Difficulty reading research papers?

[RedPill]

Maybe it's the vernacular used in certain papers, or maybe I'm just dumb.

 

I'm having trouble reading research papers all the way through. I feel as though I don't retain as much as I should. How do you read papers published in journals? Do you take notes? On the computer, on a kindle/notebook or on paper?

 

 

Tips?

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

I think understanding the general layout of a research paper is important. I took a grad class as an undergrad and it really helped me. It was a second language acquisition class. We would read about 3 research articles a week and then discuss them in class. The professor gave us a worksheet at the beginning of the semester and we would fill it out for every article. It asked about 10-15 questions, from What are the research questions, to How was the study conducted, to Who were the test subjects, to What were the results, to What were the author's conclusions. After filling out this sheet for EVERY article, which got really tedious after a few weeks, it became really easy to read any research article. I knew exactly what to look for and I had a general idea of where it would be located. Most research articles (at least in this field) followed a general format. It would begin with a short introduction of the study, then a brief history of related studies, then the influence of the current study, then the procedure for the experiment, then the test subjects, then what happened during the experiment, then the results and data produced, then conclusions based on the data, then considerations for future research. I got so used to reading articles that I could skim an article in 5-10 minutes and get a very good idea of the experiment and the results. 

Edited December 30, 2013 by Gnome Chomsky

[Guest |||]

It takes practise.

 

To some extent, its a bit like picking up a new language.  There is a particular lingo, style, structure, even grammar and syntax often seem to a particular structure.  Practise reading papers, ask questions, and if possible take classes that instead of using a text, you are assigned current papers to read instead. 

 

But above all, practise and keep an erenest effort.

[TakeruK]

The above advice is good! I just want to add that I also find it very hard to read them, even with the above ideas in mind. It does get easier with time, and I am sure some people become whizzes at reading papers and get everything (or are persistent enough to get everything after enough re-reads). However, for me, I still struggle a lot with trying to get everything out of a paper in a reasonable amount of time. In the end, I always get what I need out of a paper, but it takes a lot of time for me. I find that discussing a paper with at least one other person is incredibly helpful though!

[RedPill]

All great hints.

 

Gnome, you wouldn't happen to have one of those worksheets lying around would you? I think filling out worksheets like that would be very beneficial. It'll help me organize my thoughts. 

 

 

Edit: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchautism.org%2Ffamily%2Fresearch%2Freading%2FDetailed%2520Worksheet%2520for%2520Reading%2520Research%2520Articles.pdf

 

Google is a friend. Hopefully this helps anyone out there having the same problem. 

Edited December 30, 2013 by RedPill

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

All great hints.

 

Gnome, you wouldn't happen to have one of those worksheets lying around would you? I think filling out worksheets like that would be very beneficial. It'll help me organize my thoughts. 

 

 

Edit: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchautism.org%2Ffamily%2Fresearch%2Freading%2FDetailed%2520Worksheet%2520for%2520Reading%2520Research%2520Articles.pdf

 

Google is a friend. Hopefully this helps anyone out there having the same problem. 

No, I don't have any. I took the class almost 2 years ago and I've gotten a new computer since then. It was pretty basic though. It just asked simple questions but after doing one for every article it made you realize that most research articles are very similar. It was something like this:

What is the theoretical framework the author uses?

What is the history of literature the author discusses?

What is the motivation for the study? 

What is/are the research question(s)?

Describe the procedure for the experiment. 

Describe the participants in the study. 

What tools were used to gather data from the experiment?

Were were the results of the data produced from the experiment?

What types of conclusions did the author(s) come up with based on the data?

Do these conclusions support the theoretical framework and previous studies in this area? Explain. 

What were some issues with the way the experiment was conducted? 

What are some considerations for possible future research in this area? 

[Loric]

Step 1:

 

Realize most people can't actually write, even academics.

 

Step 2:

 

Accept the realization of Step 1. No, really, most people can't write. If you measure the success of the written word in the ability to convey an idea between two parties.. they have failed.

 

Step 3:

 

Black Sharpie. Cross out gobble-gook that people use because they think it's how educated folks speak. You can even write on the top REDACTED for fun.

 

Step 4:

 

Take dozen or so remaining words and phrases from the 27-pages of single spaced full-justification text and stitch them together however logical. This is actually what's important.

 

Step 5 (optional) :

 

Send the author a tersely worded letter about their abuse of the language.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Loric

[Cookie]

This is how I do it: First, having papers organized in broad topics in my Mendeley. This helps a lot when I read a difficult paper and try to relate it back to the general ideas, or original papers in that topic. Of course, you can search for that specific term in your favorite organizer. Then I read a paper twice: once skimming to see if it has what I look for, and to get the general ideas, the second time more thorough (if needed). I made notes, and highlighted important sentences (right inside Mendeley). The last thing and the most important is to read a lot. I read at least one new paper a day. It's a good habit and you'll see that not only you learn more, you also learn faster.

Hope this helps

[RedPill]

Mendeley.. I have never heard or used a research paper organizer, but it sounds like a great idea. 

[pqo309]

All this advice is great, but I agree with Loric's step 1.  It seems that when it comes to writing research articles, authors make it out to be a race as to who can sound most erudite. So, they consult a thesaurus and bust out arcane words thinking it makes them sound smart or parsimonious (see?), because a simpler word or turn of phrase just wouldn't do. Later, other people who read their articles start to use those words to keep up and all of a sudden, everyone's using crazy words and syntax and you're like, "wut". Bring a dictionary and read, read, read, even if you don't understand a word even after looking it up. (I also tend to skip methodology since it means nothing to me yet)

[TakeruK]

I agree with Loric's step one (that most of us cannot write--I know I sure can't). I just want to say in some fields, you don't see people busting out fancy words just because they can! In fact, I often have the opposite problem. Many of the papers I read are so condensed, and they pack so much meaning into every sentence that a naive reader like me can read an entire sentence and while I might understand what the words mean, I don't always get the consequence/significance/implication of that sentence without thinking about it for awhile. I feel like this is a combination of my lack of skill and the writer's lack of communication ability.

 

In my field, 27 page papers are either large review chapters that go in a book, or papers that contain a ton of figures/equations/data, or really poorly written papers. I can't think of very many things that would take 27 pages to explain, and if you have more than one idea to explain, it usually is written as separate papers if the ideas are not directly related. 

 

Also, Mendeley (or equivalent software) is a lifesaver, not just for markup and making notes. I have never formatted a bibliography past first year English because I have software like this to compile BiBTeX files (which software provided by journals can translate into whatever bibliographic form that journal wants). And Mendeley can read in a DOI number and automatically fill in all the info like author names, journal names, page numbers etc. It's a lifesaver for organizing the literature and I just spent about an hour last night getting about 100 papers organized (they were sent to me by a colleague, also via Mendeley! so convenient!). This would have taken me many days if I did it the way I first learned to organize my research sources in high school/early college. 

[St Andrews Lynx]

First thing I do when I want to really understand a paper is to print it out. Then (if I'm completely serious about understanding what's going on) I make myself a cup of tea. I'll then go through the paper and underline, annotate, summarise. 

 

Exactly how I approach the paper will depend what I want out of it. Am I simply acquiring background information? Do I want to use their experimental procedures? Was I attracted by a snappy, cool title when browsing for something else? 

 

If there's a term I don't understand or a concept I've never come across before, I'll sometimes search for additional literature reviews of said Concept. Or even use Google to get the 2 sentence summary. Often a detailed knowledge & understanding of the jargon isn't necessary to understand the paper itself, at least...

[yolk]

Practice, practice, practice. The more you read, the better you get. As you become more scientific literate words will hold more meaning to you. Print and annotate is always helpful.

 

Differentiating between papers that are relevant and not is an important skill. If the title sparks my interest I first read the abstract to determine if the paper might be worthwhile. I go on to skim the introduction and conclusion. If the paper presents information that is useful I'll read the the entire paper. Published literature isn't holy script. Read with skepticism and don't be afraid to check their sources.

Edited January 1, 2014 by yolk

[RedPill]

I have officially organized my papers using Mendeley. I am forever grateful. 

 

 

 

Definitely a game changer. Highly recommend. 

[Guest |||]

I have officially organized my papers using Mendeley. I am forever grateful. 

 

 

 

Definitely a game changer. Highly recommend. 

 

I am curious, could you elaborate?

Edited January 1, 2014 by |||

[TakeruK]

I am curious, could you elaborate?

 

I honestly think the best way to explain it is for you to just try it out! It is quick to set up and you can just try it on a small sample of your current PDF collection!

[amglol]

Mendeley is fantastic. Great for organization; even better when used in conjunction with Word for citing and bibliography-building.

[Guest |||]

I honestly think the best way to explain it is for you to just try it out! It is quick to set up and you can just try it on a small sample of your current PDF collection!

 

 

I'll give it a whirl, thanks!

[RedPill]

I am curious, could you elaborate?

 

Tak said it.

 

Fantastic resource. The UI is incredible. I use the Mac OSX version, but I would expect other versions to work just as well. 

[GeoDUDE!]

I haven't read most of what was said in this thread, so excuse me of i am repeating tips. I joined a paper reading club when i was a sophmore in ugrad, and basically we read over a paper a week and discussed it with a faculty member. That helped a lot. Another thing to do is read the abstract, then the results, than the discussion section. Don't read the body of the paper unless it's very interesting or there is a shocking result.  

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

I haven't read most of what was said in this thread, so excuse me of i am repeating tips. I joined a paper reading club when i was a sophmore in ugrad, and basically we read over a paper a week and discussed it with a faculty member. That helped a lot. Another thing to do is read the abstract, then the results, than the discussion section. Don't read the body of the paper unless it's very interesting or there is a shocking result.  

What's the purpose of a paper reading club? Just curious. 

 

I was co-editor of a little undergrad journal. Me and the other editor just read a shit load of awful papers then chose the least awfulest to publish. 

[GeoDUDE!]

What's the purpose of a paper reading club? Just curious. 

 

I was co-editor of a little undergrad journal. Me and the other editor just read a shit load of awful papers then chose the least awfulest to publish. 

 

 

To read papers and discuss them.

[TakeruK]

What's the purpose of a paper reading club? Just curious. 

 

Paper reading clubs, i.e. weekly "Journal Clubs" are something that is in almost every single grad program in my field. The formality really varies. In some places, it can be a lunchtime session where people eat lunch and discuss a paper. Some places have beer or wine/cheese etc. In other places, it can be a seminar style, where grad students (and profs sometimes) are assigned a week and they pick a paper to present and people discuss it. I've also seen places where Journals Club is a "course" and some places even assign a letter grade for it.

 

The purpose can be partly social/getting people from different fields to interact but also academic/educational. Sometimes, students are encouraged to present a paper outside of their own field, which requires them to look up and read related papers and broadens their knowledge. Students are often encouraged to ask questions and critically evaluate the author's methods, analysis, conclusions etc. From observing how professors and senior students critique the papers, junior students can learn about what makes a good paper, what doesn't, and also how to think about papers critically. Some Journal Clubs have discussion not just on the science, but also things like how the figures look, whether or not the wording is clear, etc. Also, papers in my field are pretty dense, so a simple statement might have an important implication that you might miss if you are not in the field. By hearing how other people who may be more of an expert than you discuss the paper, you might get a deeper insight than reading alone. And finally, if you are presenting a paper in your own field, you might take some basic things for granted. Someone who is not an expert in your field might ask you some basic fundamental questions, but this can help you take a step back and see the big picture, and also by explaining concepts to others, it might increase your own understanding!

[GeoDUDE!]

If there isn't a reading club at your school, I highly suggest starting one. There isn't one at my school, I tried very hard to start one, and thus I'm looking for another place to do my PhD. I think it speaks highly to the type of student that is in your department and the type of professor that is in your department. 

[Istoleart]

I'm a chemist and my first paper I had to present just completely went over my head. The jargon, graphs, equations etc. made it worst. I think the important part to deciphering papers is to understand their uses. A research paper is a small snapshot of someone's ongoing project within a huge field. It's not the beginning nor the end of the field. Therefore, reading a paper is like reading one sentence in the middle of a book. You can't expect to know the whole story of the book just by reading that one paper. I found that to understand them you need to go to earlier papers, reviews, textbooks, or even Wikipedia if possible. Study a bit of the background that led up to the paper and you'll find it becomes easier to read.