
• Search for evidence to support your hypothesis. Investigate existing literature and gather data that supports your hypothesis.
• Make sure that your hypothesis is pertinent. Your hypothesis should be relevant to the question you are trying to investigate.
• Revise your hypothesis as necessary. If new evidence arises that contradicts your hypothesis, you may need to adjust it accordingly.

HYPOTHESIS TEACHING STRATEGIES AND ACTIVITIES

When teaching young scientists and writers, it’s essential to remember that the process of formulating a hypothesis is not always straightforward. It’s easy to make mistakes along the way, but with a bit of guidance, you can ensure your students avoid some of the most common pitfalls like these.

• Don’t let your students be too vague. Remind them that when formulating a hypothesis, it’s essential to be specific and avoid using overly general language. Make sure their hypothesis is clear and easy to understand.
• Being swayed by personal biases will impact their hypothesis negatively. It’s important to stay objective when formulating a hypothesis, so avoid letting personal biases or opinions get in the way.
• Not starting with a clear question is the number one stumbling block for students, so before forming a hypothesis, you need to reinforce the need for a clear understanding of the question they’re trying to answer. Start with a question that is specific and relevant.

Hypothesis Warmup Activity: First, organize students into small working groups of four or five. Then, set each group to collect a list of hypotheses. They can find these by searching on the Internet or finding examples in textbooks . When students have gathered together a suitable list of hypotheses, have them identify the independent and dependent variables in each case. They can underline each of these in different colors.

It may be helpful for students to examine each hypothesis to identify the ‘cause’ elements and the ‘effect’ elements. When students have finished, they can present their findings to the class.

Task 1: Set your students the task of coming up with an investigation-worthy question on a topic that interests them. This activity works particularly well for groups.

Task 2: Students search for existing information and theories on their topic on the Internet or in the library. They should take notes where necessary and begin to form an assumption or prediction based on their reading and research that they can investigate further.

Task 3: When working with a talking partner, can students identify which of their partner’s independent and dependent variables? If not, then one partner will need to revisit the definitions for the two types of variables as outlined earlier.

Task 4: Organize students into smaller groups and task them with presenting their hypotheses to each other. Students can then provide feedback before the final wording of each hypothesis is finalized.

Perhaps due to their short length, learning how to create a well-written hypothesis is not typically afforded much time in the curriculum.

However, though they are brief in length, they are complex enough to warrant focused learning and practice in class, particularly given their importance across many curriculum areas.

Learning how to write a hypothesis works well as a standalone writing skill. It can also form part of a more comprehensive academic or scientific writing study that focuses on how to write a research question, develop a theory, etc.

As with any text type, practice improves performance. By following the processes outlined above, students will be well on their way to writing their own hypotheses competently in no time.

Lab Report Format: Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

In psychology, a lab report outlines a study’s objectives, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions, ensuring clarity and adherence to APA (or relevant) formatting guidelines.

A typical lab report would include the following sections: title, abstract, introduction, method, results, and discussion.

The title page, abstract, references, and appendices are started on separate pages (subsections from the main body of the report are not). Use double-line spacing of text, font size 12, and include page numbers.

The report should have a thread of arguments linking the prediction in the introduction to the content of the discussion.

This must indicate what the study is about. It must include the variables under investigation. It should not be written as a question.

Title pages should be formatted in APA style .

The abstract provides a concise and comprehensive summary of a research report. Your style should be brief but not use note form. Look at examples in journal articles . It should aim to explain very briefly (about 150 words) the following:

• Start with a one/two sentence summary, providing the aim and rationale for the study.
• Describe participants and setting: who, when, where, how many, and what groups?
• Describe the method: what design, what experimental treatment, what questionnaires, surveys, or tests were used.
• Describe the major findings, including a mention of the statistics used and the significance levels, or simply one sentence summing up the outcome.
• The final sentence(s) outline the study’s “contribution to knowledge” within the literature. What does it all mean? Mention the implications of your findings if appropriate.

The abstract comes at the beginning of your report but is written at the end (as it summarises information from all the other sections of the report).

Introduction

The purpose of the introduction is to explain where your hypothesis comes from (i.e., it should provide a rationale for your research study).

Ideally, the introduction should have a funnel structure: Start broad and then become more specific. The aims should not appear out of thin air; the preceding review of psychological literature should lead logically into the aims and hypotheses.

• Start with general theory, briefly introducing the topic. Define the important key terms.
• Explain the theoretical framework.
• Summarise and synthesize previous studies – What was the purpose? Who were the participants? What did they do? What did they find? What do these results mean? How do the results relate to the theoretical framework?
• Rationale: How does the current study address a gap in the literature? Perhaps it overcomes a limitation of previous research.
• Aims and hypothesis. Write a paragraph explaining what you plan to investigate and make a clear and concise prediction regarding the results you expect to find.

There should be a logical progression of ideas that aids the flow of the report. This means the studies outlined should lead logically to your aims and hypotheses.

Do be concise and selective, and avoid the temptation to include anything in case it is relevant (i.e., don’t write a shopping list of studies).

USE THE FOLLOWING SUBHEADINGS:

Participants

• How many participants were recruited?
• Say how you obtained your sample (e.g., opportunity sample).
• Give relevant demographic details (e.g., gender, ethnicity, age range, mean age, and standard deviation).
• State the experimental design .
• What were the independent and dependent variables ? Make sure the independent variable is labeled and name the different conditions/levels.
• For example, if gender is the independent variable label, then male and female are the levels/conditions/groups.
• How were the IV and DV operationalized?
• Identify any controls used, e.g., counterbalancing and control of extraneous variables.
• List all the materials and measures (e.g., what was the title of the questionnaire? Was it adapted from a study?).
• You do not need to include wholesale replication of materials – instead, include a ‘sensible’ (illustrate) level of detail. For example, give examples of questionnaire items.
• Include the reliability (e.g., alpha values) for the measure(s).
• Describe the precise procedure you followed when conducting your research, i.e., exactly what you did.
• Describe in sufficient detail to allow for replication of findings.
• Be concise in your description and omit extraneous/trivial details, e.g., you don’t need to include details regarding instructions, debrief, record sheets, etc.
• Assume the reader has no knowledge of what you did and ensure that he/she can replicate (i.e., copy) your study exactly by what you write in this section.
• Write in the past tense.
• Don’t justify or explain in the Method (e.g., why you chose a particular sampling method); just report what you did.
• Only give enough detail for someone to replicate the experiment – be concise in your writing.
• The results section of a paper usually presents descriptive statistics followed by inferential statistics.
• Report the means, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each IV level. If you have four to 20 numbers to present, a well-presented table is best, APA style.
• Name the statistical test being used.
• Report appropriate statistics (e.g., t-scores, p values ).
• Report the magnitude (e.g., are the results significant or not?) as well as the direction of the results (e.g., which group performed better?).
• It is optional to report the effect size (this does not appear on the SPSS output).
• Avoid interpreting the results (save this for the discussion).
• Make sure the results are presented clearly and concisely. A table can be used to display descriptive statistics if this makes the data easier to understand.
• DO NOT include any raw data.
• Follow APA style.

Use APA Style

• Numbers reported to 2 d.p. (incl. 0 before the decimal if 1.00, e.g., “0.51”). The exceptions to this rule: Numbers which can never exceed 1.0 (e.g., p -values, r-values): report to 3 d.p. and do not include 0 before the decimal place, e.g., “.001”.
• Percentages and degrees of freedom: report as whole numbers.
• Statistical symbols that are not Greek letters should be italicized (e.g., M , SD , t , X 2 , F , p , d ).
• Include spaces on either side of the equals sign.
• When reporting 95%, CIs (confidence intervals), upper and lower limits are given inside square brackets, e.g., “95% CI [73.37, 102.23]”
• Outline your findings in plain English (avoid statistical jargon) and relate your results to your hypothesis, e.g., is it supported or rejected?
• Compare your results to background materials from the introduction section. Are your results similar or different? Discuss why/why not.
• How confident can we be in the results? Acknowledge limitations, but only if they can explain the result obtained. If the study has found a reliable effect, be very careful suggesting limitations as you are doubting your results. Unless you can think of any c onfounding variable that can explain the results instead of the IV, it would be advisable to leave the section out.
• Suggest constructive ways to improve your study if appropriate.
• What are the implications of your findings? Say what your findings mean for how people behave in the real world.
• Suggest an idea for further research triggered by your study, something in the same area but not simply an improved version of yours. Perhaps you could base this on a limitation of your study.
• Concluding paragraph – Finish with a statement of your findings and the key points of the discussion (e.g., interpretation and implications) in no more than 3 or 4 sentences.

Reference Page

The reference section lists all the sources cited in the essay (alphabetically). It is not a bibliography (a list of the books you used).

In simple terms, every time you refer to a psychologist’s name (and date), you need to reference the original source of information.

If you have been using textbooks this is easy as the references are usually at the back of the book and you can just copy them down. If you have been using websites then you may have a problem as they might not provide a reference section for you to copy.

References need to be set out APA style :

Author, A. A. (year). Title of work . Location: Publisher.

Journal Articles

Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (year). Article title. Journal Title, volume number (issue number), page numbers

A simple way to write your reference section is to use Google scholar . Just type the name and date of the psychologist in the search box and click on the “cite” link.

Next, copy and paste the APA reference into the reference section of your essay.

Once again, remember that references need to be in alphabetical order according to surname.

Psychology Lab Report Example

Quantitative paper template.

Quantitative professional paper template: Adapted from “Fake News, Fast and Slow: Deliberation Reduces Belief in False (but Not True) News Headlines,” by B. Bago, D. G. Rand, and G. Pennycook, 2020,  Journal of Experimental Psychology: General ,  149 (8), pp. 1608–1613 ( https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000729 ). Copyright 2020 by the American Psychological Association.

Qualitative paper template

Qualitative professional paper template: Adapted from “‘My Smartphone Is an Extension of Myself’: A Holistic Qualitative Exploration of the Impact of Using a Smartphone,” by L. J. Harkin and D. Kuss, 2020,  Psychology of Popular Media ,  10 (1), pp. 28–38 ( https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000278 ). Copyright 2020 by the American Psychological Association.

Quick Guide to PostLab

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

A Guide for Writing in the Scientific Forum

Sandra v. kotsis.

1 Section of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Health System

Kevin C. Chung

2 Section of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Health System

When considering the importance of scientific writing in disseminating new discoveries and ideas, it is quite remarkable that few physicians have received any formal instruction in this essential process.

This paper focuses on the fundamental principles of scientific writing that also include a “style and grace” component.

The art of good scientific writing is to convey scientific materials in a clear and interesting way, while avoiding incomprehensible sentences that only serve to disguise marginal contents within the article.

Conclusions

The goal of this paper is to encourage authors and readers to critically examine the art of scientific writing to overcome the barrier to effective communication.

Scientific writing is often considered a “necessary evil” in order to ascend the academic ladder. After all, the phrase “publish or perish” is still commonly used. Academic promotion, improving knowledge of a subject, establishing professional contacts, disseminating knowledge, 1 and obtaining grant funding are a few reasons why physicians choose to publish.

Physicians may feel the pressure to publish, but scientific writing is a learned process and one in which few academic physicians have received any formal instruction. 2 - 6 Although scientific writing often has a reputation for being dense or unreadable, 7 - 11 we hope to assist physicians to develop a manuscript that is enjoyable to write and read.

Getting Started

We will assume that you have already completed a well-conducted scientific study and are ready to write up your findings for a peer-reviewed scientific journal. If you are new to scientific writing, it is helpful to have a mentor, particularly an experienced writer in your field who can guide you. If you are writing about a research project, you should have formed a hypothesis to your research question before analyzing any of the data. You will want to do a thorough literature search of your topic so that you are familiar with all published work. Writing an outline may seem elementary, but it can be an important tool to organize your thoughts. 12 Think about what journals you may want to publish in and follow their publication guidelines as far as word count and paper structure. Choosing your journal early on will help you to write for the readers of a specific journal. You do not want to “write down to” your readers or include details that have been published previously, such as an established surgical technique. You also want to think about the conclusions of your paper before you begin to write—the “so what?” question. Why is this project novel? What makes it different from other published studies on this topic? Why is it clinically relevant? Table 1 gives a list of “dos” and “don'ts” for scientific manuscript writing.

Dos and Don'ts for Scientific Manuscript Writing

Writing the Abstract

Although the abstract is the first writing component of a scientific manuscript, it should actually be written last. You should check the format of the journal that you are submitting to, but a structured abstract generally has four sections: Background/Purpose, Methods, Results, and Conclusions. After the rest of the paper has been completed, you can select a sentence or two from the appropriate areas (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion) to include in the aforementioned abstract sections. However, the abstract is not the introduction and should not be cut and pasted from the introduction. An abstract that is identical to the introduction in any paper or grant will be summarily rejected because of the perceived lack of effort to construct a thoughtful synthesis of the materials in the paper. You should be concise and state the purpose usually in one sentence. The emphasis should be placed on the methods and results, which should each be written in three to four sentences. The conclusion can typically be written in two sentences—the first summarizes your findings and the second makes a conclusion. 12 Only data contained in the paper should be included in the abstract—it should not contain any new data. Care should be taken in writing the abstract. Many physicians will not read past the abstract if it is not well-written. Similarly, many readers only need to scan through an abstract to determine whether a manuscript is pertinent to their topic of interest.

Writing the Introduction

Before any writing begins, it is important to perform a thorough literature search. You should be familiar with all the recent advances in your field of study as well as important historical references. “Incomplete, inaccurate, or outdated review of the literature” is one of the common reasons for manuscript rejection. 13 - 15 The Introduction should be written in the present tense. 16 You can begin in the first paragraph by mentioning the most important references and stating the research problem. The second paragraph can elaborate on the magnitude of the problem and unresolved issues. The final paragraph describes the rationale for your study and should end with the purpose: a hypothesis of what you are expecting to find. 12 Examples of elements to include in a well-written manuscript are shown in Table 2 . Of course, before you begin writing or even analyzing your data, you should have developed a hypothesis. Your observed results may not match your expected results when you analyze your data, but we will discuss that in the Discussion section.

Examples of Elements to Include in a Well-Written Scientific Manuscript 41

Writing the Materials and Methods

The traditional sequence of a manuscript is Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion, which has been referred to by the acronym IMRAD. Pollock et al. have suggested drafting the manuscript in the sequence MRDAI. 17 The Methods section should be written in enough detail that another researcher would be able to duplicate your study. 12 In fact, the Methods section is most often responsible for outright rejection of a manuscript 18 because the lack of detail is a common problem. 19 This is the section where you want to state everything you did (controlling for biases, validating research tools) to increase the reliability of your results.

The Methods section should be written in the past tense. 16 To avoid any confusion by the readers, you may want to start by describing the type of study you performed: randomized, prospective, retrospective, case-control, etc. If it is a study involving human subjects, you should state that you obtained Institutional Review Board approval and include the subject inclusion and exclusion criteria. Include how and from where subjects were recruited as well as randomization and blinding procedures. Including patient characteristics such as disease stage or severity and comorbid conditions can help the readers to determine whether the findings of the paper are applicable to their patients of interest. 16 It may be helpful to include a diagram of the number of subjects recruited, how many were excluded, losses to follow-up, or withdrew, and your final sample size. Figure 1 shows an example of a similar diagram from a meta-analysis. Details of the sample are included in the Results, but most journals will require that the previously stated information is included in the Methods. Likewise, preliminary experiments or pilot studies can be included in the Methods section if they helped you to arrive at the methods used in your study. 2 If equipment was used, the equipment manufacturer, model, and calibration methods should be included. It may also be helpful to include a timeline that shows how and when different aspects of the study protocol took place. 12 The final paragraph of the Methods section should describe the statistical analysis. You may need assistance writing this paragraph from your statistician, if you did not perform the analysis yourself. You should include the tests used, the p-value that determined statistical significance, and whether an a priori power analysis was conducted to decide your necessary sample size. The power and sample size calculation is often a neglected area of scientific presentation and should always be performed prior to conducting a study.

A study attrition diagram from a meta-analysis showing the number of references retrieved and excluded from review. 42

(Adapted from Margaliot Z, Haase SC, Kotsis SV, et al. A meta-analysis of outcomes of external fixation versus plate osteosynthesis for unstable distal radius fractures. J Hand Surg. 2005;30A:1185-1201 with permission from Elsevier)

Writing the Results

In writing the Results section, it is important to “only state the facts!” The Results section is not a place to include citations or your interpretation of the data. “Make your point with data, not arguments.” 20 The Results section should be written in the past tense. 12 You should begin by describing the study sample demographic data, which can be done in a simple table. The data reported in a table should not be repeated in the text. Furthermore, tables and figures should stand on their own. You should include a title, legend, and labels for the axes. The readers should be able to determine what the table is about by only looking at it and not having to read any text. Any percentages should include raw numbers so that the readers are not misled by a large percentage (such as 25%) that only came from 1/4 subjects.

It should be noted that the word “significance” only be used to describe statistical significance. You should avoid using significant as a synonym for importance. General phrases such as “showed a trend toward” when results are not statistically significant often tend to signal a poor study design and should be avoided. 2 Also, the word “data” is plural. Thus, it is correct to state, “Our data are…” rather than “Our data is…”

Writing the Discussion

You should begin writing the Discussion by discussing the major findings and relating them to your hypothesis. Did you reject your null hypothesis with your findings or were you unable to reject it? Although being unable to reject your null hypothesis (for example, seeing no significant change between your treatment groups) may seem like a “crash and burn” situation, you can still publish your paper. It has been stated that “Manuscripts describing studies with negative findings are especially tough to get accepted by medical journals, with publication rates generally less than one-third that of manuscripts describing studies with positive findings.” 21 You should describe whether you conducted an a priori power analysis to determine your necessary sample size in order to avoid a beta error (concluding that there is no difference between treatment groups when there is in fact a difference). Chung et al. found that 82% of negative studies in a major hand surgery journal had inadequate statistical power (probability to detect a true difference, if a difference is present) to support their conclusions. 22

Previous studies have shown that physicians, particularly those with no formal education in epidemiology and biostatistics have a limited ability to interpret study results. 23 - 25 However, more than 58% of medical residents use statistical information in the published literature in forming opinions or when making medical decisions. 26 Thus, it is important in the Discussion to spell out the meaning of your statistical findings without appearing condescending to your readers. When describing your study, past tense should be used, but present tense should be used for established knowledge from other investigators. 16

In addition to the meaning of your data, you want to discuss the importance. You should compare and contrast your results to those found in the literature. Care should be taken not to criticize other published work. Similar findings will strengthen your results, but you should still point out how your study differs from previous similar studies. When explaining the study results, it is important to consider all possible explanations rather than just those that fit your preconceived biases. However, you should avoid coming to conclusions that are not supported by your data. Some of the most common criticisms of the Discussion section by editors' and reviewers' involve “coming to erroneous or unsupported conclusions, drawing conclusions disproportionate to the results, uncritically accepting statistical results, and interpreting the findings in a manner not concordant with data reported.” 18 Unless you are absolutely sure that it is true, you should avoid statements such as, “This is the first study to demonstrate…” After all, there are few studies that change the course of scientific progress, but some authors are overly enthusiastic in advertising their study as a seminal contribution. 19 It is also important to discuss the clinical relevance of your findings and how patients or physicians may benefit from them. 27

In the Discussion section, it is essential to address the limitations and strengths of your study. We have stated them in this order rather than as strengths and limitations because it is nice to leave the readers on a good note when he/she finishes reading your paper. Thus, acknowledge your study's limitations first. One limitation may include a lack of generalizability, which often happens when trying to obtain a homogeneous sample. You may use your study's limitations to make suggestions for future research. If not, you should still include suggestions for further research, usually in your concluding section. This last paragraph or last few sentences can also be used to propose ideas for changes to medical practice. 27

Remembering Style and Grace

Throughout the writing and editing process, it is important to remember the style and grace that is needed in writing any good manuscript. First of all, do not make the readers and reviewers work unnecessarily! When reading through your paper, try to keep the reviewers in mind. When a question is left unanswered or is not answered until the Discussion, the readers can get frustrated and give up on your paper entirely. Make it easy on them by explaining early on (usually in the Methods) why you did what you did—whether it was by choice or not. On a similar note, consistently use the same word to describe the same thing in order to provide continuity and avoid confusion. 28 Of course, it is also helpful to have someone else read your manuscript—a colleague and maybe even a layperson. A different set of eyes and a different perspective can point out areas that need clarity.

A few grammatical considerations will assist your readers. Use transitions for flow. “Transitions let the reader know how each sentence relates to the story and how parts of sentences are related.” 28 You should also limit the use of passive language. Although scientists tend to use it because they think that it is objective and do not want to indicate who is conducting a certain action, 28 it becomes quite boring to continually read, “The sutures were removed…” and “The data were analyzed…”

Other grammatical points include writing with precision. Instead of saying that you observed a change, say that you measured an increase or a decrease. 28 Along this point, you should avoid wordiness and using long or unfamiliar words when a commonly used shorter one will convey the same message. 28 Words such as marked, revealed, and demonstrated are overused and have lost their intended meaning. 29 Although it is common for writers, especially inexperienced ones, to try to use “flowery” language, it is best to remember that “less is more.” You can delete unnecessary adjectives and adverbs such as fundamentally, very, and great. You should also examine your writing for wordy phrases such as, “It is often the case that…” 28 or “In our opinion…” If it is not your opinion, it should have a citation attached to it. The words while and since have primary temporal definitions, but while is often used as a synonym for although or whereas and since is commonly used instead of because. 28 Be mindful of these subtleties that can slow down your readers and cause them to misinterpret what you are trying to say.

Well-written paragraphs usually start with making a point in the first sentence and then developing that point throughout the paragraph. Focusing on a single major point in each paragraph allows the readers to follow the author's train of thought. 28

Grantsmanship

Although the focus of this paper has been how to write a scientific manuscript, we have decided to include a section on grant writing. After you have successfully written and published a few papers, you may hope to get funding to conduct your own research and compete in a different arena. An in-depth article on grant writing was written by Chung and Shauver, 30 but we will touch on the basics. In manuscript writing, you have already conducted the research whereas in grant writing, you have probably conducted preliminary research but want to obtain funding to study questions by expanding on that preliminary research. Of course, style and grace are also important in grant writing. The general formats of manuscripts and grants are similar. In manuscripts you have an Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. Likewise, in a National Institutes of Health (NIH)-formatted grant, you have Specific Aims and Research Strategy (incorporating the Significance, Innovation, Approach, and Preliminary Studies/Progress Report). 31 The Introduction corresponds to the Specific Aims where the goals and hypotheses are presented. The research question is the most important section of the grant. 32 , 33 The impact (one of the new NIH review criteria) of your proposed research on the research field should be spelled out for the reviewers in the Specific Aims. The Methods section corresponds to the Approach section. New NIH page limitations have reduced the overall size of the grant, encouraging researchers to be less detail-oriented in describing their methods. The Results section corresponds to the Preliminary Studies/Progress Report. Although a grant does not have a Discussion section per se, your “so what?” question is extremely important to answer the significance of your proposal. The Innovation section should describe whether your proposal introduces novel concepts, approaches, or methodologies. 34

New NIH review criteria consist of an overall impact score that reflects reviewers' “…assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved…” 34 The five core review criteria remain the same as before, but have been prioritized as Significance, Investigators, Innovation, Approach, and Environment. 34 Guidelines published by the NIH regarding how to prepare for grant writing are similar to manuscript writing, including finding a mentor, preparing an outline, and soliciting feedback from colleagues. 35 As described previously for manuscripts, it is best to make the grant reviewers' lives easy. One way this can be done is by separating each of the review criteria into identifiable sections. You can also get a feel for the questions reviewers might ask, depending on their research interests, by identifying the review committee that your proposal will be directed to and seeing who on that committee will most likely review your proposal. Although you should search the literature to obtain background and see if similar studies have been conducted, you should also search the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool (RePORT) to see if similar studies have been funded. 36

General Reminders

There are a few other general reminders to keep in mind. Follow the journal guidelines as far as formatting, line numbering, word limits, figures, and citations. This will save you the time and hassle of having the editor send the paper back to you before it can be sent out for review. Aesthetics is another item to keep in mind. Before submitting (especially when submitting online), preview your paper to be sure that you do not have a heading at the end of a page without text underneath it. If you have large blocks of text, it might be a good idea to add one or more subheadings. Make sure that your font is the same throughout and that you have not overused italics. Some reviewers do not like to see italics because the overuse of italics may signal to the reviewers that the authors consider the materials presented to be too complex for the reviewers to understand. Spell out abbreviations the first time you use them but do not try to avoid word count limitations by bombarding the readers with multiple abbreviations. Non-universal abbreviations force the readers to remember their meanings and substitute the full phrase each time they appear. 29 An abbreviation should be used often enough in the paper, preferably more than 10 times, so that the readers do not forget the meaning. 37

Of course, proofread, proofread, proofread, and use spell check! As previously mentioned, allow someone else to proofread, too. You should also look through your final manuscript and notice your citations. Are you continually citing the same author? If so, this can show bias. Make sure that you are citing a wide range of authors and not reiterating someone else's ideas.

If you have conducted a randomized, controlled clinical trial, you should follow the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement. 38 The CONSORT statement requires authors of a randomized, controlled clinical trial to fill out a checklist of the key information that should be included. 16 Figure 2 has a general manuscript checklist of items to include.

Manuscript checklist. 16 (Reprinted with permission from The Annals of Pharmacotherapy, copyright 2001, Harvey Whitney Books Company.)

Although you should be optimistic, you should also remember that there is a chance that your manuscript will be rejected by the journal you initially submit to. The acceptance rate of clinical research-based manuscripts submitted to major biomedical journals is 30-40%. 39 The acceptance rates for journals such as New England Journal of Medicine and JAMA is less than 10%. 16 Even if your manuscript is not accepted, the comments by the reviewers will most likely help you to identify your weaknesses and improve your paper. If your manuscript is accepted with revisions (major or minor) then congratulations! However, you may still have plenty of work to do. In revising, draft a response letter with each reviewer's comments typed out and how you have addressed them. Also state where in the paper the revision can be found (i.e. Methods section, paragraph 2, line 2). Remember to be polite; if you are choosing not to make a suggested revision, you should give a reason for doing so. Although it is not necessary to do every suggested edit, your manuscript will not be looked upon kindly if you choose to make a rebuttal for all or the majority of suggestions.

Although scientific writing can be a long and tedious process, your writing ability will continuously improve. Remember that, “Only the researcher who is competent in the art of written communication can play an active and effective role in contributing to science.” 40

Acknowledgments

Supported in part by a Midcareer Investigator Award in Patient-Oriented Research (K24 AR053120) from the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (to Dr. Kevin C. Chung).

Financial Disclosure: None of the authors has a financial interest in any of the products, devices, or drugs mentioned in this manuscript.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

• Ask a Librarian

Chemistry Lab Resources (for CHM 1XX and 2XX Labs)

• Organizing Your Lab Notebook
• Parts of a Lab Report
• Writing Your Lab Report/Worksheet
• Graphs/Tables
• Common Calculations
• Citing Sources
• Finding Chemical Properties
• Lab techniques, instrumentation, and protocols
• Chemical Safety

General tips

Whether you are filling out lab worksheets or writing up entire lab reports, there are a few tips that will help you to create more detailed and professional documents and to assist in grading:

• Always label your units
• Show all of your calculations (don’t leave out steps)
• Use complete sentences
• Write neatly
• Strike out mistakes with a single line
• Be aware of significant figures, noting the sensitivity of the device you are using for your measurements

Why do we write lab reports in passive voice?

It’s part of the scientific point of view.  We observe and record as objectively as possible, avoiding personal bias by removing ourselves.  Using the passive voice also clarifies procedures and descriptions so they can be easily reproduced and compared.

NOTE: DO NOT write reports as directions, such as those given in your lab manual. For example, do not write, "Heat the solution until it boils." Instead, write "The solution was heated to boiling."

Write in the third person - Scientific experiments demonstrate facts that do not depend on the observer, therefore, reports should avoid using the first and second person (I,me,my,we,our, OR us.)

Using the correct verb tense - Lab reports and research papers should be mainly written in the present tense. You should limit the use of the past tense to (1) describe specific experimental methods and observations, and (2) citing results published in the past.

Tables and Figures - Should be used when they are a more efficient ways to convey information than verbal description. They must be independent units, accompanied by explanatory captions that allow them to be understood by someone who has not read the text.

Writing in the passive voice

Examples of passive voice in lab reports

200mL of distilled water was poured into a 500 mL beaker.

I poured 200mL of distilled water in a beaker. (active voice)

Pour 200mL water in a beaker. (direction/command)

The covered crucible was mounted on a ring stand.

We put the crucible on a ring stand. (active voice)

Set the crucible on a ring stand. (direction/command)

The temperature was initially measured at 75°C.

I measured the temperature at 75°C. (active voice)

Measure and write down the temperature. (direction/command)

It's understood that all actions were done by the experimenter.

Avoiding Plagiarism

• Avoiding Plagiarism From Purdue's OWL

Passive voice information derived from original work at Delta College Teaching/Learning Center

http://www.delta.edu/files/TLC/Writing%20Lab%20Reports%2009.doc

Writing a Lab Report

Purdue students explain strategies for dividing the workload for writing a lab report.

Sample Lab Reports

• Determination of the Alcohol Content of Whiskey [Courtesy of Univ. of Oregon]
• Synthesis and Characterization of Luminol [Courtesy of Truman State Univ.]
• Production of Biodiesel [Courtesy of Univ. of Vermont]
• << Previous: Parts of a Lab Report
• Next: Graphs/Tables >>
• Last Edited: Aug 5, 2024 4:46 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.purdue.edu/chemlabs

• How To Write A Hypothesis

How to Write a Hypothesis: Types and Tips to Remember

Many people might not know what a hypothesis is, the purpose of a hypothesis or where a hypothesis is needed. A hypothesis is a statement that explains the research’s predictions and the reasons behind the research. It is an “educated guess” of the final result of the research problem and is written for an academic research paper. A good hypothesis is carefully stated as a key aspect of the scientific method, yet even the simplest ones can be difficult to explain.

If you are unaware of the process of writing a hypothesis, we are here to help you with all your queries. Read the article and learn how to write a hypothesis for your academic paper/thesis.

Table of Contents

What is a hypothesis.

• Simple Hypothesis
• Complex Hypothesis
• Null Hypothesis
• Alternative Hypothesis
• Logical Hypothesis
• Empirical Hypothesis
• Statistical Hypothesis

Writing a Good Hypothesis – Points to Remember

• How to Write a Hypothesis

Frequently Asked Questions on How to Write a Hypothesis

A hypothesis is prepared in the early stages of a research project. Based on the preliminary research observations, a hypothesis is framed. It is the prediction of the end result of the research problem. For example, suppose you have observed that the plants grow up better with regular watering. In that case, your hypothesis can be “Plants grow better with regular watering”. Once you have got your hypothesis, you can begin the experiments required to support and prove it.

A hypothesis must include variables. It can be some events, objects or concepts which are to be observed and tested for your research experiments. There are two kinds of variables – dependent variables and independent variables. The independent variables are the ones which can be modified in the experiment, and the dependent variables are the ones which can only be observed.

Hypotheses are a crucial part of the research paper since they influence the direction and arrangement of the research methods. The readers will want to know if the hypothesis was proven right or wrong, and therefore it must be mentioned clearly in the introduction or the abstract of the paper.

Types of Hypotheses

Depending on the nature of the research and the findings, the hypothesis can be categorised into one or more of the seven major categories.

1. Simple Hypothesis

A simple hypothesis states the relationship between the two variables (dependent and independent variables).

2. Complex Hypothesis

A complex hypothesis entails the existence of a relationship between two or more variables. It can be two dependent variables and one independent variable or vice versa.

3. Null Hypothesis

A null hypothesis is a statement that states that the variables have no relationship.

4. Alternative Hypothesis

The null hypothesis is the polar opposite of the alternative hypothesis. It states that the two variables under study have a link (one variable has an effect on the other).

5. Logical Hypothesis

In the absence of verifiable proof, a logical hypothesis indicates a relationship between variables. Assertions are based on inference or logic rather than evidence.

6. Empirical Hypothesis

An empirical hypothesis, often known as a “working hypothesis,” is one that is being researched right now. Empirical hypotheses, unlike logical assumptions, are supported by evidence.

7. Statistical Hypothesis

When you test a sample of a population and then use the collected statistical evidence to draw conclusions about the full population, you’ve generated a statistical hypothesis. You test a section of it and then make an educated guess about the rest based on the results.

A good hypothesis is written following the same format and guidelines. To write a good hypothesis, the below-mentioned information has to be added.

Causes and Effects: A hypothesis always includes a cause-and-effect relationship where one variable causes another to change or not change, depending on the type of hypothesis.

Measurable Prediction: Other than logical hypotheses, most hypotheses are designed to be tested. Before you commit to any hypothesis, make sure that it is experimented. Select a testable hypothesis involving an independent variable over which you can have complete control.

Dependent and Independent Variables: You can define the type of variables of your research for the readers.

Language used in a Hypothesis: Make sure to write the hypothesis in simple and clear language.

Adhere to Ethics: Before conducting your research, keep an eye on what you are experimenting with. Those hypotheses which are objectionable, questionable or taboo can be avoided unless they are absolutely necessary.

How to Write a Hypothesis?

A good hypothesis can be written in the following six steps.

Asking a Question

Arousing curiosity in the minds of the readers can be a good way to start a hypothesis. It would make the readers think about the topic critically.

Conducting a Preliminary Research

Before writing the hypothesis, it is essential to get background information regarding the topic. The preliminary research can be done through various web searches, reading books, etc.

Defining the Variables

After you have decided on your hypothesis, you can now decide on your variables. Keep in mind that the independent variables are the ones over which you have complete control and accordingly decide the limits of your hypothesis.

Writing the Hypothesis in the “if-then” Statement

While writing a hypothesis, keep in mind that it must be written in an “if-then” format statement which is a reliable method of expressing the causes and effects. A simple example would be, “If we water the plants daily, then they might grow really well.”

Collection of Adequate Data to Back the Hypothesis

A hypothesis is written to reach the conclusion of the research. After writing the hypothesis, the experiments can be conducted. See to it that you collect the adequate data needed to support the hypothesis.

Writing with Confidence

After you have collected enough data, you can start writing the hypothesis. Make sure you write confidently, without any errors. It would be good to get your writing counter-checked by an expert if you are not confident about it.

What is a hypothesis?

A hypothesis is a statement that explains the research’s predictions and the reasons behind the research. It is written based on various observations.

Why is a hypothesis important?

A hypothesis is important in an academic paper because it explains the result of the research problem. It will help the researcher, as well as the audience, to stay focused and not deviate from the main idea.

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

Get the Reddit app

A subreddit for questions and discussions about grammar, language, style, conventions[,] and punctuation.

Writing a hypothesis in past tense

I'm marking psychology lab reports (using APA 7th) where they are expected to write the hypothesis in the past tense (as the study has already been carried out, and the report is being written after the fact).

I would consider it most correct to write: "It was hypothesised that x would impact y."

However, another way I've seen it written is: "It was hypothesised that x will impact y."

Which is the most grammatically correct? I would think if you're writing it in the past tense, and the experiment has also already occured, it would make sense to use past tense throughout. Thanks!

By continuing, you agree to our User Agreement and acknowledge that you understand the Privacy Policy .

Enter the 6-digit code from your authenticator app

You’ve set up two-factor authentication for this account.

Enter a 6-digit backup code

Create your username and password.

Reddit is anonymous, so your username is what you’ll go by here. Choose wisely—because once you get a name, you can’t change it.

Reset your password

Enter your email address or username and we’ll send you a link to reset your password

Check your inbox

An email with a link to reset your password was sent to the email address associated with your account

Choose a Reddit account to continue

Past Tenses for Hypothetical Meaning (Wish and If Only)

In English, we often use the past tense (i.e. past simple, past continuous, past perfect, would and could) to express a 'hypothetical' meaning. Hypothetical, in linguistic terms, means talking about an imaginary, unrealistic or possible (perhaps in another context, but not right now) situation. The past tense verb itself does NOT mean that the action is taking place in the past (i.e. past time), but can take place at any time; the past, present or future. The precise grammatical form, as well as accompanying time phrases and context, will make it clear WHEN the action is taking place.

For example:

A: Do you have a ticket for tonight's big lottery? B: Yeah, of course! What would you do if you won ? A: Oh, that's easy. I would pay off my credit card bill.

In this dialogue, the hypothetical situation is " What would you do if you won? ". You can see that all the verbs in this sentence are in the past tense; past modal and past simple to be precise. Contextually, we can see that this sentence is referring to a future time (i.e. the lottery is tonight, and spending the money takes place after). We use the past tense in this case to refer to a situation that is highly unlikely, almost like a dream or an imaginary situation. If you want to think about it in statistical terms, the chance of winning a big lottery is roughly 1 in 10,000,000 (or 0.00001%).

Consequently, it is much more natural to use past tenses in this dialogue. It is unnatural and illogical to express the same dialogue using present tenses. " What will you do if you win ? " would express the meaning that it is possible, realistic and likely to win the lottery. Wouldn't that be a great place to live in? (notice the would in this question)

There are a number of grammatical functions that follow this concept. In this first part of this series of lessons, we will focus on:

Wish / If Only

All WISH structures follow this basic form:

The verb 'wish' can take any tense depending on your meaning and intention. Following the 'that', which is optional, you need a subject (who or what you are talking about) and a past tense verb. The tense you use will change the meaning of the wish.

There are five main functions of WISH plus a few exceptions.

WISH + PAST SIMPLE

We use WISH + PAST SIMPLE to talk about a desire for something to be different in the present. This is an unrealistic and imaginary situation at the time of speaking.

I wish I was tall enough to play basketball.

Sally wishes there were more parks in her neighbourhood.

The parents wish that drivers around the school drove more slowly.

WISH + PAST CONTINUOUS

We use WISH + PAST CONTINUOUS (= was/were + verb-ing) to talk about long actions (actions that take time to complete) and actions that are happening right now (if it's an action verb ). These are things we want to be doing or want to be happening now, but is impossible at the present time.

I wish we were lying on a beach in Bora Bora right now.

David wishes he were teaching in Korea instead.

The class wishes they were travelling by plane instead of the old bus they are in.

WISH + COULD

We use WISH + COULD to talk about ability (or skills), possibility or permission in the present time. These things are unrealistic at the present time, but may be able to happen in the future.

I wish I could play the guitar and sing at the same time.

Susan wishes she could take a holiday, but she's too busy at the moment.

The team wished their manager could afford new equipment.

WISH + WOULD

We use WISH + WOULD to talk about things, events or people that annoy or inconvenience us (i.e. to complain about them). This takes place in the present.

I'm sick and tired of this weather. I wish it would stop raining.

George wishes his roommate would stop leaving dirty dishes in the sink for days.

Cyclists wish drivers would pay more attention to the riders who share the road with them.

You need to be careful with this structure as the following sentences are not possible:

I wish I wouldn't sleep through my alarm every morning.

Jack wishes he (Jack) wouldn't get so shy in front of his coworkers.

Basically, you cannot use this structure when the speaker is complaining or being annoyed about themselves. You have to complain about somebody or something else. To get around this problem, you can use WISH + COULD or WISH + PAST SIMPLE.

I wish I could get up to my alarm every morning. I wish I didn't sleep through my alarm every morning.

Jack wishes he could speak in front of his coworkers. Jack wishes he weren't so shy in front of his coworkers.

WISH + PAST PERFECT

We use WISH + PAST PERFECT to talk about a desire for something to be different in the past. Often, this shows regret or that you feel bad about something that happened in the past.

I wish I had listened to my parents and studied harder. (= I didn't listen to my parents and I was a lazy student)

Sarah wishes she hadn't studied architecture. (= Sarah did study architecture and that was a mistake)

The tour group wished the driver had taken the highway instead of the back road. (= The driver took the back roads which ended up being much slower than the highway)

IF ONLY means "I wish...". Using this tends to have a more dramatic or emphatic effect, and is common in story telling or literature. It can be used with any WISH function where it starts with "I wish". Extra context has been added to the second sentence for effect.

I wish she were nicer to me. If only she were nicer to me. I can't stop thinking about her.

I wish it would stop raining. If only it would stop raining. I want to go out.

I wish I hadn't given away the painting. It's worth double now. If only I hadn't given away the painting.

OTHER WISH FORMS

WISH is often used in fixed expressions such as:

I WISH YOU + OBJECT

I wish you a Merry Christmas .

I wish you long life and happiness . (= on someone's birthday)

I wish you all the best . (= farewell of a colleague)

WISH can also be used in this form:

WISH + TO INFINITIVE

This is unacceptable. I wish to speak to the manager immediately.

It is my understanding that you wish to plead guilty.

WISH + TO INFINITIVE means "want to" or "would like to". More often than not, it tends to sound a little old-fashioned, formal or polite. Be careful not to confuse the following:

I wish I knew the answer. (= I don't know the answer.)

I wish to know the answer. (= Please tell me the answer.)

WISH GRAMMAR and USE OF ENGLISH

If WISH grammar appears in the Use of English section, it will most likely appear in Part 4. Forms that feature auxiliary verbs or (semi-) modal verbs are more frequent because of the increased chance to make a mistake (i.e. it's more difficult).

Let's have a look at a couple of examples.

Use of English Part 4 example:

Sally wishes she hadn't thrown away her old handbag.

Sally _______________________________ her old handbag.

(scroll down for answer)

Sally regrets disposing of her old handbag.

In this example, we are going from WISH grammar to VERB PATTERN grammar, with a dependent preposition added to the mix. As with all types of these questions, it could be down in reverse order, with you having to produce the WISH grammar.

Let's take this question one step further. Imagine the sentence is now:

Sally regrets disposing of her old handbag as she would like to use tonight.

If Sally _________________ handbag, she would be able to use it tonight.

If Sally hadn't thrown away her old handbag, she would be able to use it tonight.

Now we have gone from VERB PATTERN grammar to CONDITIONAL grammar. We can see that there is a close relationship between WISH, VERB PATTERNS and CONDITIONAL grammar, which makes it very popular in Use of English Part 4.

That concludes the first part of PAST TENSES FOR HYPOTHETICAL MEANING. Make sure to check out the next part which will cover "IT'S TIME" and "WOULD RATHER".

Recent Posts

Past Tenses for Hypothetical Meaning (It's Time and Would Rather)

More Advanced Uses of Relative Clauses

Modifying Adjectives and Adverbs

How to Discuss Hypothetical Situations in English

• Pronunciation & Conversation
• Writing Skills
• Reading Comprehension
• Business English
• Resources for Teachers
• TESOL Diploma, Trinity College London
• M.A., Music Performance, Cologne University of Music
• B.A., Vocal Performance, Eastman School of Music

Hypothetical situations are situations that we imagine. There are specific English grammar structures, phrases and forms to express hypothetical situations. Here are some examples of some hypothetical situations using a wide variety of forms.

• They would invest in R & D if they had the capital. - Conditional Form
• If only we had enough time to take a vacation. - Partial conditional form / set phrase 'if only'
• It's time we improved our sales. - Set phrase 'it's time'
• I wish he lived here. - Verb 'wish' to express a desire

English uses conditional forms to express hypothetical situations.

• If they have time, they will come to the meeting.
• They would invest in R & D if they had the capital.
• If Jack had taken the job, he wouldn’t have been satisfied.

There are also a number of other forms to express hypothetical situations in English.

‘If only’ takes the same verb forms as ‘wish’. This form is used as a means of stressing the importance of the wish or hypothetical situation. The form is often also used with an exclamation point .

• If only there were more job opportunities!
• If only Mary could work for us.
• If only our friends had time to take a vacation with us in Hawaii.

‘If only’ can also be used with ‘would / wouldn’t’ to criticize another person.

• If only the boss would listen to my proposals!
• If only Jeff would consider hiring Peter.
• If only Susan wouldn't spend so much time online.

'If only' statements generally imply some sort of solution. Here are some of the example sentences with the implied solutions provided.

• If only there were more job opportunities! - I could find a better job.
• If only Jeff would consider hiring Peter. - He's the perfect person for the job.
• If only Susan wouldn't spend so much time online. - It can't be healthy for her.

Use ‘it’s time’ with the past simple to talk about an action which finally is taking place, or should take place soon. It always refers to an action or state that should have taken place before the moment of speaking.

• It’s time you began working on your own.
• It's time we changed to a new internet service provider.
• It's time they grew up!

Variations on ‘It’s Time’

Here are some common variations on ‘it’s time’ which have the same meaning:

• It’s about time…
• It’s high time…
• It’s high time she took a shower!
• It's about time we left for the meeting.

Would Rather

There are t wo uses of ‘would rather’ to express hypothetical situations:

Would Rather + Base Form of Verb

Use ‘would rather’ + the base form of a verb to talk about our preferences in the present or the future:

• He’d rather his employees work less overtime.
• I'd rather leave now.
• Jack would rather take a different approach.

In each of these cases, the phrase with 'would rather' shows that another action is taking place than the preferred action of the subject of the sentence.

Would Rather + Past Perfect

Use ‘would rather’ + past perfect to express hypothetical situations in the past:

• They’d rather they hadn’t spent so much on the marketing campaign.
• Mary would rather she had chosen a different position.

We use ‘wish’ to talk about situations we’d like to change. In this sense, ‘wish’ is very similar to the second or third conditionals because it poses an imaginary situation.

Wish for Present Situations

When we are wishing for a change in a present situation, we use ‘wish’ plus the simple past .

• The director wishes he could attend the presentation.
• They wish he concentrated more on his work and less on his hobbies.

Wish for Past Situations

When we are speaking about a past situation in a present moment, we use ‘wish’ plus the past perfect .

• Janet wishes she had applied for a new position.
• We wish you had seen the opportunity in time.

Hypotheticals: Quiz

Conjugate the verb in parentheses or provide the missing word to check your grammar usage of these hypothetical forms.

• about and high are both correct
• neither about nor high is correct
• would have paid
• had visited
• would have visited
• would have bought
• would've known
• had grown up
• have grown up
• wishful thinking
• Conditional Forms
• The Basics of If Sentences
• Indirect Questions for ESL
• What are Phrasal Verbs?
• Countable and Uncountable Nouns
• Past and Present Participles
• Beginner English Grammar Review
• Expressing Quantity for Large Amounts
• Past Unreal Conditional Exercises
• Common Present Simple Exceptions
• Guide to Past Perfect and Past Perfect Continuous for ESL
• Past, Present, and Future Are Simple Tenses
• Adverb Placement in English
• Time Expressions and Tenses
• Tips for Mastering English Grammar
• The Difference Between 'Of' and 'From'

We Trust in Human Precision

20,000+ Professional Language Experts Ready to Help. Expertise in a variety of Niches.

API Solutions

• API Pricing
• Cost estimate
• Customer loyalty program
• Educational Discount
• Non-Profit Discount
• Green Initiative Discount1

Value-Driven Pricing

Unmatched expertise at affordable rates tailored for your needs. Our services empower you to boost your productivity.

• Special Discounts
• Enterprise transcription solutions
• Enterprise translation solutions
• Transcription/Caption API
• AI Transcription Proofreading API

Trusted by Global Leaders

GoTranscript is the chosen service for top media organizations, universities, and Fortune 50 companies.

GoTranscript

One of the Largest Online Transcription and Translation Agencies in the World. Founded in 2005.

Speaker 1: So let me begin by introducing myself and our service. So our company is called Essay Review and we do edit essays but we also mostly edit research papers. So we do research papers, dissertations, manuscripts, journal cover letters, anything that you might need for universities for submission or for research or journals etc. And before we go on I'm going to tell you a bit about myself. So I am the managing editor at Essay Review and what my job is is to edit papers and also to check what other other editors see and how they edit. So personally I have a degree in a master's degree in English. I am NOT a scientific researcher but I have edited hundreds and hundreds of scientific manuscripts. So what we're going to talk about today is going to be about writing quality. So we're not going to focus on research or how to do research but how to make your research paper better so that you can get good grades and you will be able to get into journals and get your work published. That's the point right? So the content of the lecture today we're going to start with an overview of what is research writing. We'll then talk about the structure of the research paper, what parts it's composed of and you'll see there's four parts. And following that we will talk about composing each section. How do you start from the beginning and compose each section? And then we will discuss some tips for improving the quality of writing. Okay so the question we want to ask first is what the what is the point of the research paper? What's the purpose? As you might know the main purpose is to share your knowledge, share the knowledge you've gained in your study with others, especially with researchers. You want to show how your study fits into the current science and if you're writing for a popular journal such as Science or Nature or one of the more the popular science journals, then you're going to be informing the public, so regular people not just researchers. So let's talk about four important factors of research writing. Now this is not research itself but research writing. So first factor we're going to consider is coherence and that means including all of the necessary information in every section. What is the necessary information? We will get to that later. It means not repeating the information. So writing we see many times writers use the same phrase again again again. It looks very unprofessional so you want to try to avoid that. The next factor is organization. The organization is basically the structure the IMRD. Who has heard of IMRD or IMRAD? Have any of you heard that? This structure? Maybe once you know what it stands for you'll know. IMRD stands for Introduction Methods Results Discussion. So that's going to be what we will discuss today. It's the body of most research papers. You want to put the right content in the right place. Okay so that's what we're going to show you how to do that. The third factor of writing is relevance. Relevance means a lot of things but it means conforming to the length guidelines. It means choosing the right data. So for example if you have a research paper that's 4,000 words you don't want to write ten results or ten methods. Probably you want a smaller amount of methods. So what the exact answer is it's it's really up to you but you want to make sure that you're the in the research methods and results you include are relevant and most important. The most important methods. Most important results. Fourth factor of writing is clarity. Clarity means writing clearly, writing elegantly, and nicely. So it should be easy to read and understand. Your paper should not be a struggle. I understand the English is not most of your first languages your first language so we don't expect in most journals don't expect you to get the language perfect and when you send the manuscript to editor, they just edit for grammar and for clear communication. They cannot change the structure of your of your paper so this is going to be up to you but as far as clarity goes we can help you with that as editors. So you need to use proper grammar, phrasing, and style and not too too many extra words. Okay this below I don't know if you can see but this is kind of a golden rule for all rules. You want to check the formatting and style rules of your target journal. So if you have if you're applying to I don't know Bioscience Monthly you want to read everything about about for about authors or for authors section and you want to read as many articles as possible to get a sense of what their articles look like. Okay so now that we've discussed that let's talk about research writing structure. So basically there are four main parts in most research papers that you need to follow and they're usually in this order and that is introduction, methods, results, and the discussion. Sometimes you have a concluding paragraph. You've probably seen this structure before I imagine but maybe you haven't learned learned exactly what to do with them. I mean who here has written a research paper for a journal? Raise your hand if you've written a paper for a journal. Okay a couple of you. How about have you written a research paper for a class? 영어 논문을 샀어요? 수업에게? For class? If not then yeah this is a really good lecture to attend because we're going to be talking about the basics but even researchers who have written many many articles can still benefit from learning how to to write how to write these sections better. So your information actually moves from broad to specific and back to broad. So this is the shape of the research paper. You notice it has a sort of funnel shape. So you start with the introduction, what is known, the basic topic that you're going to discuss, and you quickly move into the literature. What is what is unknown? What are the gaps in the literature? And in the middle here you can see this is your hypothesis. So you're going to give a very short statement about what your research study is doing. What's the purpose of it? And your methods and results section as you can see here methods and results are the shortest. They're the shortest part of your paper but they're the most compact. They have the most data. And at the end your discussion is a bit longer. So this is the structure. Okay so let's talk about each part in particular. And this is the order that you will usually read a research paper. So the introduction, what does it do? Introduction discusses the problem that you're going to research. It discusses the background and describes how your research fits in to the known information. You also see a lot of primary literature introduced. So a lot of citations and that is the introduction is the place where you see the most citations. This study you know Smith and and Burke 1995 right those citations for other studies you see introduction. Okay the methods quickly tell you how you did it tells how you did the study and which materials and methods of experimentation which methods of analysis you used. The results explain the important findings of your study. They do not discuss the importance of the findings they simply talk about what you found what your methods found. And finally the discussion and explains what your findings mean why are they important and what are the implications for other research. It also can talk about limitations you know if you study about farming and you study about cows you do a research about cows you could say you know this study applies to this kind of cow but it might not apply to other cows. So these are limitations you need to include and you can discuss possible research in the future. All right so let's do our first quiz and if you know the answer just raise your hand anytime you don't have to wait for me to finish and I'll try to choose whoever is first. Okay which one your quiz is not in the PPT there's no answer. Okay which one is not a factor that affects quality of research writing? Is it A. coherence B. clarity C. novelty D. organization C. novelty are you sure that's right right good. So you can get a coupon afterwards if you like. So novelty might affect your research right you want to do a study of something that hasn't been done before but you don't want to write in a crazy way you know it's not a creative writing course right so you don't want to be the one that writes you know and it's in a novel way you want to follow the rules. Okay number two what does the discussion conclusion section do? A. presents the findings of your research B. gives the context and background of your research C. explains the meaning of the findings includes implications and limitations D. discusses how your study was conducted. Yes C. discussion explains the meaning of the findings ding-dong-ding-dong that's right. Okay so in the discussion is where you talk about why your study is important and we'll show you how to do that. Moving on let's talk about how to compose the paper. As you saw earlier I don't know whether to move over here or stay here I might move later. Okay so even though your introduction comes first you actually begin with the methods section you're going to write that first and then you will write the results the discussion and finally the introduction and the reason for this is so you don't leave anything out in the introduction you don't include something you know something new in the discussion that you didn't introduce. So everything all of the main meat of the paper should be introduced. It's like a summary right summarize what your study is going to do. You're not going to put exact figures and data about your study but you're going to discuss what your study yielded what you did. Okay and before writing your paper you should you should know what your hypothesis is and you should know what your research questions are. So for example what did this study seek to find. One example of this question is the study sought to find how many university students are satisfied with their school's facilities. Okay another question you need to know the answer to what is your studies main arguments or questions. For example this study how many students report satisfaction with materials what are the most common complaints students make about the universities. I'm sure you have some common complaints in your mind but if you're doing a study on on universities and satisfaction with the university classes this would be one of your main questions. You should find the answer to this question in the results. You also want to decide which audience or journal you're writing for. This really the only way to know how to do this is to is to read the articles in the journal or if you're applying for a conference to research that conference and see what other authors how other authors write. That's about all we can say about that. Okay so the first thing to do before actually writing the section is to prepare the figures and tables. This is the your core data this is the most important aspect of your research paper right. So you want to gather and create and gather everything in one place. So you have your data you're gonna make it into figures and tables. You've probably already done that before you put a pen to the paper. Then you want to give those data captions and numbers. So you want to put them in order so you know what order you're going to be writing about them when you write the methods and results. Right so place them in the order you have because your paper will just be writing in the sentence this data. I'm just gonna make sentences out of the data. That's what a paper is really. All right so in the second step you're going to write the method. So this is really the first part of the paper. Here's some questions you should ask. How is the study carried out and analyzed? In this section you should describe experiments, explain why procedures were chosen, why you use this method of analysis, or why you took this sample. Explain how your results were analyzed. And this is usually the order. I'll show you here actually. Organization. Okay so the first the first content you will write about is your materials that you used. That means where you where you got your materials and if you do sample study what your sample is. Is it adults aged 25 to 30 or is it children? So you're going to put that right away in the beginning. Second you're going to discuss how materials were prepared. What did you do with the materials to get ready to study them? Third how are your measurements made? Okay you can talk about the techniques you use to measure your your data. And fourth what methods of analysis did you use? You get into more and more detail as you go on. Okay and here's some rules. You usually want to just if you think about it chronologically. So what did you do first? We did this first and then we did this and then we did this. That's a good way to organize. Also when you do the results your results should be in the same order as your methods. You can also organize it from most to least important. So if you have methods that are you know very very central put those first. Methods of analysis. If you have other methods of analysis the details are not the most important but you might want to you know tell your reader about them then you know put them last. Your methods section is only about 10% right? It's very short 10% of your paper. It could be longer than that it might be 20% but generally speaking methods is shorter than the other parts. In this section these are in red you can see some grammar rules. It's not it's not like a hard rule but generally speaking most journal articles use will use passive voice and past tense for the methods. It's not again many teachers will say professors will say use active voice but we still find that in the methods passive voice and active are used but you should try to be consistent with your voice. Do not discuss the results okay don't talk about what you found just how you found them and be sure to use quantitative details in addition to your techniques and methods of analysis. The first thing you're going to do is to create a list of your materials and methods. This means if you know what you used for your study just make a list of them. So in three groups you have materials and sample. Let's just say you have you used 100 grams of potatoes, a cheesecloth, a distilled water. Okay it's a very simple experiment, very simple study. Your next group is your preparation. So in a little phrase what did you do? You skinned the potato with a knife, you got catecholase extract, you blended the potatoes and water, you stored in 13 degrees Celsius refrigerator for 24 hours. So list all of the things you did and also list your methods of analysis in phrases. Spectrophotometer used to measure optical density, I recalibrated it using signal linearization. Okay so it's not a sentence yet. So from this you can write the information as a sentence. So notice A and A are the same but we've just written A in a sentence form. So a plain cheesecloth, pure distilled water and a hundred grams of raw potatoes were purchased. Notice that you have your your materials in sample at the beginning. Next in preparing the catecholase extract a hundred grams of potatoes were skinned with a paring knife, washed and diced, etc etc. So and again in red we have the verbs they're in past tense and passive voice so you can see what they how to put them in that in that tense. And last you have your methods of analysis. A spectrophotometer was used to measure optical density and calibrated using signal linearization. Now you're ready to write your methods. So you're going to separate the different methods into different paragraphs. So this is one paragraph. If you have methods of analysis you might you might separate this into a paragraph as well. So it's try to keep your paragraphs separate based on the methods that you used in the methods of analysis that you used. Okay so we're going to look at a sample. This sample I chose is from Public Library of Science PLOS. You can find you can find free open source open access journals on this site open access papers. So this one is about kimchi. I thought it would be nice to do a sample about kimchi. So let's start with the heading. This student starts with a heading sample preparation. Now you don't need to use a heading. You might be able to use it but not all journals use headings obviously. But if you can it's helpful to show the reader that to organize your paper and show the reader where what you're doing in the upcoming paragraph. So the first thing that this researcher does is discuss materials site and sample. 20 kimchi samples made from Korean or Chinese kimchi cabbage were acquired via online markets. Okay so we have the where they're from and what the materials are. And then you have the exact place where they were were procured. They came from Gyeonggi, Chungcheongbuk etc. And then the Chinese kimchi samples were purchased in the same month. So you have the place and where in China they were purchased right. And before we go on this these were all one sentence or one paragraph. So I've separated them so you can see the different parts. But I just I made it separated. Okay sorry about my Korean. Okay the next thing you'll do is explain the preparation. How you prepared the materials. So you're gonna have a lot of verbs here. A lot of verbs. Each head of kimchi cabbage was cut. It's an action verb. The cut kimchi samples were stored in sealed bags. The samples were frozen using liquid nitrogen and then ground using electronic blender. The ground samples were stored at negative 80 degrees Celsius using Maldi TOF MS analysis. Okay so again you have passive voice and a lot of different verbs. This is this is a style issue but it will help your your article not be so boring and repetitive. If you use the same verbs again again again it's not really fun interesting to read. Okay so let's look at the second part of methods. We won't read everything. I'll just try to go through important parts. So again this author notice the sub the heading Maldi TOF MS analysis. So what are what is this paragraph about? Well it's going to be about this method of analysis. It's really easy to know if you're you know skimming through the paper you can see where this information what this is. So you start with how the major measurements and calculations were made. Start with the broad methods first. So Maldi TOF MS analysis was performed in triplicate for kimchi samples without protein extraction. And then you have this is how how this was done in order. First kimchi samples were mixed and homogenized using one-to-one ratio etc. And then later on you have further details about the analysis methods. So it explains the range of mass spectra and the extraction times etc. So you have all these like these little quantitative details later. So don't necessarily don't put these first. Start with the the method of analysis first. How did you do it? And then later you can discuss further details about how you how you analyzed your data. Okay what do I have here? Provide quantified details and measurements. Okay so not just a lot of many. Most. The majority of. Use numbers. Can use a lot of numbers here. Okay so we have one-to-one ratio 30% 2,000 to 20,000. You can you can see this. Alright so the third one the third part of the methods they have mass fingerprinting analysis. So this is the second method of analysis that they discuss. And here they break it down into PCA, principal component analysis, and HCA. You'll see this later when we look at the results. In the results section they will have the same order PCA then HCA. List the analytical methods first, quantified information second. So you have the methods and in blue is some quantified data. Again HCA was used, how it was done, and here's the the values in blue. And again this is one paragraph so the author has squished it together but sort of it's it's micro-organized right. It's got it's still got this the each each each method of analysis separated but then the details are put after it. But it will be a one this is one paragraph in the original. Okay so methods quiz. Let's see if you remember what I just said. What statement about method is not true? A headings are sometimes used in the method section. B methods are organized chronologically and in order of importance. The methods section describes how experiments are done or D the methods contains information about research findings. Which one is not true? Yes you sir. What's one? D? Last one? Which is not true? The methods contains information about research findings. That's right. Wow you guys are three for three. Nice job. The methods contains no information about findings just how you did the the experiment or how you did the study. Which is the best example of a sentence found in the methods? Many people get this got this wrong or maybe it's my fault but there is one that is the best based on what we just talked about. So try to keep that in mind. A. 54 men ages 30 to 39 were placed in wooden chairs. B. The spectrometer readings were 58.99 nanometers respectively. C. Cancer is a leading cause of death in the United States or D. Researchers should place slides under a 300 times microscope. Yeah. Which one? A? First one? I think you're the first one to get it right the first time. Nice job. Yeah why why do you think that's why is this the best answer? Yeah yeah right good thank you. It's clear like what the the sample is right? This is actually maybe near the beginning. Well it's how the the sample was the procedure was undertaken right? And we have our sample 54 men what their age are and then what you're doing to them. I don't know what's going on with this this methods but what's happening in this experiment but okay let's move on to the results. After you finish the methods you're going to write the results. I'm gonna switch again. Okay so the results tell you what you found. So you're going to present the findings in the same order as I mentioned methods results method analysis one results of the analysis one. Methods of analysis two is the second set of results from that analysis. You're going to present the data in figures and tables and as text. So your result is your figures and tables and it's also the text. The text is the figures and tables it's just explained in sentences. You're going to report on data collection and participants and report data relevant to your research question. So if you have many many many results you just choose the most important the most relevant to your research questions. We'll skip through these you can read them later just because we have a very we have a lot to do. So the organization of your results as I have mentioned several times same order as methods and answer the research question as presented in the figures. So for example your research question that you said in the introduction was how do hospital patients over age 55 feel about post-operative care. In the data or the way you'll present this based on the data might look like this. Hospital patients over the age of 55 were 30% more likely to report negative experiences with post-operative care. Okay this is what your general methods oh sorry your general results might look like one of your results. Then you can elaborate with secondary results so after you write your main result you put the details. Same with the methods you have the main method and then the the details. So the common negative issues reported were in attention by nurses etc and then here you can cite your figures and tables as well. So let's talk about writing captions very quickly. Captions are not sentences they're almost always phrases starting with a noun your main keyword and then what your figure or table is measuring. So if the survey question is let's say you you ask some participants what do hospital patients over the age of 55 think about post-operative care and this is the the data you come up with probably doesn't really look like it makes sense but for the sake of the picture. Attitudes towards post-operative care of patients over 55 that's how you can write your caption and when you write your text you might you're going to write as a full sentence obviously. So you're going to write the captions first before you write the results section. Let's look at our example again so you can see they start with this Maldi TOF MS analysis. That was the first method of analysis brought up in the method section right remember? So this author addresses the research question with details about the data. The Maldi TOF MS spectra of kimchi fermented for one two or three weeks were obtained in the mass range of 2,000 20,000 MZ in total 80 spectra were recorded in triplicate. So here's the data that they came up with and the second research question is how will Maldi TOF MS approach what will the approach yield in terms in determining fermentation differences? So this is what this is answering that question. Here's the secondary details however the mass range of actual acquired mass spectra was set to 2,000 to 10,000 MZ. Mass peaks greater than 10,000 were not detected in kimchi samples. Okay so you've got details about this analysis and your caption presents data as a statement right here's your the caption PCA of mass spectra of Korean and kimchi Chinese kimchi during mass fermentation. This is the text for this figure. I know this is gets really dry looking at every detail of these let's just look at what it's what this author is doing okay. Again this is the subheading discrimination of kimchi by fermentation time based on geographical origin using PCA. Well that was our first method of analysis right PCA. So this addresses a second research question which is how are the kimchi samples differentiated using PCA. They discuss how they examine these correlations. They were expressed using three-dimensional scatter plots. So here's the scatter plots and then figure one shows the sample score plots and actually they list more details in their paper which I did not put here but you can see they start with discussing how they they analyzed the data what they came up with and then the details more details about the this data and they also say figure one shows the sample. So they're referring they're having a sort of dialogue with the figure they're saying if you want to see the details of this look at figure one figure one shows XYZ so there's a lot of discussing discussion about what is being shown in these figures. Okay here's the third paragraph remember it's one paragraph just this is the heading discrimination of kimchi by fermentation phase based on origin using HCA. HCA was the second method of analysis if you remember and another research question is addressed how were the kimchi samples differentiated using HCA. These research question you should have in your mind before you write the paper so you can answer it in your results. And here the this is not a comparison of it's not a discussion about the about the results just comparing basic the basic results so you're not discussing the meaning of the results and just basically comparing them. So in contrast Korean kimchi sample D is not clearly associated with any of the Korean or Chinese kimchi samples. So yeah so you're coming you're showing how the samples differed but you'll see how later on in discussion section you're going to discuss what that means and the larger find the larger importance of the findings. But be careful not to include discussion in the results. Okay so let's talk about some data guidelines for results this is just a few there's many things you want to keep in mind but generally. Indicate statistical tests used with all relevant parameters. So use standard deep mean and standard deviation. Be specific. Median and interpercentile range. Be specific. Use quantitative details. Use mean and standard deviation to report normally distributed data. Use median and interpercentile range to report skewed data. You could probably find these results guidelines and parameters in the journal and for editors or I'm sorry the for authors section you can often find you know how they want you to report these. For numbers use two significant digits you know don't write it don't write two point zero seven eight five six four four four unless you're dealing with I don't nano nano measurements. Never use percentages for very small samples. Okay use one out of two instead of 50%. These are basic rules that if you read the for authors section you can get an idea of how to what to do in this section. Okay quiz three what should the results section include? A background information about your study. B statements about data figures and tables. C a concise hypothesis or problem statement. D data from related research sources. Yes sir. B it should include statements about data figures and tables. You guys are five for five. Better than the other schools so far. Should I tell you the other schools that we've done this at? Maybe later. Right your data in the figures and tables are the results written as sentences in the order so the reader understands. That's all that's all it is. Okay you only get one question for results. The fourth step which is the fourth section is the discussion section. So you're gonna say here what the results mean. What is the point of these results? This is the easiest section to write but it's the hardest section to get right. Does that make sense? Many many authors can just write as much as possible and you can be a little bit looser in this section but what you want to do is sell your study. Why is your study important? Why do people want to read it? Why what are the implications of your work? Okay so you want to sell your data you know like you're a salesman saleswoman when you're when you're discussing these. Criticize and justify your studies methods. Suggest improvements for how other studies could be better done to get to get more information about this topic. Answer the question did your study contribute to knowledge in the field or not? Does your study help fill in the gap or did it fail? You need to be honest too. You can't you don't want to say in my study this was the most groundbreaking study about pizza ever done. It's gonna change the face of food and pizza. Well you probably want to be specific about the kind of pizza that you're changing and how. Discuss the impact of the research on other top other areas if it's if it applies. Okay let's let's keep going here. Here's some tips for a discussion. So first focus on what is most important then move to least important. Good rule. Start with an analysis of your results and then move to implications. We'll show you the structure next. So you're gonna talk of a summary of the results. Why is it important? What can be done to make it better? Divide the analysis by paragraph. This goes with organization and clarity the writing factor. Don't smoosh everything together because the discussion section is very long. So you don't want to just write one paragraph. You need to make sure each paragraph is has a separate idea. We'll skip the grammar stuff. Okay you can read the rest later because there's a lot of details but I want to look at the structure and what the author has done to to put the correct structure here. Okay in this discussion they have not used any headings for some reason. There's no headings but they've still organized each paragraph, each one paragraph by topic. So they start by summarizing the process, the results, and overall purpose. So in this study Maldi TOF MS was utilized to discriminate between Chinese and Korean kimchi of different geological words. So you'll see this sentence in your introduction too. The discussion and the introduction have a lot in common. The discussion just has a lot more about what the results mean and why they're important. But this start off by you know why is your study important and what did it yield. So they write to the best of our knowledge a mass fingerprinting approach using Maldi TOF has not been performed to analyze kimchi samples. You're comparing your study to other studies. Why is your study better? Why is it unique? And they do this again. The mass spectra of kimchi samples obtained were analyzed using PCA, HC, and heat maps. This is interesting. PCA which is a multivariable analysis method has been applied for the discrimination of coffee, cocoa, wine, saffron, and honey. So you have all these other citations about how it can be used in other similar fermentation studies, other foods, other methods of discrimination. So well your study could be important for a lot of foods and this method has been used a lot of times so it's a good reliable method. The author also offers a critique of the study. In this case it's more of a justification. So because kimchi is a fermented food, to discriminate between Chinese and Korean kimchi based on origin, samples must be prepared at various formation times. So they're they're giving reasons why they use these times, why they used 10 minutes, and why they use this method. Okay we'll just move quickly through here. Another result is PCA scatter plots and explain the significance between of these results to the research. The result implied, keywords, we have keywords in blue by the way, useful verbs, the result implied that various polymers such as proteins or polysaccharides disappeared or appeared with the amount affected by fermentation process. Why don't we put this in the results? Because it's a more general observation, it's a more general relationship, it's not an exact finding of the experiment of the of the methods. Also you're going to assess which results were most useful. So which of the results used were most useful? This one says that the principles component scatterplot of the kimchi samples after four weeks of formation showed the best discrimination between Chinese group and Korean group as compared with the scatterplots for 1, 2, and 3. So this scatterplot was the most useful and you can go back to the results and see what that what that showed. Okay and this is the last page. They focus on the success of these methods. So HCA was found to discriminate successfully, right? That's the the main finding and a main importance of this study. Based on these results all the kimchi samples clearly successfully clustered into Chinese and Korean groups. So you're discussing how this was this the results worked in this case and you're comparing again this study to related research. The degradation of polymers with the progress of fermentation has been reported for sourdough and other fermented unsalted soybean paste. Therefore it can be used for other research and furthermore therefore constructing a database of mass spectra so if if another researcher constructs a database that contains the mass spectra and the geographical information this will allow the kimchi samples to be identified within 10 minutes. So if you do this this other kind of work you might be able to yield even better results is what they're saying. And in the conclusion they really point out why that's important. So in the conclusion, the conclusion is the same as the discussion, right? It's just the kind of the final paragraph, the 느낌표. Why is the study you know such so good? So you're going to indicate extensions and further implications you'll see here. So this author focuses on the success of the study to differentiate kimchi samples. Again Korean kimchi samples were employed for HCA which allowed clear differentiation between Chinese and Korean kimchi groups within 10 minutes. So they state clearly this worked HCA worked to differentiate the samples. And finally at the very last sentence they say our method could be applied to discriminate the origin of other fermented salted vegetables at reduced cost in shorter times. I think this the very end of this sentence is a good example of you know telling researchers why this study is awesome, why it rocks. Because it has a lot of other potential and it could actually affect the economics. It could allow researchers to find bacteria in certain kimchi, certain cabbage in different locations quicker and cheaper. All right it's our discussion quiz which is not a purpose of the discussion section. A. To explain the results of your study. B. To critique and justify your methods. C. To discuss implications and suggest further research or D. To describe how you prepared the materials. Yes. Which one? D. D again which is not a purpose of discussion. To describe how you prepared the materials. Bingo. Where do you describe how you prepared the materials? Sir? Which section do you? The methods. Yeah. All right so don't forget to grab your coupon at the end. Okay this is the last section and then we're going to discuss the introduction. We will discuss some grammar issues quickly and then we'll have a break so hang with me. Okay so in the last thing you'll do is write the introduction. The introduction tells the readers right away what does the study do, why is it important. And many researchers will tell you in journal journals will tell you introduction is most the most important part as far as getting other researchers interested. Because if they read the introduction and it's great then they're hooked. And that goes with abstract too. Abstract it's very very very important. Okay so in this section you should establish the context of the research. Include gaps in knowledge that your study is going to fill. State the purpose of the work. Give a hypothesis and or research question. And discuss why your approach, why you chose this approach. And include the main content found in the results and discussion. But you're not including the data you're just kind of some you're previewing previewing this results. Okay so here's some questions. What's the problem being solved? What do we know about the problem? Are there existing solutions? What what have other researchers showed that we can solve this problem? What are the limitations to these solutions? What's the problem with the current understanding? And your hypothesis what do you want to do with this study? So let's break it down the introduction down to two main questions. First what is the gap in knowledge that exists? And why does it need filling? Okay this is gonna show you the importance why should people care about your study? And two how does this study fill that gap? This is the role of the study or the hypothesis really. What's the problem? How does your study solve that problem? So for the introduction has many parts. I'd say it's the most complicated of of your paper and that's maybe why you should write it last so you don't miss anything. So start with the background information about the topic and this means you're going to talk about the problem. Next talk about the motivations. Why did you do the study? What are the key primary literature that you used that you can cite that supports your work? What's your hypothesis or your research question? And what approaches did you use and why? Okay this is your organization and almost all introductions will be organized like this. So let's look at our chart again. We have this upside-down pyramid shape. We start with what is known, our understanding of the world. What is unknown and how do we fill it, our hypothesis. We'll just look at a few of these. So you want to make sure only use highly relevant sources. Only use the sources that are closely related to your study, right? Don't use, you know, Einstein if you're not writing about his exact, you know, theories of relativity or related theories. Use keywords from your title. So in your introduction, use words from your paper title right away and include a clear hypothesis, of course. Okay we'll continue. Okay so let's, we're gonna look at a different paper. This is not the kimchi paper. This is a different paper and the title is Targeted Therapy Database, a model to match patients molecular profile with current knowledge. So look at the keywords. Some keywords that they've used in the abstract. Targeted therapy, early diagnosis, molecular profile, cancer biology. So right away in the first paragraph, they have used a lot of keywords. Cancer, early diagnosis, anti-cancer treatments, molecular target therapies. They've also provided information that explains why it's important. So they start off very broad, right? Cancer represents the third leading cause of death worldwide. Wow that's really broad and it also shows why this study is important. Then it moves to a little bit narrower. Early diagnosis continues to offer the best chance for most tumors. Okay then it goes even more narrow. The efficacy of anti-cancer treatments. And it also shows why, what the problem is. They're not satisfactory. And then finally you have the most focused, the most focused, general agreement exists regarding the urgency of developing molecularly targeted therapies. So your paper is about, about this. Molecularly targeted therapies. Next you're going to discuss the, the literature. So summarize what researchers knew. Define key terms. Okay you, this is very important, defining the terms. When I read a lot of researchers essays, they don't define the terms. They just write you know, STW. And I'm like, I don't know what STW means. They, they don't say where, what it means. In the introduction you can define it. You know, write the term and explain what does it mean. If it is context-specific, if it's very basic, then don't have to define it. Okay, give a general review of the primary research literature. Again, not too many details, just general. Okay, so we have, continuing in the introduction, this is still the introduction of the same paper. The author defines the term targeted therapy. The term targeted therapy includes all those approaches that aim or tailor the therapy to the patient. And then they have citations. Right, this is a general explanation. They haven't discussed every single study. It takes too much space. They next use primary research to explain the current understanding. Research on anti-cancer treatment has made several advances. So there's a lot of studies that have been done to show how the smart approaches have, have increased treatment of certain types of cancer. Okay, we'll skip this. The basic thing is primary literature should be closely related to your study. And sources, you want to use as many as you can, but for a 10 to 15 page paper, it may be 5 to 10 sources. You also need to cite all of your sources that you list in the references. So if you have, if you listed a bunch of sources at the end, you have to use all of them in your paper. They're not just sources that you read and were interested in, or they're related. You have to use them in the paper. Okay, next you're going to state your statement of purpose. And this is a matter of using signal phrases. And in our workshop, we're going to discuss more about signal phrases. And actually, these are all signal phrases. Signal phrases tell the reader what you're going to do, what this section is exactly about. So use a clear form phrase to introduce your purpose. The purpose of this study was to, blah, blah, blah. The purpose of this study was to analyze XYZ. The objective of this study is to assess the importance of blah, blah, blah. So you have this, the purpose, the objective. What did you do? We investigated two possible mechanisms to explain the blah, blah. Okay, so this kind of phrases are very basic, but they tell the reader where your hypothesis is. It should be easy to see where your hypothesis is. Now here's some key verbs. Describes, investigates, lays out, presents, etc. So find the right verb. There's not that many of them. Find the one that works for your study. And where it's located is usually placed near the end of the introduction, usually as the topic sentence of the final paragraph. So the last paragraph of introduction, the first sentence. I'll skip this. Okay, let's see an example then. So this is an example of our same essay, the cancer treatment. The objective of this present project is, right, it's very clear what this author is, where their hypothesis is. The objective of the present project is to create a manually annotated database. And it's one sentence, but it can be quite long. It's quite a long sentence, but you want to put all of the things you're doing in that short sentence, one or two sentences. Last, you may or may not use an approach rationale. Rationale is a justification of why you did this study a certain way, a justification of your study design. So this usually follows the purpose statement, right? Right after your hypothesis, purpose statement, you might explain why you did this. So you might address why you chose this kind of approach. What are the advantages of this particular system, this model? Why is this technique better than the other studies that you mentioned? Could look like this. If your hypothesis, this is your hypothesis, given the described protective role of caffeine, blah blah blah, your rationale might be, since the role of non-nuclear p27 in cells was never examined in detail, right, this is the signal phrase too, right, since this these studies never did this, we're missing, we're missing this, the way, this method of study here. We investigated whether p27 is present in the mitochondria, okay? So since nobody did this, this is why we designed our study like this. And because it would help present a new mode of action for caffeine, explaining its protective function in the cardiovascular system. So you've effectively said to your reader, oh, this is why we're approaching this way. These authors did, they approached from the cell wall. We're approaching the mitochondria. Maybe it's a bad example. Okay, explain the advantage of your approach. All right, so there's some mistakes that many authors make in the introduction. Citing basic scientific knowledge, that's really annoying as a reader. When, I'm, I'm a generalist reader, right? I'm not a biologist, I'm not a chemist, but when I read basic, a study that's not related to it, it's, if the study is about turtles and you cite research about birds that's not related, but it's like, oh, both turtles and birds are cold-blooded animals. I mean, it's not important. So you don't, you're not going to get points for putting that, that kind of literature into your introduction. It's not relevant. Don't forget to include citations. If you don't cite, you are plagiarizing and that's very bad. Don't forget to define your terms. You have to define your terms in the introduction and don't discuss your methods and results, right? Don't discuss them in detail. Bring them up, but don't, don't go into great detail. All right, this is the final quiz before our grammar section. When should you write the introduction section? A. First, before the methods. B. Last, after the discussion and before the abstract. C. Third, after the results and before the discussion. Or D. Second, after the methods. Okay, you've done one. I'm gonna get someone who hasn't done it. Thank you. How about you? Yeah. B. Last, after the discussion, before the abstract. That's right. Wow. You guys have got every single one right. I don't want to be, I feel bad if the next person doesn't get it right. But you write, you write the introduction last to make sure you captured everything that was in your paper and you're not leaving anything out. Actually, you write the abstract last, but of these sections, you write the introduction last. Okay, which section usually only uses the past tense and passive voice? We, we talked about one section in particular. Methods, results, discussion, or introduction? Yes. Methods. Good. Usually, I say usually, it's not a rule. Don't leave and say, God, that guy said we only use passive voice. And then you read an article, there's active voice all over. This stands out because the other sections generally do not use the passive voice. So, this methods, you'll see it, it's used more often. Okay, so let's talk now about improving some writing errors. Some of you, if you're a native English speaker, or if you're quite good at English, you might be sort of annoyed by some of these. But we want to show you some of the biggest mistakes in grammar and, yeah, grammar issues that writers make. So, the biggest one, you might guess, is a determiner misuse. A and the, this, that, these, those. So, let's just first talk about articles. The first thing we're going to talk about is article use. Article is just A, N, and DA. And I'm going to give you a little quiz altogether, too. So, if you know it, you can sleep through this one. Okay, so here's some rules for articles. We have uncountable, for uncountable nouns, these are nouns that cannot be counted, right? You don't use, like, water. One water, two waters, three waters. Just, water is not countable. So, if you have any of the countable noun, use the noun with no article. For example, drinking water has many benefits. Love is a strong emotion, right? You don't have any article. If your uncountable noun is one specific noun, use the. So, if you're referring to specific water, the water, that water, right? This water. We examined the water bordering the town. Which water? The water bordering the town. And remember to use the in the structure, the noun plus preposition. So, the heart of the city, the extent of the damage. So, you can kind of use this tool to decide whether or not to use an article. Or, of course, your editor will fix it for you. But we see these a lot. And if you turn it into a journal and you have these issues, the editor might question, the journal editor might question your research, which you don't want. Okay, for uncountable nouns, I'm sorry, for countable nouns, if that noun is one member of the countable noun, use a or an with the noun. I want a car. A virus could have infected this specimen. A virus, right? Not that virus, but any virus, any one of this viruses. All members of the noun use the noun with no articles, right? Colors can affect our emotions. Scientists have been researching this issue. And use a plural form, too, right? Students are often hungry during class. The countable noun as a whole group used the. The harp is a difficult instrument. So, the harp is a countable. You can count one harps, two harps. The harp, the car, sorry, the car is a difficult thing to fix. The elephant is a large animal. Okay, so use this as a tool if you need. So, let's do a quick quiz. Which article should you use? We have a, an, the, or no article. How about number one? You can just shout it out, anybody. We analyzed a variety of tissue samples. Two, experts identified lake surrounding the compound. The lake. As the source of the infection. Why, why is we use the in this case? Yeah, good. And a specific lake. If we just said like as the source of all, there is no in question, just the source of infections, then there would be, we would not need the specific. And three, colors affect our perception of reality. Oh, you guys are smart. Okay, okay. The next one's a bit more complicated. I like this one because this is more about style, not grammar. So, a nominalization. A nominalization is basically you have taken a noun, or you have a meaningless verb, and then you have a noun that's been changed to a noun from a verb. So, you have extra words and it's kind of like not, not academic, not academic writing. So, you want to delete the meaningless verb and convert the nominalization to a main verb. So, let's look at this. Instead of Joe will conduct research on the impact, blah, blah, blah, Joe will research the recent droughts impact on local wildlife. It's much shorter. In the verb, you have one verb, research. Conduct research, you have a nominalization, which is research. Here, research is a noun. So, actually, we see this all the time in science writing because science writers like to copy the form, which is okay, but I think if this is much clearer and more direct, if you see many, many, many nominalizations, it can get a bit annoying. Why do you conduct research? You're researching. Okay, the board will make a decision next week about whether to accept your, accept you. The board will decide next week whether to accept you. We don't need to make a decision, we can just decide. The approval of the plan was given by the committee. The committee approved the plan. Okay, their interpretation of the implementation of the Institute's program was insightful. Instead, they insightfully interpreted how the Institute implemented its program. Oh, both of these give me a headache, but second one is much cooler. First was their introduction of the analysis of dreams by the trauma patients. This kind of thing, we see all the time, like constantly as editors. So, if you can, try to change it by yourself. First, they introduced how they analyzed the trauma patients' dreams. When you are revising your paper is the time you can change these. When you're writing it, don't worry about it, but when you go back over it, look for, see if you have any meaningless verb like conduct or make and see if you can change to a stronger verb. So, let's try to do these together. They reached the conclusion that we should run a new cohort study. What's a better way to write this? Nice. They concluded that we should run a cohort study. The undertaking of building the new company was complicated by their lack of experience. It's a bit, it's tough. I don't know who, who wrote this in the beginning. They lacked experience, which complicated how they built the new company. So, we split it into two clauses. Or, we can say they're inexperienced, complicated how they built the new company. I like the second one better because complicated is doing more work in the middle. They're inexperienced, complicated, the predicate. Okay, and last we'll just review past and present tense. When to use either. We got about a minute before break and then we'll, we'll give you 10 minutes. Okay, so generally past tense is used in prior research or during the results or observations made in your study. For prior research, Watson asserted that mice in group B developed. So, these are the actual things you see in the study. Use the present tense with general facts, right? Grass is green, the earth revolves around the sun, the sky is blue. Or, when it's the subject of the sentence of your paper. Our study demonstrates. When you're talking about your study, how it fits in with the science, you don't use past. So, you don't say our study, our study has demonstrated that grass is green. Our study demonstrates that grass is green. Our, the results showed, you can use results as a past, past tense. Conclusion or interpretation of current findings. So, entropy may be involved in, may be involved. So, let's see some more examples. So, use past tense when referring to prior research. The Boeing Group hypothesized that there would be an increase. This actually depends on if you're using APA or, or other, I believe AMA and APA, you will use past tense. MLA, you, you will use present tense when discussing other, other works. Many studies have done throughout the 20th, should be 20th century, have confirmed this affinity between carbon and nitrogen, right? Studies have confirmed. Observations. Tumor cells, metastasize upon, upon exposure to this chemical. I think we need to edit this, which is ironic. Okay, present tense. Okay, air pressure decreases with altitude. The average human skeleton contains 20, 270 bones. And last, if the subject of the sentence is your work. This study confirms previous findings. Our research indicates this is probably the hardest rule to keep in mind, to remember when you're writing, but you can use these, these guidelines and other ones on the internet to sort of check your work before you give it to an editor. It's gonna help, help a lot in case the editor misses something or just so you understand what you've written, the quality of your writing. Okay, our last one, sorry. Comorbidity appears to be a factor. The results of past studies are corroborated by this evidence, evidence. Okay, present tense with the interpretation. All right, so that's the end of the first section. If you have any questions you can ask now, but just know during the workshop we will sort of be doing a similar, we'll be analyzing another research paper, but making some changes and then doing some activities, but you can ask any questions now.

Wishes and hypothetical situations

The tenses with wishes and hypothetical situations.

We use past tense forms when we talk about wishes.

We use would and could to talk about wishes for the future: I wish I could find a better job. It’s been raining all week. I wish it would stop. I have to get up early tomorrow. I wish I could stay out late.

We use past tense forms to talk about wishes for the present: I wish I lived in a warmer country. We all wish we had more free time. I wish I wasn’t so busy. He wishes it wasn’t so cold.

We use the past perfect for wishes in the past: I wish I had gone to university. He wishes he had taken his father’s advice and studied economics. I wish I hadn’t spent so much money last month.

Hypothetical situations

When we talk about things that we imagine (hypothetical situations) we use present tense forms after phrases like what if, in case, suppose to talk about the future if we think that this is a situation that is likely to happen: You should take an umbrella in case it rains. Take your phone. What if you need to contact me?

We use past tense forms to talk about a future that is not likely to happen: What if you lost your job? How would you live? They didn’t take a map! Suppose they got lost.

We use would and could for hypothetical situations in the future: I don’t think I’d like Canada. I’d hate the weather. John’s coming to visit. He could stay with us. A hotel would be too expensive.

We use would in the main clause and a past tense in a subordinate clause to talk about an imagined future: I would hate to be in a situation where I needed help to do everyday tasks. She would never tell anyone if you told her not to.

We use modals with have to talk about something that did not happen in the past: I didn’t know you had nothing to do yesterday. I would have called you. It’s a pity you didn’t come last night. You would have enjoyed yourself. It’s a good thing they repaired the traffic lights. There might have been an accident. Why didn’t you ring me? I could have come and picked you up.

Lesson by Tristan, teacher at EC  Malta English school

Now match the correct phrase for the following:

• 1. I wish I _. hadn’t drunk so much last night. didn’t drink so much last night.
• 2. That building is too close to the sea. _ Suppose there’s a really big storm. Suppose there will be a really big storm.
• 3. You should take a taxi in case _ you didn’t find where to park. you don’t find where to park.
• 4. That’s a terrible noise. _ I wish it will stop. I wish it would stop.
• 5. This party is awful. _ I wish we hadn’t come. I wish we didn’t come.
• 6. I didn’t know you spoke French. _ I had asked you to help me with this letter. I’d have asked you to help me with this letter.
• 7. Don’t you ever wish sometimes that _ you would study harder. you had studied harder?
• 8. We should travel by train _ it will be too tiring to drive there. it would be too tiring to drive there.

• Lesson Index

English language Schools