Scientific Writing

Den här boken ger ovärderlig hjälp för alla som ska skriva en vetenskaplig artikel eller uppsats. Att kunna hantera formalia är en viktig del av det professionella vetenskapliga hantverket och förtjänar samma uppmärksamhet som andra delar av forskningsprocessen.

I Konsten att skriva en fotnot diskuteras detaljfrågor kring formalia, såsom citat- och referatteknik samt hantering av illustrationer och fotnoter, men framför allt tar författarna ett helhetsgrepp på vetenskaplig formalia. Boken är tänkt att vara ett hjälpmedel att användas under själva skrivandet och ger exempel på en mängd frågeställningar som kan infinna sig för uppsatsskribenten. Hur ska egentligen referenser utformas i en vetenskaplig text? Ska en fotnot stå före eller efter punkten? Hur redovisas internetkällor i källförteckningen?

Boken vänder sig till nya studenter som behöver en bok i behändigt format att hålla hårt i under uppsatsskrivandet, men också till den mer erfarna forskaren som kan behöva en uppslagsbok när det uppstår frågor kring hur hänvisningar ska utformas.

The pending narrative is an important macrostructure of persuasive speech. With it, the speaker not only describes the world and its social phenomena, but also lays a foundation for transforming the world to conform with the objective imposed in the narrative. The rhetorical force of the pending narrative comes from its sudden interruption: as soon as the motivation for an action has been created and as soon as identities have been established for the actors involved in the action, the story is interrupted, brought to a halt. This article outlines the basic mechanisms of the pending narrative and illustrates them using one alcohol policy editorial and two introductory chapters from scientific texts: Erik Allartd's The Structure of Society and Social Pressure and C. Wright Mills' The Sociological Imagination.

RESUMEN
La relación interna entre filosofía, literatura y arte permite examinar con propiedad qué significan la pluralidad y complejidad en los usos de la razón. Posibilita la aproximación a esos usos y figuras desde un ángulo privilegiado. El interés por lo literario y artístico no tendría por qué significar un apresurado abandono del modelo discursivo y analítico -que es característico de la filosofía-, sino más bien el acceso a un punto de vista más completo, un nuevo método reflexivo, otro límite crítico. Esta perspectiva facilita la puesta al día de las tesis modernas sobre la filosofía como emancipación, esto es, como su salida de la minoría de edad.
Espacios ficcionales, campos de proyección de la experiencia, métodos y perspectivas trasdisciplinarias constituyen los distintos niveles a través de los cuales se trata de definir un nexo complejo entre discursos. La ficción como conocimiento, subjetividad y texto, así como la relación entre mundo y lenguaje pretenden acotar algunas dimensiones de esa relación.
A través de la literatura llegamos a estar familiarizados con situaciones, sentimientos, formas de vida, obteniendo así una mirada desde dentro -epistemológicamente empática-. Cada nueva visión del mundo constituye un nuevo tipo de conocimiento, un conocimiento que puede incluir aspectos cognitivos y emotivos y que demandará, probablemente, algún tipo de lógica paraconsistente. De modo que a la par que por nuestras narrativas creamos o descubrimos mundos (dependiendo del estatuto ontológico otorgado a la ficción) también establecemos o desentrañamos la legislación lógica, según la cual tal curso de sucesos o tal tipo de entidades son o no admisibles al interior de este particular mundo posible.
Precisamente, es en la constante re-creación de sus objetos, práctica que surge en una comunidad de problemas -un espacio de representación colectiva- el espacio en que se da la ciencia. Es, precisamente, en una particular forma de hablar y de referirse a objetos, creándolos con el habla, el que funda a la medicina -por ejemplo- como cuerpo autónomo de conocimientos, vale decir como ciencia de primer orden. Las disciplinas, pues, en tanto discursos, están, literalmente, constituidas por él. Por ello es necesario estudiar el discurso científico en tanto que discurso, hay que reflexionar sobre sus orígenes y modo de constitución, hay que aceptar que no es sólo un producto sino una fuerza productiva. La realidad es una narrativa exitosa. Es aquello que se hace hablando. Las comunidades científicas son comunidades de problemas y, sobre todo, de retóricas, reconstrucciones de objetos que sólo existen en tanto se habla de ellos de una determinada manera,
Hasta los mundos narrativos más imposibles tienen como fondo lo que es posible en el mundo que concebimos como real. Las entidades y situaciones que no son explícitamente nombradas y descritas como diferentes del mundo real son entendidas a partir de las leyes que aplicamos a la comprensión del mundo real.
Así, pues, la narración de ficción construye un modelo análogo del universo real, una proyección...lo que permite conocer la estructura y los procesos internos de la realidad y manipularla cognitivamente. Se otorga así un valor cognoscitivo a la ficción, de modo tal que todas las posibles connotaciones, no expresadas directamente por el texto, sino -más bien- mostradas implícitamente o implicadas contextualmente en lo allí dicho, iluminan aspectos de la realidad que sin estas extrapolaciones ficcionales permanecerían en penumbras.
La perspectiva crítica -propia de la filosofía- puede hallarse así implícita en escritos de ficción, de la misma manera como las teorías filosóficas pueden aceptar como suyos a los argumentos procedentes del discurso literario. La reflexión filosófica se articula, pues, desde distintos ámbitos y modalidades discursivas.
Dr. Adolfo Vásquez Rocca

Writing a scientific article does not end with a description of the summarized results. Conclusions and implications remain a crucial part of the article. The previous papers portrayed the most important aspects of the title, summary (Lamanauskas, 2019a), accurate introduction (Lamanauskas, 2019b) and research methodology (Lamanauskas, 2020a) of the article and discussed the features of the presented results (Lamanauskas, 2020b). Discussion is also accepted as an equally important structural part of the scientific article (particularly in the case of describing an experimental / empirical study). Thus, this section summarizes the results of the conducted study. However, this piece of writing is not intended to provide all possible options for discussion and drawing conclusions due to the fact that the specificity of article preparation varies in each field of science. In addition, it depends on the requirements set by scientific / research journals (or other publications) and publishing policy. Therefore, this editorial more concentrates on the general aspects of preparing the above mentioned parts of the article.

The use of ghostwriters by industry is subject to increasing public attention and scrutiny. This article addresses the practice and ethics of scientific ghostwriting. We focus on the type of ghostwriting that involves a pharmaceutical company hiring a medical education and communications company to write a paper favorable of their product, who then hires a well-known academic to publish it under his or her name without disclosing the paper’s true origins.We argue that this practice is harmful
both to the public and to the institutions of science and that it is not justified by an analogy to accepted scientific authorship practices. Finally, we consider ways to discourage the practice.

This is the penultimate typescript of Chapter 2 _of Scientific Communication: Practices, Theories, and Pedagogies_, edited by Han Yu and Kathy Northcut. The chapter attempts to contribute to our understanding of scientific communication by exploring the ethics of scientific authorship. Specifically, we explore the historical, practical and theoretical implications of the (non)decision of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI), the nation's highest ethical office, not to include authorship issues in its definition of research misconduct.


Formed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in 1992, the ORI defines research misconduct as "fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism" (FFP). However, a host of other authorship issues in addition to plagiarism are important in science (e.g., authorship credit, author order, etc.) and are regularly encountered and often violated by scientists. However, our research also reveals that there are many sources of ethics in scientific communication-some in conflict with each other, just as the ethics are often in tension (e.g., the drive for originality and credit vs. the need to collaborate and share)-and that scientific organizations and journals, combined with social, personal, and other systems of morality and values, create "ethical lines and fields of force." It is within these shifting ethical fields of force, rather than the power of the ORI, that scientists work every day. (In this, we recognize of both Actor-Network Theory, and posthumanistic understandings of the limitations of human agency in continuously emergent and mostly unpredictable ecologies, here applied specifically scientific/authorship ethics.) 


The ORI's decision to exclude authorship ethics other than plagiarism provides a unique opportunity to interrogate the supposed and real power of the ORI; to begin to map the ethical lines and fields of force that impinge on scientists; and to explore the role and implications of ethics in authorship as a fundamental concern in scientific research as well as communication.

First overview on the subject of the "Four Seasons" through time (from Egypt until Cy Twombly and contemporary art), different approaches (philosophical, climatological, art historical etc.) and different cultures (from Mesopotamia to Japan and Ancient Mexico).

Referat im Rahmen des CAS-Studiengangs Hochschuldidaktik.

Im ersten Teil des Referats wird in aller Kürze die Entwicklungs einer Strategie zur Betreuung von Bachelorarbeiten dargelegt um im zweiten Teil lernpsychologische Erkenntnisse aus den Bereichen Feedback und Zielvereinbarungen auf den Betreuungsprozess anzuwenden.  Auf dieser Grundlage lassen sich folgende Emfpehlungen formulieren:

• Es scheint sich zu lohnen, Abschlussarbeiten in zwei (benotete) Teilprojekte zu unterteilen. Am Anfang des ersten Projekts steht eine Zielvereinbarung für die Erstellung eines Exposés. Am Anfang des zweiten steht das Exposé. Die Ziele sollen dabei klar und herausfordernd sein und Inhalt, Qualität und Zeitumfang sowie ev. persönliche Entwicklungsziele umfassen.
• Feedbacks sollen idealerweise so aufgebaut werden, dass sie die Diskrepanz der aktuellen Leistungen zum Ziel aufzeigen und Hinweise zu zur Lösung von spezifischen Problemen notwendige allgemeinere Strategien liefern und/oder das grundlegende Verständnis fördern anstatt auf Details zu fokussieren. Feedbacks sollen aufzeigen, wie eine Verbesserung erreicht werden kann und dass eine Verbesserung möglich ist. Feedbacks sollen sich zudem auf Aufgaben (auf Verhalten) und nicht auf die Person richten.  Den Studierenden ist mit Vorteil mehr Verantwortung für die von Ihnen einzuholenden Feedbacks zu geben, womit der Umgang mit Feedbacks für Studierende zur aktivierenden Aufgabe wird.

This Impact Report identifies and summarises the diverse impacts, resulting from the £500m of UK funding of Science and Technology in 2013, using numerous quantitative metrics and short case study extracts.  It shows how the varied impacts of a national science and technology organization and its many funded programmes can be annually identified, captured, tracked, and summarised in a public document.

The report was produced for, and by, the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC) -  the UK Research Council responsible for funding: (1) all UK astronomy, particle and nuclear physics research, (2) related UK science and technology facilities (e.g. as Harwell and Daresbury), (3) the UK contribution to international science (e.g. CERN, international telescopes and space missions), (4) innovation and business spin-off programmes, and (5) UK public engagement activities.

The Report was co-researched and co-authored by the STFC Impact Team, including myself while Impact Evaluation Manager in 2013, with Dr. Claire Dougan-McCallie (lead author/Head of Impact) and Jenny Beard, with additional input from senior managers, and many data and case study contributions from other key managers across STFC.

Varied key impacts are identified and reported including:

• Research amongst the best (by citation impact) in astronomy, nuclear and particle physics.
• Supported research of 226 Principal Investigators in 70 universities, led to 1,100 peer-reviewed papers in 2012.
• Facilities (the Diamond Light Source, ISIS and CLF) were used in 2012/13 by over 4,200 unique users , in over 2,400 experiments, producing over 1,000 papers in peer-reviewed journals.

• Technology from CERN benefited the UK economy by over £100 billion every year.
• Funding the development of the UK’s space, internet and computer animation industries, returned over £500 billion to the UK economy per annum.
• Funded Innovation Campuses hosted over 230 enterprises and supported over 5,000 jobs.
• UK industry won £43 million in contracts from the international subscriptions funded, and had accumulated a total of £150 million since 2005.

• Funded research inspired future generations to study STEM subjects, attracting 90% of UK undergraduates to study physics, funded 782 PhD students  and 16,800 student training days.
• Between 2009 to 2012 public engagement programmes engaged people on 58 million occasions, with 2 million people engaged in face-to-face activities in 2013 alone.

Success in scientific and engineering research depends on effective writing and presentation. The purpose of this guide is to help the reader achieve that goal. The approach is not prescriptive. Rather, the emphasis is on a logical approach to communication, informed by what needs to be achieved, what works in practice, and what interferes with success. Over 400 examples of good and bad writing and graphing are presented. Each is from a published research article and is accompanied by analysis, comment, and correction where needed. Journal reviewers' critiques of submitted manuscripts are included to illustrate common pitfalls. Above all, this is a "how-to" book, comprehensive but concise, suitable for continuous study or quick reference. Checklists at the end of each chapter enable the reader to test the readiness of a dissertation, journal submission, or conference presentation for assessment or review. Although oriented towards engineering and the physical and life sciences, it is also relevant to other areas, including behavioural and clinical sciences and medicine.

"Bu kitabın amacı, bütün bilim dallarındaki bilim adamlarına ve öğrencilere, yayımlanma ve yayımlandığında anlaşılma şansı yüksek olan yazılı metinler hazırlamada yardımcı olmaktır. Dergilerin, bir daldan diğerine ve hatta aynı dal içinde bile koşulları çok değiştiği için, evrensel olarak kabul görecek önerilerde bulunmak mümkün değildir. Bu kitapta, dalların çoğunda kabul gören bazı temel ilkeleri sunmaktayım..."

1999 : chap. 1 dans Beacco (dir.) : L'astronomie dans les médias, Paris : Presses de la Sorbonne nouvelle. Contributions de G. Petit, M. Brasquet-Loubeyre, S. Moirand, F. Mourlhon-Dallies, G. Petiot, F. Cusin-Berche, M.-F. Mortureux ; p. 11-23.

Dissemination of findings about the HIV epidemic at international conferences has been dominated by researchers from developed countries working in well- resourced and supported institutions. This has led to exclusionary practices where community healthcare workers and practitioners working in under-resour- ced contexts have had limited opportunities to share their own experiences. A low focus on research in their working contexts and lack of capacity to produce ‘acceptable’ research for dissemination at international audiences have exacer- bated the exclusion.

This article describes how early career researchers and abstract submitters in resource-limited developing countries, particularly in Africa, received online help from experienced volunteer mentors in the Abstract Mentor Programme (AMP), enabling them to share their work at international conferences on the issues of preventing and managing HIV and AIDS.

Este capítulo se dedica a hacer unas recomendaciones para que el proceso de comunicación de la ciencia sea un asunto transparente y honesto, exponiendo unos lineamientos que se han establecido por consenso en el mundo de los eventos científicos y de las publicaciones. En un libro de metodología, el deber ser que implica la ética durante todo el proceso de investigación es infaltable; por esto es importante una comunicación clara sobre los asuntos problemáticos que se presentan con mayor frecuencia en el momento de la divulgación.

Indah Chairani (0304161033) English Education Department (PBI-2) /7 th Semester Abstract Technology has become important thing in every part of human's life especially in teaching learning process. Technology Integration in this life , nowadays has given many changes including in the education field. One of application that has been created that is evidence of technological progress and can also be one of the learning media when the teaching and learning process takes place is Youtube. YouTube website is regarded as one online material that can be integrated into English material. This paper focused on Youtube videos and conducted to find out the use of Youtube as an interesting media in EFL teaching and Learning in Indonesia and to know the student's response when implement videos from Youtube as a media in learning English. The research design of this research is qualitative (qualitative descriptive) method with 20 college students from different universities in Indonesia as a sample. The data collection using questionnaire and this paper also explain the impact when using Youtube in EFL teaching and learning in Indonesia and become an alternative for the teacher to teach the students using a variation educational technology. This paper can encourage the teacher to begin use technology to support teaching practice and the students can be expected can increase their skill in EFL class.

https://www.routledge.com/A-Guide-to-Argumentative-Research-Writing-and-Thinking-Overcoming-Challenges/Wentzel/p/book/9781138039735
Research is difficult. Even though students are trained in the basic research methodology skills, when confronted with research writing, it feels to them as if they enter a bizarre world, with its own language and conventions, where it is hard to get things right. This book translates the apparent complexities of research writing into everyday ideas, language and skills and will enable novice researchers to start overcoming the major stumbling blocks immediately.

This book focuses only on the greatest challenges in research writing, specifically those that supervisors find most difficult to explain to novice researchers. These challenges include both basic and more complex skills such as: finding original research contributions; establishing one’s voice while drawing on other authors; turning a vague idea into a feasible research question; generating literature reviews that are original in themselves; and avoiding list-like writing when discussing the research methodology.

It shows that it is easier to overcome these challenges, not with lists of prescriptions that are difficult to remember while writing, but rather by cultivating an argumentative mindset. Not only is such a mindset much easier to maintain, but it offers a central point around which one can organise any difficult writing task. The book shows how to use the argumentative mindset to approach every important writing challenge. It translates all the necessary skills into jargon-free language using a variety of visuals and simple step-by-step procedures that will enable any person to read the book fast and start writing immediately.

The book is accompanied by a website with an instructor’s manual with guidance on the teaching and assessment of research writing and lecture slides.

La página inicial de un trabajo de investigación casi nunca es inicial. Esta contradicción se explica porque el orden expositivo de un trabajo no es el orden en que se han redactado y compuesto sus diversas secciones. La página inicial contiene algunos de los elementos más relevantes de un artículo, entre ellos el resumen y el título, y de la importancia de estos elementos da idea el hecho de que, en inglés, esta página se llama “title page”, portada. No sólo depende de esos elementos la valoración inicial del manuscrito, sino que además se emplean para representar el contenido del trabajo en las bases de datos de bibliografía científica, cosa que afecta a su circulación y eventualmente a su impacto.
Después de enumerar brevemente los elementos de la página de título de los artículos de investigación, este tema se concentra en los dos más importantes, el resumen y el título, los define, examina sus diversos tipos y trata de proporcionar pautas para su elaboración.

Leer y escribir son herramientas de trabajo para muchos profesionales en las comunidades letradas en que vivimos. Ser un buen abogado, un buen ingeniero o un buen médico es, también, ser un buen lector y escritor de los textos propios de estas disciplinas.

Writing Analytically focuses on ways of using writing to discover and develop ideas. That is, the book treats writing as a tool of thought—a means of undertaking sustained acts of inquiry and reflection.
For some people, learning to write is associated less with thinking than with arranging words, sentences, and ideas in clear and appropriate form. The achievement of good writing does, of course, require attention to form, but writing is also a mental activity. Through writing we figure out what things mean (which is our definition of analysis). The act of writing allows us to discover and, importantly, to interrogate what we think and believe.
All the editions of Writing Analytically have evolved from what we learned while establishing and directing a cross-curricular writing program at a four-year liberal arts college (a program we began in 1989 and continue to direct). The clearest consensus we’ve found among faculty is on the kind of writing that they say they want from their students: not issue-based argument, not personal reflection (the “reaction” paper), not passive summary, but analysis, with its patient and methodical inquiry into the meaning of information. Yet most books of writing instruction devote only a chapter, if that, to analysis.
The main discovery we made when we first wrote this book was that none of the reading we’d done about thesis statements seemed to match either our own practice as writers and teachers or the practice of published writers. Textbooks about writing tend to present thesis statements as the finished products of an act of thinking—as inert statements that writers should march through their papers from beginning to end. In practice, the relationship between thesis and evidence is far more fluid and dynamic.
In most good writing, the thesis grows and changes in response to evidence, even in final drafts. In other words, the relationship between thesis and evidence is reciprocal: the thesis acts as a lens for focusing what we see in the evidence, but the evidence, in turn, creates pressure to refocus the lens. The root issue here is the writer’s attitude toward evidence. The ability of writers to discover ideas and improve on them in revision depends largely on their ability to use evidence as a means of testing and developing ideas rather than just supporting them.
By the time we came to writing the third edition, we had begun to focus on observation skills. We recognized that students’ lack of these skills is as much a problem as thought-strangling formats like five-paragraph form or a too-rigid notion of thesis. We began to understand that observation doesn’t come naturally; it needs to be taught. The book advocates locating observation as a separate phase of thinking before the writer becomes committed to a thesis. Much weak writing is prematurely and too narrowly thesis driven precisely because people try to formulate the thesis before they have done much (or any) analyzing.

Abstract. The paper addresses culture-specific as well as linguistic issues when translating a Russian research paper into English. The author advances the idea of international content adaptation
as an obligatory practice  of preparing a research product for the English-speaking academic community.
Keywords:  translation, localization, intercultural communication, academic discourse, linguoculture, cultural markedness.
Аннотация.  В  статье  рассматриваются  отдельные  вопросы  лингвокультурной  и профессиональной адаптации текста русскоязычной научной статьи при переводе на английский
язык.  Анализируя  специфику  межкультурной  коммуникации  в  сфере  науки,  автор  приходит  к выводу  о  необходимости  локализации  языкового  представления  результатов  научных
исследований для обеспечения их адекватной рецепции международным научным сообществом.
Ключевые  слова:  перевод,  локализация,  межкультурная  коммуникация,  научный дискурс, лингвокультура, культурная маркированность.