MWS Research Report
You will each produce a research paper covering the methodological and interpretive aspects of this field campaign. What follows is some basic guidelines to what specific sections should contain, as well as some tips on scientific writing style etc.
Note: The structure of your report does NOT have to strictly follow the format below (i.e., intro, methods, results, discussion). It is up to you to find the best way to present the story you wish to tell, while maintaining the style of a scientific report.
A scientific paper is designed in such a way that sufficient detail is provided to allow others to follow and repeat your work to the same specification. It should accurately report your key findings (results / data), evaluating accuracy of the data; and include a comprehensive discussion of the results obtained, looking at linkages between sections and experiments to create a coherent overarching narrative. In your case, you will be providing insight into the broader biogeography of this marine region. You will produce a significant amount of information in these three days, so being accurate and concise is paramount, 2,500 words will run out fast!
Writing style: In scientific writing, it is common practice to use the past, impersonal tense e.g., “bivalve shell size was measured on four occasions” not “I measured bivalve shell size on four occasions” (personal tense). This applies to all sections of the report.
Structure of a Paper:
Title – Should be a succinct and descriptive statement of the subject matter of the report.
Introduction – Should give a short, concise account of the background and underlying theory of the project. In this section you will outline the scientific purpose and objectives of the project, and how this fits into broader research / knowledge of the field, using supporting references where appropriate. Note that the introduction should NOT be copied from the practical descriptions in this handout, this will be counted as plagiarism. Introduction sections are generally concluded with a short paragraph outlining the aims of the work reported along with potential hypotheses tested (e.g., “The aim of this research was to examine ……………………. relative to environmental parameters catchment hydrology, testing the hypotheses that ……………. is the primary control on Loch Etive water chemistry”).
Methods – The methods section should be detailed, but as concise as possible. Allowing for reproduction by others, but no more detail than absolutely needed. You do not need to repeat in detail information from the practical instructions; a brief outline is sufficient. Avoid bullet point lists of instructions, it should be written as a report. Subheadings are often useful to clearly delineate experiments stages. Major items of equipment should be described, including the make and model numbers. Minor bits of equipment like pipettes, cuvettes, etc do not need this level of detail. Where appropriate, statistical analysis and methods should be described as the final section of the methods.
Results – Should be written as a coherent and guided talk through the key findings, it should not simply be a series of graphs requiring the reader to figure out themselves. The results are often split into sub headed sections, containing a mixture of graphical, tabular and text descriptions. Figures should be embedded in the text, they should not form the central piece of the section, and instead, they are referred to in support of points made in the text.
