Comments on: Two Good Reasons To Always Read the Methods Section of a Scientific Paper http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html Brain candy for Happy Mutants Sun, 26 May 2013 02:49:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611606 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611606 nmcvaugh: That is indeed Michael Sweet, and he is a UT staff member. He works for DIIA/CIE. I'll let him know about the teaching job at Harvard though, I'm sure he'll be very excited to hear it. nmcvaugh: That is indeed Michael Sweet, and he is a UT staff member. He works for DIIA/CIE. I’ll let him know about the teaching job at Harvard though, I’m sure he’ll be very excited to hear it.

]]> By: zikman http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611607 zikman Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611607 the first one isn't terribly funny. I'd expect them to post the actual recipe along with the rest of the methods. the second one deserves a hearty lol the first one isn’t terribly funny. I’d expect them to post the actual recipe along with the rest of the methods.
the second one deserves a hearty lol

]]> By: SKR http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611610 SKR Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611610 My favorite reason to read the methodology of a study is to understand to whom the research applies. For instance, the secondhand smoking study that many have been quoting from for years only concerns itself with people that spend at least eight hours a day in a closed environment with a smoker. Of course that hasn't stopped people from claiming that an errant whiff of secondhand smoke while walking down the street is murderous. My favorite reason to read the methodology of a study is to understand to whom the research applies. For instance, the secondhand smoking study that many have been quoting from for years only concerns itself with people that spend at least eight hours a day in a closed environment with a smoker. Of course that hasn’t stopped people from claiming that an errant whiff of secondhand smoke while walking down the street is murderous.

]]> By: 4jeg http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-612379 4jeg Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-612379 For everyone's enjoyment please see: Polar Biology (2003) 27: 56–58 DOI 10.1007/s00300-003-0563-3 http://www.meyer-rochow.com/penguin.pdf For everyone’s enjoyment please see:

Polar Biology (2003) 27: 56–58 DOI 10.1007/s00300-003-0563-3

http://www.meyer-rochow.com/penguin.pdf

]]> By: Snig http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611613 Snig Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611613 I remember reading in an intro anthropology course, the researchers were living with a isolated South American tribe that raised a few chickens. They kept them for eggs, except when someone came down with a cold, they killed one for soup. Freaked the anthropologists out, till the locals remembered that they'd learned that from some missionaries a ways back. I remember reading in an intro anthropology course, the researchers were living with a isolated South American tribe that raised a few chickens. They kept them for eggs, except when someone came down with a cold, they killed one for soup. Freaked the anthropologists out, till the locals remembered that they’d learned that from some missionaries a ways back.

]]> By: Brainspore http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611628 Brainspore Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611628 And here I thought this post was just going to have some cautionary anecdotes about why you shouldn't accept a paper's conclusion without a critical look at the methodology. Insect necrophilia is so much more amusing! And here I thought this post was just going to have some cautionary anecdotes about why you shouldn’t accept a paper’s conclusion without a critical look at the methodology. Insect necrophilia is so much more amusing!

]]> By: Patrick Dodds http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-613682 Patrick Dodds Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-613682 "chicken parmesan"? Eugh. “chicken parmesan”? Eugh.

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611899 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611899 Hmm. Interesting, but I don't see how chicken soup is going to stop your neutrophils from chemotaxing unless you inject it intravenously. I'm sure the soup was good, but really, shooting it is going a bit far. I suggest they lay off the chicken and try cold turkey. Hmm. Interesting, but I don’t see how chicken soup is going to stop your neutrophils from chemotaxing unless you inject it intravenously. I’m sure the soup was good, but really, shooting it is going a bit far. I suggest they lay off the chicken and try cold turkey.

]]> By: pspinrad http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611653 pspinrad Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611653 The one that comes to mind for me is from a decades-old paper on the chemical composition of human semen: "Samples were obtained through massage." The one that comes to mind for me is from a decades-old paper on the chemical composition of human semen:

“Samples were obtained through massage.”

]]> By: Remez http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611658 Remez Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611658 @zikman, they do include the actual recipe, including credit for the matzo balls (back of the Manaschewitz box). Sweet potatoes in chicken soup? Never seen that before. I prefer adding a bunch of dill. @zikman, they do include the actual recipe, including credit for the matzo balls (back of the Manaschewitz box). Sweet potatoes in chicken soup? Never seen that before. I prefer adding a bunch of dill.

]]> By: Lauchlin http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611670 Lauchlin Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611670 I actually find the chicken soup one quite a bit funnier than the necrophilia one. 'Traditional chicken soup was prepared according to a family recipe, which will be referred to as "Grandma's soup" (C. Fleischer; personal communication; 1970). I haven't tried it yet, but I'm planning on making a batch sometime this fall. The paper says the recipe is "very highly regarded locally" (a claim they back up with a citation).' Hilarious. I actually find the chicken soup one quite a bit funnier than the necrophilia one.

‘Traditional chicken soup was prepared according to a family recipe, which will be referred to as “Grandma’s soup” (C. Fleischer; personal communication; 1970).

I haven’t tried it yet, but I’m planning on making a batch sometime this fall. The paper says the recipe is “very highly regarded locally” (a claim they back up with a citation).’

Hilarious.

]]> By: doug117 http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611693 doug117 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611693 Dang! I wish you wouldn't split infinites. Dang! I wish you wouldn’t split infinites.

]]> By: doug117 http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611694 doug117 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611694 Err... sorry -- that would have been "infinitives." Err… sorry — that would have been “infinitives.”

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611700 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611700 Nice. I have images of a cartoon captioned "Waiter, there's a fly in my chicken soup", Sinatra singing "Come Fly With Me", PETA and NOW using these articles as fodder for new campaigns, and grad students laughing as they read journals in the library all racing through my mind... Nice. I have images of a cartoon captioned “Waiter, there’s a fly in my chicken soup”, Sinatra singing “Come Fly With Me”, PETA and NOW using these articles as fodder for new campaigns, and grad students laughing as they read journals in the library all racing through my mind…

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611701 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611701 Zikman, it's in the fulltext link, but if you don't want to click, here you go. Enjoy! -v Soup Traditional chicken soup was prepared according to a family recipe, which will be referred to as “Grandma’s soup” (C. Fleischer; personal communication; 1970). This recipe is as follows: • 1 5- to 6-lb stewing hen or baking chicken; • 1 package of chicken wings; • 3 large onions; • 1 large sweet potato; • 3 parsnips; • 2 turnips; • 11 to 12 large carrots; • 5 to 6 celery stems; • 1 bunch of parsley; and • salt and pepper to taste. Clean the chicken, put it in a large pot, and cover it with cold water. Bring the water to a boil. Add the chicken wings, onions, sweet potato, parsnips, turnips, and carrots. Boil about 1.5 h. Remove fat from the surface as it accumulates. Add the parsley and celery. Cook the mixture about 45 min longer. Remove the chicken. The chicken is not used further for the soup. (The meat makes excellent chicken parmesan.) Put the vegetables in a food processor until they are chopped fine or pass through a strainer. Both were performed in the present study. Salt and pepper to taste. (Note: this soup freezes well.) Matzoh balls were prepared according to the recipe on the back of the box of matzoh meal (Manischewitz; Jersey City, NJ). Zikman, it’s in the fulltext link, but if you don’t want to click, here you go. Enjoy!
-v

Soup

Traditional chicken soup was prepared according to a family recipe, which will be referred to as “Grandma’s soup” (C. Fleischer; personal communication; 1970). This recipe is as follows:

• 1 5- to 6-lb stewing hen or baking chicken;

• 1 package of chicken wings;

• 3 large onions;

• 1 large sweet potato;

• 3 parsnips;

• 2 turnips;

• 11 to 12 large carrots;

• 5 to 6 celery stems;

• 1 bunch of parsley; and

• salt and pepper to taste.

Clean the chicken, put it in a large pot, and cover it with cold water. Bring the water to a boil. Add the chicken wings, onions, sweet potato, parsnips, turnips, and carrots. Boil about 1.5 h. Remove fat from the surface as it accumulates. Add the parsley and celery. Cook the mixture about 45 min longer. Remove the chicken. The chicken is not used further for the soup. (The meat makes excellent chicken parmesan.) Put the vegetables in a food processor until they are chopped fine or pass through a strainer. Both were performed in the present study. Salt and pepper to taste. (Note: this soup freezes well.) Matzoh balls were prepared according to the recipe on the back of the box of matzoh meal (Manischewitz; Jersey City, NJ).

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611703 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611703 Is it possible that the male flies wanted the sex to be over faster, but found it really hard to come with the female flies just laying there like they're dead? Honestly, maybe there's something about the squirming that triggers release. Is it possible that the male flies wanted the sex to be over faster, but found it really hard to come with the female flies just laying there like they’re dead?

Honestly, maybe there’s something about the squirming that triggers release.

]]> By: drscience http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-612243 drscience Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-612243 Seconded. Seconded.

]]> By: ZackGarrett http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611735 ZackGarrett Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611735 This comment is just about the picture: YEEEE-HAH! I have two jobs: I work for the Daniel Boone Regional Library (where this photo was taken) and KOMU-TV (them what took it). My two jobs have intersected on BoingBoing! In a picture that has nothing to do with the article! Yay, me! This comment is just about the picture: YEEEE-HAH! I have two jobs: I work for the Daniel Boone Regional Library (where this photo was taken) and KOMU-TV (them what took it). My two jobs have intersected on BoingBoing! In a picture that has nothing to do with the article! Yay, me!

]]> By: zikman http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-614584 zikman Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-614584 er, I meant that it should be a given that they would post the actual recipe. I realize that it was in there. er, I meant that it should be a given that they would post the actual recipe. I realize that it was in there.

]]> By: nmcvaugh http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611532 nmcvaugh Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611532 Hard to find pictures of people reading articles? You just need to know where to look. Allow me to help. The link is to a photo a a former doctoral student (now teaching at Harvard). He's incorrectly identified as 'staff' in the blurb - I'll have to talk to Classics and get them to fix it. http://www.utexas.edu/cola/depts/classics/news/1868 Hard to find pictures of people reading articles? You just need to know where to look. Allow me to help. The link is to a photo a a former doctoral student (now teaching at Harvard). He’s incorrectly identified as ‘staff’ in the blurb – I’ll have to talk to Classics and get them to fix it.

http://www.utexas.edu/cola/depts/classics/news/1868

]]> By: drscience http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-612055 drscience Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-612055 I particularly enjoy the methods sections from studies of infants, where they detail how many "subjects" (babies) had to be excluded and for what reasons, which typically include "fussing" or "failure to complete the task" (read: would not let go of mom's leg). It both keeps you honest in interpreting how much we can hope to learn from little humans and reminds you how incredible it is that we get any robust data from them at all. I particularly enjoy the methods sections from studies of infants, where they detail how many “subjects” (babies) had to be excluded and for what reasons, which typically include “fussing” or “failure to complete the task” (read: would not let go of mom’s leg).

It both keeps you honest in interpreting how much we can hope to learn from little humans and reminds you how incredible it is that we get any robust data from them at all.

]]> By: Kyle Armbruster http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-612068 Kyle Armbruster Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-612068 The methods section is the only one I read really thoroughly. I read the abstract, skim the intro/review of lit if I'm interested in doing similar research and think I might get some good leads on other papers to read, then close-read methods, then read the tables in results, and might skim the discussion/conclusion for unfounded assertions. The reason for all of this is that, in my field anyway, a lot of people set up their experiments wrong, get some poor statistician to bang out some tables the author doesn't understand, make some ridiculous claims as conclusions, and then get it published in a peer-reviewed journal staffed by people as clueless as them. The methods section is where you can find out if that's what happened, or if this person actually knows what they're talking about. (Applied linguistics.) Also, as Maggie points out, this is often where you can see the authors slip some of their own personality into the paper, which I do appreciate. Research is fun; why do we have to pretend it's not? The methods section is the only one I read really thoroughly. I read the abstract, skim the intro/review of lit if I’m interested in doing similar research and think I might get some good leads on other papers to read, then close-read methods, then read the tables in results, and might skim the discussion/conclusion for unfounded assertions.

The reason for all of this is that, in my field anyway, a lot of people set up their experiments wrong, get some poor statistician to bang out some tables the author doesn’t understand, make some ridiculous claims as conclusions, and then get it published in a peer-reviewed journal staffed by people as clueless as them. The methods section is where you can find out if that’s what happened, or if this person actually knows what they’re talking about.

(Applied linguistics.)

Also, as Maggie points out, this is often where you can see the authors slip some of their own personality into the paper, which I do appreciate. Research is fun; why do we have to pretend it’s not?

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611566 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611566 Great photo! Did the citizen enjoy the book format over the scroll he is obviously used to? Great photo! Did the citizen enjoy the book format over the scroll he is obviously used to?

]]> By: MrJM http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-611568 MrJM Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-611568 "the team had gassed female flies to death, propped them up so they appeared alive and interested in sex, and tricked the male flies into necrophilia." If I had a nickle for every time a research scientist pulled that one on me... -- MrJM “the team had gassed female flies to death, propped them up so they appeared alive and interested in sex, and tricked the male flies into necrophilia.”

If I had a nickle for every time a research scientist pulled that one on me…

– MrJM

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/10/13/two-good-reasons-to.html#comment-612093 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-612093 The nest architecture of the ant, Camponotus socius. An additional 10 casts were made using molten zinc or aluminum. The metals were melted in a portable, charcoal-fired kiln provided with a draft from a car heater fan run on a battery. The bottom of a scuba tank served as a crucible. More details can be found in Tschinkel (2005). In contrast to the fragile plaster casts, metal casts of C. socius nests were very strong and never broke, and were effective weapons in barroom fights. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1283890/?tool=pubmed The nest architecture of the ant, Camponotus socius.

An additional 10 casts were made using molten zinc or aluminum. The metals were melted in a portable, charcoal-fired kiln provided with a draft from a car heater fan run on a battery. The bottom of a scuba tank served as a crucible. More details can be found in Tschinkel (2005). In contrast to the fragile plaster casts, metal casts of C. socius nests were very strong and never broke, and were effective weapons in barroom fights.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1283890/?tool=pubmed

]]>