Previous studies have shown…

This follows with the previous post, and is something I keep running into today: unsubstantiated  statements.

IF you start a sentence with the phrase, “Previous studies have shown…”, you BETTER:

1) Have some references to those studies at the end of the sentence

2) Have follow up sentences that give examples of said studies.

3) BOTH OF THESE THINGS.

Using the phrase, “Previous studies have shown…”, with out these things basically says to the reader, “My adviser told me there is research that shows this, but I’m too lazy to go look them up myself”, or just, “I’m to lazy to look up what they are, but I’m sure I read something that supports this statement”. This really opens you up to looking a fool because you ASSUMED something, and that something is, “this information is well known enough to be common knowledge”.

Trust me, in scientific writing you should never assume something is common knowledge. This is ESPECIALLY true if you are writing a grant. If you assume someone is expert enough that this is common knowledge to them, you are assuming wrong. Even if you luck out, the reviewer is more likely going to be looking to see if you really know what you think you know. Also, if they are that familiar with your research area they will probably be looking for you to cite something from their lab!

I’m not telling you to avoid this phrase. I’m just saying to use it with caution, and use it appropriately. If I was a reviewer I would kick the paper back to you asking to support your claim. However, you will trip across this more often than you’d think in published works. For me it always happens when I finally find someone backing up a statement similar to one *I* want to make, and I’m want to look into their references to make sure that I can make the same statement. I fear this is how many “accepted as truth” myths get started, because enough people said it was true with out backing up the statement or checking to be sure what they said the previous research found is in fact what they discovered! (8 glasses of water a day anyone?).

 

~~~

Afterthought.

Don’t take this to mean you need to cite EVERY previous study, this is where exempli gratia (you know, good ole e.g.) comes in handy. If this is for a grant, DO scope out who is likely on review panels. Citing your reviewers makes them very happy. Not citing them makes them grumpy.

Accurate Wording

Angelina Jolie’s op-ed was a brave sharing of a very personal journey, but it has opened a can of worms in the discussion of genetic testing.  I’m a little behind the wave on this as I’ve have been laid up sick in bed, so I’m not going to talk about the repercussions this might have influencing other women’s decisions. I think other authors, such as Maria Konnikova, have done well to remind people that the entire process – from getting genetic tests to the decisions you make based on those tests – are very personal.

 

What I do want to talk about is the importance of wording, ESPECIALLY when trying to convey scientific information to the general public. The first new story I saw reporting the op-ed was NPR, and reading their Facebook lead in made my skin crawl. It reads, “Angelina Jolie 37, wants other women to hear of her decision. She chose to have the surgery after learning that she carries the BRCA1 gene. Studies show women with that gene have a much greater chance of developing breast and ovarian cancer”. Furthermore, within the story they quote Patti Neighmond’s reporting on a JAMA study where she is quoted saying, “clearest evidence yet that women carrying BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes the should consider preventive surgery because they are at a very high risk for breast and ovarian cancers.”

 

The parts I highlighted are what irritate me most, because NPR’s (and many other outlets) poor use of wording actually misinforms the public. (Full disclosure I used to do BRCA* research). To the uneducated reader, this wording suggests that if you carry a BRCA gene you are at much greater risk to get cancer. The writers of this statement may have just been interpreting Ms. Jolie’s statement that she “carr[ies] a “faulty” gene, BRCA1, …”. I believe she was trying to avoid using the “scary” word mutation, but her avoidance (or poor use of commas), and the lack of many to use the word later, just buries the truth of the matter. To be fair to Patti Neighmond, her report does eventually say, “women with the BRCA mutations”, but she should have said this much earlier in her reporting. The JAMA article is quite unambiguous in its statement about the matter, even in the abstract.

 

The truth is EVERYONE has BRCA 1 and 2 genes. These genes code proteins that have important roles in the normal function and physiology of all men and women. However, researchers have found that mutations of the BRCA1/2 genes can increase the likelihood of breast, ovarian, prostate, and other cancers (I’m going to be bad and not list any citations right now, but just do a quick search on pubmed or Google scholar it if you doubt me). How much a mutation increases your risk, depends on the mutation. (If you really want to understand how type of mutation can affect disease, I suggest reading up on mutations in the genes related to cystic fibrosis). One of the best analogies I’ve heard is the rock and jar example. You are a jar, and inside that jar are a number of rocks representing mutations in your genome. The size of those rocks varies depending on the “nastiness” of the mutation. Now water is poured into the jar, which represents environmental factors which further influence your body’s processing and possibly cause more mutations. Water overflowing the jar represents the onset of disease, e.g., cancer. You can imagine then if you have a very large rock, representing a nasty mutation, it won’t take much water to overflow the jar.

 

Anyways, back to my soapbox. As scientists, it is our duty to help educate the general population in a way that they can understand and properly use that knowledge to improve their own life. People in the media who translate our research and statements have the same obligation. I was happy to hear on later stories that it sounded like some news outlets got the memo, because I heard them saying phrases like, “mutations in the BRCA genes”. I hope this helps stem people going to their doctor to ask if they could possibly have the BRCA gene (which is still very expensive to get tested since Myriad still holds the patients on them, but that is another issue entirely).

 

So, take home lesson: Watch your wording. If you use wording that is clear and direct, but still accurate, it can prevent a lot of confusion. This is true at any level of writing. Writing for the general public requires a special touch of distilling the information to its basic elements, and explaining it simply without overdoing it so you are misrepresenting the facts. This is also true in grant writing. While you can presume a certain level of education, you have to understand that the reader will most likely NOT be an expert in your field, nor will they be reading it under ideal conditions. In other words, you want to optimize you wording so the stressed and sleep deprived reviewer reading your proposal (along with 20 others) on an airplane is as likely to understand it as well as if he was reading it well rested with nothing else going on around him. Honestly, which do you think is more likely to happen?

 

————-

* I have to say another pet peeve is when people call the genes “bRA-KA”, love the people who call it B-R-C-A. This is probably just personal preference influenced by the people I worked with researching these genes.

Outlining your way to greatness!

I’ve been gone for too long, but have topics galore to catch up on!!!

~~~~

I believe outlining is a skill that is often glanced over or forgotten about during out pursuit to turn out grants, manuscripts, and other written documents. However, it is something that can be invaluable, from the shortest abstract to a book chapter (or book if you are an intrepid writer)!

Why outline?? I was recently helping a graduate student with her dissertation prospectus/proposal. In the past I had helped her with manuscripts. In all instances she showed dire need to develop outlining skills. Her ideas where jumping all over the place, there was no connection between (and often within) paragraphs, and she would often leave out central concepts/ideas vital to understanding and making her argument, while repeating other ones that didn’t need repetition. This just left me frustrated and confused, and made it very difficult for me to help her improve what she had written, because too much was missing or inappropriate. Therefore, before I attempted to edit I sat down with her to review the importance and basics of outlining. By outline you will help yourself write better, and help people help YOU to improve what you have written!  In other words, they will be able to give you constructive help off the bat, and not make lots of notes like, “connection to or reasoning for this unclear”.

~~~

First thing you need to remember when doing an outline is that it is just a guide. IT IS NOT SET IN STONE! Outlines are there to help your organize you thoughts, not force to you a ridged structure. I cannot tell you the number of times my outlines have been turned inside out once I started writing. The key is it gave me a focus point to get my writing started, and direction to flow the writing towards. Having an outline will help to ensure that you cover all the main points you need to discuss, that you connect similar ideas in the same area, and that you don’t repeat yourself in embarrassing ways.

Second, consider what you are writing and your audience. Outline layouts will differ depending on what you are working on, and sometimes who you are writing for.

For Example:

Abstracts – I gave a general template for writing abstracts before in Abstract Writing. Abstracts tend to be pretty straight forward, so this may be all you ever need. If you have to write an epic abstract, say for your dissertation, just add more detail in under each section.

Comprehensive Exam Questions – Depending on your format, you may be writing this sitting in a room being watched and timed, not being watched but timed, or just preparing an oral response. Either way, outlining your response before you start writing or talking is key, but in this case it will likely be brief and general with few details. Remember, start with a statement that reiterates the question. This helps make it clear to the committee that you understood the question. This is especially true if you are given an oral question and giving an oral answer. For oral response, if you are prepping for being in the room, make a real outline, but it is still perfectly acceptable to jot down a few outlining notes before starting a response to an oral question. Imagine watching the Presidential debates. Before they answer you usually see them scribbling a few things. They also do this while their opposition is talking, so that they are ready to rebut and respond. Trust me, it is better to take the moment before responding.  If the committee sees you are making a note or two on paper before your respond they will realize that you aren’t reaching for an answer, but are thinking things through before responding. Even if you have NO CLUE and you brain is racing, it will make you look better than just talking off the cuff with a bunch of unorganized thoughts. It can also help stop the racing thoughts.

Manuscripts/Thesis/Dissertation – Start with the format required by the journal. So something like: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. Then start filling in the key parts needed under each section. For example, in the introduction write the leading off statement that says what the meat of the document is about vs. some vague statement. In other words, avoid “throat clearing” statements that you are using to ease yourself into writing, or you think the audience might need to prep their brain for reading you paper. (You can still WRITE it, just leave it in the outline). Then generally it is best to outline introductions from broad ideas to narrow. These should still be broad statements like, History, Recent Findings, Questions Raised, and Current Research. The last is important, because it really focuses your reader so they can better understand your methods. Then start under each adding details. This should include the main points and papers you need to mention/discuss. I even will put a partial citation in as I do this. THIS will help your writing flow more later, because you won’t be hunting citations.

Presentations – I can’t tell you the number of times I wanted to scream, “Did you outline this first?!” at the last meeting I attended. Outlining the flow of your power point presentations is as important as outlining a written document!! Make sure you are giving adequate background, not introducing new concepts in inappropriate places, and give adequate attention to each part of the presentation. This will help you decide what needs to be on the slide vs. what you can just say. In other words, it helps reduce presentations that have slides cluttered with a lot of words and the presenter is just reading the slides. Have you EVER found such presentations to be memorable/stimulating? Not likely. Outlining will even allow you to anticipate questions, so you can prep “hidden” slides to help answer such questions.

Grants – Again, start with the format they require. Each section tends to be independent of each other; so outlining each section as if it was an independent document can help (or is necessary!). This is not to say you need to rehash everything each time, but remind the reader about important ideas/concepts. Then proceed filling out the outline with details you need to cover. This will help you see what information is really needed (i.e., are you including key items AND do you really need to mention that other item), which will help make sure you are presenting ideas in a logical flow. This will help you refine and limit what you are saying, which are valuable things to be able to do when page space is at a premium!

Lastly, before you start writing, try discussing your outline with a peer or mentor. This is for the same reason you should have someone read your other written documents: to get input. Outlining can be personal as we all have our own style, but talking someone through the outline can help you find holes/flaws that you are not seeing. Fixing these from the beginning will help improve your first draft!

As I have said before, I am still a big fan of free writing your first draft, and outlining does not change this conviction. A well-planned outline will help this free writing FLOW out of you! It will help focus you AND unstick you when you brain gets lost on what to say next. I find taking the time to do an outline will help reduce procrastination time and time spent writing. Actually, sometimes I work on and tweak my outline to procrastinate, and this helps get me to writing.

Ok. I did not outline this… did I forget anything?

Fresh PhD Smell

It is that time of year again. People are gathering their friends and loved ones, and praying their mentor is taller than them so they aren’t choked when that hard earned hood finally slides over their heads.

I want to extend my congratulations to all of you finishing this year, and wish you luck in the Post Doc and job market. I’m sure someone right now is compiling the numbers of average number of job applications to interview to offer of job ratios, and I’m sure it isn’t looking good. What I’ve heard around the water cooler is that for the biology types the numbers are several 100 applications, less than 5 interviews, and only one offer. Good thing is one is all it takes.

Those of you out there still plugging away on the PhD, or even in a Post Doc, remember to consider applying for transition grants like NIH’s K99/R00 grants. These will help you stand out from the sea of PhDs. It will especially show potential employers your grant writing skills!

I am reminded this time of year of an article the Economist put out just over 2 years ago called, “The Disposable Academic”. It paints a bleak outlook for PhDs, but also should be used as a reminder of why it is important to have good skills – like writing – outside of your science. This will help you stand out. However, also remember to use your time as a student/Post Doc to look beyond the walls of academia. Education about what is beyond those walls is often ignored in most PhD programs, but like learning good writing skills, it is something that can benefit you greatly in the long run. You just need to make a little time to take the adventure.

Sharing Words

I know I’ve been ignoring the blog, and it is on my resolutions list to get back on the regular!

However, the suicide of Aaron Swartz prompts me to write…

I knew of his “piracy” case, but I have to admit I didn’t know much about the man. If you don’t know who he is, I recommend you start with Wikipedia, for which he volunteered as an editor. I also recommend a post by his friend Lawrence Lessing, which speaks to the root of the issue, that Swartz was bullied for his beliefs.

Basically, Swartz was being prosecuted for downloading millions (we are talking around 4 million) of academic articles from JSTOR, which left him facing felony charges that could lead to $1 million dollar in fines and 35 yeas in prison. His belief was that the cost of accessing JSTOR’s digital library, with those fees going to publishers vs. authors, was limiting access to academic works (and probably limiting academic advancement). While prosecution was going forward on Swartz, JSTOR developed a program that allows access to “older” articles at no-cost (if you register for the service). Therefore, the sentence Swartz faced seems even more ridiculous and shameful.

This prompted me to write, because open access has been a hot topic of debate as of late. Access to journals has even joked about at #overlyhonestmethods, “we didn’t read half of the papers we cite because they are behind a paywall” ~@devillesylvain. (This feed has become like a non-anonymous PostSecret for scientists.) We need to keep this conversation going. I understand that journals need money to run and function, and they have lost a lot of revenue as print subscriptions have lost traction to online access. However, there has to be a way of doing this with out undermining the quality of research we are trying to turn out. You can’t tell me you have looked passed a paper or cited it based on its abstract alone because you can’t access it, or even worse you cited it based on how someone interpreted it! I spent a lot of time writing authors trying to avoid doing this during me degree, but we all have limits (usually time based ones)!

I’m not going to harp on this endlessly, because I don’t really know the answer and how to strike a balance (I still don’t know how to feel about the Pandora’s box Napster opened), but please take a moment to start the debate in your mind. Then consider joining the movement to get publishers and online libraries to open their vaults, even if it is on a delayed basis. Think about how this will even the playing field for all levels of researchers and universities.

We put a lot of though and research into our words. We should have say in who can and how they can be accessed.

Grammar and Punctuation Commentary

I have been composing a post about the oxford comma (Just you wait!!), and came across an article in Harvard Business Review by a the CEO of iFixit. The focus is that he requires all job applicants to take a mandatory grammar test, and why. Basically you fail, you do not get hired! He is nice and makes some allowance for dyslexics!

It is a critical thing to think about in today’s job market. The ability to write is important, and quick correspondence methods (texting, twitter, facebook) has sadly lowered our writing and grammar IQ. We joke when people miss use your and you’re on Facebook or the like, but it is important to remember that to a potential employer this might reflect on what kind of detail oriented or critical thinker you will be at your job.

Bottom line: proofread your resume and C.V. carefully!
I’ve read a good article that somewhat counters this… but can’t seem to find it again just now.