Scientific Writing
Peer review and scientific journals
by: Natalie H Kuldell, Ph.D.
http://www.visionlearning.com/library/module_viewer.php?mid=123
We’ve all read the headlines at the supermarket checkout line. “Aliens Abduct New Jersey School Teacher” or
“Quadruplets Born to 99-Year Old Woman: Exclusive Photos Inside.” Journals like The National Enquirer sell
copies by publishing sensational headlines, and most readers believe only a fraction of what is printed. A
person more interested in news than gossip could buy a publication like Time, Newsweek or Discover. These
magazines publish information on current news and events, including recent scientific advances. But where do
they get their scientific information? News magazines hire people to read specialized journals where scientists
publish their research findings. Scientific journals can provide reliable information because of the process
called “peer-review” in which other scientists (peers) evaluate the value and credibility of research before
allowing it to appear in print.
Peer-Review
Peer-review is performed by knowledgeable scientists who are not directly involved with the research being
evaluated. In fact, reviewers are often scientific competitors! To remove any bias from the review process,
most manuscripts (articles prior to publication) are independently considered by three reviewers. Reviewers
consider the validity of the approach, the significance and originality of the finding, its interest and timeliness
to the scientific community, and the clarity of the writing. Reviewers then provide feedback on the
manuscript they have read. Journal editors rely on peer-review feedback to guide their publication decisions,
and authors use reviewers' comments to refine the text of their manuscript and the experiments within.
Journal editors must occasionally resolve issues related to conflict of interest among reviewers; reviewers’
identities are generally not revealed to manuscript authors. This later rule is intended to free reviewers from
any social pressures, allowing them to consider only the quality of the science before them.
Reviewers are expected to keep the information in a manuscript confidential until it is published, but it is rare
that the work comes as a complete surprise to the entire scientific community. This is because peer-review is
integrated into almost every step of science. Most research scientists request public funding for their
experiments. Funding decisions are made by a committee of other scientists who debate each proposal’s
likelihood of success, the validity of its approach and the importance of the question being asked. Once
funded, the experiments can begin, and preliminary data is often revealed at scientific meetings. This allows
the findings to be debated and defended with colleagues prior to publication. Once the experiments are
completed, a manuscript is written and circulated to all those who contributed to the work. Manuscripts
commonly undergo several rounds of revision by the authors before being submitted to a journal for peer-
review. Journals vary in their selectivity and focus. For example, the journal Cell publishes articles focused
on biological process related to cell function; the journal Environmental Science and Technology publishes
articles related to environmental pollution and cleanup. Consequently, manuscripts are first sent to the most
widely read journal likely to publish the work. If that journal declines to publish the manuscript, it can be sent
to a different journal for consideration.
Thanks to the peer-review system, readers can feel confident that the information
found in scientific journals is credible. Despite the best efforts of reviewers, cases of
scientific misconduct do occur and incorrect or unsubstantiated data does get
published. Some cases turn out to be elaborate hoaxes. For example, in 1912 Charles
Dawson showed off parts of a skull and jawbone to the public and convinced
scientists that the fossils represented the missing link between man and ape.
Dawson’s “Piltdown Man” confused the scientific community for 40 years until it
was discovered that the skull was only 500 years old rather than 500,000, and the
jawbone was that of an orangutan. In other instances of misconduct, data in
scientific journals has been improperly reported. Twenty five papers published by
Jan Hendrick Schon between 2000 and 2003 were called into question because data from key experiments
related to superconductivity were inadequately documented and several control samples were improperly
reported. At least 16 of those papers have since been declared to be false, and the journal Science has
withdrawn eight of Schon’s papers. The scientific community has also been tarnished with cases of outright
fraud and forgery. For example, in 1974 William T. Summerlin used a felt-tip pen to change the fur color of
some mice in an effort to convince his mentor that he had successfully grafted skin between different strains of
mice.
Cases of scientific misconduct are rare but important because of the publicity they receive once they are
discovered, eroding the public's trust in the peer-review system and science itself. One cornerstone of science
is that scientific findings must be reproducible and well documented. Many instances of scientific misconduct
have been exposed when other scientists cannot reproduce reported data. For example, in 1989 Stanley Pons
and Martin Fleischmann announced to the world that they had discovered “cold fusion,” a possible unlimited
source of energy. When other scientists were unable to replicate the work, it was discredited. To keep this
type of conduct in check, scientific articles include detailed descriptions of experimental protocols that enable
others to reproduce experiments.
Article Format
Scientific articles are neither mystery stories, intended to surprise the reader with a discovery, nor diaries of
every successful and unsuccessful experiment performed. Instead, the major discoveries are set out in the
article’s first section. The writer’s goal is to present his or her findings and persuade the readers with his or
her interpretation of the data. Journal articles are divided into sections, each with a specific purpose. Although
every journal has a particular “house style” for the way it formats and names the sections of the scientific
articles it publishes, a generic scientific article would include the following:
Title: A well-written title gives information about the research. The names of all scientific contributors
are usually listed immediately after the title. By convention, the scientist who performed most of the
work described in the article is listed first, while the last author is usually a senior scientist who
secured funding for the work and who runs the lab in which it was performed.
Abstract: Some journals call this the “summary” since it must concisely describe the experimental
question, the general methods and the major findings and implications of the experiments. It is
generally limited to 250 words since the text is typed into literature databases, such as PubMed (see the
Research links on the right menu). A well-written abstract will include likely “search words” since
searching databases is a major way scientists find articles of interest.
Introduction: The central experimental question and important background information are presented
in this section. Relevant and established scientific knowledge is cited in this section and then listed in
the References section at the end of the article. Introductions are intended to lead the reader to
understand the authors' hypothesis and means of testing it.
Materials and Methods: All experimental procedures and reagents are described in detail sufficient
for another researcher to reproduce the findings. This section must be accurate and complete if the
discoveries are to be validated and then extended by others.
Results: The data are presented in this section, giving other scientists an opportunity to judge their
merit. The findings are described with words and also illustrated using figures and tables. Figures are
used to facilitate the interpretation of the data and have accompanying explanations, called “legends.”
Discussion: In this section, authors may present a model or idea they feel best fits their data. They also
present the strengths and significance of their data. Some journal articles fuse “Results and
Discussion” into one section, but when they are separated a reader can easily distinguish the data
collected from the authors' interpretation of it.
References: Scientific progress builds on existing knowledge, and previous findings are recognized by
directly citing them in any new work. The citations are collected in one list, commonly called
“References,” although the precise format for each reference section varies considerably. Some
journals ask that citations be listed alphabetically, while others require that they be listed by the order
of appearance in the text.
Figure 1: Scientific research articles often include figures
and tables that help explain the results of the experiments
conducted during the work. This figure was modified from
Vitousek, P. M. and P. A. Matson (1993). Agriculture, the
global nitrogen cycle, and trace gas flux. The
Biogeochemistry of Global Change: Radiative Trace Gases.
R. S. Oremland. New York, Chapman and Hall: 193-208.
Reading Scientific Articles
The specialized format of scientific articles can make them hard to approach, but once the purpose and
requirements for each section are understood, primary journal articles can be read by anyone. Strange as it
seems, the most efficient way to tackle a new article may be a piecemeal approach, reading some but not all
the sections and not necessarily in their order of appearance. For example, the abstract of an article will
summarize its key points, but this section can often be dense and difficult to understand. Sometimes the end
of the article may be a better place to start reading. In many cases, authors present a model that fits their data
as the final figure of the article. The discussion section may emphasize some themes or ideas that tie the story
together, giving the reader some foundation for reading the article from the beginning.
Readers who are unfamiliar with a specific field may feel like outsiders when they try to read scientific
articles. Sometimes older research articles, from the time when a field of study was first developing, can be
useful because they present the concept in a simpler fashion (look at the Classics section in the right menu for
ideas). Written guidelines for reading can also help if they are written by an experienced reader. The reading
guidelines can demystify the process of reading an article. For example, focus on the anatomy of the paper
(e.g. “How many references are cited, and how are they organized?”) and the language within (e.g. “Use your
glossary to find definitions for the following terms...”). Guidelines for beginning readers can be content
oriented, highlighting interesting scientific questions and approaches, or even the quality of writing.
The scholarly vocabulary in scientific articles can be one of the greatest obstacles to reading the primary
literature. In some articles it’s possible to pinpoint the exact moment the authors move from understandable
language to “science speak.” A list of terms and definitions can help a new reader navigate this transition.
Another helpful tool is a well-written and relevant review article. Particularly good review articles can be
found in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Science and Nature and other journals. Review
articles can help a reader take his or her first steps into the primary scientific literature.
In addition to the language barrier, scientific articles often contain daunting figures or formulas. For more
information on how to read and understand figures, see our Visualizing Scientific Data module.
Given the volume of literature that exists and the number of new research articles available each day, finding
appropriate articles should be possible. Reading them is a valuable and lasting skill. It emphasizes science as
a process of discovery. It also prepares anyone interested in science for life-long self-directed learning.
Scientific articles can also teach persuasive writing, a valuable tool for any field of study.