Read e-book An Introduction to Scientific Research

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online An Introduction to Scientific Research file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with An Introduction to Scientific Research book. Happy reading An Introduction to Scientific Research Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF An Introduction to Scientific Research at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF An Introduction to Scientific Research Pocket Guide.

Second, they move the more detailed, less important parts of the body to the end of the paper in one or more appendices so that these parts do not stand in the readers' way. Finally, they structure the content in the body in theorem-proof fashion, stating first what readers must remember for example, as the first sentence of a paragraph and then presenting evidence to support this statement. At the beginning of the Introduction section, the context and need work together as a funnel: They start broad and progressively narrow down to the issue addressed in the paper.

To spark interest among your audience — referees and journal readers alike — provide a compelling motivation for the work presented in your paper: The fact that a phenomenon has never been studied before is not, in and of itself, a reason to study that phenomenon. Write the context in a way that appeals to a broad range of readers and leads into the need. Do not include context for the sake of including context: Rather, provide only what will help readers better understand the need and, especially, its importance.

Consider anchoring the context in time, using phrases such as recently , in the past 10 years , or since the early s. You may also want to anchor your context in space either geographically or within a given research field. Convey the need for the work as an opposition between actual and desired situations.

Start by stating the actual situation what we have as a direct continuation of the context. If you feel you must explain recent achievements in much detail — say, in more than one or two paragraphs — consider moving the details to a section titled State of the art or something similar after the Introduction , but do provide a brief idea of the actual situation in the Introduction. Next, state the desired situation what we want. Emphasize the contrast between the actual and desired situations with such words as but , however, or unfortunately. One elegant way to express the desired part of the need is to combine it with the task in a single sentence.

This sentence expresses first the objective, then the action undertaken to reach this objective, thus creating a strong and elegant connection between need and task. Here are three examples of such a combination:.

To confirm this assumption , we studied the effects of a range of inhibitors of connexin channels. To assess whether such multiple-coil sensors perform better than single-signal ones , we tested two of them — the DuoPXK and the GEMM3 — in a field where. To form a better view of the global distribution and infectiousness of this pathogen , we examined postmetamorphic and adult amphibians collected from 27 countries between and for the presence of. An Introduction is usually clearer and more logical when it separates what the authors have done the task from what the paper itself attempts or covers the object of the document.

In other words, the task clarifies your contribution as a scientist, whereas the object of the document prepares readers for the structure of the paper, thus allowing focused or selective reading. To confirm this assumption, we studied the effects of a range of inhibitors of connexin channels, such as the connexin mimetic peptides Gap26 and Gap27 and anti-peptide antibodies, on calcium signaling in cardiac cells and HeLa cells expressing connexins. During controlled experiments, we investigated the influence of the HMP boundary conditions on liver flows.

To tackle this problem, we developed a new software verification technique called oblivious hashing, which calculates the hash values based on the actual execution of the program.

Site Search

The three examples below are suitable objects of the document for the three tasks shown above, respectively. This paper clarifies the role of CxHc on calcium oscillations in neonatal cardiac myocytes and calcium transients induced by ATP in HL-cells originated from cardiac atrium and in HeLa cells expressing connexin 43 or This paper presents the flow effects induced by increasing the hepatic-artery pressure and by obstructing the vena cava inferior.

This paper discusses the theory behind oblivious hashing and shows how this approach can be applied for local software tamper resistance and remote code authentication. Even the most logical structure is of little use if readers do not see and understand it as they progress through a paper. Thus, as you organize the body of your paper into sections and perhaps subsections, remember to prepare your readers for the structure ahead at all levels.

You already do so for the overall structure of the body the sections in the object of the document at the end of the Introduction. You can similarly prepare your readers for an upcoming division into subsections by introducing a global paragraph between the heading of a section and the heading of its first subsection. This paragraph can contain any information relating to the section as a whole rather than particular subsections, but it should at least announce the subsections, whether explicitly or implicitly.

An explicit preview would be phrased much like the object of the document: "This section first. Although papers can be organized into sections in many ways, those reporting experimental work typically include Materials and Methods , Results , and Discussion in their body. In any case, the paragraphs in these sections should begin with a topic sentence to prepare readers for their contents, allow selective reading, and — ideally — get a message across. When reporting and discussing your results, do not force your readers to go through everything you went through in chronological order.

Instead, state the message of each paragraph upfront: Convey in the first sentence what you want readers to remember from the paragraph as a whole. Focus on what happened, not on the fact that you observed it. Then develop your message in the remainder of the paragraph, including only that information you think you need to convince your audience. At the end of your Conclusion , consider including perspectives — that is, an idea of what could or should still be done in relation to the issue addressed in the paper. If you include perspectives, clarify whether you are referring to firm plans for yourself and your colleagues "In the coming months, we will.

Scholarly Network Analysis (SNA)

If your paper includes a well-structured Introduction and an effective abstract, you need not repeat any of the Introduction in the Conclusion. Main article: Experiment. Main article: Models of scientific inquiry. See also: Pragmatic theory of truth. See also: Scientific community and Scholarly communication. Main article: Reproducibility. See also: Philosophy of science and Sociology of science.

How to Write a Scientific Research Paper: Choosing the Right Structure

Main article: Role of chance in scientific discoveries. Armchair theorizing Contingency Empirical limits in science Evidence-based practices Fuzzy logic Information theory Logic Historical method Philosophical methodology Scholarly method Methodology Metascience Operationalization Quantitative research Rhetoric of science Social research Strong inference Testability Verificationism.

Holism in science Junk science List of cognitive biases Normative science Philosophical skepticism Poverty of the stimulus Problem of induction Reference class problem Replication crisis Skeptical hypotheses Underdetermination. Baconian method Epistemology Epistemic truth Mertonian norms Normal science Post-normal science Science studies Sociology of scientific knowledge. Translated by Cohen, I. Bernard; Whitman, Anne; Budenz, Julia. Bernard Cohen, pp. The Principia itself is on pp. OED Online 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Related Posts

UC Riverside. Archived from the original on 19 August Hibbert Journal. Reprinted with previously unpublished part, Collected Papers v. His thought experiments disprove Aristotle's physics of falling bodies, in Two New Sciences. Scientific Method in Practice Reprint ed. Cambridge University Press.

The scientific method 'is often misrepresented as a fixed sequence of steps,' rather than being seen for what it truly is, 'a highly variable and creative process' AAAS The claim here is that science has general principles that must be mastered to increase productivity and enhance perspective, not that these principles provide a simple and automated sequence of steps to follow.

CUA Press. BBC News. Alhazen or Al-Haytham; — CE was perhaps one of the greatest physicists of all times and a product of the Islamic Golden Age or Islamic Renaissance 7th—13th centuries. He made significant contributions to anatomy, astronomy, engineering, mathematics , medicine, ophthalmology, philosophy, physics, psychology, and visual perception and is primarily attributed as the inventor of the scientific method, for which author Bradley Steffens describes him as the "first scientist".

Scientific Methods". Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. General Introduction.

Introduction to Scientific Thinking

Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved If typical formulations were accurate, the only location true science would be taking place in would be grade-school classrooms. Theories of Scientific Method: An Introduction. Philosophy and science. There is a large core of people who think there is such a thing as a scientific method that can be justified, although not all agree as to what this might be. But there are also a growing number of people who think that there is no method to be justified.

For some, the whole idea is yesteryear's debate, the continuation of which can be summed up as yet more of the proverbial 'flogging a dead horse'. We beg to differ. We shall claim that Feyerabend did endorse various scientific values, did accept rules of method on a certain understanding of what these are and did attempt to justify them using a metamethodology somewhat akin to the principle of reflective equilibrium.

Writing an Introduction for a Scientific Paper

Popular Science Monthly. Karl R. Popper , 'The Logic of Scientific Discovery'. The Logic of Scientific Discovery pp. Leon Lederman , for teaching physics first , illustrates how to avoid confirmation bias: Ian Shelton , in Chile, was initially skeptical that supernova a was real, but possibly an artifact of instrumentation null hypothesis , so he went outside and disproved his null hypothesis by observing SN a with the naked eye. The Kamiokande experiment, in Japan, independently observed neutrinos from SN a at the same time. If we wish to do justice to the historical enterprise, we must take the past for what it was.

And that means we must resist the temptation to scour the past for examples or precursors of modern science. My concern will be with the beginnings of scientific theories , the methods by which they were formulated, and the uses to which they were put; Light travels through transparent bodies in straight lines only We have explained this exhaustively in our Book of Optics.

But let us now mention something to prove this convincingly: the fact that light travels in straight lines is clearly observed in the lights which enter into dark rooms through holes He demonstrated his conjecture that "light travels through transparent bodies in straight lines only" by placing a straight stick or a taut thread next to the light beam, as quoted in Sambursky , p. Hockney quotes Alhazen as the first clear description of the camera obscura in Hockney, p.