Lab report Analysis
Cindy Aurelio
City College of New York
ENGL 21007: Writing For Engineers
Prof. Jacobson
3/25/24
Lab report Analysis
When it comes to reading lab reports, many are made every single day depending on the subject from Biology to Engineering. They all have the same elements that make up a lab report. These elements are the title, abstract, introduction, methods and materials, results, discussion, conclusion, and references. The lab report that this paper will focus on is titled, “Disentangling early versus late audiovisual integration in adult ADHD: A combined behavioral and resting state connectivity study” by Marcel Schulze, Behrem Aslan, Tony Stöcker, Rüdiger Stirnberg, Silke Lux, Alexandra Philipse which talks about how information from their senses, such as sight and hearing, is processed by adults with ADHD. They observed variations in the way they interpret information from each sense, but they also aimed to investigate potential issues with integrating data from the two senses. Comparisons will be made about the structure of this report compared to the 13th Edition of Technical Communications by Mike Markel and Stuart A. Selber.
The title is a summary of what the lab report is about and provides the main idea of the report. The name of the title is important since having an interesting, and fun title entices the reader into reading the abstract of the lab report. The title “Disentangling early versus late audiovisual integration in adult ADHD: A combined behavioral and resting state connectivity study” is full of information and it gives the reader the idea of what the lab report is all about. This abides with what the textbook talks about how a lab title should be effective and has plenty of information so that the reader has some idea on what the report is about. The title is also wordy with jargon that most readers may not get but this also demonstrates what type of audience the lab report is meant to target. Overall, this title does a good job demonstrating what topics the report will cover further on.
The abstract is a basic summary of the report that is a copy of its structure but since the abstract takes a small portion of the report each section within the abstract is usually addressed in one or two sentences. In this lab report, the abstract gave a fundamental summary of the methods, results, limitations, and conclusion. This is exactly what the book wants and recommends of what the contents of the abstract should have as both Markel and Selber stated, “Readers of abstracts are most interested in what questions motivated your study (introduction), what answers you discovered (results), and what implications your findings have (conclusions).” (527). The abstract format fulfills its job and provides an excellent description of the lab report, although it may be a little monotonous because it matches the description of the relatively controversial descriptive abstract.
The writers begin to highlight the importance of their work in the introduction, which comes next. Here, they provide an explanation of the hypothesis or question that their study aims to answer as well as the significance of this question for placing their work within a broader framework. The scientist’s theory that distinct brain regions are in charge of combining data from various senses is presented in detail in the study. In the book, the authors state, “By placing your study in the context of previous research, you establish its significance. Provide just enough detail to help readers understand how your study contributes new information to the field and to communicate the purpose of your study.”(528). This introduction meets the criteria of how that section in a lab report is supposed to be formatted. The writers make sure their study findings are examined coherently and resonate with the larger scientific community by adhering to this systematic approach.
Materials and procedures discuss the tools, supplies, and techniques utilized in the research while attempting to persuade the reader that the methodology used in the lab report was suitable for addressing the subject posed in the paper and that the experiment’s results are reliable. “Disentangling early versus late audiovisual integration in adult ADHD: A combined behavioral and resting state connectivity study” gives a list of items and statistics used in this section along with a description of how it was used and what purpose it served. The 13th Edition of Technical Communications also mentions how describing the methods used in a lab report, gives the report more credibility. As they state, “Your purpose in writing the materials and methods section (sometimes called equipment and methods) is to convince your readers that your approach was appropriate for the question you hoped to answer, that you conducted your research or experiment carefully, and that your results are credible. Describe your methods in enough detail that another researcher could perform the same experiment using the same materials and methods.”(469). To enable anyone to try to repeat the experiment, this lab report does a good job of outlining the supplies and procedures that were employed. Since part of this involves reproducing the experiment with the same materials, it also adds extra significance to the Materials section.
The result presents the findings of the experiments that will be used to support the claims in the lab report that will be discussed in the discussion and presented to the readers. This section contains a summary of the data that is pertinent to the topic or hypothesis covered in the introduction. The data are typically presented as tables, diagrams, or graphs. In this lab report, they show a multitude of tables and bar graphs and they give a thorough explanation what what each illustration means. As Markel and Selber state, “Depending on the type of data, you might present your supporting evidence with a combination of text and graphics (such as tables, graphs, and diagrams).”(531). Based on this data, the report effectively uses graphs and charts to illustrate the experiment’s outcome and make it easy to grasp. The authors emphasized that integrating several data types, such as verbal summaries and graphical representations like tables, diagrams, and graphs, is necessary for the efficient communication of experiment results.
The discussion is where the author interprets the results and findings that answer the question and supports or argues against the hypothesis that is discussed in the introduction. The lab report has a discussion section and they answer the hypothesis the authors set out to answer of whether or not people with ADHD have different ways on how they interpret information from each sense. In the technical communications book, the authors emphasized supporting the argument the authors of the lab report established. As the technical communications authors state, “Support your argument with data from your results, and do not hesitate to discuss problematic data or “failed” experiments. Remember that sometimes a negative result or a failure to find a significant difference helps researchers create new knowledge in their field.”(530). The lab report shows additional graphs like brain MRIs and scatter plots to explain how this result impacts the question the scientists try to answer.
When it comes to ending a lab report the conclusion is very important since everything that was stated in the paper is summarized and explains how certain variables affect the paper. This conclusion from the lab report makes a closing remark and summarizes all of the new information the scientists gathered and the answers they discovered. The technical communications textbook, states, “The conclusion is your final opportunity to persuade your audience of the significance of your work. Do not introduce any new information or analysis in this section.”(530). The authors of the lab report take this opportunity to make their conclusions and summarize their main points of the lab report. This acts as a forum for the scientists to synthesize their findings and clarify how different factors interact to affect the results seen.
The acknowledgments are where the authors thank the people who helped them throughout the lab report process. This is where the author explains why they are thanking someone for a specific reason whether it be financially, morally, or professionally supported. In this lab report, the authors give everyone the proper credit that they merit and it explains what each person did to contribute in the making of the lab report.
The references are where the author cites all the references from other resources. Even if the author cites throughout the lab report, they must still cite the source in the references. Some authors have a unique way to cite sources for this instance in APA. In the lab report, the authors cite all of the sources that they used as references for their lab report. When it comes to adding a reference this makes the scientist look even more credible since they cite all of the sources that were used in the lab report. As Markel and Selber explain, “Most of your citations will appear in the introduction, materials and methods, and discussion sections. However, check the other sections as well to make sure you include all sources cited in your report. Most scientists and engineers follow a particular documentation system for their discipline”(531). The lab report used proper APA citations throughout the reading and proved that the whole paper was credible.
Finally, the appendix which follows the references is where additional data, graphs, or tables that were excluded in the lab report that some readers might not understand. This lab report does not include an appendix which is not the worst thing in the world but it would’ve been more beneficial if they did include the appendix. As Markel and Selber state, “An appendix, which follows the references, is the appropriate place for information that readers do not need to understand the body of your lab report.”(531). Although the writers of the lab report might have had some more information to contribute, it would have been a good idea to include an appendix. supplying further details on specific definitions and graphs that the reader could have found interesting.
Overall, this is a decent lab report that fits into the criteria Markel and Selber laid out in the Technical Communications book even though it does a few things differently it does an effective job of conveying the ideas these scientists wanted to show within their community. Even if it misses some smaller nitpicky details it does not deter the fact that it is an effective lab that talks about the hypothesis relating to ADHD.
Works Cited
Markel, M. H., & Selber, S. A. (2021). Technical communication. Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Schulze, M., Aslan, B., Stocker, T., Stirnberg, R., Lux, S., & Philipsen, A. (2021). Disentangling early versus late audiovisual integration in adult ADHD: a combined behavioral and resting-state connectivity study. Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, 46(5), E528+. https://link-gale-com.ccny-proxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/apps/doc/A681184449/AONE?u=cuny_ccny&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=f8395f12
