The Results section is the most important section of your report because it is where you make a direct scientific contribution. While the interpretation of your results can change as other discoveries are made, carefully collected and accurately analyzed data are a permanent record of what you observed (i.e. what you observed does not change in the light of new interpretation). This is why we distinguish between observations and interpretations by separating the Results section from the Discussion section.
Your job in the results is to present your analyzed data in a manner that directly addresses the purpose you stated in the introduction. Your analysis should clearly draw your reader's attention to the most important trends.
Many students make the mistake of not spending enough time on data analysis before they jump into writing the results. Before you can decide how to present the results you must have a clear idea as to what your results actually show.
The approach you will take to analyzing your results will vary depending on the field you are working in and the type of study/experiment you did. However, you will generally need to manipulate your data in some manner. For example, if you conducted an experiment where you did replicate trials of several treatments, you will likely need to calculate means and measure the variability around the mean (e.g. standard deviation or standard error). Usually your instructor will have some tips on how to analyze the data you have collected.
Students frequently get confused as to what belongs in the results and what belongs in the discussion. Part of the confusion stems from the use of the word "interpret" to mean different things in different contexts.
In order to have results to present, you will need to analyze your data. This analysis includes manipulating the data to find trends. It is your job to figure out what your data show, and to make sure the reader can easily follow what you found. Because you are figuring out what the raw data 'means' many sources refer to data analysis as interpreting the data, but it is less confusing to simply call this analyzing the data.
In the discussion, you will explain what the results mean. We often refer to this as interpreting the results, but it distinctly different from analyzing the data. To make it less confusing, think of the discussion as giving MEANING to the results.
The statement can be fully supported by the actual data you collected = Results.
The statement includes some speculation or supporting the statement requires using results you did not produce in this study = Discussion.
Visual summaries allow you to present your analyzed results in a concise and easy to follow manner. Visual summaries generally take the form of tables or figures. A figure includes any type of visual that is not a table (e.g. a graph or a photo or a model).
Rarely will your visual summary include raw data. If you really think your instructor needs to see the raw data, put in an appendix.
Every datum you collect may not need to be in a visual summary.
You probably need a visual if the answer to either of the following question is yes.
You can only show analyzed data once so ask yourself
Do not include visuals you will not use (i.e. if the visual does not support a statement in the results section).
Graphs are best for showing
Tables are best for
It is not enough to simply put some tables and figures into the results section. You need to use SENTENCES to tell the story of your results. In the results section, your goal is to clearly highlight the important trends. For example, don't simply describe the visual in words, instead use the visual to back up a statement.
The important trends will include those that directly relate to the study's purpose. If your purpose was to answer a particular question, the important trends should answer that question. If you set out to test a hypothesis, the important trends should support or refute the hypothesis.
Important trends will also include any unexpected results or results that differ from previously published results. You will need to point these out because you will want to address them in the discussion.
Please note that there are too many types of figures and tables for us to cover them all. We will give you some generic tips. Make sure you investigate the best ways to handle the particular visual you are using.
Figures are any visuals that are not tables. All figures are labeled sequentially as "Figure #". Stick with whole numbers for your figure labels, unless you have been told otherwise (i.e. the first figure is Figure 1, the next figure is Figure 2).
See figure examples below.
There are many problems with this chart, keep scrolling to see what needs to be fixed.
As noted above, all figures must be self-contained. I.e., if a reader looks only at a figure and its associated legend, they should be able to fully understand three things. This figure addresses all three aspects as summarized below.
Why is the result important (or what question does the figure address)?
What is the effect of substrate concentration on the time needed to reach equilibrium in IDH catalyzed NADPH production? (In this example, this is spelled out in the figure legend.)
What is the key result summarized in the figure?
Adding more substrate results in the reaction taking more time to reach equilibrium. (This can be seen by looking at both the figure legend and the chart. The plateau in absorbance happens sooner when starting with lower substrate concentrations (the figure legend indicates that each line is a different substrate concentration - the lowest was 0.5 mM and it reached a plateau in the shortest amount of time).)
Genetics Example:
In my introduction, I stated, "I determined if fruit-fly mating frequency was influenced by different types of music."
Poor trend description
Fruit flies mated 3 times per h when exposed to classical music and mated 5 times per h when exposed to rap music.
This is a poor trend description because I am expecting the reader to do the actual comparison.
Better trend description
Fruit flies mated more frequently when exposed to rap music rather than classical music. OR Fruit flies mated almost twice as often when exposed to rap music compared to classical music.
Microbiology Example 1:
In the introduction, I predicted, "more normal flora bacteria would be found in moist locations like the throat than in dry locations like the forearm".
Poor trend description
Table 2 shows that I found 2000 colonies on agar plates inoculated with a throat sample, but only 10 colonies for a forearm sample and 20 colonies for a neck sample.
Better trend description
Throat samples yielded 100 to 200 times more colonies than forearm or neck samples (Table 2).
Microbiology Example 2:
My stated purpose was "to determine the best growth conditions for Escherichia coli by measuring the lag time under various growth conditions".
Poor trend description
In Figure 2 you can see that when grown in Tryptic Soy broth, the lag time for E. coli growth was 6 h using a 3 day-old starter and 2 h when using a 1 day-old starter. When grown in Brain-Heart Infusion broth, Figure 3 shows that the lag time was 9 h for a 3 day-old starter and 1 h for a 1 day-old starter culture.
Here I have not described a trend at all, but I am really just restating the figure. Instead, make actual comparisons and back them up by referring to the figures parenthetically.
Better trend description
In Tryptic Soy broth, the lag time for E. coli growth was three times longer when a 3 day-old starter culture was used than when a 1 day-old starter culture was used (Figure 2). This effect was even more pronounced when Escherichia coli was grown in Brain-Heart Infusion broth (Figure 3).
This is better because I am actually making comparisons that allow the reader to 'get' that I found shorter lag times with the 1 day-old culture.
Even better
The shortest lag times were observed when 1 day-old starter cultures were used. For example, in Tryptic Soy broth, the lag time for E. coli growth was three times longer than when a 3 day-old starter culture was used than when a 1 day-old starter culture was used (Figure 2). This effect was even more pronounced when E. coli was grown in Brain-Heart Infusion broth (Figure 3).
This is even better because I am clear about what conditions produced the shortest lag times. This statement belongs in the results because I can completely back it up with the data I produced in this study.