- Email: [email protected]
Elements of the Scientific Paper
D. W. Hukins
article hints atthe same conclusion as Getting and Dekin - t h a t neural circuits are multifunctional- but adds the idea that the switch between states can be a neuromodulator. The Mayeri and Rothman article reviews the role of peptides in one invertebrate, Aplysia, and when combined with the Scheller article, provides a good overview of what investigators in this area are trying to do. The O'Shea article takes a more limited view, but is a very clear survey of his work with a peptide transmitter and probably one of the best examples of the cellular approach to the function of a peptide transmitter. The book has its limitations even within the constraints of the area the editor proposes to cover. There is no history of where the field originated, who first carved out the problems, or how we arrived at the particular preparations represented here. As a group, the articles on motor systems and neuromodulators represent half of the book. The rest
of the field - learning, neurodevelopment, neurogenetics, molecular neurobiology, synaptic physiology etc. - is covered in the book's other half, and thus can only be touched upon. As I mentioned above, sensory systems are barely represented at all. For example, the large and very interesting areas of insect vision and audition, where good progress in relating neuronal structure and function to behavior is being made, are omitted altogether. There is not one article on nematodes, although one would have to concede that members of this phylum are certainly being used as a model system. In the end, however, my main complaint with the book is the feeling of d~j& vu I got while reading it. Many of the articles have clones in other similar collections or in short reviews like those found in TINS. In my own collection of books and reprints I was able to find articles similar to eight of those presented here. The Abrams article, which is a very
well-written survey of learning in Aplysia, is the best example of this. It is very similar to an article by another author (Hawkins) in a J. Exp. Biol. volume edited by Burrows (1984). Nearly half of the figures are identical, as are the legends and, needless to say, much of the text. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with repetition but it illustrates the problem: the same work is reviewed over and over again. One good rewrite of three or four such books in each sub-discipline, with the appropriate history, transitions from one subject to another and an absence of duplication, would be far more useful than these overlapping collections, and it would save room on all of our bookshelves. In summary, this is a better book than most of its type. A graduate student, postdoc or other student of neurobiology looking for a survey of the sub-discipline of simple neural networks would find it useful but would have to buy a few others of the genre to get a complete picture.
Elements of the Scientific
papers'. I must admit to being prejudiced against any attempt to present scientific activity as a set of rules. However, the good sense and clear instruction that follow more than make up for the rulebook introduction. There are so many important points, carefully explained, that there is not room enough to comment on all of them in a short review. I was very sympathetic to the view that 'writing is research; it is a process of discovery'. We have all met colleagues who discovered our latest work themselves, before we did, but never bothered to write it up: their ideas are invariably muddled and incomplete. Similarly, scientists who dismiss published work in their field as trivial, but write nothing themselves, are spectators rather than participants in research. Writing helps us to understand our own ,ideas, as well as to communicate them to others, provided we try to meet the high standards of precision and clarity laid down in this book. The author's insistence on 'listening to your data' emphasizes how writing can aid thinking, provided experiments are carefully and
conscientiously performed. From a more practical point of view, the book is full of useful hints and advice. I found myself agreeing with most of the points made, even though some of them are unconventional. For example, I agree that it is important to choose a journal before writing a paper to ensure that the intended readership is clearly defined. The importance of re-drafting papers, of repeating experiments during the course of writing, and of performing further experiments as weak points emerge are all difficult to over-emphasize. I also liked the advice to write in the first person, which I believe is especially important when expressing opinions, and, at least sometimes, of writing in the active voice. Unfortunately editorial staff frequently disagree. Unlike nearly every other book on the subject, this one does not avoid the problems arising from refereeing. The vast majority of referees are thoughtful, conscientious and helpful. Although, at first, their comments may appear stupid, obstructive, pernickety or obtuse, they are usually worth careful consideration. However,
Departmentof Paper MedicalBiophysics, Universityof by Michael J. Katz, Yale University Manchester,5topford Press 1985. £6.95 pbk/E20.O0 hbk Building,Manchester (xii + 130pages) ISBN 0300 03532 2 M13 9PT,UK. This book differs from other guides to scientific writing in that it traces the development of a single example, from inception to eventual publication, in order to explain how to write a paper. My initial response was unfavourable but I soon changed my mind. I was initially concerned about the narrow view of the scientific paper as a report of experimental observations. Indeed, the author appears to view the scientist as 'a natural historian of some class of phenomena', which precludes many theoretical approaches to scientific enquiry. Thus I believe that he is arguing from the particular to the general in his belief that the principles developed 'will hold across the natural sciences'. Nevertheless, the example chosen - the growth of axons - i s likely to make the book especially useful to many neurobiologists. The author's intention is to offer 'a set of rules for scientific 96
© 1987, ElsevierScience Publishers B.V., Amsterdam 0378- 59121871502.00
TINS- February 1987 [10]
some referees are lazy, a few are not very intelligent, and a very few are dishonest. This book gives an excellent example of appalling refereeing, and the best way I have ever seen of dealing with it - to find out how you will have to read the book. In general, I believe that referees' opinions
should be carefully considered, and replied to in a letter to the editor. In conclusion, this is an excellent practical guide to writing scientific papers. I shall certainly recommend it to my research students, although I shall indicated its limitations to them and
make good a few omissions. These omissions include labelling graphs, layout of equations, and the use of spaces in units e.g. 3.5 MN m -2. I predict that it will not be long before my free review copy becomes well worn with use or is 'borrowed' fo re ve r- I shall then have to buy another.
The Case for Animal Experimentation: An Evolutionary and Ethical Perspective
mans and non-humans that, in his view, make it impossible for humans to admit animals for full membership in 'the moral community'. Animals are not autonomous beings in that they do not take 'deliberative, responsible action and have the sort of awareness necessary to see this kind of action as essential to their nature, well-being and development as individuals'. Nor are they 'capable of recognizing autonomy in others' (p. 56). Fox argues that it is this autonomy - taking and recognizing moral responsibility - that should decide whether we acknowledge rights in other beings (black people, women, dogs), not the widely advocated criterion of whether a being has the ability to suffer. The capacity to suffer in animals should give rise to humaneness and kindness from humans, but it should not form the sole basis of morality. He concludes that we should give consideration to the suffering of animals and reduce it whenever we can, but that animals' pain still counts for less than that of human beings. Consequently, there may be circumstances in which to alleviate human pain and suffering, research using animals may be morally permissible, even if it causes suffering. The second section of the book moves into the more concrete areas of what scientists actually do, and is written in the belief that many people simply misunderstand what research is about and how science proceeds (for example, how important the ability to reproduce results is). Not everyone will agree with his analysis of the experiments that are described nor with his conclusions about possible alternatives to the use of animals. Others will take issue with his defence of
'pure' research and his belief that the best way of ensuring humane treatment of animals is peer review by scientists themselves. However, whatever views we individually hold, his attempt to correct the frequent claims that animal research is trivial, pointless and redundant will, I hope, be seen as contributing positively to debates that are often one-sided and extreme. Apart from some slightly dubious biology on p. 3, this book is certainly to be recommended for anyone interested in the issues surrounding animal experimentation. The arguments are important ones. And the list of recommendations at the end of the book should reassure anyone who thinks they are put forward by a complacent defender of all animal experiments.
by Michael Allen Fox, University of California Press, 1986. $24.95 (xii + 262 pages) 0 520 05501 2 Michael Allen Fox (not to be confused with Michael W. Fox of the Humane Society of the United States) has written a book that will make welcome reading for many scientists, and will be all the more welcome because it is written in a readable, unpolemical style. Fox first makes the case that, under some circumstances, animal experimentation is quite justifiable and that the ethical arguments that have been brought against it often do not stand up to scrutiny. Then, having cleared the philosophical ground, he moves on to discuss a number of examples of experiments on animals that have been widely criticized as being immoral. His concern is not to justify animal experiments in general- he simply wants to point out that there is another side to the issue, one that is often left out altogether when animal rights activists describe what scientists do to animals. In many ways, the most valuable part of the book is the first, philosophical part. Here Fox takes issue with Peter Singer and others who have argued that speciesism (discriminating against members of other species) is as morally indefensible as racism and sexism. Fox argues that discriminating against black people or women is, in fact, in a quite different category, since the discrimination here is on the basis of the morally irrelevant differences of skin colour or sex. With animals, however, there are morally relevant differences, that is, differences between hu-
TINS- February 1987[10]
Marian Stamp Dawkins Departmentof Zoolo~, Universityof Oxford,SouthParks Road,OxfordOXl 3PS,UK.
100th Issue Additional copies of this issue can still be obtained at a cost of $4.35 (£2,90). Discounts on orders of 10 or more copies are available. All prices include postage and packing, Name: ........................................................... Address: .......................................................
........................................ Zipcode: ...............
Payment must accompany order and may be made by cheque (made out to Elsevier) or by credit card. We accept AmEx, Visa (France. excepted) and Access/Mastercard/Eurocard. Please give card number, expiry date, issuing bank, the card holder's name, address and signature. Send this order form to: Elsevier Publications Cambridge, 68 Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 1LA, UK.
© 1987, ElsevierSciencePublishersB.V.,Amsterdam 0378- 5912/87/$02.0(3
97
article hints atthe same conclusion as Getting and Dekin - t h a t neural circuits are multifunctional- but adds the idea that the switch between states can be a neuromodulator. The Mayeri and Rothman article reviews the role of peptides in one invertebrate, Aplysia, and when combined with the Scheller article, provides a good overview of what investigators in this area are trying to do. The O'Shea article takes a more limited view, but is a very clear survey of his work with a peptide transmitter and probably one of the best examples of the cellular approach to the function of a peptide transmitter. The book has its limitations even within the constraints of the area the editor proposes to cover. There is no history of where the field originated, who first carved out the problems, or how we arrived at the particular preparations represented here. As a group, the articles on motor systems and neuromodulators represent half of the book. The rest
of the field - learning, neurodevelopment, neurogenetics, molecular neurobiology, synaptic physiology etc. - is covered in the book's other half, and thus can only be touched upon. As I mentioned above, sensory systems are barely represented at all. For example, the large and very interesting areas of insect vision and audition, where good progress in relating neuronal structure and function to behavior is being made, are omitted altogether. There is not one article on nematodes, although one would have to concede that members of this phylum are certainly being used as a model system. In the end, however, my main complaint with the book is the feeling of d~j& vu I got while reading it. Many of the articles have clones in other similar collections or in short reviews like those found in TINS. In my own collection of books and reprints I was able to find articles similar to eight of those presented here. The Abrams article, which is a very
well-written survey of learning in Aplysia, is the best example of this. It is very similar to an article by another author (Hawkins) in a J. Exp. Biol. volume edited by Burrows (1984). Nearly half of the figures are identical, as are the legends and, needless to say, much of the text. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with repetition but it illustrates the problem: the same work is reviewed over and over again. One good rewrite of three or four such books in each sub-discipline, with the appropriate history, transitions from one subject to another and an absence of duplication, would be far more useful than these overlapping collections, and it would save room on all of our bookshelves. In summary, this is a better book than most of its type. A graduate student, postdoc or other student of neurobiology looking for a survey of the sub-discipline of simple neural networks would find it useful but would have to buy a few others of the genre to get a complete picture.
Elements of the Scientific
papers'. I must admit to being prejudiced against any attempt to present scientific activity as a set of rules. However, the good sense and clear instruction that follow more than make up for the rulebook introduction. There are so many important points, carefully explained, that there is not room enough to comment on all of them in a short review. I was very sympathetic to the view that 'writing is research; it is a process of discovery'. We have all met colleagues who discovered our latest work themselves, before we did, but never bothered to write it up: their ideas are invariably muddled and incomplete. Similarly, scientists who dismiss published work in their field as trivial, but write nothing themselves, are spectators rather than participants in research. Writing helps us to understand our own ,ideas, as well as to communicate them to others, provided we try to meet the high standards of precision and clarity laid down in this book. The author's insistence on 'listening to your data' emphasizes how writing can aid thinking, provided experiments are carefully and
conscientiously performed. From a more practical point of view, the book is full of useful hints and advice. I found myself agreeing with most of the points made, even though some of them are unconventional. For example, I agree that it is important to choose a journal before writing a paper to ensure that the intended readership is clearly defined. The importance of re-drafting papers, of repeating experiments during the course of writing, and of performing further experiments as weak points emerge are all difficult to over-emphasize. I also liked the advice to write in the first person, which I believe is especially important when expressing opinions, and, at least sometimes, of writing in the active voice. Unfortunately editorial staff frequently disagree. Unlike nearly every other book on the subject, this one does not avoid the problems arising from refereeing. The vast majority of referees are thoughtful, conscientious and helpful. Although, at first, their comments may appear stupid, obstructive, pernickety or obtuse, they are usually worth careful consideration. However,
Departmentof Paper MedicalBiophysics, Universityof by Michael J. Katz, Yale University Manchester,5topford Press 1985. £6.95 pbk/E20.O0 hbk Building,Manchester (xii + 130pages) ISBN 0300 03532 2 M13 9PT,UK. This book differs from other guides to scientific writing in that it traces the development of a single example, from inception to eventual publication, in order to explain how to write a paper. My initial response was unfavourable but I soon changed my mind. I was initially concerned about the narrow view of the scientific paper as a report of experimental observations. Indeed, the author appears to view the scientist as 'a natural historian of some class of phenomena', which precludes many theoretical approaches to scientific enquiry. Thus I believe that he is arguing from the particular to the general in his belief that the principles developed 'will hold across the natural sciences'. Nevertheless, the example chosen - the growth of axons - i s likely to make the book especially useful to many neurobiologists. The author's intention is to offer 'a set of rules for scientific 96
© 1987, ElsevierScience Publishers B.V., Amsterdam 0378- 59121871502.00
TINS- February 1987 [10]
some referees are lazy, a few are not very intelligent, and a very few are dishonest. This book gives an excellent example of appalling refereeing, and the best way I have ever seen of dealing with it - to find out how you will have to read the book. In general, I believe that referees' opinions
should be carefully considered, and replied to in a letter to the editor. In conclusion, this is an excellent practical guide to writing scientific papers. I shall certainly recommend it to my research students, although I shall indicated its limitations to them and
make good a few omissions. These omissions include labelling graphs, layout of equations, and the use of spaces in units e.g. 3.5 MN m -2. I predict that it will not be long before my free review copy becomes well worn with use or is 'borrowed' fo re ve r- I shall then have to buy another.
The Case for Animal Experimentation: An Evolutionary and Ethical Perspective
mans and non-humans that, in his view, make it impossible for humans to admit animals for full membership in 'the moral community'. Animals are not autonomous beings in that they do not take 'deliberative, responsible action and have the sort of awareness necessary to see this kind of action as essential to their nature, well-being and development as individuals'. Nor are they 'capable of recognizing autonomy in others' (p. 56). Fox argues that it is this autonomy - taking and recognizing moral responsibility - that should decide whether we acknowledge rights in other beings (black people, women, dogs), not the widely advocated criterion of whether a being has the ability to suffer. The capacity to suffer in animals should give rise to humaneness and kindness from humans, but it should not form the sole basis of morality. He concludes that we should give consideration to the suffering of animals and reduce it whenever we can, but that animals' pain still counts for less than that of human beings. Consequently, there may be circumstances in which to alleviate human pain and suffering, research using animals may be morally permissible, even if it causes suffering. The second section of the book moves into the more concrete areas of what scientists actually do, and is written in the belief that many people simply misunderstand what research is about and how science proceeds (for example, how important the ability to reproduce results is). Not everyone will agree with his analysis of the experiments that are described nor with his conclusions about possible alternatives to the use of animals. Others will take issue with his defence of
'pure' research and his belief that the best way of ensuring humane treatment of animals is peer review by scientists themselves. However, whatever views we individually hold, his attempt to correct the frequent claims that animal research is trivial, pointless and redundant will, I hope, be seen as contributing positively to debates that are often one-sided and extreme. Apart from some slightly dubious biology on p. 3, this book is certainly to be recommended for anyone interested in the issues surrounding animal experimentation. The arguments are important ones. And the list of recommendations at the end of the book should reassure anyone who thinks they are put forward by a complacent defender of all animal experiments.
by Michael Allen Fox, University of California Press, 1986. $24.95 (xii + 262 pages) 0 520 05501 2 Michael Allen Fox (not to be confused with Michael W. Fox of the Humane Society of the United States) has written a book that will make welcome reading for many scientists, and will be all the more welcome because it is written in a readable, unpolemical style. Fox first makes the case that, under some circumstances, animal experimentation is quite justifiable and that the ethical arguments that have been brought against it often do not stand up to scrutiny. Then, having cleared the philosophical ground, he moves on to discuss a number of examples of experiments on animals that have been widely criticized as being immoral. His concern is not to justify animal experiments in general- he simply wants to point out that there is another side to the issue, one that is often left out altogether when animal rights activists describe what scientists do to animals. In many ways, the most valuable part of the book is the first, philosophical part. Here Fox takes issue with Peter Singer and others who have argued that speciesism (discriminating against members of other species) is as morally indefensible as racism and sexism. Fox argues that discriminating against black people or women is, in fact, in a quite different category, since the discrimination here is on the basis of the morally irrelevant differences of skin colour or sex. With animals, however, there are morally relevant differences, that is, differences between hu-
TINS- February 1987[10]
Marian Stamp Dawkins Departmentof Zoolo~, Universityof Oxford,SouthParks Road,OxfordOXl 3PS,UK.
100th Issue Additional copies of this issue can still be obtained at a cost of $4.35 (£2,90). Discounts on orders of 10 or more copies are available. All prices include postage and packing, Name: ........................................................... Address: .......................................................
........................................ Zipcode: ...............
Payment must accompany order and may be made by cheque (made out to Elsevier) or by credit card. We accept AmEx, Visa (France. excepted) and Access/Mastercard/Eurocard. Please give card number, expiry date, issuing bank, the card holder's name, address and signature. Send this order form to: Elsevier Publications Cambridge, 68 Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 1LA, UK.
© 1987, ElsevierSciencePublishersB.V.,Amsterdam 0378- 5912/87/$02.0(3
97