This module, we discussed what makes quality research. Gawk your

1. SENSATIONALISED HEADLINES Headlines of articles are generally designed to entice viewers into clicking on and finding out the article. At most efficient, they over-simplify the findings of research. At worst, they sensationalise and mis­ sing them.

2. MISINTERPRETED RESULTS News articles in most cases distort or misread the findings of research for the sake of a appropriate chronicle, deliberately or otherwise. If doable, strive to read the distinctive research, rather than relying on the article in line with it for knowledge.

3. CONFLICT OF INTERESTS Many companies make use of scientists to carry out and put up research – even as this does no longer necessarily invalidate research, it’ll be analysed with this in mind. Research would possibly well perchance well be misrepresented for deepest or financial impact.

4. CORRELATION Et CAUSATION Be wary of bewilderment of correlation & causation. Correlation between two variables doesn't robotically mean one causes the opposite. Global warming has elevated for the reason that 1800s, and pirate numbers reduced, however lack of pirates doesn't trigger world warming.

5. SPECULATIVE LANGUAGE ()

Speculations from research are factual that – hypothesis. Be on the stare out for words similar to 'would possibly well perchance well', 'would possibly well perchance well well', 'would possibly well perchance well', and others, because it is unlikely the research affords laborious proof for any conclusions they precede.

6. SAMPLE SIZE TOO SMALL In trials, the smaller a sample size, the lower the boldness within the outcomes from that sample. Conclusions drawn must be regarded as with this in mind, even though in some conditions runt samples are unavoidable. It’ll be trigger for suspicion if a tall sample modified into doable however avoided.

7. UNREPRESENTATIVE SAMPLES In human trials, researchers will attempt to make your mind up on other folks which would possibly well perchance well be representative of a nearer inhabitants. If the sample is assorted from the inhabitants as a total, then the conclusions would possibly well perchance well successfully also be assorted.

8. NO CONTROL GROUP USED In scientific trials, outcomes from test topics must be in comparison with a 'lend a hand an eye on neighborhood' no longer given the substance being tested. Groups must also be allotted randomly. On the total experiments, a lend a hand an eye on test must be weak the assign apart all variables are managed.

9. NO BLIND TESTING USED To forestall any bias, topics must no longer know if they’re within the test orthe lend a hand an eye on neighborhood. In double­ blind testing, even researchers don't know which neighborhood topics are in till after testing. Philosophize, blind testing isn't continually feasible, or ethical.

10. 'CHERRY-PICKED' RESULTS This involves deciding on data from experiments which helps the conclusion of the research, even as ignoring of us who invent no longer. If a research paper attracts conclusions from a vary of its outcomes, no longer all, it’ll be cherry-picking.

11. UNREPLICABLE RESULTS Results must be replicable by fair research, and tested over a gargantuan quantity of stipulations (the assign apart doable) to be particular they’re generalisable. Out of the ordinary claims require unparalleled proof – that is, a long way more than one fair gaze!

12. JOURNALS Et CITATIONS Research printed to predominant journals can maintain undergone a overview course of, however can accrued be mistaken, so must accrued be evaluated with these points in mind. Similarly, tall numbers of citations invent no longer continually indicate that research is very talked-about .

• 2014 COMPOUND INTEREST – WWW.COMPOUNDCHEM.COM L@l<[92+WJ[92+WJ

Dialogue Put up Rubric 20 That it’s seemingly you’ll perchance well factor in Factors

Category 4 Factors 2 Factors 0 Factors

Length of Put up – Ample yelp to stammer a scholarly message

The author’s put up consisted of 150 – 200 words (No longer counting reference citations)

The author’s put up consisted of 100-149 words (No longer counting reference citations)

The author’s put up consisted of 100 words or less (No longer counting reference citations)

Grammar, Utilization, Spelling – The author proofread utilizing application for obvious errors in grammar, usage, and spelling

The author’s put up contained lower than 2 grammar, usage, or spelling errors.

The author’s put up contained 3-4 grammar, usage, or spelling errors.

The author’s put up contained more than 5 grammar, usage, or spelling errors and proofreading modified into no longer obvious.

Referencing and Utilizing Open air Sources – The author referenced all assigned readings and (1) outlandish reference

The author posted a outlandish reference from a appreciate-reviewed doc AND your total assigned readings.

The author modified into missing a assorted reference from a appreciate-reviewed doc or didn’t cite your total assigned readings.

The author neither weak a assorted reference from a appreciate-reviewed doc and/or did no longer cite your total assigned readings.

Promotes Dialogue – The author produces yelp past a abstract and applies it to a logical argument.

The author’s put up clearly responds to the task immediate, develops tips cogently, organizes them logically, and helps them thru empirical writing. The author’s put up also raises questions or stimulates dialogue.

The author’s put up responds to the task immediate however relies closely on definitional explanations and does no longer invent and obtain usual tips and enhance them logically. The author’s put up would possibly well perchance well stimulate some dialogue.

The author’s put up does no longer correspond with the task immediate, mainly discusses deepest opinions, beside the level knowledge, or knowledge is presented with restricted logic and shortage of model and organization of tips Would not enhance any claims made.

Demonstrates Utility – The author is ready to educate yelp to an example or real world application

The author’s put up clearly demonstrates application and relationship to the week’s assigned finding out/topic.

The author’s put up refers to the assigned topic/finding out tangentially however does no longer tag application.

The author’s put up does no longer tag application of the week’s assigned topic/finding out.

Be urged, there are also response charges associated with particular behaviors:

● A response tag of three points will be administered for no longer responding to a appreciate’s put up ● A response tag of three points will be administered for late submissions (up to 2 days) ● Dialogue posts which would possibly well perchance well be more than two days late would possibly well perchance well no longer be well-liked except excused by the

teacher