<!DOCTYPE html>

<html data-programme="Research Integrity" data-course="Data Selection, Analysis and Presentation">

	<head>
		<title>Data presentation in practice: Writing</title>
		<meta charset="UTF-8">
		<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge">
		<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">

		<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../css/project.min.css">
		<link id="basic-print" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../css/print.min.css" disabled>
		<link id="summary-print" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../css/print_interactive.min.css">
	<script type="text/javascript" src="../scripts_scorm_12/SCORM_12_APIWrapper.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="../scripts_scorm_12/courseFunctions.js"></script>
</head>

	<body onLoad="javascript:Initialize();" onUnload="javascript:Terminate();">
	  
		<div id="app" v-cloak>
			<base-container
				screen-id="dap_1_50"
				current-module = "Data Selection, Analysis and Presentation"
				page-title = "Data presentation in practice: Writing"
				screen-time = "5"
				screen-time-period = "mins">

				<page-container>

					<page-row>
						<page-content-main>
							
							<p>It is essential that you use the right words to present your research. The words you use must be accurate and honest. It also goes without saying that they should be your own, or (if you are quoting someone else) properly attributed. Regardless of your field of study, knowing how to write properly is a prerequisite for publication and communication. If you have concerns about your writing skills, you should seek additional training.</p>
							
							<h3>The misuse of words</h3>
							
						</page-content-main>
					</page-row>
					
					<page-row>
						<page-content-main>
							
							<p>The misuse of words can be due to carelessness, a lack of writing skills or a deliberate effort to mislead readers. Whatever the reason, the results are the same. The words do not present an accurate account of the research being reported.</p>
							
							<instructional-text><p>Each screen presents an example of the misuse of words and an explanation of how the words were misused. You will then be asked to consider how the phrasing or information provided could have been changed to address the issue, typing your answer into the box provided. Once you have entered your answer, you can click for feedback and proceed to the next example.</p></instructional-text>
							<instructional-text-accessible><p>Each of the following examples present the misuse of words and an explanation of how the words were misused. You will be asked to consider how the phrasing or information provided could have been changed to address the issue. Once you have considered your answer, continue on for our feedback. Then you can proceed to the next example.</p></instructional-text-accessible>
							
						</page-content-main>
					</page-row>
					
					<page-row>
						<page-content-main>
							
							<!-- ACTIVITY START -->
							<process show-in-accessible-version="false" summary="true" variant="notemaking">
								<process-page>
									<note-making>
										<note-question>
											<text-block>
												<p><strong>Conclusion presented in a publication:</strong> "Most participants preferred the first option."</p>
												<p><strong>Results of the experiment:</strong>
												<br>Option 1: 35% 
												<br>Option 2: 33% 
												<br>Option 3: 32% (no preference)</p>
											</text-block>
											<p>This is an example of <strong>misleading presentation</strong>. The stated conclusion is misleading in two ways: 1) if the respondents who had no preference are added in, then 'most' did not prefer Option 1; and 2) the term 'most' is vague and usually suggests that the difference is greater than a simple majority.</p>
											<p><strong>How would you rephrase the conclusion to more accurately reflect the results of the experiment?</strong></p>
										</note-question>
										<note-input></note-input>
										<note-feedback>
											<p><strong>Our suggestion:</strong> "Of those who had an opinion, slightly more preferred Option 1."</p>
											<p>This statement could also be supported by incorporating the percentages.</p>
										</note-feedback>
									</note-making>
								</process-page>
								<process-page>
									<note-making>
										<note-question>
											<text-block><p><strong>Abstract in an anthropology journal:</strong> "Conventional notions of ethnicity are similar to Maasai ideology, which asserts that the term Maasai refers to a non-problematical, unitary, and given social entity. The term serves not as a simple ethnic marker, however, but as a pragmatic shifter. Its sense and reference vary across the ethnosociological context, signifying economic practice, the social margin, and the pastoral division of labor. The semiotic process, then, generates, rather than simply represents, the social order." (Galaty, 1982)</p></text-block>
											<p>This is an example of <strong>overuse of jargon</strong>. Even if you work in a field where it is common to use complex terminology or jargon to describe research, you should keep complex terms to a minimum; the language should be understandable to others in your field. Simply inventing words and phrases to make your work seem more scholarly is not responsible. There are a number of different tools available for free online (or even built into word-processing software) that can help you assess readability (for links to articles discussing this topic and tools you might wish to use, see the "Useful links" pod). What you write should be readable at the level of your intended audience, and the words and phrases you use should have established meanings. If a meaning is not available elsewhere (e.g. in a dictionary), you should provide a clear definition. </p>
											<p><strong>How could the abstract be more clearly written?</strong></p>
										</note-question>
										<note-input></note-input>
										<note-feedback><p><strong>Our suggestion:</strong> The simple answer to this question is to use words and phrases that are more widely understood and have a clear meaning, while avoiding the use of compound words/phrases that have no clear meaning (e.g. 'non-problematical' or 'pragmatic shifter'). </p></note-feedback>
									</note-making>
								</process-page>
								<process-page>
									<note-making>
										<note-question>
											<text-block>
												<p><strong>Stated method:</strong> "We added an additional 1 ml of reagent after step #1."</p>
												<p><strong>Actual information from lab notebook:</strong> "After 24 hours no change was observed following step #1, so I added an additional 1 ml of reagent. This caused an immediate colour change."</p>
											</text-block>
											<p>The stated method, when compared to the information in the lab notebook, highlights a <strong>lack of transparency</strong>. In this case, the one-day delay should have been mentioned. Since conditions could have changed, additional details about how the experiment was conducted should have been included.</p>
											<p><strong>How would you rephrase the stated method to more accurately reflect the information from the lab notebook?</strong></p>
										</note-question>
										<note-input></note-input>
										<note-feedback><p><strong>Our suggestion:</strong> "We added an additional 1 ml of reagent 24 hours after completing step #1." In this case, all that is required is for the information in the lab notebook to be honestly and fully presented.</p></note-feedback>
									</note-making>
								</process-page>
								<process-page>
									<note-making>
										<note-question>
											<text-block>
												<p><strong>Response to a question about conflicts of interest in a request to conduct human participants research:</strong> "None."</p>
												<p><strong>Actual information in researcher's CV:</strong> The CV refers to a consultancy contract with and grants awarded by an organisation that would be interested in the results of the research.</p>
											</text-block>
											<p>This is an example of a <strong>lack of honesty and transparency</strong>. In this case, the researcher might believe that the interests listed on their CV will not influence their research and thus do not need to be listed. However, it is always best to list in the conflicts of interest section anything that you think might be relevant so that others can make this decision; it is better to disclose too much than be accused of hiding a conflict of interest.</p>
											<p><strong>How should the question on conflicts of interest be answered, based on the information contained in the CV?</strong></p>
										</note-question>
										<note-input></note-input>
										<note-feedback><p><strong>Our suggestion:</strong> To honestly answer the question, the researcher should have provided a full account of all of their consulting work and the grants they have received (as listed in their CV). </p></note-feedback>
									</note-making>
								</process-page>
								<process-page>
									<note-making>
										<note-question>
											<text-block>
												<p><strong>Opening sentence in a report to a primary school committee:</strong> "Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), particularly carbonated soft drinks, may be a key contributor to the epidemic of overweight and obesity, by virtue of these beverages' high added sugar content, low satiety, and incomplete compensation for total energy." (Malik, 2006)</p>
												<p><strong>Background:</strong> The committee is made up of parents and school administrators making a decision about whether to allow soft drink machines in their school.</p>
											</text-block>
											<p>This is an example of <strong>academic writing</strong> intended for a professional audience, not the general public.  The researcher should write the report using words and concepts that the committee, which is formed of people from outside the author's professional area, will understand.</p>
											<p><strong>How could you convey the same information to the committee in a clearer way?</strong></p>
										</note-question>
										<note-input></note-input>
										<note-feedback><p><strong>Our suggestion:</strong> "Sugar-sweetened carbonated soft drinks could contribute to the widespread increase in weight problems. This is because these drinks have high sugar content and do not satisfy hunger."</p></note-feedback>
									</note-making>
								</process-page>
							</process>
							<!-- ACCESSIBLE START -->
							<accessible-block>
								<h4>Example 1 of 5:</h4>
								<p><strong>Conclusion presented in a publication:</strong> "Most participants preferred the first option."</p>
								<p><strong>Results of the experiment:</strong></p>
								<ul>
									<li>Option 1: 35%</li>
									<li>Option 2: 33%</li>
									<li>Option 3: 32% (no preference)</li>
								</ul>
								<p>This is an example of <strong>misleading presentation</strong>. The stated conclusion is misleading in two ways: 1) if the respondents who had no preference are added in, then 'most' did not prefer Option 1; and 2) the term 'most' is vague and usually suggests that the difference is greater than a simple majority.</p>
								<p><strong>How would you rephrase the conclusion to more accurately reflect the results of the experiment? Please take a moment to consider your response before moving on to our feedback.</strong></p>
								<h4>Feedback:</h4>
								<p><strong>Our suggestion:</strong> "Of those who had an opinion, slightly more preferred Option 1."</p>
								<p>This statement could also be supported by incorporating the percentages.</p>
								<hr>
								<h4>Example 2 of 5:</h4>
								<p><strong>Abstract in an anthropology journal:</strong> "Conventional notions of ethnicity are similar to Maasai ideology, which asserts that the term Maasai refers to a non-problematical, unitary, and given social entity. The term serves not as a simple ethnic marker, however, but as a pragmatic shifter. Its sense and reference vary across the ethnosociological context, signifying economic practice, the social margin, and the pastoral division of labor. The semiotic process, then, generates, rather than simply represents, the social order." (Galaty, 1982)</p>
								<p>This is an example of <strong>overuse of jargon</strong>. Even if you work in a field where it is common to use complex terminology or jargon to describe research, you should keep complex terms to a minimum; the language should be understandable to others in your field. Simply inventing words and phrases to make your work seem more scholarly is not responsible. There are a number of different tools available for free online (or even built into word-processing software) that can help you assess readability (for links to articles discussing this topic and tools you might wish to use, refer to the "Useful links" pod). What you write should be readable at the level of your intended audience, and the words and phrases you use should have established meanings. If a meaning is not available elsewhere (e.g. in a dictionary), you should provide a clear definition.</p>
								<p><strong>How could the abstract be more clearly written? Please take a moment to consider your response before moving on to our feedback.</strong></p>
								<h4>Feedback:</h4>
								<p><strong>Our suggestion:</strong> The simple answer to this question is to use words and phrases that are more widely understood and have a clear meaning, while avoiding the use of compound words/phrases that have no clear meaning (e.g. 'non-problematical' or 'pragmatic shifter').</p>
								<hr>
								<h4>Example 3 of 5:</h4>
								<p><strong>Stated method:</strong> "We added an additional 1 ml of reagent after step #1."</p>
								<p><strong>Actual information from lab notebook:</strong> "After 24 hours no change was observed following step #1, so I added an additional 1 ml of reagent. This caused an immediate colour change."</p>
								<p>The stated method, when compared to the information in the lab notebook, highlights a <strong>lack of transparency</strong>. In this case, the one-day delay should have been mentioned. Since conditions could have changed, additional details about how the experiment was conducted should have been included.</p>
								<p><strong>How would you rephrase the stated method to more accurately reflect the information from the lab notebook? Please take a moment to consider your response before moving on to our feedback.</strong></p>
								<h4>Feedback:</h4>
								<p><strong>Our suggestion:</strong> "We added an additional 1 ml of reagent 24 hours after completing step #1." In this case, all that is required is for the information in the lab notebook to be honestly and fully presented.</p>
								<hr>
								<h4>Example 4 of 5:</h4>
								<p><strong>Response to a question about conflicts of interest in a request to conduct human participants research:</strong> "None."</p>
								<p><strong>Actual information in researcher's CV:</strong> The CV refers to a consultancy contract with and grants awarded by an organisation that would be interested in the results of the research.</p>
								<p>This is an example of a <strong>lack of honesty and transparency</strong>. In this case, the researcher might believe that the interests listed on their CV will not influence their research and thus do not need to be listed. However, it is always best to list in the conflicts of interest section anything that you think might be relevant so that others can make this decision; it is better to disclose too much than be accused of hiding a conflict of interest.</p>
								<p><strong>How should the question on conflicts of interest be answered, based on the information contained in the CV? Please take a moment to consider your response before moving on to our feedback.</strong></p>
								<h4>Feedback:</h4>
								<p><strong>Our suggestion:</strong> To honestly answer the question, the researcher should have provided a full account of all of their consulting work and the grants they have received (as listed in their CV).</p>
								<hr>
								<h4>Example 5 of 5:</h4>
								<p><strong>Opening sentence in a report to a primary school committee:</strong> "Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), particularly carbonated soft drinks, may be a key contributor to the epidemic of overweight and obesity, by virtue of these beverages' high added sugar content, low satiety, and incomplete compensation for total energy." (Malik, 2006)</p>
								<p><strong>Background:</strong> The committee is made up of parents and school administrators making a decision about whether to allow soft drink machines in their school.</p>
								<p>This is an example of <strong>academic writing</strong> intended for a professional audience, not the general public. The researcher should write the report using words and concepts that the committee, which is formed of people from outside the author's professional area, will understand.</p>
								<p><strong>How could you convey the same information to the committee in a clearer way? Please take a moment to consider your response before moving on to our feedback.</strong></p>
								<h4>Feedback:</h4>
								<p><strong>Our suggestion:</strong> "Sugar-sweetened carbonated soft drinks could contribute to the widespread increase in weight problems. This is because these drinks have high sugar content and do not satisfy hunger."</p>
							</accessible-block>
							<!-- ACCESSIBLE END -->
							<!-- ACTIVITY END -->
							
						</page-content-main>

						<page-content-sidebar>

							<!-- USEFUL LINKS START -->
                            <pod variant="a" has-modal="true">
                                <pod-heading>Useful links</pod-heading>
                                <pod-content></pod-content>
                                <!-- pop-up pod content -->
                                <pod-modal-heading>Useful links</pod-modal-heading>
                                <pod-modal-content>
									<hosted-link id="RI_INT_dap_1_50">
										<ul>
											<li><a href="https://www.universityaffairs.ca/career-advice/ask-dr-editor/how-when-and-why-to-use-readability-formulas-to-improve-your-academic-writing/" target="_blank">How, When and Why to Use Readability Formulas to Improve Your Academic Writing</a></li>
											<li><a href="https://www.anthropologymatters.com/index.php/anth_matters/article/view/443" target="_blank">"Talking the Talk": A Case Study in Teaching About Jargon in an Undergraduate Writing-Intensive Anthropology Course</a></li>
											<li><a href="http://countwordsworth.com/" target="_blank">Count Wordsworth</a></li>
											<li><a href="http://www.hemingwayapp.com/" target="_blank">Hemingway App</a></li>
										</ul>
									</hosted-link>
                                </pod-modal-content>
                            </pod>
                            <!-- USEFUL LINKS END -->

						</page-content-sidebar>
					</page-row>
					
					<page-row>
						<page-content-main>
							
							<p>Words should be used to explain to others, carefully and fully, what you did, why you did it and what you have concluded.</p>
							
							<h3>Summary</h3>
							
							<p>When you write up your results, ask yourself the following questions:</p>
							
							<ul>
								<li>Is what I have written true?</li>
								<li>Who are my readers and will they be able to clearly understand what I have written?</li>
								<li>Have I included all the essential information?</li>
							</ul>
							
							<p>If you are not confident that your writing is clear, understandable and complete, ask someone else to read it and comment. Keep in mind that your primary goal is to present a clear and unbiased description of your work. What matters most is the quality of your research, not the quality of your sales pitch.</p>
							
						</page-content-main>
					</page-row>
					
				</page-container>
			</base-container>
		</div> <!-- END content wrapper -->
		
		<!-- scripts -->
		<script src="../js/vendor.min.js"></script>
		<script src="../js/vue-components.min.js"></script>
		<script>
			new Vue({
			  el: "#app",
			  data: {},
			  mounted: function () {
				var core = document.createElement('script');
				core.src = "../js/core.min.js";
				document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(core);

				var project = document.createElement('script');
				project.src = "../js/project.min.js";
				document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(project);
			  }
			});
		</script>

	</body>
</html>