Immediate impetus: You will be asked to submit along with your second exam a summary of one experiment from a research article

Long-term impetus: Research articles are the source of scientific truth, but they are exhausting to read,... if you're intent is to understand everything they contain. On the other hand, the task becomes easier if you learn how to extract just what you need from an article to answer your specific question. Ten years from now (actually, even right now), you will need to do this, so long as you haven't given up and chosen to rely on the claims of others to guide your thoughts.

What article? What experiment?

• You are seeking a research article (not news, not review) that addresses a subject within the focus of your research group.
• A research article can be recognized by its presentation of actual experimental results (not merely conclusions) and a description of the methods used to obtain them, sufficient to enable someone else to replicate the experiment. If you can't identify both, you haven't found a research article.
• There are many ways to find a pertinent research article. Here are some:
  • Use previously described search strategies
  • Find a good review article in your area of interest and plunder the reference list
  • Avail yourself of the reference list at the back of the article given to your focus group
• You can use the same article as other members in your group but not the same experiment
• Your life will be easier if you choose an experiment that is relatively self-contained, one that can be described without needing to slog through other experiments in the article.

What if I don't understand half of the experiment?

Do not panic! Focus on the other half, and ask what, if anything is missing from the story you are trying to tell. If you are stumped by a technique used in the article (and this may be a common experience), first ask yourself if you need to understand this technique in order to tell your story. If not, then forget about it. But if you judge the technique to be essential for your understanding (and your reader's understanding) of the experiment you've chosen, then do whatever is necessary to gain the insight you need. Hit the web. Read another article. Talk with your colleagues. Talk with a TA or with me. Whatever it takes.

How do I write a summary of a research article?

Your summary should be written aimed at an audience of your peers, students like yourself except without the benefit of having experienced BNFO 301. It should consist of a few well organized short paragraphs that address the following:

• Introduction of problem
  What is the big picture surrounding the experiment? How is that area of general interest logically connected to the question addressed by experiment? What hole existed in our knowledge before the experiment was performed?
   
• Description of experiment
  Describe how one experiment was performed in sufficient detail that the reader will thoroughly understand the principle. There is no value, however, in providing detail that is useful only in replicating the experiment (e.g. the composition of a buffer, etc). Avoid terms that will be unfamiliar to the reader, or if they're useful, then define them.
   
• Result of experiment
  Describe what was observed, not the authors' conclusion based on that observation. A figure from the article may be helpful. If you use one, don't be afraid to relabel it to be more easily understood by the reader.
   
• Observations and connections
  What insight can be drawn from the experimental result? Does it answer the question? Does it have higher implications? It may or may not be useful to briefly relate other results from the paper, but do this only to the extent they illuminate the experiment you've chosen to present.

What NOT to do?

• Don't paraphrase. You might think that paraphrasing is a reasonable strategy. "After all," you might say, "the authors know what they are talking about and I do not." That may be true at the moment, but confusion is a temporary condition and only you can tell your story to your audience. The authors have a much larger story to a much different audience. It's just as likely that you can piece together a coherent and pertinent story from theirs as you could piece together a hummingbird from an F16.
  
  How to avoid paraphrasing? Easy. Put the paper down and walk away from it. Say what you're trying to say. If you can't, identify why you can't and fix the problem. Then walk away and try agin. Finally, write down what you said. Go back later to fix the parts that sound funny.
   
• Don't quote. This isn't a literary analysis. Quotations are almost never used in scientific writing, because it is generally the content, not the phrasing, that's important. Just give us what you want to say in your own words. But what if you don't understand the content...?
   
• Don't pass your ignorance on to your reader. If you don't understand what the authors are saying, neither will we. Find a way to avoid a topic you're confused by, or if there's no way around it, do whatever is necessary to gain insight.
   
• Don't merely recite conclusions. Interpretation is fine, but only after you've given us the facts of the matter, the results. What was the actual data?
   
• Don't forget your audience. Your audience is people like yourself. I am not your audience. Always ask yourself whether you would have understood last year what you are writing.

Examples

• Here is an example of a good summary.
• Here is an example of a bad summary.
• And here's one in between (though not just right).