Page 180 - How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper, 8th Edition 8th Edition

Page 200

Page 209
at pH 7.6 (13). Various other Streptomyces species are most susceptible to streptomycin at even lower pH levels (6, 9,
17)."

In short, you should normally use the present tense when you refer to previously published work, and you should use
the past tense when referring to your present results.

The principal exception to this rule is in the area of attribution and presentation. It is correct to say "Smith (9) showed
that streptomycin inhibits S. nocolor." It is also correct to say "Table 4 shows that streptomycin inhibited S. everycolor
at all pH levels." Another exception is that the results of calculations and statistical analyses should be in the present
tense, even though statements about the objects to which they refer are in the past tense; e.g., "These values are
significantly greater than those of the females of the same age, indicating that the males grew more rapidly." Still
another exception is a general statement or known truth. Simply put, you could say "Water was added and the towels
became damp, which proves again that water is wet." More commonly, you will need to use this kind of tense
variation: ''Significant amounts of type IV procollagen were isolated. These results indicate that type IV procollagen is
a major constituent of the Schwann cell ECM."

Active Versus Passive Voice

Let us now talk about voice. In any type of writing, the active voice is usually more precise and less wordy than is the
passive voice. (This is not always true; if it were, we would have an Eleventh Commandment: "The passive voice
should never be used.") Why, then, do scientists insist on using the passive voice? Perhaps this bad habit is the result
of the erroneous idea that it is somehow impolite to use first-person pronouns. As a result, the scientist typically uses
such verbose (and imprecise) statements as "It was found that" in preference to the short, unambiguous "I found."

I herewith ask all young scientists to renounce the false modesty of previous generations of scientists. Do not be afraid
to name the agent of the action in a sentence, even when it is "I" or "we." Once you get into the habit of saying "I
found," you will also find that you have a tendency to write "S. aureus produced lactate" rather than "Lactate was
produced by S. aureus." (Note that the "active" statement is in three words; the passive requires five.)

Page 210
You can avoid the passive voice by saying "The authors found" instead of "it was found." Compared with the simple
"we," however, "the authors'' is pretentious, verbose, and imprecise (which authors?).

Euphemisms

In scientific writing, euphemistic words and phrases normally should not be used. The harsh reality of dying is not
improved by substituting "passed away." Laboratory animals are not "sacrificed," as though scientists engaged in
arcane religious exercises. They are killed and that's that. The CBE Style Manual (CBE Style Manual Committee,
1983) cites a beautiful example of this type of euphemism: "Some in the population suffered mortal consequences
from the lead in the flour." The Manual then corrects this sentence, adding considerable clarity as well as eliminating
the euphemism: "Some people died as a result of eating bread made from the lead-contaminated flour." Recently, I
gave the "mortal consequences" sentence to graduate students as a test question in scientific writing. The majority
were simply unable to say "died." On the other hand, I received some inventive answers. Two that I particularly liked
were: "Get the lead out" and "Some were dead from the lead in the bread."

Singulars and Plurals

file:///C|/...0208%20Books%20(part%201%20of%203)/How%20to%20write%20&%20publish%20scientific%20paper/32.htm[4/27/2009 1:30:01 PM]