How to read a scientific paper
And not be fooled by the news
Have you ever read the news and found a title which says “A study finds…” or “Science finally reveals that…”? Did this make you feel like a sort of final truth has finally being revealed?
I am sure that this has happened to many of you, and I personally find it very dangerous. Especially in times like these, in which news are continuously running (often too fast), it is very important to learn to mindfully read them; otherwise, you will probably end up spending a lot of money for some magical solution to problems (that very likely does not exist) or who knows what.
Especially now that we are facing a global healthcare emergency, we need to be very careful in reading the news and their sources. Badly divulged and/or false news are often the cause of generalized anxiety that leads to bad outcomes.
Before going on, I want to say that science is an ongoing process. There is not an absolute truth that must be revealed at some point, however it is composed by step-by-step discoveries that make it grow more every day. I know this is sometimes difficult to accept, because we want answers straight away. On the contrary, it is more likely to find oneself with more answers. Therefore, it is more common that a single research does not reach a final conclusion, but instead “only” adds a little piece to the huge puzzle that is science.
It is not that simple to read a scientific paper, it often requires knowledge of scientific terms, methodologies and topics that often vary depending on the field of research. That is why I will try to explain how to highlight the information that you need to understand it, or to have just a general idea about it. For this reason, now I will provide you a basic understanding of how a paper is composed to have a general idea of what to expect, and what you should focus on. In order to do so, at first, I will provide a brief description of the structure of a scientific paper, then I will highlight what are the aspects you should focus on more when reading the news.
Basic structure of a paper
A scientific paper is usually approximately 10 pages long, and it is structured as it follows:
Title and Authors
From the title already should be clear what is the topic of the research. Take a look at the year of publication, is it recent? Keep in mind that the date of publication usually it takes place after a few months after the actual results. It should also be noted in which journal the paper has been published.
Abstract
The abstract is a brief summary of the research, and it should include the hypotheses of the research and the expected results, the methods used, the results obtained. By looking at the abstract you should have an idea of what is that the Authors were looking for, how they looked for it and whether their results match their initial hypothesis. However, if you want to go in depth you should read more to have a clearer idea.
Introduction/Background
Usually, the first section of a scientific paper is the Introduction. This part should give the readers insights about the topic investigated, coming up with definitions and explanations, and what results of previous researches achieved already. It should be clear at this point what is the initial hypotheses of the Authors, but it should also be clear what is the research question.
The research question is in line with previous research (and possibly future), it should state what is the purpose of this research in terms of practical outcomes (i.e. possible new treatments for a disease).
Methods
This is the part that most people find more boring. It includes who participates into the experiment (i.e. humans, animals) and how many they were (be careful with the number!), what instruments there were used (i.e. scans, recorders, calculus programs, drugs, etc.), and, if used, a description of the tasks subjects underwent to.
Basically, it is a description of the experiment in terms of materials used and methodologies. Certainly, the nature of such methods strongly depend on the field of research.
Results
Keeping it clear what was the initial hypothesis, the Authors should describe what their results showed. Usually, they use graphs and charts to explain results in a faster and simpler way (prepare yourself to encounter a lot of them). At this point start to ask yourself: Did they well predicted these outcomes? Are those results in line to the research question?
Discussion
This is, in my opinion, the most interesting part. Here the Authors should state objectively what were the strengths and the limitations of their research in terms of the research question: Did they achieve their goals? Could it be done better? Do they need further examination? Also, they should suggest what future research could take from their work.
Please, remember that science is a continuous process, there is not one single research that needs to achieve a massive goal, the Authors should be aware that someone in the future could confirm or confute their work.
Conclusions
It is a brief summary of what discussed so far and it underlines the main points. Keep in mind that usually you can find contacts (i.e. email) of the Authors and if you have an interesting question to ask them you can contact them.
References
It is the list of resources used by the Authors.
What you should focus on
Now that I provided a brief and approximate description of a scientific paper, I will tell you what are, in my opinion, the main aspects you should focus on more. Certainly, scientific papers are not an easy read, very often they are very technical and require deep knowledge in the field to get all the information. Therefore, there is no need to worry to get everything that is written on that, but rather it is important to get some critical information.
First, you must look at the year of publication: Is it in line to what stated in the newspaper? Are they reporting an obsolete news (keep in mind that often in science a 5–10 years ago news could be obsolete already)? Then, look at the Journal in which it has been published and Google it to check whether it is a good Journal or not: it should have a high level of citations. These two basic information should make you immediately guess whether the newspaper has tried to fool you or not.
When you are satisfied with these two information, go ahead and read the abstract. If it is well written, it should give you a brief overview of what is the research about. As I stated already, after the Abstract you should find Introduction, which is very interesting to read, especially if you are interested in the topic of the research. Just note that the more citation there are (Names of the Authors, Year of publication), the more material has been consulted. From this part you should try to get what are the Authors’ hypotheses and what is the research question.
Jumping to Methods, this is a very technical part, and if you are not familiar with them, I suggest you to not struggle much. Just note, if it is an experimental paper that included human testing, the number of participants and if the Authors made it clear whether it well repressed the population or not (the statistical population does not refer necessarily to the global population but to the population taken in consideration by the experimenters).
For the Results, try to understand whether they confirm what the Authors predicted in the hypothesis. If you feel more comfortable reading the graphs, they should explain simply the finding reported.
As I said already, the most interesting part is the Discussion one. It should be sufficiently easy to read and it gives insights about the Authors’ feelings about their research and work.
Finally, if you found a topic related to that research you want to further explore, check the References.
Conclusions
In conclusion, I hope I have been clear enough in explaining how a scientific paper is structured and what are the main aspects to focus on more. I strongly believe that, especially in times like these, it is very important that everyone should be aware that the news that travel all over the web and in television are not always honest with us. Moreover, it is very important that people, regardless their level of education, should be able to look at scientific data in a critical way.
Finally, I am open to any suggestions and recommendations, in case you have some comment below or contact me :)
