写科研论文的高级方法学react
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
nxssw(金币+6,VIP+0):感谢来论文版分享经验与心得，牛人有空多写点啊^_^
bingyulin3(金币+10,VIP+0):感谢分享，又一个精品帖子～ios
个人博客：express
http://zhenmafudan.yculblog.com网络
读中学的时候，我最喜欢语文写做，可是提升写做能力是很艰难的事情，不少时候，学习者没有头绪。语文老师上做文课也只是出个题目让你们写做，而后下一次上课读读范文（个人做文），笼统地说要观点明确、结构清楚，要多读多写，可是具体的“秘诀”说不上来。后来参加了《少年文艺》新芽写做函授班。记得那时候的函授教材的第一课就是“立意”。看着教材里面的范文，感到写得很是好，耳目一新。后来虽然也受到专业做家张成新的函授指导，也曾听过《少年文艺》主办的讲座，可是写起文章来还不是很驾轻就熟，主要缘由是那时实行应试教育，市场上教学生写做文的书不多，即便有，也是针对考试的做文。一直到了高2、高三，我才在做文上发挥出来，获得区级和市级做文竞赛多个奖项。app
应该说，大学里面学习的影视剧艺术、管理学原理、国际贸易、伦理学、大学生心理学、大学生生活导论课程对语文写做是有间接做用的，由于人的阅历多了，知识面拓宽了，就更够更好地认识和描述社会现象，抒发本身的观点。可是，在大学里面我没有看过一本做文书，到了大学里之后，因为没有语文课，几年下来，笔头锈掉了。对于英语学习来讲，当时也是应试教育，学习的重点是单词、习惯用语和语法。虽然我认可复旦的教育使个人英语水平上升了不少，可是其实学英语的最高境界就是没有专门的英语课本，或者说什么（好比原版录像、原版小说、杂志、书本）都是英语课本。后来在复旦读了研究生，科研写做获得了初步锻炼，虽然有学术大师指点，可是在科技写做上仍是不驾轻就熟。主要缘由是：（1）看科研文献太少；（２）练得太少；（３）没有读专业指导写做的书。在读研究生后期的一个收获是发表网络文学，结果笔头又好了，找到感受了。less
出国之后，一开始写的第一篇科研文章(Journal of Catalysis)的初稿仍是写得不怎么好。被博导来回修改了好几遍，每一遍都是纸头上一片红的，他在纸头上修改好之后，我再在计算机上进行修改，再给他看。如此这般，反复修改。他又不会当面给我仔细分析这个地方为何要这么改，所以我主要靠本身的悟性和反复修改了。原创科研论文固然不是常常有的，由于作实验出文章固然慢，因此锻炼的机会也少。我获得最好的锻炼就是写综述。在写综述的过程当中阅读了大量文献，基础打得扎实。读书破万卷，下笔若有神嘛。写了几篇综述，一篇比一篇长，一篇比一篇难写。其中第三篇综述，我不作实验整整写了七个月，终于把笔头练出来了。在作博士后的时候，在写做方面就更加有独立性了，基本上我怎么写，就怎么发表的，审稿人都说写得很好。也接触到了一些专门教写做的书籍，在理论知识上获得进步。如今，我介绍一下个人一些关于写科技论文方法学的笼统的体会。xss
写科技论文，有基本功要求，主要是如何遣词造句，如何用标点符号，如何用缩略语等。关于这一方面的书有：The ACS Style Guide和The Elements of Style。能够说，这些都是科技写做的基本功，若是基本功不扎实，审稿人一眼就看出来了。可是，熟读这些书，把用法都背出来仍是远远不够的。除此以外还有一些高级的方法和高级的指导书。曾经读到一些专门介绍科技写做的书，如Wiley出版社出版的The Arts of Scientific Writing，可是读了之后感到没有什么收获。后来认识到要学习到“高级”的写做方法，仍是要回归到逻辑学、修辞学、市场营销学（广告学）、科学哲学上面来，从这些非化学的知识里面获得启发。ide
好比：写文章初稿的时候，通常人是按照本身的思路来写，想怎么写就怎么写。但是，高级的方法就是首先要分析不少问题：Is this research new? Are the data important and interesting? What is the point here? Since there are already a lot of papers, then why should we report our current work? Can the data sufficiently support the conclusions? Are the conclusions consistent with what was reported in the literature?这些问题有点象市场营销学：既然市场上已经有不少同类商品了，为何咱们要生产咱们的商品？咱们的商品和别人的商品有什么区别？怎么把“市场细分原理”运用到咱们商品（文章）的销售中去？有这种critical thinking很重要！记得读博士的时候学习化学动力学，考试的形式之一是从文献里拿一篇文章来说解。考官就会问：既然别人已经研究过这个体系，那么为何这篇文章还要研究相似的东西？是它的结论推翻了之前的结论，仍是它用了新的仪器方法，仍是它的数据更加精确？若是只是数据更加精确，换汤不换药，那么意义在什么地方？学习
更重要的是，不是从本身的角度分析本身的文章如何如何好，而是从读者角度分析：Why should the reader read my paper? Why should people care about our research? How can our research benefit others' research? What can be done next by others based on our results? What questions will the reader have? If so, then how can we better write our paper to make the points clearer to the reader?这种思惟方法如同准备作报告的思惟方法同样：作报告以前，重要的不只仅是想清楚本身要讲什么重要思想，并且仍是要想清楚听众是哪些人？他们来听报告，但愿获得什么样的信息？怎样讲才是对听众来讲有价值的？怎样创建起本身的报告和听众的联系？有的人作报告就是说这个催化剂效果比那个好，听众睡着了。要提炼出更加有通用性的、方法学的东西，这样听众才会有兴趣。（关于这方面的方法学论述见哈佛商学院出版的Presentatios that Persuade and Motivate, 2004年出版。）这也和广告学、消费者心理学的原理相似，即要分析受众关心什么、须要什么。这个要点（从读者角度分析），提及来很简单，可是作起来却很难，由于这是一种很微妙的方法，通常人很难把握。ui
Don Dunbar写的What You Don't Know Can Keep You Out of College
p. 29. "For essays, showing your best self starts the same way as for interviews: You need to interest both yourself and your reader. But when you're writing, you don't have the reader sitting across from you, showing with his or her reactions whether you are getting through. For this reason, it's a good idea to make sure that the subject you're writing about is not just personal, but universal. Universal doesn't mean "very very big" and "important", it means that anyone--anyone in the universe, I suppose--can connect with it. It's universal the way type O blood is the "universal doner": anyone can receive it."
哈佛商学院出版的Face-to-Face Communicaions for Clarity and Impact
"Don't recite the facts--interpret them! People don't want a recitation. What they want to know is, What sense do you make out of this data? What is the conclusion? Do you have a logical flow in your thought process? And can we see that?"
哈佛商学院出版的Presentatios that Persuade and Motivate
"We humans are at once nobel and selfish. If you appeal soley to our self-interest, we will listen, and perhaps appreciate your words. But we won't respect you. To really get your audience on its feet--and rioting--you have to show them how self-interest and larger principles coincide, such that personal sacrifice is worth it if it becomes necessary."
"You need to find the way in which you and the audience are alike and make those clear early on. Your listeners will then be willing to open themselves to your message. It is way of building trust early on. Audiences want their speakers to have credibility, and they want to be able to trust them. You can't create the latter unless you find a way to conntect with your audience."
"In any communication task, you must understand what your audience needs to know, Your first step--long before you walk into the room--is to ask who the audience is and how they will use the information you provide. Then you can structure your presentation around those needs."
"The audience arrives wondering: Why should we care? Why is this important? So rather than jumping straight into the history of federal housing on Indian reservations, start by describing the current housing crisis. You get your listeners' minds working (How did this come about? How can we solve it?) in ways that give them context for the historical discussion.
Timothy W. Crusius和Carolyn E. Channell写的The Aims of Argument: A Brief Rhetoric
"The first step is to identify possible appeals to your readership. Keep in mind that good persuaders are able to empathize and sympathize with other people, building bridges of commonality and solidarity. To aid in your audience analysis, ask these questions:
-- Who are my readers? How do I define them in terms of age, economic and social class, gender, education, and so forth?
-- What type of attitudes or stances toward my topic do they have?
-- What in their background or daily experiences helps explain their point of view?
-- What are they likely to know my topic?
-- How might they be uninformed or informed about it?
-- How would they they like to see the problem, question, or issue resolved, answered, or handeled? Why?
-- In what larger framework--religious, political, economic--do they place my topic?"
在修改文章的时候，要走到纸头的“背面”去，用审稿人的眼光来挑剔地看本身的文章，给与本身的文章无情的轰击，指出这个很差，那个不清楚，还要作什么实验。带着疑问，去作实验，查文献，进行弥补漏洞。通过几回“反馈回路”，把文章的水平提升。相反，若是对本身的文章很是乐观和自信，有晕轮效应，获得稻草也觉得是获得黄金了，那么就投不中。有的人本身作过不少回审稿人，有一种奇妙的感受，知道投这个杂志应该达到什么样的水平。有的书上说，能够请懂行的人看一下文章，提出尖锐意见，而后进行修改。这里要说的是修改文章从审稿人的角度去修改，颇有用处。能够说，不少文章投某个杂志，遭到退稿，其实按照审稿人的意见仔细修改之后，质量仍是不错的，可是就是由于已经被退稿了，因此只能投其它杂志了。让咱们想想：假设这样的文章实现能获得懂行人的“模拟审稿意见”，把把脉，而后进行补作实验、精心修改，原本就能一次命中高档次杂志的！
Timothy W. Crusius和Carolyn E. Channell写的The Aims of Argument: A Brief Rhetoric
"Have a dialogue with yourself about your own writing.
1. Ask what you mean by the words that are central to the argument. Have you provided definations when they are needed?
2. Find the reasons, and note their relation to the thesis. Be able to state the connection, ideally, with the word "because": thesis because of reason.
3. Be able to state what assumptions lie behind your thesis and any of your reasons. Ask yourself, What else would someone have to believe to accept this as valid? If your audience is unlikely to share the assumption, then you must add an argument for it--or change your thesis.
4. Look at your comparisons and analogies. Are they persuasive?
5. Look at your evidence. Have you offered facts, expert opinion, illustrations, and so on? Have you presented these in a way that would not raise doubuts but eliminate them?
6. Consider your own bias. What do you stand to gain from advocating the position you take? Is your argument self-serving or truth-serving?
Because it is hard to be objective about your own work, getting a reading from a friend, classmate, teacher, or family member is a good way o see where revision would help. An unfocused reading, however, usually isn't critical enoughl casual readers may applaud the draft woo readily if they agree with the thesis and condemn it if they disagree. Therefore, have your readers use a revision checklist."
写好科技论文，除了知足基本功要求和用读者、审稿人的角度来反思本身文章之外，具体到写做方法来讲，这里面也有不少“战法”。这正如拍电影、写小说、下围棋都是有必定方法的同样。关于段落的结构和写法能够见Sheridan Baker的The Practical Stylist。这本书讲到开头要从一个宽泛的事情或者概念收拢到本文具体到讲的东西。这本书还讲了每一段都要有主题句（topics sentence），每一段话讲一个意思，而每一段要有具体的功能！
Timothy W. Crusius和Carolyn E. Channell写的The Aims of Argument: A Brief Rhetoric
"Multiple paragraphs are generally required to develop and support a reason. The key thing to remember about paragraphs is that each one is a unit that performs some function in presenting the case. You ought to be able to say what the function of a given paragraph is--and your reader ought to be able to sense it. Doe it introduce a reason? Does it define a term? Does it support a reason by setting up an analogy? Does another paragraph support the same reason by offering examples or some hard data or an illustrative case?"
"Not all paragraphs need topic sentences to announce their main point. Worry instead about opening each paragraph with some hints that allow readers to recognize the function of the paragraph. For example, some transitional word or phrase could announce to readers that you are turning from one reason to a new one. When you introduce a new reason, be sure that readers can see how it relates to the thesis. Repeating a key word or offering a synonym for one of the words in the thesis is a good idea."
咱们常常发现不少写得很差科研论文的段落没有功能，或者一段话有两个功能！如今我来举例说明段落的主题句和功能。22. H.F. Yin, Z. Ma, S.H. Overbury, S. Dai*, Promotion of Au(en)2Cl3-Derived Au/Fumed SiO2 by Treatment with KMnO4, Journal of Physical Chemistry C, in press. <link> http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp800797t
这篇文章Introduction的第三段写得很基本，是白话文，可是里面有起承转合在里面：第一句是总起句。接下去，第二句和第三句的功能是举例说明总起句总结的内容：第二句指出在文献中，别人作了什么。这句话用了一个"For one..."，表示这句话的功能是举例；第三句指出咱们小组和别人之前还报道了什么。既然别人和咱们小组作了这个，作了那个，那么为何发表本文有必要呢？第四句笔锋一转，说："Nevertheless, even though..."其功能是指出文献（或者说“市场”）中缺少的东西（或者说“产品”），为第五句埋下伏笔。第五句"Hence, the promotional effect based on a better starting point (i.e., highly active Au/SiO2 synthesized by advanced methods16-22) may be further considered, and new methodologies for the installation of appropriate promoters may be developed."指出根据以上逻辑分析，在“市场”上，什么样的“产品”是须要的。这句话的好处之一是用了"hence"(therefore)显示逻辑关系。好处之二是它“预测”了市场上什么样的东西是须要的。这固然不能乱写，胡乱预测，由于预测的东西，经过作实验，在本文中获得了实现。若是做者不许备报道什么东西，就不要在Introduction里面胡乱预测。也就是说，预测的东西在后面是要有“呼应”的，若是没有呼应，审稿人就会说他被欺骗了。
"Attempts have been made to modify SiO2 supports before loading gold.28-35 For one, Nieuwenhuys and coworkers reported that the T50 (reaction temperature at which 50% of CO molecules are converted to CO2) value of Au/SiO2 in CO oxidation is 240oC, but when SiO2 is modified by CoOx, LaOx, or CeOx and gold is loaded thereafter, the T50 values decrease to 185, 135, and 115oC, respectively, indicating the promotional effect of these additives.28 Our group29,31 and others28,30,32-35 developed Au/TiO2/SiO229-33 and Au/CoOx/SiO234,35 catalysts for CO oxidation. Nevertheless, even though the addition of certain promoters may improve the activity, the promoted catalysts are still not particularly active due to the unadvantageous starting point: the deposition-precipitation method does not work well for making active Au/SiO2 catalysts.29 Hence, the promotional effect based on a better starting point (i.e., highly active Au/SiO2 synthesized by advanced methods16-22) may be further considered, and new methodologies for the installation of appropriate promoters may be developed."
在Results部分，每一段开头都有一个topics sentence，虽然这些句子很简单，也很“原始”，可是至少让审稿人一目了然地知道做者要说什么，在每一段里面用了什么方法实现了什么功能。
3.1. Catalytic Activity in CO oxidation
Figure 2A shows the CO light-off curves of Au/SiO2 synthesized using Au(en)2Cl3 as the precursor.
Figure 2B shows the CO light-off curves of KMnO4/Au/SiO2 (pH 7).
The KMnO4/Au/SiO2 (pH 7) catalyst is greatly activated after treatment in O2-He at 220-600oC, and the optimal pretreatment temperature is 300oC (Figure 2B).
Figure 3 shows the catalytic results when the H2-pretreated Au/SiO2 is treated by KMnO4 under acidic (pH 3) or basic (pH 11) conditions.
3.2. Catalyst Characterization
Figure 4 collects four sets of XRD patterns of Au/SiO2, KMnO4/Au/SiO2 (pH 3), KMnO4/Au/SiO2 (pH 7), and KMnO4/Au/SiO2 (pH 11).
To know the gold particle sizes(向读者说明这么作的目的), we used TEM to probe different positions and recorded several images for each sample.
For comparison(向读者说明逻辑关系：对比), Figure 6 collects typical TEM images of KMnO4/Au/SiO2 (pH 7).
Figure 8 compares TG/DTG data of Au/SiO2 and KMnO4/Au/SiO2 (pH 7).
3.3. Catalyst Stability on Stream
Finally, we tested the stability of 300oC-pretreated KMnO4/Au/SiO2 (pH 7).
另一本Timothy W. Crusius和Carolyn E. Channell写的The Aims of Argument: A Brief Rhetoric虽然是介绍怎么在报纸杂志写议论文的，可是对科研写做（特别是Discussion部分）颇有启发，有助于写出有条理、有逻辑性的文章。联系到写科研论文Discussion部分，比如说你发现一个现象，若是你只是如痴如醉地用一种缘由来解释这种现象，那么还不如逐个分析三种不一样的解释，用证据和论证来否认前面两种，而后正面证明第三种解释。这种方法被运用在下面两篇文章的Discussion部分：
22. H.F. Yin, Z. Ma, S.H. Overbury, S. Dai*, Promotion of Au(en)2Cl3-Derived Au/Fumed SiO2 by Treatment with KMnO4, Journal of Physical Chemistry C, in press. <link> http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp800797t
20. W.F. Yan, Z. Ma, S.M. Mahurin, J. Jiao, E.W. Hagaman, S.H. Overbury, S. Dai*, Novel Au/TiO2/Al2O3.xH2O Catalysts for CO Oxidation, Catalysis Letters 121 (2008) 209-218. <link> http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10562-007-9369-1
哈佛商学院出版的Presentatios that Persuade and Motivate
p. 40. "If it's going to be controversial, lay out three alternatives and tell, in order, why each one won'd work. Then, describe your favored solution--and describe its pitfalls, too. The point is to walk them through the decesion-making process, after all, so if there are other obvious alternatives, and pitfalls to your own, don't avoid them. If you do, the audience will start creating them at the water cooler after the talk, and all your hard work will be for nothing."
p. 40. "Rhetorically, you should present the options you intend the audience to favor at the end of your list, because audiences tend to remember best things they hear last."
还有种表现手法就是先详细阐述本身的解释，而后笔锋一转说也许有的人（好比审稿人）会说......（提出不一样的解释），可是咱们并不支持这个不一样的解释，这是由于......这两种表现手法在The Aims of Argument: A Brief Rhetoric也有说明。道理是：读者内心固然有不一样的解释，做为做者，就应该起到释疑的做用，给读者分析清楚每种解释的利弊。再有，现代社会召唤什么样的人？思惟活泼开放，敢于接受新理论的人。若是有的做者不分析其它的解释，只是一味强调、一口咬定本身的解释是对的，那么这就是思惟僵化。（证据见：What You Don't Know Can Keep You Out of College, Don Dunbar著）
Timothy W. Crusius和Carolyn E. Channell写的The Aims of Argument: A Brief Rhetoric
"A final--and optional--step is to assess an arguger's refutations. In a refutation a writer anticipitates potential objections to his or her position and tries to show why they do not undermine the basic argument. Refutations do not relate directly to claims, reasons, and evidence. A skilled arguer typically uses them not as part of the main logic of an argument but as a separate step to deal with any obvious objections a reader is likely to have."
Don Dunbar写的What You Don't Know Can Keep You Out of College
p. 47. "Students with passionate interests often hold strong views. They have perceptions about the things that interest them, and they've thought about them enough to express options. One counselee of mine had strong fellings on the issue if abortion and wrote the following:
There are no circumstances that warrent the killing of a baby at any stage of development, no matter what the excuse. It is just plain murder. It amazes me that anyone can even speak up for the side of murder.
When I recommended that she choose another essay topic, she thought I was saying that her views were wrong. I told her that one their campuses, colleges like to have conservatives and liberals and everything in between. However, this essay introduction didn't just show an option. It showed a lack of interest in the views of the other side. College seek thinkers who can see more than one side of an issue and open to the possibility of learning something new. If your portray yourself as completely closed to arguments besides the one you believe, you show political passtion, but not intellectual passion. You sound like you don't want to learn. And, as I've said, if you don't show intellectual passion, you're as good as dead."
你们看典型的TOEFL做文里面，当论述住在学校里面仍是住在学校外面好的时候，错误的写法是一边倒或者两边都不得罪；正确的写法是说：的确，某种选择有什么什么优势；可是（笔锋一转），考虑到什么什么，我仍是以为另一种选择更好，道理是三点。而后，对三点展开论述，每一点就是一段。在对这三点展开论述的时候有这样的论证结构:
总的观点
缘由1==>证据
缘由2==>证据
缘由3==>证据
The Aims of Argument: A Brief Rhetoric一书里面介绍了不少有用的东西，好比什么东西能够做为证据？证据有哪几种？什么样的证据更具备可信度？要多少证据才能说明观点？Reasoning Skills: Success in 20 Minutes a Day 用大众化的语言介绍了经常使用逻辑学原理和逻辑学陷阱，这对科研写做很是有帮助。好比要分清楚事实和观点！要分清楚大前提、小前提和结论；要避免循环论证，避免非此即彼、非白即黑等。看了这本书，运用到写科研论文里面，就逻辑清楚，审稿人看了舒服，抓不出逻辑漏洞。
总结：通过研究，发现原来写科技论文仍是有方法能够遵循，有奥妙能够体会和总结的。能够从科学哲学、逻辑学、修辞学、市场学、广告学、心理学、管理学当中获得启发。