3

I have written a paper with some interesting results. However, I would like to add one or two sentences that draw the attention of the reader to the fact that the results also depend on the instruments used for the experiment. I would like to point out, that if the equipment were more advanced, the results may be different. Do I add this information at the end of the results section, the discussion or do I add it to the conclusion? Which section is best suited for this kind of information?

Improve this question
3
  • probably the conclusion part, where you discuss your results and compare with the other works. IMO, this is also the place where you should explain the problematic parts of your approach / method.
    – Our
    Commented Aug 1, 2020 at 8:41
  • What field/area is your research paper in? That will probably help us find examples to best guide the structure of your specific paper. As others have noted, the answer is probably field-dependent.
    – Undergraduate Student
    Commented Aug 1, 2020 at 20:41
  • @RobertBahensky The field is computer science and I wrote about a novel algorithm.
    – Gilfoyle
    Commented Aug 2, 2020 at 5:15

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
7

I think it depends. In my opinion, it makes most sense to address equipment limitations (e.g. instrument resolution, reachable temperatures, etc.) in the method(ology) section, as was suggested by astronat. Limitations on your results, however, are more naturally addressed in the discussion (e.g. since we are resolution limited, we cannot definitively rule out alternative interpretations X, or Y, but our results are consistent with prevailing theory Z). If it is a particularly important qualifier that's central to your work, it can make sense to repeat it in the conclusion and possibly elsewhere.

Improve this answer
4

Look at other similar papers in your field to see what they do, but I expect this should be written in a methodology section or similar, where you describe the equipment used and how you used it, before presenting your results.

Improve this answer
2
  • I looked into similar papers in my field and could not find any such statements. Therefore I came here to ask this question. I think your suggestion is valid but I would like to follow some logical pattern that is standard in the scientific community.
    – Gilfoyle
    Commented Aug 1, 2020 at 9:39
  • @I_told_you_so there is no standard across the entire scientific community. Conventions differ wildly between fields, and even if there is a convention, there's no law stating you have to follow it. Write the sentence where you feel its most appropriate; I think that is in the methods section.
    – astronat supports the strike
    Commented Aug 1, 2020 at 12:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .