And that’s the third and last part of #overlyhonestmethods (I love trilogies): (go to part one, and two)
The winners of day 4 are:
Our parsimony analysis was in total disagreement with the Bayesian analysis but who cares anymore
Leftover liquid nitrogen was disposed of by freezing everything for our entertainment.
Image recognition software was coded by my housemate ’cause I knew asking would distract him from his loud girlfriend
Room temperature was maintained at 26 degrees celsius, as the research assistant acclimatised to British weather
Our laser source was 650 nM, 250 mW because that’s what we found on eBay.
Prior to euthanasia, each animal was thanked and kissed goodbye. Then I cried
Frames were recorded every 5ps but analyzed every 100ps. It’s a long simulation and I ran out of RAM.
surveys for nocturnal birds were not included as they would have compromised our nightly schedule of drinking and cards
The OD600 was taken at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 18 hours because I started the culture too late and fell asleep at my bench.
We used a hierarchical Bayesian analysis in the hope it would intimidate and confuse reviewers.
My advisor added 14 words to the title of my paper so that the university would think I had done something important.
3 replicates were used because 3 is the magical number that makes all results true
I actually already have more precise data, but I’d like to squeeze more than one paper out of this
Variance in dye performance was likely due to 30 year age difference between vials.
We microseeded protein crystal trays using hair from a postdoc who left 8 years ago.
We used a thesaurus to adapt the introduction from our last 4 papers to a non-plagiarized format
Stimuli for this experiment were inspired by a Monty Python sketch…they worked so I stuck with it
Samples were conditioned for an extra 12 hours because the lab staff discovered Minecraft.
We used this method of DNA extraction because it meant we got to use a robot.
We’re citing Jones et al. because their crap results make ours look good.
Limitations: You will never get this particular set of variables to happen again, and we’re not even going to try.
PCR was performed by first praying to the PCR voodoo doll my labmate had fashioned out of pipette tips.
Interrater reliability was 0.95. This really shocked 3rd author, as 1st & 2nd authors can’t even agree on paint colors.
NMR spectra were obtained in deuterated DMF to obscure the residual solvent in the sample.
After heating sealed reaction flask, product was isolated from lab bench surface via paper towel extraction.
Advisor suggested a qualitative approach because “I just can’t handle any more math right now.”
We watched a Youtube video on how to calculate the Spearman Rank Correlation for our results.
Optimal yields were obtained by weighing in flasks whose exteriors weren’t completely dry after coming off the rotovap.
Three ways to get ideal simulation curves: 1. Change input data; 2. Improve platform configuration; 3. Photoshop.
We submitted to this journal because our collaborator is on the editorial board
This is a great idea- it was even better when it was first published in 1968.
By laboratory I mean my kitchen table.
Coffee did more for this project than the Principal Investigator.
Ran out of ethanol while in the field. Used cheap vodka instead.
Recruited grad student subjects by putting free pizza in the conference room then locking the door when they came in.
buy your friendly statatician lots of whisky and hand over the data
What we lack in meaningful results we make up for with a witty pun in our title.
Further experiments are out of the scope of this study because I can’t stand my supervisor anymore
phenol-chloroform extraction was used to purify DNA because WE ARE MORE HARDCORE THAN THOU!
“Janitor is listed as co-author for pointing out simple math errors. Cleaning lady contributor for lending bleach.”
The previous postdoc used magic to interpret the results which is why mine are different
inter-rater reliability was .95 because we all had the same tequila-induced hangover.
We have cited a paper that cited another paper that cited another,that cited the original method-we’ve never read it
“Ethanol had to be replaced by methanol due to stress-induced temptation to drink it all.”
We did a netnography of Facebook & Twitter so we could justify our extensive use of social media to the faculty IT team
This algorithm is called like this because we really wanted it to have a funny acronym.
It started off as a double blind study. But hey who can keep secrets?!
“This result may have several important implications, but we removed those so reviewer #2 would stop arguing.”
The width of our nanodevice is 1500nm because nano sounds cooler than micro.
We chose to study how crickets jump because we wanted to play with the high speed camera…
he study was extended while we begged our relatives to wire money to the helicopter company so we could get back.
We chose #6, of our 10 working examples, for a detailed qualitative study, because the rest of ’em are bloody boring.
We used the low power setting on the sonicator to disperse because the dodgy button wouldn’t turn any higher
The constant mass peak on ms/ms is attributed to volatiles present while the institute’s hallways were being painted.
We thought that “random” and “chance” didn’t sound so good, so “Monte Carlo simulation” it is then
The data were deemed unreliable as 20% of the experimenters were potentially unknowingly under the influence of
We arbitarily increased the errors by 10% because we didn’t believe they could really be that small
The terms ‘biodiversity’ and ‘birds’ are used interchangeably throughout this manuscript.
The spectrometer was made by a company which no longer exists, in a country which also, no longer exists
a realistic model is too difficult to work with so here’s twenty papers playing with a toy model.
In this paper we used pseudo random numbers for the data and pseudy random words for the prose
“quantification was performed blind” I handed my undergrad my images and made him count stuff unrelated to his project
I used students as subjects because rats are expensive and you get too attached to them
This statistical test was chosen because it had the most Greek letters and therefore Science!
The bacterial samples, my lab coat, the bench, my hands, and the floor, were Gram-stained.
Expedited ethics review was sought due to impending divorce between primary and secondary supervisors
I did the experiment but the PI is a control freak and wrote the paper. I can’t even translate it for you.
The dilution fridge can provide temperatures as low as 0.03 degrees above absolute zero. It works primarily by magic.
Samples were taken every hour for 72 hr because I live in the lab
The experiment was randomised because I realised I had forgotten to label anything halfway through
Alignment was performed by the most sober person in the lab.
Despite not understanding Spanish, I cited this paper based on a Google translate of the abstract
the diastereomers are readily separable by chromatography, so long as you use 1kg of silica gel and load at 0.1%.