I’ll be the first to admit it: I am not a big fan of reading scientific articles, and that’s putting it lightly. For years I found it incredibly frustrating when I couldn’t tackle what appeared to be a 30-minute read, which instead became a several-hours-long back-and-forth between the article and a scientific dictionary. Even after going through that arduous ordeal, I couldn’t explain to myself what I had just read. Some articles diverged from basic English grammar rules: sentences were paragraphs long, words stretched out to their most convoluted and jargonesque limits. To my frustration, I assumed I was too dumb to understand it all, and worse yet, I thought my inability to understand what I was reading was a sign that STEM wasn’t for me.
Over time, I realized that I was approaching articles entirely wrong!
Even though I was a major bookworm, I didn’t know that every writing piece didn’t have to follow the linear pattern common among the average journal article, book, or poem. Scientific papers don’t follow the same process, and with good reason. Scientists write them for other scientists, and something scientists always keep in mind is that science is ever-changing, and their writing must reflect that (note how many times I said science in one sentence). Some researchers have entire sections dedicated to their research limitations and how it can be improved upon by others.
So how should we start reading scientific articles? Over the years, I learned that my reference frame for scientific papers should function as a map, with different routes to get to the same destination. Shortcuts are usually encouraged. When you are looking at a map, the first thing I tend to do is skim it. Analyze the title, sections, and sub-sections, charts, graphs, and images. Skimming is enough to go by when you decide if you want to keep reading. Note how the article is structured and figure out what part you’d like to read first.
You might find that the article you’re reading follows a particular version of this set-up: Title, Abstract, Introduction, Literature Review, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, and References. Here is a simple breakdown of how it typically looks.
By this point, you might have an idea of what you are looking for. Or, you might not, and that’s okay. At least you know where the different sections of the paper are, and you can use that knowledge to look for specific information.
If you want the general info of the article, look no further than the abstract. The abstract serves the same purpose as a summary does, but with a little more detail. After reading an abstract, you’ll have a general understanding of what the researchers did, what steps they took in their study, what they found, and what they concluded—the very basics. Usually, you understand what the article is going to share with you, and you can choose to continue reading from here on out. Keep an eye out for the papers that have a key-words section, right in or underneath the abstract. It’s there to help other scientists find it when researching a topic and further highlight what the writer will discuss. Make sure you look up the definitions of those words if you aren’t familiar with them!
The next place I recommend reading next depends on how much you know about the article’s subject. I will use an example of a project I worked on a semester prior. I was reading an article about turn-alternation behavior in pillbugs. I already knew what turn-alternations were and how they related to pillbugs, so I skipped over the introduction and headed straight for the methods to see how the researchers conducted their study. (I don’t expect you to know what turn-alterations are, but if you are curious, it’s an aspect of roly-poly behavior and how they walk around). If you are new to the subject, then the introduction is the best place to…get an introduction. Sometimes introductions are attached to a literature review. They’re kind of like a helpful catch-up on all of the research conducted regarding this topic. You can break it down into two parts: what we already know about the subject from previous researchers and what is left to uncover (aka their hypothesis!).
So as I previously mentioned, I would skip over the introduction and the lit review to get to the methods and the results. Here is where you get super analytical because this is where you break down the section with your scientist’s brain. Ask lots of questions, like “What steps did they take?” and “How did they use their participants or tools?” or “Why did they use these kinds of charts and graphs?” Over time, you will better analyze the methods and results, especially complicated graphs and charts you might not have used before.
Here is an example of what I do to help myself understand the methods and results, as I had problems finding the connections between them: I would read that the researcher had done A and B. The results showed C and D. I would connect the dots by writing, “The researcher did A and C occurred as a result. They also did B, and I think D represents the outcome of action B.” After doing all that, I found myself a little less confused than before, and I could also come to conclusions independently.
To test how much I understood from the results, I would head to the discussions and conclusion next. The discussion is essentially where the researcher explains what they think the outcome of the results exhibits and whether the data supports one conclusion. Note that this doesn’t always mean that the points made in the discussion are concrete. Instead of taking them as fact, observe them as theories and think about whether they are substantial or changeable. There is always an opportunity for a future inquiry in any study. Another chapter to open, another layer to unwrap. That is why scientists mention the study’s limitations in the conclusions so that in the future, other scientists can pick the research right back up.
The last (and often ignored) section is the references. That place is a treasure trove of information! You may find that the author sprinkled different sources throughout the paper when you read it. Finding something particularly interesting cited from another published work is excellent when you can find it and other similar articles in the references. You can also take this as a cue to learn how to cite your sources correctly if you don’t know already; I promise it will be immensely helpful in the long run!
If there is any parting advice you can take away from this, please reach out to your professors, librarians, and even the scientists directly for assistance in understanding. They can make the whole process so much easier for you and keep you on the right track. They can also share some beneficial tips, like how you should prefer recently written articles over older ones.
As added reassurance, you shouldn’t bum yourself out over not immediately understanding something you had only just learned. Everyone starts somewhere, and even the authors of those complicated articles you are reading had to build up to their works over many years. Keep reading and good luck, fellow scientists!