Still using the Writing Center for STEM papers? Check out SciComm Lab!
This the first of our 3 Q&A series on how to get better and (maybe) happier at writing and presenting scientific discoveries. Read this article in full to get inspired💡
Our Collaborator: Brandeis SciComm lab fellow Kathleen Maigler
What is SciComm Lab? Who are the lab members?
From the website of SciComm Lab: The graduate student and postdoc Communication Fellows in the Science Communications Lab offer individual coaching, targeted workshops, and a range of initiatives to support the Brandeis scientific community with the skills they need to communicate the rationale, process and results of their incredible science to any audience in written, spoken or visual form.
How can Kathleen help me?
Brandeis students can make an appointment with Kathleen or other SciComm fellows for individual coaching on any scientific work at any stage of writing - from brainstorming to final edits. Make an appointment here for an in-person or online session!
Let’s dive into our first Q & A! In this article, we will cover some general tips and tricks of writing and presenting science.
Q1: In one sentence, what’s the uniqueness of scientific papers?
Scientific writing is special because it is technical, written for scientists, but also tentative in that it will avoid making any claims that would be false or inaccurate - the conclusions will be very specific and dependent on the exact context of the experiments.
Q2: How might a paper for Neuroscience be different from a paper in Biochem?
Style tends to come from the writer, not necessarily the field. I would expect the jargon and the background knowledge the writer expects the audience to have to vary between fields, but style will mostly depend on:
What the editors of the journal allow or prefer
The writing preferences of the submitting author.
Q3: How should I start writing for a life science research paper?
You can start however you feel comfortable (or whatever will get you motivated)!
For a primary research article, I like to write the methods and results first. Hopefully, while I continue collecting data, the methods won’t change, and once I finish data collection I can simply describe it in the results. Once those are in, I know what background information the audience needs to understand my results and can write the introduction. Finally, the discussion requires the most knowledge about the field and literature and addresses any missing pieces of my data or future directions, so I always do that last.
For a review article, I gather all the references I use first. Then I pull out the sentences I want to use to build my argument. I outline how the argument will flow, and start writing, paraphrasing from the sentences I have pulled out (of course citing as I go). Usually, I will end up adding or removing references depending on the direction of the paper.
Of course, just because this is how I do it, does not mean it’s the right way or the best way. The important thing is to write! Then you can find what is lacking or have someone else look it over to help.
Q3: What are some pro tips for delivering an impressive presentation for my research?
A: Impressive presentations have great organization that points toward a clear conclusion. Capture attention and make the audience care about the science you are going to present. You will want your voice and slides to be engaging. The best way to do this is to practice, get feedback, make some changes and repeat. See SciComm’s recorded workshop Talk So People Will Listen: Presenting your Research.
Q4: How can I start to love academic writing? It’s so boring. Every time I want to write a paper, I want to give up 🙁
The format of the scientific paper is formulaic, but that has its advantages! You know exactly what the paper needs and where it is going to go. There’s lots of resources and templates and of course examples of the type of paper you need to write. But who says standardized has to be boring? Scientific writing necessitates excitement! What is the motivation of the study? How is the work unique? Why do we care? All of this needs to be included up-front and requires a persuasive, if not contentious tone. Maybe there is not much to be done creatively in the methods or results, but the flair comes back in the discussion! Just because some scientists are dry writers, doesn’t mean we all have to be. I’ve read textbooks that are downright delightful, spicy reviews, and accurate but engaging popsci pieces. Don’t give up on academic writing just because reading it can be boring. You’re in charge of your prose and so long as it is not inaccurate, it can be fun (and is always a challenge)!
