Scientific Writing, HRP 214

1. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Bob and I were very fond of the piece. B. Bob and me were very fond of the piece.

2. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Bob and I were very fond of the piece. B. Bob and me were very fond of the piece.

3. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. That man and I were talking. B. That man and me were talking.

4. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. That man and I were talking. B. That man and me were talking.

5. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Their data was intriguing. B. Their data were intriguing.

6. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Their data was intriguing. B. Their data were intriguing.

7. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. She told Bob and me that the end was near. B. She told Bob and I that the end was near.

8. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. She told Bob and me that the end was near. B. She told Bob and I that the end was near.

9. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. I hope that she and I will reconcile. B. I hope that she and me will reconcile.

10. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. I hope that she and I will reconcile. B. I hope that she and me will reconcile.

11. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Between you and I, we should have it done in no time. B.Between you and me, we should have it done in no time.

12. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Between you and I, we should have it done in no time. B. Between you and me, we should have it done in no time.

13. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. He looks like Bill Clinton. B. He looks as Bill Clinton.

14. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. He looks like Bill Clinton. B. He looks as Bill Clinton.

15. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Her dresses weren’t worth very much compared with her shoes. B. Her dresses weren’t worth very much compared to her shoes.

16. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Her dresses weren’t worth very much compared with her shoes. B.Her dresses weren’t worth very much compared to her shoes. mnemonic: when things are inherently similar, they are generally grouped with each other  Your scientific studies will more commonly be seeking distinctions among things previously understood to be similar (than similarities among inherently different things)

17. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. To whom did you betray my secret? B.To who did you betray my secret?

18. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. To whom did you betray my secret? B.To who did you betray my secret?

19. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Who owns that mean dog? B.Whom owns that mean dog?

20. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Who owns that mean dog? B.Whom owns that mean dog?

21. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. The person about who you speak is a fool. B. The person about whom you speak is a fool.

22. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. The person about who you speak is a fool. B. The person about whom you speak is a fool.

23. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. People whom live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. B. People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

24. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. People whom live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. B. People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

25. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. It’s my head on the line. B. Its my head on the line.

26. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. It’s my head on the line. B. Its my head on the line.

27. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Its head was on the chopping block. B. It’s head was on the chopping block.

28. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Its head was on the chopping block. B. It’s head was on the chopping block.

29. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Virgil is the candidate who we hope to elect. B. Virgil is the candidate whom we hope to elect.

30. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Virgil is the candidate who we hope to elect. B. Virgil is the candidate whom we hope to elect.

31. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Your cigarette tastes good, like a cigarette should. B. Your cigarette tastes good, as a cigarette should.

32. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Your cigarette tastes good, like a cigarette should. B. Your cigarette tastes good, as a cigarette should.

33. Scientific Writing, HRP 214

34. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Over 30 disease states can result in the clinical characteristics of dementia. B. More than 30 disease states can result in the clinical characteristics of dementia.

35. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Over 30 disease states can result in the clinical characteristics of dementia. B. More than 30 disease states can result in the clinical characteristics of dementia.

36. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Fewer men are in the class than women. B. Less men are in the class than women.

37. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Fewer men are in the class than women. B. Less men are in the class than women.

38. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Fewer restrictive measures are needed. B. Less restrictive measures are needed.

39. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Juan Zabala is a twenty-nine-year-old Mexican whom the San Francisco police charged with breaking into a 1991 Honda Accord. B. Juan Zabala is a twenty-nine-year-old Mexican who the San Francisco police charged with breaking into a 1991 Honda Accord.

40. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Juan Zabala is a twenty-nine-year-old Mexican whom the San Francisco police charged with breaking into a 1991 Honda Accord. B. Juan Zabala is a twenty-nine-year-old Mexican who the San Francisco police charged with breaking into a 1991 Honda Accord.

41. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Some Notes on Science Style Following are some general guidelines on preferred style for manuscripts submitted to Science: • Avoid jargon; explain obscure terms and define acronyms (keep in mind that many potential readers of your work will not be specialists in your field). • Use active voice when suitable, particularly when necessary for correct syntax (e.g., "To address this possibility, we constructed a lZap library . . .," not "To address this possibility, a lZap library was constructed . . ."). • Write concisely (e.g., "even though," not "in spite of the fact that").

42. Scientific Writing, HRP 214Sentence-editing warm-up… Recent research suggests that these two disorders may not be as distinct as previously was thought and the degree of overlap may be considerable.

43. Scientific Writing, HRP 214Sentence-editing warm-up… Possible rewrite… Recent research suggests that these two disorders may overlap considerably.

44. Scientific Writing, HRP 214Sentence-editing warm-up… The study of Barrett et al. (1997) is considered to be methodologically sound. In that study, 1,000 bacteria were transformed with the novel gene.

45. Scientific Writing, HRP 214Sentence-editing warm-up… Possible rewrites… In a methodologically sound study by Barret et al. (1997), 1,000 bacteria were transformed with the novel gene. (passive voice) Using sound methods, Barret et al. (1997), transformed 1,000 bacteria with the novel gene. (active voice)

46. Scientific Writing, HRP 214MORE WARM-UP • 1. A progressive decrease in the death rate occurred. • The death rate progressively decreased. 2. These agents exert their action by inhibition of synthesis of cholesterol by the liver. • These agents inhibit cholesterol synthesis by the liver.

47. Scientific Writing, HRP 214WARM-UP 3. There are many scientists who don’t like to write. • Many scientists don’t like to write. • In classic epidemiology, the case-control can provide efficiencies when the occurrence of disease in the population is relatively rare.  In classic epidemiology, the case-control study is efficient for rare diseases.

48. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 • Lecture Three: Punctuation, Parallelism, and the Good Sentence.

49. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 For those of you reading Sin and Syntax…(from Salon magazine) • Rather than a beepOr a rude error message,These words: “File not found.” • A crash reducesYour expensive computerTo a simple stone.

50. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 • The code was willing,It considered your request,But the chips were weak. • Errors have occurred.We won't tell you where or why.Lazy programmers.