Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Module 5 - Coggle Diagram
Module 5
IQ2 - What type of methodology best suits a scientific investigation
Types of Scientific Investigations
EXPERIMENTAL TESTING
experiment done by scientist
individual conducts experiment
collects + analyses results
FIELDWORK
scientist makes direct observations
observer not changing conditions
often done in ecological studies
LOCATING & USING INFORMATION SOURCES
scientist examines results
from another scientists experiment
genetics
SURVEYS
collecting data from a large amount of people
medical studies
MODELLING
phenomenon is represented to show how it works
diagram of cell
SIMULATIONS
recreates parts of phenomenon
allows aspects to be changed
climate modelling
MARSHALL & WARREN (PEPTIC ULCERS)
methodology
experimental testing
data collected/conclusion
qualitative data
Marshall injected himself w/ bacteria
suffered same symportoms
treated with antibiotics
justify relevance
change in treatment of peptic ulcers
ERATOSTHENES (EARTH'S CIRCUMFERENCE)
area studied
geometry
circumference of Earth
methodology
primary investigation
data collected/conclusion
quantitative data
length of shadow
created at noon
summer solstice
secondary sourced data
distance between Alexandria and Syrene
justify methodology
reflection of technology at the time
DOPPLER (DOPPLER EFFECT)
area studied
astronomy
electromagnetic spectrum
hypothesis
images of binary stars over time
differences in EMR emitted
methodology
fieldwork
collect large amounts of data from one location
data collected/conclusion
qualitative data
photographic images
star moves closer
light emitted - blue shifted
star moves further
light emitted - red shifted
justify methodology
not a lot known - binary stars
large amounts of data was needed
justify relevance
led to evidence of Big Bang Theory
development of radar
PRIESTLEY (EXPERIMENT OXYGEN)
area studied
gases in air (oxygen)
hypothesis
oxygen is needed by living things
methodology
primary investigations
data collected/conclusion
qualitative
flame of candle, mouse (dead/alive)
plant replinished oxygen
after candle used some up
justify methodology
useful in determining conclusion
elements of air
justify relevance
disovey of oxygen
foundation of gas exchange in plants
IQ1 - What initiates an investigation?
PLANT GROWTH
Jan Baptist Von Helmont
INSTIGATION:
Curious about how plants seemed to grow from nothing
PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS
mass of soil
converted into mass of willow tree over time
DEVIATION
Generalisation of all plant life
Little to no planning
No repetition
one test subject
not reliable
external factors not considered
no control (gas exchange, etc)
INVESTIGATION
watered single willow sapling for 5-7 years
recorded mass of tree and soil both before and after
soil remained pretty much the same mass (90kg)
test previous conclusion
disprove ancient Greeks
plants grew due to eating soil
early 1600s, belgium
MICROWAVES
Percy Spencer
1940s
American Physicist
factors
working with magnetrons
noticed chocolate bar melted in pocket
electromagnetic radiation - wavelengths 1m-1mm
began exposing foods to microwaves
data/scientific knowledge for accurate predictions
created first microwave oven
electromagnetic radiation could be directed
2m tall, weighed 350kg
hypothesis
radar range technology
used to heat food for consumption
deviations
invented by accident
no experiment
no hypothesis beforehand
PEPTIC ULCERS
Factors
curiosity driven research
H. pylori
'Why do these bacteria live here?'
Relationships/patterns identified
3-5 days bacteria showed sympotoms
hypothesis
H. pylori bacteria was the cause of peptic ulcers
deviations
not reliable
not valid
variables not controlled
caused by bacteria or lifestyle
not ethical
Barry Marshall & Robin Warren
1979-1985
Perth, Aus.
IQ4 - How is the Integrity of a scientific investigation judged?
RELIABILITY
consistency of results
standard deviation
reducing error
systematic vs random
VALIDITY
fair test
did the test measure what was intended to measure?
DESIGN
Sample Size and selection
how many different things are being tested?
which thing is being tested?
materials
availability, cost, risk, familiarity of use
ethics
confidentiality, human treatment, animal welfare
timeframe
achievable?
collaboration
individual vs groupwork
IQ5 - What is the structure of an investigative report?
comparison structure and function
similarities
includes title - overview
includes background information
context on why investigation was carried out
show methods/procedure taken
evidence is collected
part of the scientific theory
has set structure of steps
Differences - Working Scientifically
title is not descriptive
no summary of aims, methods, results, discussion
background information is own subheading
procedure is in steps
experiments conducted to collect evidence
identification of IQ
form hypothesis
more individual subheadings
Differences - Peer-reviewed scientific report
descriptive title
includes abstract - summart
introduction includes background information
method - description of procedure
analysis and discussion of evidence/results
IQ is tested and is answered
follows structured format
uses common scientific language
structure of journal article
TITLE
subject of report
top of report
AUTHOR
clearly listed
uni/research affiliations
ABSTRACT
shortened version of experiment, aims, methods, results, discussion
article summary
INTRODUCTION
beginning of report
background information and aim
METHODS
tells reader of what was used, done
graphs, statistics, tables
specialised vocabulary
RESULTS
findings presented
tables, figures
summarise results
DISCUSSION
results explained & interpreted
implications of research
address what needs further exploration
highlights limitations of research
CONCLUSION
final statement
recommendations from study
REFERENCES
list publications that have been referred to in body of article
APPENDIX (-CES)
extra detail about methodology or results