Scientific Writing – The Abstract

Objective of the Session: Discuss and evaluate each section of a scientific paper throughout the tutorial schedule.
Weekly Breakdown:
- Week 7: Aims
- Week 8: Introduction
- Week 9: Materials and Methods
- Week 10: Results
- Week 11: Discussion
- Week 13: References

Source Reference:
- Bulletin by the Ecological Society of America titled "Scientific Writing Made Easy"
- First published on: 03 October 2016
- DOI link: https://doi.org/10.1002/bes2.1258
- Editor: Charlene D'Avanzo, School of Natural Sciences, Hampshire College.

Peer Reviewed Journals:
1. Regular papers
2. Short communications
3. Review articles
4. News and Views
5. Letters to the Editor

Key Questions to Consider:
- How does scientific writing differ from other forms of writing?
- What differentiates newspaper articles from scientific papers?
- Understanding differences between reports, books, and journal articles.
- Is New Scientist classified as a scientific journal?
Illustrative Example:
- Serious Scientific Paper titled "Scientists Are Sharing Hilarious Titles of Real Studies" – Link: PubMed Article

Clear: Avoid unnecessary detail, focusing on clarity.
Simple: Maintain simplicity without vagueness or complexity.
Impartial: No assumptions or unproven statements.
Structured Logic: Ideas should be presented in logical order.
Accuracy: Avoid vague language such as "about," "approximately," or "almost."
Objectivity: Support statements and ideas with evidence, acknowledging previous work.

Voice Options:
- Passive Voice: Emphasizes the recipient of the action (e.g., "Samples were analyzed").
- Active Voice: Emphasizes the action performer (e.g., "We analyzed samples").
Impersonal Tone: Avoid personal pronouns like "I think" or "I believe."
Tenses: Prefer past tense and formal language.

Sources to Explore:
- Peer-reviewed journals
- Google Scholar
- UWE databases
- Science Direct

Types of Literature:
- Academic books
- Library search engines
- International reports
- IPCC Reports
- IPBES – Global Assessment Report
- GEO-6 report e-book

Ten Rules for Reading a Scientific Paper:
- Critical thinking is essential; science is a continuously evolving field.
- Question alternative explanations and be aware of your biases and perspectives (cognitive dissonance).

Common Sections Found in Peer Reviewed Papers:
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
6. Acknowledgements
7. References
Example Source: Soil Biology and Biochemistry guide for authors.

Title: "Seasonal Variations in Decomposition Processes in a Valley-Bottom Riparian Peatland"
Authors: Samuel A.F. Bonnett, Nick Ostle, et al.
Abstract Details:
- Duration: Year-long field survey at a peatland site from January 2002 to December 2002.
- Focus: Seasonal variation of decomposition processes and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentrations.
- Key Data Monitored:
- Peat temperature
- Physicochemical parameters
- Organic carbon pools
- Basal CO2 respiration
- Extracellular enzyme activities (e.g., B-glucosidase, phosphatase, sulphatase, phenol oxidase)
- Key Findings:
- Positive correlation of basal CO2 respiration, soil solution DOC, and phenolics to soil temperature with specific statistical results:
  - P<0.01, F=12.25
  - P<0.001, F=59.8
  - P<0.001, F=141.27
- Q10 responses for variables:
  - Basal CO2 respiration: $Q_{10}=2.29$
  - Soil solution DOC: $Q_{10}=6.42$
  - Phenolics: $Q_{10}=14.42$
- Suggests temperature influences seasonal variation in DOC concentrations but does not account for long-term DOC export trends.

Discussion Points:
- Structure of aims section and identifying elements of background, methods, objectives or hypotheses, results, and conclusions.
- Important inquiries:
- What do the authors want to discover?
- What methodologies were employed?
- Rationale behind chosen approach?
- Interpretation of results?
- Recommended future research directions?