Some Suggestions to Young Authors of Research Works Presented to the Scientific Conference in Memory of V. I. Vernadsky

We hope that the following release will help tutors and authors of junior scientific research works avoid some defects and errors in designing and carrying out their works, summing up their results, and on the whole improve their quality.

Research or scientific approach to studying different phenomena is one of the methods that people use in order to cognize the world surrounding them (art, religion and the others can also be methods of cognition).

This approach has some specific patterns that are customary in the scientific world, and those characteristics should be presented in every research work using scientific approach.

What are those above-mentioned characteristics of a scientific work?

First, there should be a distinct aim of the research and it should be formulated in it, because reading certain works presented to the Conference of junior scientific works one cannot clearly understand what were the reasons to carry out such a work. It is mostly a feature of fiction, when the composition of a novel is designed by the author in order to mark out certain details of the plot and so sometimes all the reasons come only in the end of the story as a denouement. But it is in a different way in research scientific works, that are bound to have a standard composition and structure, and those standards and rules shouldn�t be easily broken (as it is not allowed to use your hands when playing football).

The aim of a research mostly consists in studying several facts and events — for example, we could study levels of acidity of the water taken from different lakes, rivers and other sources in a certain national park. Of course, the same approach should be applied to research in the field of the humanities, too).

Second, there should be a hypothesis in the research. It is very important, too, as it can concretize the research and make it deeper. In carrying out the research the hypothesis can be confirmed or denied. The hypothesis should be based on some bibliographic data and be logically formulated. In our example we could take as a hypothesis a proposition that the water acidity may depend on the depth of the water reservoir from where it had been taken. This proposition can also determine the choice of water reservoirs to take specimens from — more and less deep ones.

Then one should set a task in order to confirm or to deny the proposition, that is, to determine concrete things to do — for example, to take a number of specimens of water in different water sources and to analyze their acidity using indicators, such as litmus paper or others.

And, certainly, a research work should contain a bibliographic summary, that is, a brief summary of other research in the chosen field of activity studying the same problem. It is necessary to show that the author is familiar with the problem he/she attempts to solve, that there is something new in the task set, that the author hasn�t merely copied the results from other research and so on. Writing a a bibliographic summary will help young researchers to familiarize themselves with the material, to make it easier for them to answer questions during their reports. If the work is properly and well done, the contents of the report and even the text itself are like a visible part of an iceberg, whose main part is hidden under the water.

Using the example in which we determined the water acidity we show the methods used in a research work — for example, what containers we used for water specimens, whether we took them standing ashore or from a boat, from what depth they were taken, if it was by day or at night, if we used litmus paper at once, how we determined the color of certain specimens — using the color circle or without it, the way we registered the obtained data and so on. Those methods should also be described in a research work. Authors must clearly understand how their methods can affect the results — for example, what can happen if they used dirty containers.

Then authors present their own data. The difference between operational data and the data presented in the text of a research work must be also distinctly understood The fact is that during a research there are often huge amounts of data, and they needn�t be presented all. Authors should choose the most significant ones to illustrate their research and to confirm the conclusions they came to. That�s why they are to process operational data and to quote only some of them, which are the most important. Graphs are the most illustrative form of showing the data obtained in a research, because they enable the reader to grasp the gist of a work in a short period of time.

The data should be compared with those taken from articles and other scientific sources and then analyzed, that is, there should be determined any regularities which were found during a research.

And, finally, every research work is concluded with the results. The conclusions are to be concise, brief and strict, they should be answering questions risen in the work, dealing with its aim, tasks and hypotheses.

There is a great difference between the text of a work and the report. In fact, why are scientific conferences held, if apparently everybody can read any work in a journal or in a book? But conferences have their own advantages. Giving a report, one has to choose only the main and to present it to the audience vividly and emotionally, illustrating it with a relatively small amount of data. Reporting is not only a form of presenting data and results, it also has a communicative role, so the speakers is to reveal their own individuality in the research, to get into contact with their colleagues listening to them.

It is the reason why a written article and a report basing on it differ so much and so deeply, and authors should prepare to them in a different way, too. Making a report you can not merely read out the article nor you can overload it with insignificant data. There is a strict time-limit at scientific conferences, too — it takes no more than 10 minutes on average, and it is really enough to make the audience get the gist of a work. If the work is of any interest to the audience, questions will follow, so the speaker will have an opportunity to give more information about the work.

And now a few words about ethical rules that are customary in the world of science. Above all, the participants of a conference are colleagues, who have the same aim — to cognize the world, surrounding us, to get to know its principles, its laws, if only a part of them. That is the reason why mutual respect is the main and the most important in their communication. We ask you to remember about it, to bear in your mind, that you may unintentionally offend a colleague of yours if you are leaving the room during his/her report and thus showing your lack of respect for the work being presented and its author, too, and to avoid any actions that could be understood as offensive of disrespectful.

Research works of yours are the first step through the door that leads into the world of science. Please never forget your tutors, who helped you to make this first step and opened that door for you. A real, proper, independent research is possible only when you got a good all-round education, so if your ambition is to become a scientist, there are years and years of intense studying before you. Good luck and don�t stop moving to your achievements!

A. V. Leontovich, A. S. Savvichev.