TitleThis needs to
contain the name of the experiment and the date. Titles should be
straightforward and informative.
AbstractThe abstract
is a short summary of your work. They will usually follow the general structure
of the work itself along the lines of the IMRAD principle (Intro, Method,
Results and Discussion (Alexandrov and Hennerici,
2007). The information should clearly sum up the report within
100-200 words.
Study Task:
Print off
abstracts from articles taken from three different journal titles. Using
different colours, underline the different components of the abstracts.
Find a journal article and put the abstract to one side. Read the
journal writing down the key elements of each section. Write an abstract of up
to 200 words and then compare this to the published abstract.
Introduction An
introduction is designed to set the context in which the study has been
undertaken and to move the reader from what is known about an area to what is
unknown and outline the aim of the specific experiment in question (Foote,
2006). There should be three
phases to the introduction that move from a broader review of the topic area,
toward the areas being addressed in your study and then, only in the last
sentence or so, should the specific aims of the study be highlighted. In longer
theses, there may be a whole section or chapter covering a literature review,
but within a shorter lab reports this will be addressed by the use of more
concise critiques of previous studies (MacAuley,
1994).
Common
errors
Aim, objectives, hypotheses:
whilst the aim of the study should be included at the end of the introduction,
common errors are to include it too soon, to have an aim that is not linked to
the rationale, or is too vague, or to avoid having an aim at all.
Note on Verb Tense
Introductions often
create difficulties for students who struggle with keeping verb tenses straight.
These two points might help you navigate the introduction:
Print
out an introduction from a journal article. Using three colours identify the
following three phases 1: context, 2:development of themes, 3: aim of this
experiment. Within the same introduction, circle the references that have been
cited for an idea of how many could be used.
Method This
section should be written so that someone else can repeat the experiment just by
reading your method section. A key point throughout is to include enough
information for replication, but to not include unnecessary information.
The methods section should have some distinct elements within it
that may be presented under sub-headings or might be presented in separate
paragraphs. The content should include participants, study design, experimental
procedures and intended statistical analysis.
When reporting the
participants that have taken part in the experiment, the writer should include
standard characteristics such as age, height and body mass. It is also
recommended that you describe the participants’ backgrounds in terms of
experience and fitness levels. The section on participants should also make
reference to ethical considerations, informed consent and health screening that
has been completed.
Experimental Procedure describes the process in
chronological order. Using clear paragraph structure (avoid numbering the
stages), explain all steps in the order as they happened.
General
points
Results The
purpose of the results section is to present the data you have collected in a
clear, concise manner. The data should be presented in a logical format and will
probably include a combination of figures and/or tables, statistical analysis
and brief descriptions of data.(Foote,
2009)
Figures
Tables
Don’t discuss the results. Use concise text that
presents or describes findings, but avoid discussing reasons or explanations.
Ensure figures and tables contain
useful information presented with attention to detail.
Discussion The discussion is the most important part of your
report where you show can that you understand the experiment beyond the simple
level of completing it. It requires the writer to explain, analyse and interpret
the results and present them in a clear, concise and meaningful way (Price,
2013).
The discussion should start with a brief
summary of the main findings of the study. This should not include any
statistical data but a concise description of the conclusions presented in a
short paragraph.
It should then relate the findings to your
original predictions and to the reported conclusions of previous studies. The
results of your study can then be contextualised to support, contradict or
qualify these previous findings. Speculation can be offered as to the reason for
any differences but try to avoid simply saying that it was human error or bad
scientific practice as this implies you are incompetent. If the flaws result
from the experimental design explain how the design might be improved.
It is often appropriate to suggest how the findings of this study can be
used in the wider context. How can this method of assessment, or this knowledge
help practitioners work with athletes or health-related clients?
It is
common to suggest how future studies may build on your findings and experience
in order to be more robust in design or to look at further questions and issues.
Avoid the phrase “more research is needed” but do be more precise in making
suggestions for future research designs.
The discussion should end with
a paragraph that summarises the main findings of the study and makes conclusions
based on the topics that have been covered.
Common Errors
References These should be presented in the appropriate format as
in-text citations and in the final reference section.
Appendices These typically include such elements as raw data,
calculations, graphs pictures or tables that have not been included in the
report itself. Each kind of item should be contained in a separate appendix.
Make sure you refer to each appendix at least once in your report.
Article References
Recommended ReadingField,
A. (2012) Writing up Research [available online at: http://www.statisticshell.com/docs/writinglabreports.pdf]
Price, M. (2013) Lab Reports and Projects in
Sport and Exercise Science. Harlow: Pearson [amazon]
contain the name of the experiment and the date. Titles should be
straightforward and informative.
AbstractThe abstract
is a short summary of your work. They will usually follow the general structure
of the work itself along the lines of the IMRAD principle (Intro, Method,
Results and Discussion (Alexandrov and Hennerici,
2007). The information should clearly sum up the report within
100-200 words.
Study Task:
Print off
abstracts from articles taken from three different journal titles. Using
different colours, underline the different components of the abstracts.
Find a journal article and put the abstract to one side. Read the
journal writing down the key elements of each section. Write an abstract of up
to 200 words and then compare this to the published abstract.
Introduction An
introduction is designed to set the context in which the study has been
undertaken and to move the reader from what is known about an area to what is
unknown and outline the aim of the specific experiment in question (Foote,
2006). There should be three
phases to the introduction that move from a broader review of the topic area,
toward the areas being addressed in your study and then, only in the last
sentence or so, should the specific aims of the study be highlighted. In longer
theses, there may be a whole section or chapter covering a literature review,
but within a shorter lab reports this will be addressed by the use of more
concise critiques of previous studies (MacAuley,
1994).
Common
errors
Aim, objectives, hypotheses:
whilst the aim of the study should be included at the end of the introduction,
common errors are to include it too soon, to have an aim that is not linked to
the rationale, or is too vague, or to avoid having an aim at all.
Note on Verb Tense
Introductions often
create difficulties for students who struggle with keeping verb tenses straight.
These two points might help you navigate the introduction:
- The experiment is already finished. Use the
past tense when talking about the experiment. - "The objective of the experiment was..."
- The report, the theory and permanent
equipment still exist; therefore, these get the present tense: - "The purpose of this report is..."
out an introduction from a journal article. Using three colours identify the
following three phases 1: context, 2:development of themes, 3: aim of this
experiment. Within the same introduction, circle the references that have been
cited for an idea of how many could be used.
Method This
section should be written so that someone else can repeat the experiment just by
reading your method section. A key point throughout is to include enough
information for replication, but to not include unnecessary information.
The methods section should have some distinct elements within it
that may be presented under sub-headings or might be presented in separate
paragraphs. The content should include participants, study design, experimental
procedures and intended statistical analysis.
When reporting the
participants that have taken part in the experiment, the writer should include
standard characteristics such as age, height and body mass. It is also
recommended that you describe the participants’ backgrounds in terms of
experience and fitness levels. The section on participants should also make
reference to ethical considerations, informed consent and health screening that
has been completed.
Experimental Procedure describes the process in
chronological order. Using clear paragraph structure (avoid numbering the
stages), explain all steps in the order as they happened.
General
points
- The method should be written in “past tense,
third person” ie “height and body mass were recorded prior to the tests being
completed” rather than “height and weight will be taken…” - Equipment used should be included in the main
body of the method whenever it has been used ie the participants completed a
warm-up on the treadmill (Woodway Desmo HP, Woodway GmbH, Weil am Rhein,
Germany) follow this link for a list of the
equipment available in the Marjon sport science lab
- Learn how to present common units
correctly.
Results The
purpose of the results section is to present the data you have collected in a
clear, concise manner. The data should be presented in a logical format and will
probably include a combination of figures and/or tables, statistical analysis
and brief descriptions of data.(Foote,
2009)
Figures
- Figures should be labelled under the graph
with a label that briefly describes the data that is included. - The Axes should be labelled and SI units
should be included alongside. - If there are more than one series on any axis
then a legend should be included. If there is only one then no legend is
required. - If printing in black and white, ensure that
the data markers are easily distinguishable for each series.
Tables
- Tables should have a title and this should go
above the table. - Tables require formatting so that there is
little unnecessary white space. Experiment with the row height, column width and
position of text within the table. - Raw data should be included in the
appendices, the results section should only include data that is concise,
representative of key data and should not simply repeat that which is found in
any figures. - For more see Annesley (2010)
Don’t discuss the results. Use concise text that
presents or describes findings, but avoid discussing reasons or explanations.
Ensure figures and tables contain
useful information presented with attention to detail.
Discussion The discussion is the most important part of your
report where you show can that you understand the experiment beyond the simple
level of completing it. It requires the writer to explain, analyse and interpret
the results and present them in a clear, concise and meaningful way (Price,
2013).
The discussion should start with a brief
summary of the main findings of the study. This should not include any
statistical data but a concise description of the conclusions presented in a
short paragraph.
It should then relate the findings to your
original predictions and to the reported conclusions of previous studies. The
results of your study can then be contextualised to support, contradict or
qualify these previous findings. Speculation can be offered as to the reason for
any differences but try to avoid simply saying that it was human error or bad
scientific practice as this implies you are incompetent. If the flaws result
from the experimental design explain how the design might be improved.
It is often appropriate to suggest how the findings of this study can be
used in the wider context. How can this method of assessment, or this knowledge
help practitioners work with athletes or health-related clients?
It is
common to suggest how future studies may build on your findings and experience
in order to be more robust in design or to look at further questions and issues.
Avoid the phrase “more research is needed” but do be more precise in making
suggestions for future research designs.
The discussion should end with
a paragraph that summarises the main findings of the study and makes conclusions
based on the topics that have been covered.
Common Errors
- Not discussing your own results at all
- Not discussing your findings in the context
of previous findings - Repeating previous passages of content
- Blaming equipment failure and/or passing the
buck to others
References These should be presented in the appropriate format as
in-text citations and in the final reference section.
Appendices These typically include such elements as raw data,
calculations, graphs pictures or tables that have not been included in the
report itself. Each kind of item should be contained in a separate appendix.
Make sure you refer to each appendix at least once in your report.
Article References
- Alexandrov, A. V. and Hennerici, M.G. (2006).
Writing good abstracts. Cerebrovascular Diseases, Vol. 23, No.4: 256-259.
[full
text] - Annesley, T. M. (2010). Bring your best to
the table. Clinical chemistry, Vol. 56, No.10: 1528-1534. [full text]
- Foote, M. (2006). How to make a good first
impression: a proper introduction. CHEST Journal, Vol.130, No. 6: 1935-1937.
[full
text] - Foote, M. (2009). The proof of the pudding:
how to report results and write a good discussion. CHEST Journal, Vol. 135, No.
3: 866-868. [full
text] - MacAuley, D. (1994). READER: an acronym to
aid critical reading by general practitioners. The British Journal of General
Practice, Vol. 44, No. 379: 83 [full
text] - Price, M. (2013) Lab Reports and Projects in
Sport and Exercise Science. Harlow: Pearson [amazon]
Recommended ReadingField,
A. (2012) Writing up Research [available online at: http://www.statisticshell.com/docs/writinglabreports.pdf]
Price, M. (2013) Lab Reports and Projects in
Sport and Exercise Science. Harlow: Pearson [amazon]