communicating research a quick guide for undergrads
TRANSCRIPT
Communicating research
Basics of peer review
How Peer Review WorksAuthor
submission
Reject
Senior editor
Associate Editor
ReviewersReject
Editor makes their decision
Reject Accept
Original submission
To SE for assessment
To AE for assessment
AE Assign reviewers
AE makes recommendation
To SE for decision
Reject
Recommend reject
Reject with resubmission
Revision submittedMajor revision
Minor revision
To SE for final decision
Accept Production
Resubmission
Revision submitted
How it actually works
AssitEd invites reviewers
AE asks for re-review
AssitEd invites reviewers
AE makes recommendation
How to write a paper (and how you’ll read it)
• Title• Abstract• Methods• Results• Discussion• Conclusion
The title is the hook
• Brief and clear • Summarises the main finding of the paper• Must say what your paper is about!
Abstract tells you to read on… or not
• Brief background or justification• Broad description of what you did• Key findings.• Final statement (a synthesis) about the
importance of the study.
The introduction sets the scene
• Gives the background for the paper• Tells the reader why they should be interested
in the study• Should be a logical train of thought leading
the reader to the conclusion that the study is novel, exciting and worth doing.
Methods
• Should give enough information so the reader can
• 1) understand how what you did answered the questions you asked
• 2) judge whether what you did was the correct approach
Methods – it’s all about the details
• Keep important details eg. number of plots, experimental treatments, frequency of data collection, etc.
• Leave out details that have no influence on the measurements, results, or the way the data is collected
Results
• REMEMBER THE WHY - Link results to your research aims or hypotheses to show how the results address the questions you raised
Key results Novel findings that you will discuss further
Supporting results Lend weight/give evidence for your interpretation of results and to support the conclusions.
The discussion is the playground
• Discuss your results but also:• Remember your introduction
Brings together different lines of evidence based on your study and other published work to make sound conclusions and propose new ideas and hypotheses to be tested in future.
Your conclusion should actually conclude things
• What should the reader remember from the paper?
• Why should they care? • What should we do next?
The worst way to end a paper is to leave the reader thinking: "So what?"
POSTERSPutting those skills you learnt in
primary school to work!
Why?
• Can be seen by hundreds of people.• Excellent way of transmitting scientific
information• Easily portable• Easier to read than a paper• Much less risk of stage-fright than a talk!
Rules of layout (break with caution)
• Title - should be at least 2.5cm tall• Text naturally flows right-left and top-bottom• Don’t box off what you want to link• Breathe! Your poster should have about 20%
empty space
Posters are visual representations of your work
• Beware the ‘Wall of Text’!• Do your figures and graphics first• Only show what adds to your
central message• Stick to a few colours or one
colourscheme• Circuses are distracting
ORAL PRESENTATIONS
You’ve got lots to say, but don’t say too much.
Opening, Main, Finish and goodbye!
For science!
We got some actors to teach lecturers how to speak better. Some of them did.Some of them went off to do pop-sci TV
OPENINGGet them in the door (hook!)
Why you had to do what you did (need)What you actually did/what you found (action)
What you’re going to say (preview)
OPENINGResearch has shown that academics spend almost 90% of their life attempting to communicate with others, with at least 30% of their life spent talking at people. Despite this, most academics lack any kind of training in public speaking—they learn by observation, but mostly through trial and error. We experimented with using trained performers – specifically, actors- to provide specialised training to see if we could enhance their public speaking. I'm going to give you a little background on some of the particular communication difficulties academics have, go over what kind of training we did and what results we had.
Hook
Need
Action
Preview
MAIN
Structure: think tree, not chain
1 key message3-5 main points
3-5 sub/supporting points
KEY MESSAGE
SUBPOINT
MAIN POINT
SUBPOINT
SUBPOINT
SUBPOINT
MAIN POINT
SUBPOINT
SUBPOINT
SUBPOINT
MAIN POINT
SUBPOINT
SUBPOINT
Actors can teach lecturers how to speak better
Better at speaking
Lecturers lectured better
Some lecturers still boring, but clearer
Not effective in tutorials
Cost-effective
Effect lasted >1 year
Needs more study for long-
term effects
The “Brian Cox” effect
Some academics left to be media personalities
Many cited “better money”
Is this a bad thing?
FINISH YOUR TALK
• Review your key message• Tell them when you’re done.
“Many thanks for listening. I’m happy to answer any questions you might have”
Slides are not your notes
• Slides are visual aids for the audience (graphs, figures, key points).
• Your talk and your slides should stand alone.• A complete sentence is better than a vague
title.
32% of Academics in the study joined Am-Dram groups within 2 years
No further involvement; 58%
Joined Amateur Dramatics groups; 32%
Signed up with an Extras agency; 8%"Brian Cox" Effect; 2%
Social Media
Public = ProfessionalProfessional = Self-Promotion.
Your SFW public identity should not link to anything locked.