【正文】 ished in a top journal, so the authors must have a high standing, and the work must have received a critical review by experts. Unfortunately, that39。s not so bad when the assertive sentence is welldocumented (as it was in the example given), but all too often the assertive sentence is nothing more than a speculation, and the hasty reader may well conclude that the issue is settled when it isn39。 accordingly, the paper should be read in that way as well, skipping Materials and Methods and referring back to this section as needed to clarify what was actually done. A reader familiar with the field who is interested in a particular point given in the Abstract often skips directly to the relevant section of the Results, and from there to the Discussion for interpretation of the findings. This is only easy to do if the paper is anized properly. Codewords Many papers contain shorthand phrases that we might term 39。 describes concisely the major findings of the paper。 A successfly scientific career needs: 1. An insightful research. 2. A good municator writing and speech. 3. A capable manager。顯然他在如何讓別人明白 他要講的東西上是下了功夫的。（隨時(shí)隨地的收集你的想法、念頭、任務(wù) ......） ? Write at a regular time, for a fixed time, every day。 4. 參考文獻(xiàn) ：引用文獻(xiàn)要忠實(shí)文獻(xiàn)內(nèi)容。 ? 要點(diǎn) o 隨時(shí) ：看到、聽到、想到任何東西都要順手就記下來，這樣才能保證搜集信息的全面性。這是避免時(shí)間浪費(fèi)的又一重要手段。 之六 ，少數(shù)文章看全文 掌握了一點(diǎn)查全文的技巧，往往會以搞到全文為樂，以至于沒有時(shí)間看文章的內(nèi)容，更不屑于看摘要。一旦搞清楚了論文的大概和創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)，就可以決定是否需要進(jìn)行第二階段 了。只有勤奮努力才能不斷有優(yōu)秀工作的積累，才可能在工作中逐漸產(chǎn)生真正創(chuàng)新的，別人無法剽竊的創(chuàng)新思想，才有可能在重大問題上取 得突破。 閱讀文獻(xiàn)以追蹤當(dāng)前發(fā)展動態(tài)時(shí)，務(wù)須切記發(fā)揮自己判斷 力，不可盲從，即使是知名科學(xué)家和教科書有時(shí)也會有錯(cuò)誤。 而且，每個(gè)作者的研究方法多少有所區(qū)別，讀得多了，漸漸就會比較出研究方法的優(yōu)點(diǎn)和缺點(diǎn)，對自己今后的研究大有裨益。通過閱讀，掌握專業(yè)領(lǐng)域的方法和知識。對于下載的文獻(xiàn)，要以其內(nèi)容建立以專題雜 志按時(shí)間先后的專門分類。無論是工作中的點(diǎn)滴發(fā)現(xiàn)，思想火花，都應(yīng)該寫下 來。逐步擴(kuò)展自己的視野，構(gòu)建個(gè)人的專業(yè)知識結(jié)構(gòu) 和看法。zz 如何閱讀文獻(xiàn) Tags: 文獻(xiàn) . 之一 1。去圖書館找他的文章看全文。好記性不如爛筆頭 。 4。下載的目的是學(xué)習(xí)。 所以，我覺得對新手而言，應(yīng)當(dāng)重視閱讀文獻(xiàn)的數(shù)量，積累多了，自然就由量變發(fā)展為質(zhì)變了。掌握文獻(xiàn)、對文獻(xiàn)進(jìn)行綜合，以批判的眼光評價(jià)文獻(xiàn)，并從中提取出有 用的和正確的信息以指導(dǎo)今后的研究是一個(gè)能獨(dú)立工作的科學(xué)工作者必備的能力。這就 是前面提到的旺火爐原理，也是諾貝爾獎(jiǎng) 經(jīng) 常出在少數(shù)幾個(gè)單位的原因。如果這些方法都不行，就只好順序快速瀏覽了。理解論文，就要了解論文的目的，作者所作的選擇（很多都是隱含的），假設(shè)和形式化是否可行， 論文指出了怎樣的方向，論文所涉及領(lǐng)域都有哪些問題，作者的研究中持續(xù)出現(xiàn)的難點(diǎn)模式是什么，論文所表達(dá)的策略觀點(diǎn)是什么，諸如此類。 pdf 或 html 格式的文獻(xiàn)，可以用編輯器標(biāo)亮或改變文字顏色。（至少我個(gè)人是這樣的） o 幫助記憶 ：永遠(yuǎn)都不要太相信自己的記憶力，李 笑來說他用了很多年才領(lǐng)悟一個(gè)簡單的道理 “ 好記性不如爛筆頭 ” 。 3. 總結(jié)部分 ：與研究性論文的小結(jié)有些類似，將全文主題進(jìn)行扼要總結(jié)，對所綜述的主題有研究的作者，最好能提出自己的見解。 ? Keep an Everyday book。 還有其他一些感受很難用文字來描述了，比如他讓大家來描述一副照片 ，然后通過大家的描述來讓大家區(qū)別結(jié)果和討論有什么區(qū)別。 ? A man who knows why will have a leader。 How to Read a Scientific Paper Biochemistry/MCB 568 Fall 2020 John W. Little and Roy ParkerUniversity of Arizona Back to 568 home page The main purpose of a scientific paper is to report new results, usually experimental, and to relate these results to previous knowledge in the field. Papers are one of the most important ways that we municate with one another. In understanding how to read a paper, we need to start at the beginning with a few preliminaries. We then address the main questions that will enable you to understand and evaluate the paper. 1. How are papers anized? 2. How do I prepare to read a paper, particularly in an area not so familiar to me? 3. What difficulties can I expect? 4. How do I understand and evaluate the contents of the paper? 1. Organization of a paper In most scientific journals, scientific papers follow a standard format. They are divided into several sections, and each section serves a specific purpose in the paper. We first describe the standard format, then some variations on that format. A paper begins with a short Summary or Abstract. Generally, it gives a brief background to the topic。 and so on. In response to the pressure to edit and make the paper concise, many authors choose to condense or, more typically, omit the logical connections that would make the flow of the paper easy. In addition, much of the background that would make the paper accessible to a wider audience is condensed or omitted, so that the lessinformed reader has to consult a review article or previous papers to make sense of what the issues are and why they are important. Finally, again, authors often circumvent page limitations by putting crucial details into the Figure and Table legends, especially when (as in PNAS) these are set in smaller type. Back to outline 2. Reading a scientific paper Although it is tempting to read the paper straight through as you would do with most text, it is more efficient to anize the way you read. Generally, you first read the Abstract in order to understand the major points of the work. The extent of background assumed by different authors, and allowed by the journal, also varies as just discussed. One extremely useful habit in reading a paper is to read the Title and the Abstract and, before going on, review in your mind what you know about the topic. This serves several purposes. First, it clarifies whether you in fact know enough background to appreciate the paper. If not, you might choose to read the background in a review or textbook, as appropriate. Second, it refreshes your memory about the topic. Third, and perhaps most importantly, it helps you as the reader integrate the new information into your previous knowledge about the topic. That is, it is used as a part of the selfeducation process that any professional must continue throughout his/her career. If you are very familiar with the field, the Introduction can be skimmed or even skipped. As stated above, the logical flow of most papers goes straight from the Introduction to Results。 look at recent issues of Cell for examples. It39。s not always the case. In any case, developing your ability to evaluate evidence is one of the hardest and most important aspects of learning to be a critical scientist and reader. How can you evaluate the evidence? First, you need to understand thoroughly the methods used in the experiments. Often these are described poor