background research lab report

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Academic writing
• How to write a lab report

How To Write A Lab Report | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Published on May 20, 2021 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on July 23, 2023.

A lab report conveys the aim, methods, results, and conclusions of a scientific experiment. The main purpose of a lab report is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method by performing and evaluating a hands-on lab experiment. This type of assignment is usually shorter than a research paper .

Lab reports are commonly used in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. This article focuses on how to structure and write a lab report.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Structuring a lab report, introduction, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about lab reports.

The sections of a lab report can vary between scientific fields and course requirements, but they usually contain the purpose, methods, and findings of a lab experiment .

Each section of a lab report has its own purpose.

• Title: expresses the topic of your study
• Abstract : summarizes your research aims, methods, results, and conclusions
• Introduction: establishes the context needed to understand the topic
• Method: describes the materials and procedures used in the experiment
• Results: reports all descriptive and inferential statistical analyses
• Discussion: interprets and evaluates results and identifies limitations
• Conclusion: sums up the main findings of your experiment
• References: list of all sources cited using a specific style (e.g. APA )
• Appendices : contains lengthy materials, procedures, tables or figures

Although most lab reports contain these sections, some sections can be omitted or combined with others. For example, some lab reports contain a brief section on research aims instead of an introduction, and a separate conclusion is not always required.

If you’re not sure, it’s best to check your lab report requirements with your instructor.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Your title provides the first impression of your lab report – effective titles communicate the topic and/or the findings of your study in specific terms.

Create a title that directly conveys the main focus or purpose of your study. It doesn’t need to be creative or thought-provoking, but it should be informative.

• The effects of varying nitrogen levels on tomato plant height.
• Testing the universality of the McGurk effect.
• Comparing the viscosity of common liquids found in kitchens.

An abstract condenses a lab report into a brief overview of about 150–300 words. It should provide readers with a compact version of the research aims, the methods and materials used, the main results, and the final conclusion.

Think of it as a way of giving readers a preview of your full lab report. Write the abstract last, in the past tense, after you’ve drafted all the other sections of your report, so you’ll be able to succinctly summarize each section.

To write a lab report abstract, use these guiding questions:

• What is the wider context of your study?
• What research question were you trying to answer?
• How did you perform the experiment?
• What did your results show?
• How did you interpret your results?
• What is the importance of your findings?

Nitrogen is a necessary nutrient for high quality plants. Tomatoes, one of the most consumed fruits worldwide, rely on nitrogen for healthy leaves and stems to grow fruit. This experiment tested whether nitrogen levels affected tomato plant height in a controlled setting. It was expected that higher levels of nitrogen fertilizer would yield taller tomato plants.

Levels of nitrogen fertilizer were varied between three groups of tomato plants. The control group did not receive any nitrogen fertilizer, while one experimental group received low levels of nitrogen fertilizer, and a second experimental group received high levels of nitrogen fertilizer. All plants were grown from seeds, and heights were measured 50 days into the experiment.

The effects of nitrogen levels on plant height were tested between groups using an ANOVA. The plants with the highest level of nitrogen fertilizer were the tallest, while the plants with low levels of nitrogen exceeded the control group plants in height. In line with expectations and previous findings, the effects of nitrogen levels on plant height were statistically significant. This study strengthens the importance of nitrogen for tomato plants.

Your lab report introduction should set the scene for your experiment. One way to write your introduction is with a funnel (an inverted triangle) structure:

• Start with the broad, general research topic
• Narrow your topic down your specific study focus
• End with a clear research question

Begin by providing background information on your research topic and explaining why it’s important in a broad real-world or theoretical context. Describe relevant previous research on your topic and note how your study may confirm it or expand it, or fill a gap in the research field.

This lab experiment builds on previous research from Haque, Paul, and Sarker (2011), who demonstrated that tomato plant yield increased at higher levels of nitrogen. However, the present research focuses on plant height as a growth indicator and uses a lab-controlled setting instead.

Next, go into detail on the theoretical basis for your study and describe any directly relevant laws or equations that you’ll be using. State your main research aims and expectations by outlining your hypotheses .

Based on the importance of nitrogen for tomato plants, the primary hypothesis was that the plants with the high levels of nitrogen would grow the tallest. The secondary hypothesis was that plants with low levels of nitrogen would grow taller than plants with no nitrogen.

Your introduction doesn’t need to be long, but you may need to organize it into a few paragraphs or with subheadings such as “Research Context” or “Research Aims.”

A lab report Method section details the steps you took to gather and analyze data. Give enough detail so that others can follow or evaluate your procedures. Write this section in the past tense. If you need to include any long lists of procedural steps or materials, place them in the Appendices section but refer to them in the text here.

You should describe your experimental design, your subjects, materials, and specific procedures used for data collection and analysis.

Experimental design

Briefly note whether your experiment is a within-subjects  or between-subjects design, and describe how your sample units were assigned to conditions if relevant.

A between-subjects design with three groups of tomato plants was used. The control group did not receive any nitrogen fertilizer. The first experimental group received a low level of nitrogen fertilizer, while the second experimental group received a high level of nitrogen fertilizer.

Describe human subjects in terms of demographic characteristics, and animal or plant subjects in terms of genetic background. Note the total number of subjects as well as the number of subjects per condition or per group. You should also state how you recruited subjects for your study.

List the equipment or materials you used to gather data and state the model names for any specialized equipment.

List of materials

35 Tomato seeds

15 plant pots (15 cm tall)

Light lamps (50,000 lux)

Nitrogen fertilizer

Measuring tape

Describe your experimental settings and conditions in detail. You can provide labelled diagrams or images of the exact set-up necessary for experimental equipment. State how extraneous variables were controlled through restriction or by fixing them at a certain level (e.g., keeping the lab at room temperature).

Light levels were fixed throughout the experiment, and the plants were exposed to 12 hours of light a day. Temperature was restricted to between 23 and 25℃. The pH and carbon levels of the soil were also held constant throughout the experiment as these variables could influence plant height. The plants were grown in rooms free of insects or other pests, and they were spaced out adequately.

Your experimental procedure should describe the exact steps you took to gather data in chronological order. You’ll need to provide enough information so that someone else can replicate your procedure, but you should also be concise. Place detailed information in the appendices where appropriate.

In a lab experiment, you’ll often closely follow a lab manual to gather data. Some instructors will allow you to simply reference the manual and state whether you changed any steps based on practical considerations. Other instructors may want you to rewrite the lab manual procedures as complete sentences in coherent paragraphs, while noting any changes to the steps that you applied in practice.

If you’re performing extensive data analysis, be sure to state your planned analysis methods as well. This includes the types of tests you’ll perform and any programs or software you’ll use for calculations (if relevant).

First, tomato seeds were sown in wooden flats containing soil about 2 cm below the surface. Each seed was kept 3-5 cm apart. The flats were covered to keep the soil moist until germination. The seedlings were removed and transplanted to pots 8 days later, with a maximum of 2 plants to a pot. Each pot was watered once a day to keep the soil moist.

The nitrogen fertilizer treatment was applied to the plant pots 12 days after transplantation. The control group received no treatment, while the first experimental group received a low concentration, and the second experimental group received a high concentration. There were 5 pots in each group, and each plant pot was labelled to indicate the group the plants belonged to.

50 days after the start of the experiment, plant height was measured for all plants. A measuring tape was used to record the length of the plant from ground level to the top of the tallest leaf.

In your results section, you should report the results of any statistical analysis procedures that you undertook. You should clearly state how the results of statistical tests support or refute your initial hypotheses.

The main results to report include:

• any descriptive statistics
• statistical test results
• the significance of the test results
• estimates of standard error or confidence intervals

The mean heights of the plants in the control group, low nitrogen group, and high nitrogen groups were 20.3, 25.1, and 29.6 cm respectively. A one-way ANOVA was applied to calculate the effect of nitrogen fertilizer level on plant height. The results demonstrated statistically significant ( p = .03) height differences between groups.

Next, post-hoc tests were performed to assess the primary and secondary hypotheses. In support of the primary hypothesis, the high nitrogen group plants were significantly taller than the low nitrogen group and the control group plants. Similarly, the results supported the secondary hypothesis: the low nitrogen plants were taller than the control group plants.

These results can be reported in the text or in tables and figures. Use text for highlighting a few key results, but present large sets of numbers in tables, or show relationships between variables with graphs.

You should also include sample calculations in the Results section for complex experiments. For each sample calculation, provide a brief description of what it does and use clear symbols. Present your raw data in the Appendices section and refer to it to highlight any outliers or trends.

The Discussion section will help demonstrate your understanding of the experimental process and your critical thinking skills.

In this section, you can:

• Interpret your results
• Compare your findings with your expectations
• Identify any sources of experimental error
• Explain any unexpected results
• Suggest possible improvements for further studies

Interpreting your results involves clarifying how your results help you answer your main research question. Report whether your results support your hypotheses.

• Did you measure what you sought out to measure?
• Were your analysis procedures appropriate for this type of data?

Compare your findings with other research and explain any key differences in findings.

• Are your results in line with those from previous studies or your classmates’ results? Why or why not?

An effective Discussion section will also highlight the strengths and limitations of a study.

• Did you have high internal validity or reliability?
• How did you establish these aspects of your study?

When describing limitations, use specific examples. For example, if random error contributed substantially to the measurements in your study, state the particular sources of error (e.g., imprecise apparatus) and explain ways to improve them.

The results support the hypothesis that nitrogen levels affect plant height, with increasing levels producing taller plants. These statistically significant results are taken together with previous research to support the importance of nitrogen as a nutrient for tomato plant growth.

However, unlike previous studies, this study focused on plant height as an indicator of plant growth in the present experiment. Importantly, plant height may not always reflect plant health or fruit yield, so measuring other indicators would have strengthened the study findings.

Another limitation of the study is the plant height measurement technique, as the measuring tape was not suitable for plants with extreme curvature. Future studies may focus on measuring plant height in different ways.

The main strengths of this study were the controls for extraneous variables, such as pH and carbon levels of the soil. All other factors that could affect plant height were tightly controlled to isolate the effects of nitrogen levels, resulting in high internal validity for this study.

Your conclusion should be the final section of your lab report. Here, you’ll summarize the findings of your experiment, with a brief overview of the strengths and limitations, and implications of your study for further research.

Some lab reports may omit a Conclusion section because it overlaps with the Discussion section, but you should check with your instructor before doing so.

If you want to know more about AI for academic writing, AI tools, or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

• Ad hominem fallacy
• Post hoc fallacy
• Appeal to authority fallacy
• False cause fallacy
• Sunk cost fallacy
• Deep learning
• Generative AI
• Machine learning
• Reinforcement learning
• Supervised vs. unsupervised learning

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

A lab report conveys the aim, methods, results, and conclusions of a scientific experiment . Lab reports are commonly assigned in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields.

The purpose of a lab report is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method with a hands-on lab experiment. Course instructors will often provide you with an experimental design and procedure. Your task is to write up how you actually performed the experiment and evaluate the outcome.

In contrast, a research paper requires you to independently develop an original argument. It involves more in-depth research and interpretation of sources and data.

A lab report is usually shorter than a research paper.

The sections of a lab report can vary between scientific fields and course requirements, but it usually contains the following:

• Abstract: summarizes your research aims, methods, results, and conclusions
• References: list of all sources cited using a specific style (e.g. APA)
• Appendices: contains lengthy materials, procedures, tables or figures

The results chapter or section simply and objectively reports what you found, without speculating on why you found these results. The discussion interprets the meaning of the results, puts them in context, and explains why they matter.

In qualitative research , results and discussion are sometimes combined. But in quantitative research , it’s considered important to separate the objective results from your interpretation of them.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Bhandari, P. (2023, July 23). How To Write A Lab Report | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved March 20, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-writing/lab-report/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, guide to experimental design | overview, steps, & examples, how to write an apa methods section, how to write an apa results section, unlimited academic ai-proofreading.

✔ Document error-free in 5minutes ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Writing Studio

Writing a lab report: introduction and discussion section guide.

In an effort to make our handouts more accessible, we have begun converting our PDF handouts to web pages. Download this page as a PDF:   Writing a Lab Report Return to Writing Studio Handouts

Part 1 (of 2): Introducing a Lab Report

The introduction of a lab report states the objective of the experiment and provides the reader with background information. State the topic of your report clearly and concisely (in one or two sentences). Provide background theory, previous research, or formulas the reader should know. Usually, an instructor does not want you to repeat whatever the lab manual says, but to show your understanding of the problem.

Questions an Effective Lab Report Introduction Should Answer

What is the problem.

Describe the problem investigated. Summarize relevant research to provide context, key terms, and concepts so that your reader can understand the experiment.

Why is it important?

Review relevant research to provide a rationale for the investigation. What conflict, unanswered question, untested population, or untried method in existing research does your experiment address? How will you challenge or extend the findings of other researchers?

What solution (or step toward a solution) do you propose?

Briefly describe your experiment : hypothesis , research question , general experimental design or method , and a justification of your method (if alternatives exist).

Tips on Composing Your Lab Report’s Introduction

• Move from the general to the specific – from a problem in research literature to the specifics of your experiment.
• Engage your reader – answer the questions: “What did I do?” “Why should my reader care?”
• Clarify the links between problem and solution, between question asked and research design, and between prior research and the specifics of your experiment.
• Be selective, not exhaustive, in choosing studies to cite and the amount of detail to include. In general, the more relevant an article is to your study, the more space it deserves and the later in the introduction it appears.
• Ask your instructor whether or not you should summarize results and/or conclusions in the Introduction.
• “The objective of the experiment was …”
• “The purpose of this report is …”
• “Bragg’s Law for diffraction is …”
• “The scanning electron microscope produces micrographs …”

Part 2 (of 2): Writing the “Discussion” Section of a Lab Report

The discussion is the most important part of your lab report, because here you show that you have not merely completed the experiment, but that you also understand its wider implications. The discussion section is reserved for putting experimental results in the context of the larger theory. Ask yourself: “What is the significance or meaning of the results?”

Elements of an Effective Discussion Section

What do the results indicate clearly? Based on your results, explain what you know with certainty and draw conclusions.

Interpretation

What is the significance of your results? What ambiguities exist? What are logical explanations for problems in the data? What questions might you raise about the methods used or the validity of the experiment? What can be logically deduced from your analysis?

Tips on the Discussion Section

1. explain your results in terms of theoretical issues..

How well has the theory been illustrated? What are the theoretical implications and practical applications of your results?

For each major result:

• Describe the patterns, principles, and relationships that your results show.
• Explain how your results relate to expectations and to literature cited in your Introduction. Explain any agreements, contradictions, or exceptions.
• Describe what additional research might resolve contradictions or explain exceptions.

2. Relate results to your experimental objective(s).

If you set out to identify an unknown metal by finding its lattice parameter and its atomic structure, be sure that you have identified the metal and its attributes.

3. Compare expected results with those obtained.

If there were differences, how can you account for them? Were the instruments able to measure precisely? Was the sample contaminated? Did calculated values take account of friction?

4. Analyze experimental error along with the strengths and limitations of the experiment’s design.

Were any errors avoidable? Were they the result of equipment?  If the flaws resulted from the experiment design, explain how the design might be improved. Consider, as well, the precision of the instruments that were used.

5. Compare your results to similar investigations.

In some cases, it is legitimate to compare outcomes with classmates, not in order to change your answer, but in order to look for and to account for or analyze any anomalies between the groups. Also, consider comparing your results to published scientific literature on the topic.

The “Introducing a Lab Report” guide was adapted from the University of Toronto Engineering Communications Centre and University of Wisconsin-Madison Writing Center.

The “Writing the Discussion Section of a Lab Report” resource was adapted from the University of Toronto Engineering Communications Centre and University of Wisconsin-Madison Writing Center.

Last revised: 07/2008 | Adapted for web delivery: 02/2021

In order to access certain content on this page, you may need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader or an equivalent PDF viewer software.

How to Write a Lab Report

Lab Reports Describe Your Experiment

• Chemical Laws
• Periodic Table
• Projects & Experiments
• Scientific Method
• Biochemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Medical Chemistry
• Chemistry In Everyday Life
• Famous Chemists
• Activities for Kids
• Abbreviations & Acronyms
• Weather & Climate
• Ph.D., Biomedical Sciences, University of Tennessee at Knoxville
• B.A., Physics and Mathematics, Hastings College

Lab reports are an essential part of all laboratory courses and usually a significant part of your grade. If your instructor gives you an outline for how to write a lab report, use that. Some instructors require a lab report to be included in a lab notebook , while others will request a separate report. Here's a format for a lab report you can use if you aren't sure what to write or need an explanation of what to include in the different parts of the report.

A lab report is how you explain what you did in ​your experiment, what you learned, and what the results meant.

Lab Report Essentials

Not all lab reports have title pages, but if your instructor wants one, it would be a single page that states:​

• The title of the experiment.
• Your name and the names of any lab partners.
• Your instructor's name.
• The date the lab was performed or the date the report was submitted.

The title says what you did. It should be brief (aim for ten words or less) and describe the main point of the experiment or investigation. An example of a title would be: "Effects of Ultraviolet Light on Borax Crystal Growth Rate". If you can, begin your title using a keyword rather than an article like "The" or "A".

Introduction or Purpose

Usually, the introduction is one paragraph that explains the objectives or purpose of the lab. In one sentence, state the hypothesis. Sometimes an introduction may contain background information, briefly summarize how the experiment was performed, state the findings of the experiment, and list the conclusions of the investigation. Even if you don't write a whole introduction, you need to state the purpose of the experiment, or why you did it. This would be where you state your hypothesis .

List everything needed to complete your experiment.

Describe the steps you completed during your investigation. This is your procedure. Be sufficiently detailed that anyone could read this section and duplicate your experiment. Write it as if you were giving direction for someone else to do the lab. It may be helpful to provide a figure to diagram your experimental setup.

Numerical data obtained from your procedure usually presented as a table. Data encompasses what you recorded when you conducted the experiment. It's just the facts, not any interpretation of what they mean.

Describe in words what the data means. Sometimes the Results section is combined with the Discussion.

Discussion or Analysis

The Data section contains numbers; the Analysis section contains any calculations you made based on those numbers. This is where you interpret the data and determine whether or not a hypothesis was accepted. This is also where you would discuss any mistakes you might have made while conducting the investigation. You may wish to describe ways the study might have been improved.

Conclusions

Most of the time the conclusion is a single paragraph that sums up what happened in the experiment, whether your hypothesis was accepted or rejected, and what this means.

Figures and Graphs

Graphs and figures must both be labeled with a descriptive title. Label the axes on a graph, being sure to include units of measurement. The independent variable is on the X-axis, the dependent variable (the one you are measuring) is on the Y-axis. Be sure to refer to figures and graphs in the text of your report: the first figure is Figure 1, the second figure is Figure 2, etc.

If your research was based on someone else's work or if you cited facts that require documentation, then you should list these references.

• How to Format a Biology Lab Report
• Science Lab Report Template - Fill in the Blanks
• How to Write a Science Fair Project Report
• How to Write an Abstract for a Scientific Paper
• Six Steps of the Scientific Method
• How To Design a Science Fair Experiment
• Understanding Simple vs Controlled Experiments
• Make a Science Fair Poster or Display
• What Is an Experiment? Definition and Design
• What Are the Elements of a Good Hypothesis?
• How to Organize Your Science Fair Poster
• Scientific Method Lesson Plan
• The 10 Most Important Lab Safety Rules
• 6 Steps to Writing the Perfect Personal Essay
• How to Write a Great Book Report

Princeton Correspondents on Undergraduate Research

How to Write An Effective Lab Report

Whether you are in lab for general chemistry, independent work, or senior thesis, almost all lab experiments will be followed up with a lab report or paper. Although it should be relatively easy to write about an experiment you completed, this is often the most difficult part of lab work, especially when the results are unexpected. In this post, I will outline the components of a lab report while offering tips on how to write one.

Understand Your Experiments Thoroughly

Before you begin writing your draft, it is important that you understand your experiment, as this will help you decide what to include in your paper. When I wrote my first organic chemistry lab report, I rushed to begin answering the discussion questions only to realize halfway through that I had a major conceptual error. Because of this, I had to revise most of what I had written so far, which cost me a lot of time. Know what the purpose of the lab is, formulate the hypothesis, and begin to think about the results you are expecting. At this point, it is helpful to check in with your Lab TA, mentor, or principal investigator (PI) to ensure that you thoroughly understand your project. 

The abstract of your lab report will generally consist of a short summary of your entire report, typically in the same order as your report. Although this is the first section of your lab report, this should be the last section you write. Rather than trying to follow your entire report based on your abstract, it is easier if you write your report first before trying to summarize it.

Introduction and Background

The introduction and background of your report should establish the purpose of your experiment (what principles you are examining), your hypothesis (what you expect to see and why), and relevant findings from others in the field. You have likely done extensive reading about the project from textbooks, lecture notes, or scholarly articles. But as you write, only include background information that is relevant to your specific experiments. For instance, over the summer when I was still learning about metabolic engineering and its role in yeast cells, I read several articles detailing this process. However, a lot of this information was a very broad introduction to the field and not directly related to my project, so I decided not to include most of it. 

This section of the lab report should not contain a step-by-step procedure of your experiments, but rather enough details should be included so that someone else can understand and replicate what you did. From this section, the reader should understand how you tested your hypothesis and why you chose that method. Explain the different parts of your project, the variables being tested, and controls in your experiments. This section will validate the data presented by confirming that variables are being tested in a proper way.

You cannot change the data you collect from your experiments; thus the results section will be written for you. Your job is to present these results in appropriate tables and charts. Depending on the length of your project, you may have months of data from experiments or just a three-hour lab period worth of results. For example, for in-class lab reports, there is usually only one major experiment, so I include most of the data I collect in my lab report. But for longer projects such as summer internships, there are various preliminary experiments throughout, so I select the data to include. Although you cannot change the data, you must choose what is relevant to include in your report. Determine what is included in your report based on the goals and purpose of your project.

Discussion and Conclusion

In this section, you should analyze your results and relate your data back to your hypothesis. You should mention whether the results you obtained matched what was expected and the conclusions that can be drawn from this. For this section, you should talk about your data and conclusions with your lab mentors or TAs before you begin writing. As I mentioned above, by consulting with your mentors, you will avoid making large conceptual error that may take a long time to address.

There is no correct order for how to write a report, but it is generally easier to write some sections before others. For instance, because your results cannot be changed, it is easier to write the results section first. Likewise, because you also cannot change the methods you used in your experiment, it is helpful to write this section after writing your results. Although there are multiple ways to write and format a lab report or research paper, the goals of every report are the same: to describe what you did, your results, and why they are significant. As you write, keep your audience and these goals in mind.

— Saira Reyes, Engineering Correspondent

Share this:

• Share on Tumblr

Lab Report Format: Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, Ph.D., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years experience of working in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

In psychology, a lab report outlines a study’s objectives, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions, ensuring clarity and adherence to APA (or relevant) formatting guidelines.

A typical lab report would include the following sections: title, abstract, introduction, method, results, and discussion.

The title page, abstract, references, and appendices are started on separate pages (subsections from the main body of the report are not). Use double-line spacing of text, font size 12, and include page numbers.

The report should have a thread of arguments linking the prediction in the introduction to the content of the discussion.

This must indicate what the study is about. It must include the variables under investigation. It should not be written as a question.

Title pages should be formatted in APA style .

The abstract provides a concise and comprehensive summary of a research report. Your style should be brief but not use note form. Look at examples in journal articles . It should aim to explain very briefly (about 150 words) the following:

• Start with a one/two sentence summary, providing the aim and rationale for the study.
• Describe participants and setting: who, when, where, how many, and what groups?
• Describe the method: what design, what experimental treatment, what questionnaires, surveys, or tests were used.
• Describe the major findings, including a mention of the statistics used and the significance levels, or simply one sentence summing up the outcome.
• The final sentence(s) outline the study’s “contribution to knowledge” within the literature. What does it all mean? Mention the implications of your findings if appropriate.

The abstract comes at the beginning of your report but is written at the end (as it summarises information from all the other sections of the report).

Introduction

The purpose of the introduction is to explain where your hypothesis comes from (i.e., it should provide a rationale for your research study).

Ideally, the introduction should have a funnel structure: Start broad and then become more specific. The aims should not appear out of thin air; the preceding review of psychological literature should lead logically into the aims and hypotheses.

• Start with general theory, briefly introducing the topic. Define the important key terms.
• Explain the theoretical framework.
• Summarise and synthesize previous studies – What was the purpose? Who were the participants? What did they do? What did they find? What do these results mean? How do the results relate to the theoretical framework?
• Rationale: How does the current study address a gap in the literature? Perhaps it overcomes a limitation of previous research.
• Aims and hypothesis. Write a paragraph explaining what you plan to investigate and make a clear and concise prediction regarding the results you expect to find.

There should be a logical progression of ideas that aids the flow of the report. This means the studies outlined should lead logically to your aims and hypotheses.

Do be concise and selective, and avoid the temptation to include anything in case it is relevant (i.e., don’t write a shopping list of studies).

USE THE FOLLOWING SUBHEADINGS:

Participants

• How many participants were recruited?
• Say how you obtained your sample (e.g., opportunity sample).
• Give relevant demographic details (e.g., gender, ethnicity, age range, mean age, and standard deviation).
• State the experimental design .
• What were the independent and dependent variables ? Make sure the independent variable is labeled and name the different conditions/levels.
• For example, if gender is the independent variable label, then male and female are the levels/conditions/groups.
• How were the IV and DV operationalized?
• Identify any controls used, e.g., counterbalancing and control of extraneous variables.
• List all the materials and measures (e.g., what was the title of the questionnaire? Was it adapted from a study?).
• You do not need to include wholesale replication of materials – instead, include a ‘sensible’ (illustrate) level of detail. For example, give examples of questionnaire items.
• Include the reliability (e.g., alpha values) for the measure(s).
• Describe the precise procedure you followed when conducting your research, i.e., exactly what you did.
• Describe in sufficient detail to allow for replication of findings.
• Be concise in your description and omit extraneous/trivial details, e.g., you don’t need to include details regarding instructions, debrief, record sheets, etc.
• Assume the reader has no knowledge of what you did and ensure that he/she can replicate (i.e., copy) your study exactly by what you write in this section.
• Write in the past tense.
• Don’t justify or explain in the Method (e.g., why you chose a particular sampling method); just report what you did.
• Only give enough detail for someone to replicate the experiment – be concise in your writing.
• The results section of a paper usually presents descriptive statistics followed by inferential statistics.
• Report the means, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each IV level. If you have four to 20 numbers to present, a well-presented table is best, APA style.
• Name the statistical test being used.
• Report appropriate statistics (e.g., t-scores, p values ).
• Report the magnitude (e.g., are the results significant or not?) as well as the direction of the results (e.g., which group performed better?).
• It is optional to report the effect size (this does not appear on the SPSS output).
• Avoid interpreting the results (save this for the discussion).
• Make sure the results are presented clearly and concisely. A table can be used to display descriptive statistics if this makes the data easier to understand.
• DO NOT include any raw data.
• Follow APA style.

Use APA Style

• Numbers reported to 2 d.p. (incl. 0 before the decimal if 1.00, e.g., “0.51”). The exceptions to this rule: Numbers which can never exceed 1.0 (e.g., p -values, r-values): report to 3 d.p. and do not include 0 before the decimal place, e.g., “.001”.
• Percentages and degrees of freedom: report as whole numbers.
• Statistical symbols that are not Greek letters should be italicized (e.g., M , SD , t , X 2 , F , p , d ).
• Include spaces on either side of the equals sign.
• When reporting 95%, CIs (confidence intervals), upper and lower limits are given inside square brackets, e.g., “95% CI [73.37, 102.23]”
• Outline your findings in plain English (avoid statistical jargon) and relate your results to your hypothesis, e.g., is it supported or rejected?
• Compare your results to background materials from the introduction section. Are your results similar or different? Discuss why/why not.
• How confident can we be in the results? Acknowledge limitations, but only if they can explain the result obtained. If the study has found a reliable effect, be very careful suggesting limitations as you are doubting your results. Unless you can think of any c onfounding variable that can explain the results instead of the IV, it would be advisable to leave the section out.
• Suggest constructive ways to improve your study if appropriate.
• What are the implications of your findings? Say what your findings mean for how people behave in the real world.
• Suggest an idea for further research triggered by your study, something in the same area but not simply an improved version of yours. Perhaps you could base this on a limitation of your study.
• Concluding paragraph – Finish with a statement of your findings and the key points of the discussion (e.g., interpretation and implications) in no more than 3 or 4 sentences.

Reference Page

The reference section lists all the sources cited in the essay (alphabetically). It is not a bibliography (a list of the books you used).

In simple terms, every time you refer to a psychologist’s name (and date), you need to reference the original source of information.

If you have been using textbooks this is easy as the references are usually at the back of the book and you can just copy them down. If you have been using websites then you may have a problem as they might not provide a reference section for you to copy.

References need to be set out APA style :

Author, A. A. (year). Title of work . Location: Publisher.

Journal Articles

Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (year). Article title. Journal Title, volume number (issue number), page numbers

A simple way to write your reference section is to use Google scholar . Just type the name and date of the psychologist in the search box and click on the “cite” link.

Next, copy and paste the APA reference into the reference section of your essay.

Once again, remember that references need to be in alphabetical order according to surname.

Psychology Lab Report Example

Quantitative paper template.

Quantitative professional paper template: Adapted from “Fake News, Fast and Slow: Deliberation Reduces Belief in False (but Not True) News Headlines,” by B. Bago, D. G. Rand, and G. Pennycook, 2020,  Journal of Experimental Psychology: General ,  149 (8), pp. 1608–1613 ( https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000729 ). Copyright 2020 by the American Psychological Association.

Qualitative paper template

Qualitative professional paper template: Adapted from “‘My Smartphone Is an Extension of Myself’: A Holistic Qualitative Exploration of the Impact of Using a Smartphone,” by L. J. Harkin and D. Kuss, 2020,  Psychology of Popular Media ,  10 (1), pp. 28–38 ( https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000278 ). Copyright 2020 by the American Psychological Association.

Scientific Reports

What this handout is about.

This handout provides a general guide to writing reports about scientific research you’ve performed. In addition to describing the conventional rules about the format and content of a lab report, we’ll also attempt to convey why these rules exist, so you’ll get a clearer, more dependable idea of how to approach this writing situation. Readers of this handout may also find our handout on writing in the sciences useful.

Background and pre-writing

Why do we write research reports.

You did an experiment or study for your science class, and now you have to write it up for your teacher to review. You feel that you understood the background sufficiently, designed and completed the study effectively, obtained useful data, and can use those data to draw conclusions about a scientific process or principle. But how exactly do you write all that? What is your teacher expecting to see?

To take some of the guesswork out of answering these questions, try to think beyond the classroom setting. In fact, you and your teacher are both part of a scientific community, and the people who participate in this community tend to share the same values. As long as you understand and respect these values, your writing will likely meet the expectations of your audience—including your teacher.

So why are you writing this research report? The practical answer is “Because the teacher assigned it,” but that’s classroom thinking. Generally speaking, people investigating some scientific hypothesis have a responsibility to the rest of the scientific world to report their findings, particularly if these findings add to or contradict previous ideas. The people reading such reports have two primary goals:

• They want to gather the information presented.
• They want to know that the findings are legitimate.

Your job as a writer, then, is to fulfill these two goals.

How do I do that?

Good question. Here is the basic format scientists have designed for research reports:

• Introduction

Methods and Materials

This format, sometimes called “IMRAD,” may take slightly different shapes depending on the discipline or audience; some ask you to include an abstract or separate section for the hypothesis, or call the Discussion section “Conclusions,” or change the order of the sections (some professional and academic journals require the Methods section to appear last). Overall, however, the IMRAD format was devised to represent a textual version of the scientific method.

The scientific method, you’ll probably recall, involves developing a hypothesis, testing it, and deciding whether your findings support the hypothesis. In essence, the format for a research report in the sciences mirrors the scientific method but fleshes out the process a little. Below, you’ll find a table that shows how each written section fits into the scientific method and what additional information it offers the reader.

Thinking of your research report as based on the scientific method, but elaborated in the ways described above, may help you to meet your audience’s expectations successfully. We’re going to proceed by explicitly connecting each section of the lab report to the scientific method, then explaining why and how you need to elaborate that section.

Although this handout takes each section in the order in which it should be presented in the final report, you may for practical reasons decide to compose sections in another order. For example, many writers find that composing their Methods and Results before the other sections helps to clarify their idea of the experiment or study as a whole. You might consider using each assignment to practice different approaches to drafting the report, to find the order that works best for you.

What should I do before drafting the lab report?

The best way to prepare to write the lab report is to make sure that you fully understand everything you need to about the experiment. Obviously, if you don’t quite know what went on during the lab, you’re going to find it difficult to explain the lab satisfactorily to someone else. To make sure you know enough to write the report, complete the following steps:

• What are we going to do in this lab? (That is, what’s the procedure?)
• Why are we going to do it that way?
• What are we hoping to learn from this experiment?
• Why would we benefit from this knowledge?
• Consult your lab supervisor as you perform the lab. If you don’t know how to answer one of the questions above, for example, your lab supervisor will probably be able to explain it to you (or, at least, help you figure it out).
• Plan the steps of the experiment carefully with your lab partners. The less you rush, the more likely it is that you’ll perform the experiment correctly and record your findings accurately. Also, take some time to think about the best way to organize the data before you have to start putting numbers down. If you can design a table to account for the data, that will tend to work much better than jotting results down hurriedly on a scrap piece of paper.
• Record the data carefully so you get them right. You won’t be able to trust your conclusions if you have the wrong data, and your readers will know you messed up if the other three people in your group have “97 degrees” and you have “87.”
• Consult with your lab partners about everything you do. Lab groups often make one of two mistakes: two people do all the work while two have a nice chat, or everybody works together until the group finishes gathering the raw data, then scrams outta there. Collaborate with your partners, even when the experiment is “over.” What trends did you observe? Was the hypothesis supported? Did you all get the same results? What kind of figure should you use to represent your findings? The whole group can work together to answer these questions.
• Consider your audience. You may believe that audience is a non-issue: it’s your lab TA, right? Well, yes—but again, think beyond the classroom. If you write with only your lab instructor in mind, you may omit material that is crucial to a complete understanding of your experiment, because you assume the instructor knows all that stuff already. As a result, you may receive a lower grade, since your TA won’t be sure that you understand all the principles at work. Try to write towards a student in the same course but a different lab section. That student will have a fair degree of scientific expertise but won’t know much about your experiment particularly. Alternatively, you could envision yourself five years from now, after the reading and lectures for this course have faded a bit. What would you remember, and what would you need explained more clearly (as a refresher)?

Once you’ve completed these steps as you perform the experiment, you’ll be in a good position to draft an effective lab report.

Introductions

How do i write a strong introduction.

For the purposes of this handout, we’ll consider the Introduction to contain four basic elements: the purpose, the scientific literature relevant to the subject, the hypothesis, and the reasons you believed your hypothesis viable. Let’s start by going through each element of the Introduction to clarify what it covers and why it’s important. Then we can formulate a logical organizational strategy for the section.

The inclusion of the purpose (sometimes called the objective) of the experiment often confuses writers. The biggest misconception is that the purpose is the same as the hypothesis. Not quite. We’ll get to hypotheses in a minute, but basically they provide some indication of what you expect the experiment to show. The purpose is broader, and deals more with what you expect to gain through the experiment. In a professional setting, the hypothesis might have something to do with how cells react to a certain kind of genetic manipulation, but the purpose of the experiment is to learn more about potential cancer treatments. Undergraduate reports don’t often have this wide-ranging a goal, but you should still try to maintain the distinction between your hypothesis and your purpose. In a solubility experiment, for example, your hypothesis might talk about the relationship between temperature and the rate of solubility, but the purpose is probably to learn more about some specific scientific principle underlying the process of solubility.

For starters, most people say that you should write out your working hypothesis before you perform the experiment or study. Many beginning science students neglect to do so and find themselves struggling to remember precisely which variables were involved in the process or in what way the researchers felt that they were related. Write your hypothesis down as you develop it—you’ll be glad you did.

As for the form a hypothesis should take, it’s best not to be too fancy or complicated; an inventive style isn’t nearly so important as clarity here. There’s nothing wrong with beginning your hypothesis with the phrase, “It was hypothesized that . . .” Be as specific as you can about the relationship between the different objects of your study. In other words, explain that when term A changes, term B changes in this particular way. Readers of scientific writing are rarely content with the idea that a relationship between two terms exists—they want to know what that relationship entails.

Not a hypothesis:

“It was hypothesized that there is a significant relationship between the temperature of a solvent and the rate at which a solute dissolves.”

Hypothesis:

“It was hypothesized that as the temperature of a solvent increases, the rate at which a solute will dissolve in that solvent increases.”

Put more technically, most hypotheses contain both an independent and a dependent variable. The independent variable is what you manipulate to test the reaction; the dependent variable is what changes as a result of your manipulation. In the example above, the independent variable is the temperature of the solvent, and the dependent variable is the rate of solubility. Be sure that your hypothesis includes both variables.

Justify your hypothesis

You need to do more than tell your readers what your hypothesis is; you also need to assure them that this hypothesis was reasonable, given the circumstances. In other words, use the Introduction to explain that you didn’t just pluck your hypothesis out of thin air. (If you did pluck it out of thin air, your problems with your report will probably extend beyond using the appropriate format.) If you posit that a particular relationship exists between the independent and the dependent variable, what led you to believe your “guess” might be supported by evidence?

Scientists often refer to this type of justification as “motivating” the hypothesis, in the sense that something propelled them to make that prediction. Often, motivation includes what we already know—or rather, what scientists generally accept as true (see “Background/previous research” below). But you can also motivate your hypothesis by relying on logic or on your own observations. If you’re trying to decide which solutes will dissolve more rapidly in a solvent at increased temperatures, you might remember that some solids are meant to dissolve in hot water (e.g., bouillon cubes) and some are used for a function precisely because they withstand higher temperatures (they make saucepans out of something). Or you can think about whether you’ve noticed sugar dissolving more rapidly in your glass of iced tea or in your cup of coffee. Even such basic, outside-the-lab observations can help you justify your hypothesis as reasonable.

Background/previous research

This part of the Introduction demonstrates to the reader your awareness of how you’re building on other scientists’ work. If you think of the scientific community as engaging in a series of conversations about various topics, then you’ll recognize that the relevant background material will alert the reader to which conversation you want to enter.

Generally speaking, authors writing journal articles use the background for slightly different purposes than do students completing assignments. Because readers of academic journals tend to be professionals in the field, authors explain the background in order to permit readers to evaluate the study’s pertinence for their own work. You, on the other hand, write toward a much narrower audience—your peers in the course or your lab instructor—and so you must demonstrate that you understand the context for the (presumably assigned) experiment or study you’ve completed. For example, if your professor has been talking about polarity during lectures, and you’re doing a solubility experiment, you might try to connect the polarity of a solid to its relative solubility in certain solvents. In any event, both professional researchers and undergraduates need to connect the background material overtly to their own work.

Organization of this section

Most of the time, writers begin by stating the purpose or objectives of their own work, which establishes for the reader’s benefit the “nature and scope of the problem investigated” (Day 1994). Once you have expressed your purpose, you should then find it easier to move from the general purpose, to relevant material on the subject, to your hypothesis. In abbreviated form, an Introduction section might look like this:

“The purpose of the experiment was to test conventional ideas about solubility in the laboratory [purpose] . . . According to Whitecoat and Labrat (1999), at higher temperatures the molecules of solvents move more quickly . . . We know from the class lecture that molecules moving at higher rates of speed collide with one another more often and thus break down more easily [background material/motivation] . . . Thus, it was hypothesized that as the temperature of a solvent increases, the rate at which a solute will dissolve in that solvent increases [hypothesis].”

Again—these are guidelines, not commandments. Some writers and readers prefer different structures for the Introduction. The one above merely illustrates a common approach to organizing material.

How do I write a strong Materials and Methods section?

As with any piece of writing, your Methods section will succeed only if it fulfills its readers’ expectations, so you need to be clear in your own mind about the purpose of this section. Let’s review the purpose as we described it above: in this section, you want to describe in detail how you tested the hypothesis you developed and also to clarify the rationale for your procedure. In science, it’s not sufficient merely to design and carry out an experiment. Ultimately, others must be able to verify your findings, so your experiment must be reproducible, to the extent that other researchers can follow the same procedure and obtain the same (or similar) results.

Here’s a real-world example of the importance of reproducibility. In 1989, physicists Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischman announced that they had discovered “cold fusion,” a way of producing excess heat and power without the nuclear radiation that accompanies “hot fusion.” Such a discovery could have great ramifications for the industrial production of energy, so these findings created a great deal of interest. When other scientists tried to duplicate the experiment, however, they didn’t achieve the same results, and as a result many wrote off the conclusions as unjustified (or worse, a hoax). To this day, the viability of cold fusion is debated within the scientific community, even though an increasing number of researchers believe it possible. So when you write your Methods section, keep in mind that you need to describe your experiment well enough to allow others to replicate it exactly.

With these goals in mind, let’s consider how to write an effective Methods section in terms of content, structure, and style.

Sometimes the hardest thing about writing this section isn’t what you should talk about, but what you shouldn’t talk about. Writers often want to include the results of their experiment, because they measured and recorded the results during the course of the experiment. But such data should be reserved for the Results section. In the Methods section, you can write that you recorded the results, or how you recorded the results (e.g., in a table), but you shouldn’t write what the results were—not yet. Here, you’re merely stating exactly how you went about testing your hypothesis. As you draft your Methods section, ask yourself the following questions:

• How much detail? Be precise in providing details, but stay relevant. Ask yourself, “Would it make any difference if this piece were a different size or made from a different material?” If not, you probably don’t need to get too specific. If so, you should give as many details as necessary to prevent this experiment from going awry if someone else tries to carry it out. Probably the most crucial detail is measurement; you should always quantify anything you can, such as time elapsed, temperature, mass, volume, etc.
• Rationale: Be sure that as you’re relating your actions during the experiment, you explain your rationale for the protocol you developed. If you capped a test tube immediately after adding a solute to a solvent, why did you do that? (That’s really two questions: why did you cap it, and why did you cap it immediately?) In a professional setting, writers provide their rationale as a way to explain their thinking to potential critics. On one hand, of course, that’s your motivation for talking about protocol, too. On the other hand, since in practical terms you’re also writing to your teacher (who’s seeking to evaluate how well you comprehend the principles of the experiment), explaining the rationale indicates that you understand the reasons for conducting the experiment in that way, and that you’re not just following orders. Critical thinking is crucial—robots don’t make good scientists.
• Control: Most experiments will include a control, which is a means of comparing experimental results. (Sometimes you’ll need to have more than one control, depending on the number of hypotheses you want to test.) The control is exactly the same as the other items you’re testing, except that you don’t manipulate the independent variable-the condition you’re altering to check the effect on the dependent variable. For example, if you’re testing solubility rates at increased temperatures, your control would be a solution that you didn’t heat at all; that way, you’ll see how quickly the solute dissolves “naturally” (i.e., without manipulation), and you’ll have a point of reference against which to compare the solutions you did heat.

Describe the control in the Methods section. Two things are especially important in writing about the control: identify the control as a control, and explain what you’re controlling for. Here is an example:

“As a control for the temperature change, we placed the same amount of solute in the same amount of solvent, and let the solution stand for five minutes without heating it.”

Structure and style

Organization is especially important in the Methods section of a lab report because readers must understand your experimental procedure completely. Many writers are surprised by the difficulty of conveying what they did during the experiment, since after all they’re only reporting an event, but it’s often tricky to present this information in a coherent way. There’s a fairly standard structure you can use to guide you, and following the conventions for style can help clarify your points.

• Subsections: Occasionally, researchers use subsections to report their procedure when the following circumstances apply: 1) if they’ve used a great many materials; 2) if the procedure is unusually complicated; 3) if they’ve developed a procedure that won’t be familiar to many of their readers. Because these conditions rarely apply to the experiments you’ll perform in class, most undergraduate lab reports won’t require you to use subsections. In fact, many guides to writing lab reports suggest that you try to limit your Methods section to a single paragraph.
• Narrative structure: Think of this section as telling a story about a group of people and the experiment they performed. Describe what you did in the order in which you did it. You may have heard the old joke centered on the line, “Disconnect the red wire, but only after disconnecting the green wire,” where the person reading the directions blows everything to kingdom come because the directions weren’t in order. We’re used to reading about events chronologically, and so your readers will generally understand what you did if you present that information in the same way. Also, since the Methods section does generally appear as a narrative (story), you want to avoid the “recipe” approach: “First, take a clean, dry 100 ml test tube from the rack. Next, add 50 ml of distilled water.” You should be reporting what did happen, not telling the reader how to perform the experiment: “50 ml of distilled water was poured into a clean, dry 100 ml test tube.” Hint: most of the time, the recipe approach comes from copying down the steps of the procedure from your lab manual, so you may want to draft the Methods section initially without consulting your manual. Later, of course, you can go back and fill in any part of the procedure you inadvertently overlooked.
• Past tense: Remember that you’re describing what happened, so you should use past tense to refer to everything you did during the experiment. Writers are often tempted to use the imperative (“Add 5 g of the solid to the solution”) because that’s how their lab manuals are worded; less frequently, they use present tense (“5 g of the solid are added to the solution”). Instead, remember that you’re talking about an event which happened at a particular time in the past, and which has already ended by the time you start writing, so simple past tense will be appropriate in this section (“5 g of the solid were added to the solution” or “We added 5 g of the solid to the solution”).
• Active: We heated the solution to 80°C. (The subject, “we,” performs the action, heating.)
• Passive: The solution was heated to 80°C. (The subject, “solution,” doesn’t do the heating–it is acted upon, not acting.)

Increasingly, especially in the social sciences, using first person and active voice is acceptable in scientific reports. Most readers find that this style of writing conveys information more clearly and concisely. This rhetorical choice thus brings two scientific values into conflict: objectivity versus clarity. Since the scientific community hasn’t reached a consensus about which style it prefers, you may want to ask your lab instructor.

How do I write a strong Results section?

Here’s a paradox for you. The Results section is often both the shortest (yay!) and most important (uh-oh!) part of your report. Your Materials and Methods section shows how you obtained the results, and your Discussion section explores the significance of the results, so clearly the Results section forms the backbone of the lab report. This section provides the most critical information about your experiment: the data that allow you to discuss how your hypothesis was or wasn’t supported. But it doesn’t provide anything else, which explains why this section is generally shorter than the others.

Before you write this section, look at all the data you collected to figure out what relates significantly to your hypothesis. You’ll want to highlight this material in your Results section. Resist the urge to include every bit of data you collected, since perhaps not all are relevant. Also, don’t try to draw conclusions about the results—save them for the Discussion section. In this section, you’re reporting facts. Nothing your readers can dispute should appear in the Results section.

Most Results sections feature three distinct parts: text, tables, and figures. Let’s consider each part one at a time.

This should be a short paragraph, generally just a few lines, that describes the results you obtained from your experiment. In a relatively simple experiment, one that doesn’t produce a lot of data for you to repeat, the text can represent the entire Results section. Don’t feel that you need to include lots of extraneous detail to compensate for a short (but effective) text; your readers appreciate discrimination more than your ability to recite facts. In a more complex experiment, you may want to use tables and/or figures to help guide your readers toward the most important information you gathered. In that event, you’ll need to refer to each table or figure directly, where appropriate:

“Table 1 lists the rates of solubility for each substance”

“Solubility increased as the temperature of the solution increased (see Figure 1).”

If you do use tables or figures, make sure that you don’t present the same material in both the text and the tables/figures, since in essence you’ll just repeat yourself, probably annoying your readers with the redundancy of your statements.

Feel free to describe trends that emerge as you examine the data. Although identifying trends requires some judgment on your part and so may not feel like factual reporting, no one can deny that these trends do exist, and so they properly belong in the Results section. Example:

“Heating the solution increased the rate of solubility of polar solids by 45% but had no effect on the rate of solubility in solutions containing non-polar solids.”

This point isn’t debatable—you’re just pointing out what the data show.

As in the Materials and Methods section, you want to refer to your data in the past tense, because the events you recorded have already occurred and have finished occurring. In the example above, note the use of “increased” and “had,” rather than “increases” and “has.” (You don’t know from your experiment that heating always increases the solubility of polar solids, but it did that time.)

You shouldn’t put information in the table that also appears in the text. You also shouldn’t use a table to present irrelevant data, just to show you did collect these data during the experiment. Tables are good for some purposes and situations, but not others, so whether and how you’ll use tables depends upon what you need them to accomplish.

Tables are useful ways to show variation in data, but not to present a great deal of unchanging measurements. If you’re dealing with a scientific phenomenon that occurs only within a certain range of temperatures, for example, you don’t need to use a table to show that the phenomenon didn’t occur at any of the other temperatures. How useful is this table?

As you can probably see, no solubility was observed until the trial temperature reached 50°C, a fact that the text part of the Results section could easily convey. The table could then be limited to what happened at 50°C and higher, thus better illustrating the differences in solubility rates when solubility did occur.

As a rule, try not to use a table to describe any experimental event you can cover in one sentence of text. Here’s an example of an unnecessary table from How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper , by Robert A. Day:

As Day notes, all the information in this table can be summarized in one sentence: “S. griseus, S. coelicolor, S. everycolor, and S. rainbowenski grew under aerobic conditions, whereas S. nocolor and S. greenicus required anaerobic conditions.” Most readers won’t find the table clearer than that one sentence.

When you do have reason to tabulate material, pay attention to the clarity and readability of the format you use. Here are a few tips:

• Number your table. Then, when you refer to the table in the text, use that number to tell your readers which table they can review to clarify the material.
• Give your table a title. This title should be descriptive enough to communicate the contents of the table, but not so long that it becomes difficult to follow. The titles in the sample tables above are acceptable.
• Arrange your table so that readers read vertically, not horizontally. For the most part, this rule means that you should construct your table so that like elements read down, not across. Think about what you want your readers to compare, and put that information in the column (up and down) rather than in the row (across). Usually, the point of comparison will be the numerical data you collect, so especially make sure you have columns of numbers, not rows.Here’s an example of how drastically this decision affects the readability of your table (from A Short Guide to Writing about Chemistry , by Herbert Beall and John Trimbur). Look at this table, which presents the relevant data in horizontal rows:

It’s a little tough to see the trends that the author presumably wants to present in this table. Compare this table, in which the data appear vertically:

The second table shows how putting like elements in a vertical column makes for easier reading. In this case, the like elements are the measurements of length and height, over five trials–not, as in the first table, the length and height measurements for each trial.

• Make sure to include units of measurement in the tables. Readers might be able to guess that you measured something in millimeters, but don’t make them try.
• Don’t use vertical lines as part of the format for your table. This convention exists because journals prefer not to have to reproduce these lines because the tables then become more expensive to print. Even though it’s fairly unlikely that you’ll be sending your Biology 11 lab report to Science for publication, your readers still have this expectation. Consequently, if you use the table-drawing option in your word-processing software, choose the option that doesn’t rely on a “grid” format (which includes vertical lines).

How do I include figures in my report?

Although tables can be useful ways of showing trends in the results you obtained, figures (i.e., illustrations) can do an even better job of emphasizing such trends. Lab report writers often use graphic representations of the data they collected to provide their readers with a literal picture of how the experiment went.

When should you use a figure?

Remember the circumstances under which you don’t need a table: when you don’t have a great deal of data or when the data you have don’t vary a lot. Under the same conditions, you would probably forgo the figure as well, since the figure would be unlikely to provide your readers with an additional perspective. Scientists really don’t like their time wasted, so they tend not to respond favorably to redundancy.

If you’re trying to decide between using a table and creating a figure to present your material, consider the following a rule of thumb. The strength of a table lies in its ability to supply large amounts of exact data, whereas the strength of a figure is its dramatic illustration of important trends within the experiment. If you feel that your readers won’t get the full impact of the results you obtained just by looking at the numbers, then a figure might be appropriate.

Of course, an undergraduate class may expect you to create a figure for your lab experiment, if only to make sure that you can do so effectively. If this is the case, then don’t worry about whether to use figures or not—concentrate instead on how best to accomplish your task.

Figures can include maps, photographs, pen-and-ink drawings, flow charts, bar graphs, and section graphs (“pie charts”). But the most common figure by far, especially for undergraduates, is the line graph, so we’ll focus on that type in this handout.

At the undergraduate level, you can often draw and label your graphs by hand, provided that the result is clear, legible, and drawn to scale. Computer technology has, however, made creating line graphs a lot easier. Most word-processing software has a number of functions for transferring data into graph form; many scientists have found Microsoft Excel, for example, a helpful tool in graphing results. If you plan on pursuing a career in the sciences, it may be well worth your while to learn to use a similar program.

Computers can’t, however, decide for you how your graph really works; you have to know how to design your graph to meet your readers’ expectations. Here are some of these expectations:

• Keep it as simple as possible. You may be tempted to signal the complexity of the information you gathered by trying to design a graph that accounts for that complexity. But remember the purpose of your graph: to dramatize your results in a manner that’s easy to see and grasp. Try not to make the reader stare at the graph for a half hour to find the important line among the mass of other lines. For maximum effectiveness, limit yourself to three to five lines per graph; if you have more data to demonstrate, use a set of graphs to account for it, rather than trying to cram it all into a single figure.
• Plot the independent variable on the horizontal (x) axis and the dependent variable on the vertical (y) axis. Remember that the independent variable is the condition that you manipulated during the experiment and the dependent variable is the condition that you measured to see if it changed along with the independent variable. Placing the variables along their respective axes is mostly just a convention, but since your readers are accustomed to viewing graphs in this way, you’re better off not challenging the convention in your report.
• Label each axis carefully, and be especially careful to include units of measure. You need to make sure that your readers understand perfectly well what your graph indicates.
• Number and title your graphs. As with tables, the title of the graph should be informative but concise, and you should refer to your graph by number in the text (e.g., “Figure 1 shows the increase in the solubility rate as a function of temperature”).
• Many editors of professional scientific journals prefer that writers distinguish the lines in their graphs by attaching a symbol to them, usually a geometric shape (triangle, square, etc.), and using that symbol throughout the curve of the line. Generally, readers have a hard time distinguishing dotted lines from dot-dash lines from straight lines, so you should consider staying away from this system. Editors don’t usually like different-colored lines within a graph because colors are difficult and expensive to reproduce; colors may, however, be great for your purposes, as long as you’re not planning to submit your paper to Nature. Use your discretion—try to employ whichever technique dramatizes the results most effectively.
• Try to gather data at regular intervals, so the plot points on your graph aren’t too far apart. You can’t be sure of the arc you should draw between the plot points if the points are located at the far corners of the graph; over a fifteen-minute interval, perhaps the change occurred in the first or last thirty seconds of that period (in which case your straight-line connection between the points is misleading).
• If you’re worried that you didn’t collect data at sufficiently regular intervals during your experiment, go ahead and connect the points with a straight line, but you may want to examine this problem as part of your Discussion section.
• Make your graph large enough so that everything is legible and clearly demarcated, but not so large that it either overwhelms the rest of the Results section or provides a far greater range than you need to illustrate your point. If, for example, the seedlings of your plant grew only 15 mm during the trial, you don’t need to construct a graph that accounts for 100 mm of growth. The lines in your graph should more or less fill the space created by the axes; if you see that your data is confined to the lower left portion of the graph, you should probably re-adjust your scale.
• If you create a set of graphs, make them the same size and format, including all the verbal and visual codes (captions, symbols, scale, etc.). You want to be as consistent as possible in your illustrations, so that your readers can easily make the comparisons you’re trying to get them to see.

How do I write a strong Discussion section?

The discussion section is probably the least formalized part of the report, in that you can’t really apply the same structure to every type of experiment. In simple terms, here you tell your readers what to make of the Results you obtained. If you have done the Results part well, your readers should already recognize the trends in the data and have a fairly clear idea of whether your hypothesis was supported. Because the Results can seem so self-explanatory, many students find it difficult to know what material to add in this last section.

Basically, the Discussion contains several parts, in no particular order, but roughly moving from specific (i.e., related to your experiment only) to general (how your findings fit in the larger scientific community). In this section, you will, as a rule, need to:

Explain whether the data support your hypothesis

• Acknowledge any anomalous data or deviations from what you expected

Derive conclusions, based on your findings, about the process you’re studying

• Relate your findings to earlier work in the same area (if you can)

Explore the theoretical and/or practical implications of your findings

Let’s look at some dos and don’ts for each of these objectives.

This statement is usually a good way to begin the Discussion, since you can’t effectively speak about the larger scientific value of your study until you’ve figured out the particulars of this experiment. You might begin this part of the Discussion by explicitly stating the relationships or correlations your data indicate between the independent and dependent variables. Then you can show more clearly why you believe your hypothesis was or was not supported. For example, if you tested solubility at various temperatures, you could start this section by noting that the rates of solubility increased as the temperature increased. If your initial hypothesis surmised that temperature change would not affect solubility, you would then say something like,

“The hypothesis that temperature change would not affect solubility was not supported by the data.”

Note: Students tend to view labs as practical tests of undeniable scientific truths. As a result, you may want to say that the hypothesis was “proved” or “disproved” or that it was “correct” or “incorrect.” These terms, however, reflect a degree of certainty that you as a scientist aren’t supposed to have. Remember, you’re testing a theory with a procedure that lasts only a few hours and relies on only a few trials, which severely compromises your ability to be sure about the “truth” you see. Words like “supported,” “indicated,” and “suggested” are more acceptable ways to evaluate your hypothesis.

Also, recognize that saying whether the data supported your hypothesis or not involves making a claim to be defended. As such, you need to show the readers that this claim is warranted by the evidence. Make sure that you’re very explicit about the relationship between the evidence and the conclusions you draw from it. This process is difficult for many writers because we don’t often justify conclusions in our regular lives. For example, you might nudge your friend at a party and whisper, “That guy’s drunk,” and once your friend lays eyes on the person in question, she might readily agree. In a scientific paper, by contrast, you would need to defend your claim more thoroughly by pointing to data such as slurred words, unsteady gait, and the lampshade-as-hat. In addition to pointing out these details, you would also need to show how (according to previous studies) these signs are consistent with inebriation, especially if they occur in conjunction with one another. To put it another way, tell your readers exactly how you got from point A (was the hypothesis supported?) to point B (yes/no).

Acknowledge any anomalous data, or deviations from what you expected

You need to take these exceptions and divergences into account, so that you qualify your conclusions sufficiently. For obvious reasons, your readers will doubt your authority if you (deliberately or inadvertently) overlook a key piece of data that doesn’t square with your perspective on what occurred. In a more philosophical sense, once you’ve ignored evidence that contradicts your claims, you’ve departed from the scientific method. The urge to “tidy up” the experiment is often strong, but if you give in to it you’re no longer performing good science.

Sometimes after you’ve performed a study or experiment, you realize that some part of the methods you used to test your hypothesis was flawed. In that case, it’s OK to suggest that if you had the chance to conduct your test again, you might change the design in this or that specific way in order to avoid such and such a problem. The key to making this approach work, though, is to be very precise about the weakness in your experiment, why and how you think that weakness might have affected your data, and how you would alter your protocol to eliminate—or limit the effects of—that weakness. Often, inexperienced researchers and writers feel the need to account for “wrong” data (remember, there’s no such animal), and so they speculate wildly about what might have screwed things up. These speculations include such factors as the unusually hot temperature in the room, or the possibility that their lab partners read the meters wrong, or the potentially defective equipment. These explanations are what scientists call “cop-outs,” or “lame”; don’t indicate that the experiment had a weakness unless you’re fairly certain that a) it really occurred and b) you can explain reasonably well how that weakness affected your results.

If, for example, your hypothesis dealt with the changes in solubility at different temperatures, then try to figure out what you can rationally say about the process of solubility more generally. If you’re doing an undergraduate lab, chances are that the lab will connect in some way to the material you’ve been covering either in lecture or in your reading, so you might choose to return to these resources as a way to help you think clearly about the process as a whole.

This part of the Discussion section is another place where you need to make sure that you’re not overreaching. Again, nothing you’ve found in one study would remotely allow you to claim that you now “know” something, or that something isn’t “true,” or that your experiment “confirmed” some principle or other. Hesitate before you go out on a limb—it’s dangerous! Use less absolutely conclusive language, including such words as “suggest,” “indicate,” “correspond,” “possibly,” “challenge,” etc.

Relate your findings to previous work in the field (if possible)

We’ve been talking about how to show that you belong in a particular community (such as biologists or anthropologists) by writing within conventions that they recognize and accept. Another is to try to identify a conversation going on among members of that community, and use your work to contribute to that conversation. In a larger philosophical sense, scientists can’t fully understand the value of their research unless they have some sense of the context that provoked and nourished it. That is, you have to recognize what’s new about your project (potentially, anyway) and how it benefits the wider body of scientific knowledge. On a more pragmatic level, especially for undergraduates, connecting your lab work to previous research will demonstrate to the TA that you see the big picture. You have an opportunity, in the Discussion section, to distinguish yourself from the students in your class who aren’t thinking beyond the barest facts of the study. Capitalize on this opportunity by putting your own work in context.

If you’re just beginning to work in the natural sciences (as a first-year biology or chemistry student, say), most likely the work you’ll be doing has already been performed and re-performed to a satisfactory degree. Hence, you could probably point to a similar experiment or study and compare/contrast your results and conclusions. More advanced work may deal with an issue that is somewhat less “resolved,” and so previous research may take the form of an ongoing debate, and you can use your own work to weigh in on that debate. If, for example, researchers are hotly disputing the value of herbal remedies for the common cold, and the results of your study suggest that Echinacea diminishes the symptoms but not the actual presence of the cold, then you might want to take some time in the Discussion section to recapitulate the specifics of the dispute as it relates to Echinacea as an herbal remedy. (Consider that you have probably already written in the Introduction about this debate as background research.)

This information is often the best way to end your Discussion (and, for all intents and purposes, the report). In argumentative writing generally, you want to use your closing words to convey the main point of your writing. This main point can be primarily theoretical (“Now that you understand this information, you’re in a better position to understand this larger issue”) or primarily practical (“You can use this information to take such and such an action”). In either case, the concluding statements help the reader to comprehend the significance of your project and your decision to write about it.

Since a lab report is argumentative—after all, you’re investigating a claim, and judging the legitimacy of that claim by generating and collecting evidence—it’s often a good idea to end your report with the same technique for establishing your main point. If you want to go the theoretical route, you might talk about the consequences your study has for the field or phenomenon you’re investigating. To return to the examples regarding solubility, you could end by reflecting on what your work on solubility as a function of temperature tells us (potentially) about solubility in general. (Some folks consider this type of exploration “pure” as opposed to “applied” science, although these labels can be problematic.) If you want to go the practical route, you could end by speculating about the medical, institutional, or commercial implications of your findings—in other words, answer the question, “What can this study help people to do?” In either case, you’re going to make your readers’ experience more satisfying, by helping them see why they spent their time learning what you had to teach them.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

American Psychological Association. 2010. Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association . 6th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Beall, Herbert, and John Trimbur. 2001. A Short Guide to Writing About Chemistry , 2nd ed. New York: Longman.

Blum, Deborah, and Mary Knudson. 1997. A Field Guide for Science Writers: The Official Guide of the National Association of Science Writers . New York: Oxford University Press.

Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, Joseph Bizup, and William T. FitzGerald. 2016. The Craft of Research , 4th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Briscoe, Mary Helen. 1996. Preparing Scientific Illustrations: A Guide to Better Posters, Presentations, and Publications , 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Council of Science Editors. 2014. Scientific Style and Format: The CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers , 8th ed. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.

Davis, Martha. 2012. Scientific Papers and Presentations , 3rd ed. London: Academic Press.

Day, Robert A. 1994. How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper , 4th ed. Phoenix: Oryx Press.

Porush, David. 1995. A Short Guide to Writing About Science . New York: Longman.

Williams, Joseph, and Joseph Bizup. 2017. Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace , 12th ed. Boston: Pearson.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

• How To Find Articles with Databases
• How To Evaluate Articles
• How To Read A Scientific Paper
• How To Interpret Data
• How To Write A Lab Report
• How To Write A Scientific Paper
• Get More Help
• Reference: Encyclopedia, Handbooks & Dictionaries
• Research Tools: Databases, Protocols & Citation Locators
• E-Journal Lists by Subject
• Scholarly vs Popular
• Search Tips
• Open Resources
• E-Journal lists by subject
• Develop a Research Question

Writing Lab Reports

Writing lab reports follows a straightforward and structured procedure. It is important to recognize that each part of a lab report is important, so take the time to complete each carefully. A lab report is broken down into eight sections: title, abstract, introduction, methods and materials, results, discussion, conclusion, and references. 

• Ex: "Determining the Free Chlorine Content of Pool Water"
• Abstracts are a summary of the experiment as a whole and should familiarize the reader with the purpose of the research. 
• Abstracts will always be written last, even though they are the first paragraph of a lab report. 
• Not all lab reports will require an abstract. However, they are often included in upper-level lab reports and should be studied carefully. 
• Why was the research done or experiment conducted?
• What problem is being addressed?
• What results were found?
• What are the meaning of the results?
• How is the problem better understood now than before, if at all?

Introduction

• The introduction of a lab report discusses the problem being studied and other theory that is relevant to understanding the findings. 
• The hypothesis of the experiment and the motivation for the research are stated in this section. 
• Write the introduction in your own words. Try not to copy from a lab manual or other guidelines. Instead, show comprehension of the experiment by briefly explaining the problem.

Methods and Materials

• Ex: pipette, graduated cylinder, 1.13mg of Na, 0.67mg Ag
• List the steps taken as they actually happened during the experiment, not as they were supposed to happen. 
• If written correctly, another researcher should be able to duplicate the experiment and get the same or very similar results. 
• The results show the data that was collected or found during the experiment. 
• Explain in words the data that was collected.
• Tables should be labeled numerically, as "Table 1", "Table 2", etc. Other figures should be labeled numerically as "Figure 1", "Figure 2", etc. 
• Calculations to understand the data can also be presented in the results. 
• The discussion section is one of the most important parts of the lab report. It analyzes the results of the experiment and is a discussion of the data. 
• If any results are unexpected, explain why they are unexpected and how they did or did not effect the data obtained. 
• Analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the design of the experiment and compare your results to other similar experiments.
• If there are any experimental errors, analyze them.
• Explain your results and discuss them using relevant terms and theories.
• What do the results indicate?
• What is the significance of the results?
• Are there any gaps in knowledge?
• Are there any new questions that have been raised?
• The conclusion is a summation of the experiment. It should clearly and concisely state what was learned and its importance.
• If there is future work that needs to be done, it can be explained in the conclusion.
• If using any outside sources to support a claim or explain background information, those sources must be cited in the references section of the lab report. 
• In the event that no outside sources are used, the references section may be left out. 

Other Useful Sources

• The Lab Report
• Sample Laboratory Report #2
• Some Tips on Writing Lab Reports
• Writing a Science Lab Report
• << Previous: How To Interpret Data
• Next: How To Write A Scientific Paper >>
• Last Updated: Mar 8, 2024 2:26 PM
• URL: https://guides.libraries.indiana.edu/STEM

Social media

• Instagram for Herman B Wells Library
• Facebook for IU Libraries

Additional resources

Featured databases.

• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) OneSearch@IU
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Academic Search (EBSCO)
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) ERIC (EBSCO)
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Nexis Uni
• Resource available without restriction HathiTrust Digital Library
• Databases A-Z
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Google Scholar
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) JSTOR
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Web of Science
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Scopus
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) WorldCat

IU Libraries

• Diversity Resources
• About IU Libraries
• Alumni & Friends
• Departments & Staff
• Jobs & Libraries HR
• Intranet (Staff)
• IUL site admin

• Scientific Lab Reports
• Understanding the Assignment
• Need a Topic?
• Evaluating Sources
• Brainstorming Strategies
• Drafting Strategies
• Thesis Formulation
• Introductions
• Conclusions
• Show Don't Tell
• Expand Your Draft
• Flow & Lexical Coherence
• Revision Checklist
• Introduction to Style and Grammar
• Apostrophes
• Article Usage for ESL Learners
• Capitalization
• Clarity: Get Rid of Nominalizations
• Cohesion: Does my Paragraph Flow?
• Commas and Colons
• Conciseness
• Confusing Words
• Parallel Structure
• Passive Voice
• Quotation Marks
• Run-on Sentences
• Subject-Verb Agreement
• Writing Mechanics
• Other Styles
• Art History This link opens in a new window
• Programming Lab Reports

Writing a Lab Report

Link to other resources.

• Screenwriting
• Publication Opportunities
• Meet with a Tutor This link opens in a new window

Academic Resource Center Hours :

Monday-Thursday: 8:00 AM-6:00 PM

Friday: 8:00 AM-4:00 PM

Phone Number : 310-338-2847

Email :  [email protected]

www.lmu.edu/arc

We are located in Daum Hall on the 2nd floor!

Writing a scientific lab report is significantly different from writing for other classes like philosophy, English, and history. The most prominent form of writing in biology, chemistry, and environmental science is the lab report, which is a formally written description of results and discoveries found in an experiment. College lab reports should emulate and follow the same formats as reports found in scholarly journals, such as Nature , Cell , and The American Journal of Biochemistry .

Report Format

Title: The title says what you did. It should be brief (aim for ten words or less) and describe the main point of the experiment or investigation.

• Example:  Caffeine Increases Amylase Activity in the Mealworm ( Tenebrio molitar).
• If you can, begin your title using a keyword rather than an article like “The” or “A.”

Abstract: An abstract is a very concise summary of the purpose of the report, data presented, and major conclusions in about 100 - 200 words.  Abstracts are also commonly required for conference/presentation submissions because they summarize all of the essential materials necessary to understand the purpose of the experiment. They should consist of a background sentence , an introduction sentence , your hypothesis/purpose of the experiment, and a sentence about the results and what this means.

Introduction: The introduction of a lab report defines the subject of the report, provides background information and relevant studies, and outlines scientific purpose(s) and/or objective(s).

• The introduction is a place to provide the reader with necessary research on the topic and properly cite sources used.
• Summarizes the current literature on the topic including primary and secondary sources.
• Introduces the paper’s aims and scope.
• States the purpose of the experiment and the hypothesis.

Materials and Methods: The materials and methods section is a vital component of any formal lab report. This section of the report gives a detailed account of the procedure that was followed in completing the experiment as well as all important materials used. (This includes bacterial strains and species names in tests using living subjects.)

• Discusses the procedure of the experiment in as much detail as possible.
• Provides information about participants, apparatus, tools, substances, location of experiment, etc.
• For field studies, be sure to clearly explain where and when the work was done.
• It must be written so that anyone can use the methods section as instructions for exact replications.
• Don’t hesitate to use subheadings to organize these categories.
• Practice proper scientific writing forms. Be sure to use the proper abbreviations for units. Example: The 50mL sample was placed in a 5ºC room for 48hrs.

Results: The results section focuses on the findings, or data, in the experiment, as well as any statistical tests used to determine their significance.

• Concentrate on general trends and differences and not on trivial details.
• Summarize the data from the experiments without discussing their implications (This is where all the statistical analyses goes.)
• Organize data into tables, figures, graphs, photographs, etc.  Data in a table should not be duplicated in a graph or figure. Be sure to refer to tables and graphs in the written portion, for example, “Figure 1 shows that the activity....”
• Number and title all figures and tables separately, for example, Figure 1 and Table 1 and include a legend explaining symbols and abbreviations. Figures and graphs are labeled below the image while tables are labeled above.

  Discussion: The discussion section interprets the results, tying them back to background information and experiments performed by others in the past.This is also the area where further research opportunities shold be explored.

• Interpret the data; do not restate the results.
• Observations should also be noted in this section, especially anything unusual which may affect your results.

For example, if your bacteria was incubated at the wrong temperature or a piece of equipment failed mid-experiment, these should be noted in the results section.

• Relate results to existing theories and knowledge.This can tie back to your introduction section because of the background you provided.
• Explain the logic that allows you to accept or reject your original hypotheses.
• Include suggestions for improving your techniques or design, or clarify areas of doubt for further research.

Acknowledgements and References: A references list should be compiled at the end of the report citing any works that were used to support the paper. Additionally, an acknowledgements section should be included to acknowledge research advisors/ partners, any group or person providing funding for the research and anyone outside the authors who contributed to the paper or research.

General Tips

• In scientific papers, passive voice is perfectly acceptable. On the other hand, using “I” or “we” is not.

          Incorrect: We found that caffeine increased amylase levels in Tenebrio molitar.  Correct: It was discovered that caffeine increased amylase levels in Tenebrio molitar.   

• It is expected that you use as much formal (bland) language and scientific terminology as you can. There should be no emphasis placed on “expressing yourself” or “keeping it interesting”; a lab report is not a narrative.
• In a lab report, it is important to get to the point. Be descriptive enough that your audience can understand the experiment, but strive to be concise.
• << Previous: Programming Lab Reports
• Next: Screenwriting >>
• Last Updated: Mar 14, 2024 12:00 PM
• URL: https://libguides.lmu.edu/writing

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game New
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• Science Writing

How to Write a Science Lab Report

Last Updated: February 29, 2024 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Meredith Juncker, PhD . Meredith Juncker is a PhD candidate in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center. Her studies are focused on proteins and neurodegenerative diseases. There are 14 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 357,111 times.

Depending on the expectations of your program, the preferences of your teacher or adviser, and the level of education you are currently at, there are many variations of science lab reports you might use. Generally speaking, your science lab report should have a title, abstract, introduction, a list of materials used in your experiment, a description of methods used, your results, discussion about your results, and a list of literature cited. [1] X Research source [2] X Research source This may seem like an overwhelming amount of work, but by adhering to a few guidelines and putting in the necessary effort, you'll soon have a report your instructor will love.

Sample Lab Report and Writing Help

Formulating a Plan for Your Report

• You may have performed supplemental experiments/simulations or repeated your initial experience after receiving your first round of feedback.
• (a) Self-review and revision
• (b) Peer review and constructive feedback
• (c) Advisor/instructor review and feedback

• It can help remind yourself of this goal at the beginning of every section before starting writing.
• When you finish a section of your report, read it through carefully, and at the end of it, ask yourself: was that easy to read and understand? Did I succeed in my goal?

• If you believe your paper might be of use to researchers in another discipline, like social science, you may want to include definitions or explanations for the more technical jargon used in your paper.

• Since different instructors have different preferences, you should check your lab report handout or course syllabus to verify expectations for the order and content of your report. [4] X Research source
• Most lab reports are organized, first to last: background information, problem, hypothesis, materials, procedure, data, and your interpretation of what happened as a conclusion.

• The organization of the body of your lab report will be specific to your problem/experiment.
• You may also have a separate section for the statement of your design methodology, experimental methodology, or proving subsidiary/intermediary theorems in your report.

Writing a Top-down Outline

• The section-level outline
• The subsection-level outline
• The paragraph-level outline

• Bullet points are invaluable when you reach the paragraph level of your report. These will allow you to note important terms, phrases, and data that will need to be integrated with the text of your report.
• Take special note, at the paragraph level, of important symbols, protocols, algorithms, and jargon.

• You might also consider using simple figures as a way of cutting down unnecessary wordiness.

Writing Your Introduction and Abstract

• The title of your report should reflect what you have done and bring out any eye-catching factor of your work.
• The abstract should be concise, generally about 2 paragraphs or about 200 words in length. [9] X Research source

• (a) Main motivation
• (b) Main design point
• (c) Essential differences from previous work
• (d) Methodology
• (e) Noteworthy results, if any

• What is the setting of the problem? This is, in other words, the background. In some cases, this may be implicit, and in some cases, this question may be merged with your paper's motivation.
• What is the problem you are trying to solve? This is also known as the problem statement of your report.
• Why is your problem important? This is the motivation behind your report. In some cases, it may be implicit in the background, or even the problem statement.
• Is the problem still unsolved? The constitutes the statement of past/related work, and should be conveyed succinctly. [10] X Research source

• Each section of the body of your report can be thought of as an in-depth look at the points mentioned in the introduction.

• Why is your problem difficult to solve?
• How have you solved the problem?
• What are the conditions under which your solution is applicable?
• What are the main results?
• What is the summary of your contributions? This, in some cases, maybe implicit in the body of your introduction. Sometimes it helps to state contributions explicitly.
• How is the rest of your report organized?

Writing the Body of Your Lab Report

• Describe the equipment or theory in a short paragraph.
• Consider including a diagram of the apparatus for equipment.
• Theoretical elements should be included in both natural and derived forms. [15] X Research source
• Include what strategies and methodologies you are using for the experiment.

• A large quantity of work closely related to your work would likely be best closer to the beginning of your report. This will allow you to point out differences best.
• Relevant work that is substantially different from your own is probably best toward the end of your report. However, this placement risks leaving your readers wondering about differences until the end of your report.

• Functionality
• Performance
• 1. Functionality
• 3. Implementation
• 4. Anticipated results or successes

• Make sure to cite the work of others so you can avoid plagiarism and give yourself more credibility.
• If you decide to use a chart, it is a general convention that you include your own work in either the first or last column.

• All figures and tables should be titled descriptively, numbered sequentially, and include a descriptive legend for symbols, abbreviations, etc.
• The columns and rows of all tables and the axes of graphs should be labeled. [16] X Research source

• What aspects of your system or algorithm are you trying to evaluate? Why?
• What are the cases of comparison? If you have proposed an algorithm or a design, what do you compare it with?
• What are the performance metrics? Why?
• What are the parameters understudy?
• What is the experimental setup?

Concluding Your Lab Report

• Predictions are expected in this section, though these should be clearly identified as such.
• Future experiments that might clarify your results should be suggested. [17] X Research source

• Precisely and in as few words as possible state the main findings of your lab.
• Answer the question: How has the reader become smarter, or how does your research and work fit into the bigger picture?

Getting the Most Out of Peer Review

• Many academic papers are reviewed 3 times by 3 sets of reviewers before they are published. Take constructive criticism for your lab report if you plan to pursue a career in academics.

• You might also make use of your campus writing center, if available. Here you can have a fresh set of eyes assess the quality of your report.

• Title/abstract logical, understandable, and eye-catching?
• All relevant questions answered in the introduction?
• Overall structure of sections and subsections meaningful?
• Is there a logical flow of information?
• Differences between related/past work apparent?
• Technical sections intelligible?
• Figures/tables explained properly?
• Use of terminology clear?
• Symbols defined appropriately?
• Results explained properly?
• Technical holes/flaws?
• Potential problems or alternatives?

• Try to keep your comments as impersonal as possible. Locate specific elements that can be isolated, targeted, and improved.
• While taking feedback from a peer, take the comments on their technical merit and avoid being defensive.

Expert Q&A

• If you're looking for how to write a lab report for elementary, junior, or high school, try Write a Good Lab Conclusion in Science . Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

• Under no circumstances should you plagiarize the work of another. Doing so can result in immediate expulsion from most universities, and could tarnish your reputation as an academic. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://guides.libraries.indiana.edu/c.php?g=992698&p=7182653
• ↑ https://libguides.lmu.edu/c.php?g=324079&p=2174135
• ↑ https://www.apu.edu/live_data/files/288/lab_reports.pdf
• ↑ https://services.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/471276/Writing_Science_Laboratory_Reports_Update_051112.pdf
• ↑ https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/544/02/
• ↑ https://biology.kenyon.edu/Bio_InfoLit/how/page2.html
• ↑ https://www.trentu.ca/academicskills/how-guides/how-succeed-math-and-science/writing-lab-reports/writing-lab-reports-figures-and-tables
• ↑ https://writingcenter.gmu.edu/writing-resources/different-genres/writing-an-abstract
• ↑ https://www.vanderbilt.edu/writing/resources/handouts/introducing-a-lab-report/
• ↑ https://writing.engr.psu.edu/workbooks/laboratory.html
• ↑ https://www.mhhe.com/biosci/genbio/maderinquiry/writing.html
• ↑ https://lsa.umich.edu/sweetland/undergraduates/writing-guides/how-do-i-present-findings-from-my-experiment-in-a-report-.html
• ↑ https://www.chem.ucla.edu/~gchemlab/labnotebook_web.htm
• ↑ https://guides.lib.purdue.edu/c.php?g=352816&p=2377942

About This Article

To write a lab report, start by coming up with a title that points to what you’ve done and an abstract that summarizes your work in 2 paragraphs. Follow this up with an introduction, which should introduce the problem you’re trying to solve, and explain why it’s important. Next, write a section on your materials and methods that informs the reader how you did your work. Additionally, present your results in a separate section, and highlight key points so they’re not overlooked. Finally, conclude with a section discussing the significance of your results and any problems with the study. For tips on how to write a top-down outline for your report and make the most of peer reviews, read on! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Blanca Huerta

Oct 26, 2018

Did this article help you?

May 20, 2017

Alice Roberson

Oct 29, 2017

Primrose Matthews

Sep 10, 2017

Sep 12, 2017

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

wikiHow Tech Help Pro:

Level up your tech skills and stay ahead of the curve

• Science Notes Posts
• Contact Science Notes
• Todd Helmenstine Biography
• Anne Helmenstine Biography
• Free Printable Periodic Tables (PDF and PNG)
• Periodic Table Wallpapers
• Interactive Periodic Table
• Periodic Table Posters
• How to Grow Crystals
• Chemistry Projects
• Fire and Flames Projects
• Holiday Science
• Chemistry Problems With Answers
• Physics Problems
• Unit Conversion Example Problems
• Chemistry Worksheets
• Biology Worksheets
• Periodic Table Worksheets
• Physical Science Worksheets
• Science Lab Worksheets
• My Amazon Books

Lab Report Format – How to Write a Laboratory Report

A science laboratory experiment isn’t truly complete until you’ve written the lab report. You may have taken excellent notes in your laboratory notebook, but it isn’t the same as a lab report. The lab report format is designed to present experimental results so they can be shared with others. A well-written report explains what you did, why you did it, and what you learned. It should also generate reader interest, potentially leading to peer-reviewed publication and funding.

Sections of a Lab Report

There is no one lab report format. The format and sections might be specified by your instructor or employer. What really matters is covering all of the important information.

Label the sections (except the title). Use bold face type for the title and headings. The order is:

You may or may not be expected to provide a title page. If it is required, the title page includes the title of the experiment, the names of the researchers, the name of the institution, and the date.

The title describes the experiment. Don’t start it with an article (e.g., the, an, a) because it messes up databases and isn’t necessary. For example, a good title might be, “Effect of Increasing Glucose Concentration on Danio rerio Egg Hatching Rates.” Use title case and italicize the scientific names of any species.

Introduction

Sometimes the introduction is broken into separate sections. Otherwise, it’s written as a narrative that includes the following information:

• State the purpose of the experiment.
• State the hypothesis.
• Review earlier work on the subject. Refer to previous studies. Cover the background so a reader understands what is known about a subject and what you hope to learn that is new.
• Describe your approach to answering a question or solving a problem. Include a theory or equation, if appropriate.

This section describes experimental design. Identify the parameter you changed ( independent variable ) and the one you measured ( dependent variable ). Describe the equipment and set-up you used, materials, and methods. If a reader can’t picture the apparatus from your description, include a photograph or diagram. Sometimes this section is broken into “Materials” and “Methods.”

Your lab notebook contains all of the data you collected in the experiment. You aren’t expected to reproduce all of this in a lab report. Instead, provide labelled tables and graphs. The first figure is Figure 1, the second is Figure 2, etc. The first graph is Graph 1. Refer to figures and graphs by their figure number. For some experiments, you may need to include labelled photographs. Cite the results of any calculations you performed, such as slope and standard deviation. Discuss sources of error here, including instrument, standard, and random errors.

Discussion or Conclusions

While the “Results” section includes graphs and tables, the “Discussion” or “Conclusions” section focuses on what the results mean. This is where you state whether or not the objective of the experiment was met and what the outcome means.  Propose reasons for discrepancies between expected and actual outcomes. Finally, describe the next logical step in your research and ways you might improve on the experiment.

References or Bibliography

Did you build upon work conducted by someone else? Cite the work. Did you consult a paper relating to the experiment? Credit the author. If you’re unsure whether to cite a reference or not, a good rule of thumb is to include a reference for any fact not known to your audience. For some reports, it’s only necessary to list publications directly relating to your procedure and conclusions.

The Tone of a Lab Report

Lab reports should be informative, not entertaining. This isn’t the place for humor, sarcasm, or flowery prose. A lab report should be:

• Concise : Cover all the key points without getting crazy with the details.
• Objective : In the “Conclusions” section, you can propose possible explanations for your results. Otherwise, keep your opinions out of the report. Instead, present facts and an analysis based on logic and math.
• Critical : After presenting what you did, the report focuses on what the data means. Be on the lookout for sources of error and identify them. Use your understanding of error to determine how reliable your results are and gauge confidence in your conclusions.

Related Posts

WashU Libraries

Chemistry writing resources, starting a lab report or research paper, general writing style information, parts of research paper or report.

• Citations and References
• Return to Main Chemistry Guide

To get started writing a research paper or laboratory report, it is important to consider if you have enough data or enough information to compose a paper.  Additionally, it is also important to consider what you want you want to report and how to report it--clear communication of results is crucial when discussing the experiments. 

This American Chemical Society (ACS) blog post on  How to Write a Research Paper provides some general guidelines to determine when to write a paper and how to get started when it comes to reporting and communicating the results of an experiment or experiments.

Every discipline has a style and format that is used for scholarly communication, and chemistry as a field has a certain format for papers as well as a a style of writing that developed as the field itself grew and information was shared and published.

General Style and Writing Guidelines:

• Chemistry is always written in the third person, in the past-tense and passive voice. 
• Pronouns like "I", "We", and "Us" are not typically used
• Be succinct when describing observations and processes
• It is not necessary to provide detailed descriptions of standard practices or techniques. 

For information on specific sections that might appear in a scholarly article or laboratory report you may wish to go to the next section in this guide that provides a summary on all the different Parts of A Research Paper and provides links to articles that provide significant detail regarding the style and content for each major section.

Note: While the resources in the guide are meant to help, it is always important to follow the guidelines of the publication or course instructor that you are writing for.

Adapted from information found in Chapter 2 of the ACS Style Guide

Additional resources and information on each sections are also provided from the journal Clinical Chemistry from the section of their journal "Guide To Scientific Writing." Click on the title for a direct link to the PDF or use the corresponding citation for each article to view the online version. All articles are open access articles.

The title should be brief and specific enough to clearly communicate the contents of the paper/research, but should not be overly technical.

• Clinical Chemistry -Guide to Scientific Writing: The Title Says it All

Thomas M Annesley, The Title Says It All, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 56, Issue 3, 1 March 2010, Pages 357–360, https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2009.141523

The byline or list of authors includes all individuals that contributed in a substantial manner to the research being reported.

Generally, the person that did the research is listed as the first author of the paper and names are traditionally formatted as "first name, middle initial, and surname"

The abstract should provide an informative and brief summary of what is written in the paper, and should allow for a reader to quickly understand the nature/purpose of the research, the methods used, the results observed, and any major conclusions that came from the research.

• Clinical Chemistry -Guide to Scientific Writing: The Abstract and the Elevator Talk: A Tale of Two Summaries

Thomas M Annesley, The Abstract and the Elevator Talk: A Tale of Two Summaries, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 56, Issue 4, 1 April 2010, Pages 521–524, https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2009.142026

An introduction puts the experiment or research into context; it should provide background regarding the question or problem being explored and using applicable scientific literature and references help explain why the question being answered or the research being pursued is relevant and/or important.

• Clinical Chemistry -Guide to Scientific Writing: It was a cold and rainy night”: Set the Scene with a Good Introduction

Thomas M Annesley, “It was a cold and rainy night”: Set the Scene with a Good Introduction, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 56, Issue 5, 1 May 2010, Pages 708–713, https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.143628

Depending upon the publication or style, this section has many different possible names; chose the correct name for the section based upon the publication to which the research is being submitted or the laboratory report is meant to emulate. 

This section should provide information regarding the techniques used in answering your research question and should say HOW the research question was probed or answered with enough information that another practitioner in the field could reproduce the experiment and results.  In order to accomplish these goals, the experimental section should  identify the materials used and must also provide sufficient details about characterization methods, experimental procedures, or any apparatus used  that is not standard for the field.

• Clinical Chemistry -Guide to Scientific Writing: Who, What, When, Where, How, and Why: The Ingredients in the Recipe for a Successful Methods Section

Thomas M Annesley, Who, What, When, Where, How, and Why: The Ingredients in the Recipe for a Successful Methods Section, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 56, Issue 6, 1 June 2010, Pages 897–901, https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.146589

The data collected or the results of the research/experiment are presented and summarized in this section often using graphs, tables, or equations.  When dealing with a large amount of data, the results section provides a summary while additional results or data can be included in a supporting information section. 

It is important to remember that in this section, the results are NOT put into context nor are the results or observations explained. 

• Clinical Chemistry -Guide to Scientific Writing: Show Your Cards: The Results Section and the Poker Game

Thomas M Annesley, Show Your Cards: The Results Section and the Poker Game, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 56, Issue 7, 1 July 2010, Pages 1066–1070, https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.148148

• Clinical Chemistry -Guide to Scientific Writing: If an IRDAM Journal Is What You Choose, Then Sequential Results Are What You Use

              IRDAM = Introduction, Results, Discussion, Methods in terms of order of sections. Many ACS Journals follow this format!

              IMRAD = Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion in terms of order of sections

Pamela A Derish, Thomas M Annesley, If an IRDAM Journal Is What You Choose, Then Sequential Results Are What You Use, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 56, Issue 8, 1 August 2010, Pages 1226–1228, https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.150961

The discussion section highlights and interprets the results or data obtained and explains how the resulting data relates to the original research question.  It explains how and why the results obtained  are significant.  It is appropriate to examine and explain why the results were observed and why the data was interpreted in a specific way. This is also the section where additional research or further work regarding the research question can be stated.

The results and the discussion can be presented as a combined "Results and Discussion" section if it makes sense to do so.

• Clinical Chemistry -Guide to Scientific Writing: The Discussion Section: Your Closing Argument

Thomas M Annesley, The Discussion Section: Your Closing Argument, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 56, Issue 11, 1 November 2010, Pages 1671–1674, https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.155358 '

Figures and tables should be included in the Results or the Results and discussion section and should support, clarify, and make your work more clear through a visual, organized, representation of the data collected.

• Clinical Chemistry -Guide to Scientific Writing: Put Your Best Figure Forward: Line Graphs and Scattergrams

Thomas M Annesley, Put Your Best Figure Forward: Line Graphs and Scattergrams, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 56, Issue 8, 1 August 2010, Pages 1229–1233, https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.150060

• Clinical Chemistry -Guide to Scientific Writing: Bars and Pies Make Better Desserts than Figures

Thomas M Annesley, Bars and Pies Make Better Desserts than Figures, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 56, Issue 9, 1 September 2010, Pages 1394–1400, https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.152298

• Clinical Chemistry -Guide to Scientific Writing: Bring Your Best to the Table

Thomas M Annesley, Bring Your Best to the Table, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 56, Issue 10, 1 October 2010, Pages 1528–1534, https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.153502

The conclusion provides a brief summary of what was accomplished in a manner similar to the abstract, but the conclusion should specifically address how the results of the research relate back to the original question or problem.

A list of the published works that were cited in the paper or report using the proper citation and reference format for the field and publication (e.g. citing and providing a reference list using the American Chemical Society guidelines).

• Clinical Chemistry -Guide to Scientific Writing: Giving Credit: Citations and References

Thomas M Annesley, Giving Credit: Citations and References, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 57, Issue 1, 1 January 2011, Pages 14–17, https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.158048

• << Previous: Home
• Next: Citations and References >>
• Last Updated: Sep 8, 2022 2:41 PM
• URL: https://libguides.wustl.edu/chemwriting

Types of Technical Documents

Lab reports/primary research reports.

Lab reports present primary research, no matter whether the data were gathered in a physical lab or in the field. A lab report is the opposite of a secondary research report, such as a technical background report, in which you present information gathered from other sources that offer their own interpretations of someone’s data.

Lab reports present your data and conclusions, and also discuss how you went about the experiment, survey, interview, or observation. In other words, you enable your reader to replicate your experiment, or at least visualize quite specifically how you went about it.

Preparing for an Experiment and Resultant Lab Report

To prepare for a lab experiment and the resultant report, consider the following questions:

• Why is this research important? How does it solve a problem or contribute in some way to expanding human knowledge?
• What have other researchers already discovered about this? How are you contributing to this conversation?
• What gaps are there in our knowledge about this topic?
• Why have you chosen this methodology to test your hypothesis? What limitations might it have?
• How and why do you derive these inferences from the data you have collected?
• What further research should be done? Why?

Also remember that lab reports are based on the work you have done in the lab or original work you have done in the field. Therefore, you must have a plan for keeping careful notes on what you have done, how you have done it, and what you observed. You may want to maintain a notebook, digital document, or personal blog.  You may want to pre-design tables or charts to record the data you know you will be observing—your own lab manual to use while completing a particular experiment to record your observations and data in a pre-organized format. Try to plan ahead so that you can capture as much information as possible during your research; don’t rely only on memory to record important procedures, results, observations, and conclusions.

Writing a Lab Report

The content and format for a lab report depends on your audience and purpose. How you write the results of a scientific experiment will generally follow a standard pattern, but may vary depending on audience and purpose. Remember that science writing generally focuses on observable results, so the results and discussion are usually the most developed parts of a lab report. Lab reports typically contain the following elements:

Create a descriptive and informative title that helps readers understand at a glance the type of research and information in the report. A title also needs key words for indexing .

An abstract summarizes your information and mirrors your report structure (Hypothesis, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion) in condensed form—roughly one sentence or so per section.

Introduction/Hypothesis

Explain the context and significance of your work, its relevance in the field, and the hypothesis or question your study addresses. Give a brief overview of your methodology for testing your hypothesis and why it is appropriate. If necessary for your readers, provide a specialized theoretical framework, background or technical knowledge to help them understand your focus and how it contributes to the field.

Materials and Methods

This section has two key purposes. First, it must allow any reader to perfectly replicate your methodology; therefore, you must thoroughly describe what you used and how you conducted your experiment. Second, you must persuade your reader that your chosen methodology and the materials are appropriate and valid for testing your hypothesis, and will lead to credible and valid results. This section generally includes 1) a list of all materials you used, which may include sub-lists, diagrams, and other graphic; and 2) a detailed description of your procedure, presented chronologically.

The results section presents the raw data that you generated in your experiment, and provides the evidence you need to form conclusions about your hypothesis. Present only the data that are relevant to your results. If you omit data, you may have to explain why they are not relevant.

Organize this section either chronologically, following your methodology, or from most to least important, based on the importance of data in proving (or negating) the hypothesis. Present data visually whenever possible, using tables, graphs, flowcharts, or any type of appropriate visual to help readers understand your data. Make sure you present the data honestly and ethically; do not distort or obscure data to make it better fit your hypothesis. If data are inconclusive or contradictory, be honest about that. Avoid interpreting or explaining your data in the Results section, as interpretation belongs in the Discussion.

The discussion section includes your analysis and interpretation of the data you presented in the Results section in terms of how well it supports your original hypothesis. Start with the most important findings. It is perfectly fine to acknowledge that the data you have generated is problematic or fails to support the hypothesis. If your findings are inconsistent, try to suggest possible reasons for this. You can also make recommendations in the discussion section, as well as discuss the need for further research.

In a few short paragraphs, review the overall purpose of your study and the hypothesis you tested, then summarize your key findings and the important implications. This is your opportunity to persuade the audience of the significance of your work.

List all references you have cited in your report (e.g., those you may have included to provide a theoretical framework, or sources that help justify your methodology).

Optional Sections

There are a few sections that you may want to include in lab reports, depending on your purpose, audience, and context.

Include in an appendix any information that does not fit within the body of the report, but still adds valuable information to your report. While you may have summarized data in the results section of the report, you may want to include full data tables in an appendix. You may also include logs, calculations, or notes on analytical methods. Be sure to refer to your appendices in the body of your report to let readers know there is additional information.

Literature Review

If it makes sense within the context of your lab report, given your purpose and audience, you may want to summarize the literature related to your project—relevant books, journal articles, websites. For example, if you’re doing a study of speech recognition software, what articles have already been written on that subject? What do they have to say about the merits of certain software? As much as possible, use research that has undergone peer review, a process during which a group of acknowledged professionals in the field review the validity of article content. A literature review summarizes key research that has been published about a specific topic, to show current thinking in the field as well as gaps in knowledge or contradictory results.

Acknowledgements

As appropriate, formally express appreciation for any assistance you have received while preparing the report (e.g., financial/funding support, help from colleagues or your institution).

Writing Style

For scientists and engineers to make valuable contributions to the sum of human knowledge, they must be able to convince readers that their findings are valid, replicable, and valuable. The way that you write a lab report impacts the credibility and authority of your work; people will judge your work partly on how you present it. Even lab reports have a persuasive edge and must make careful use of rhetorical strategies. Careless writing, poor organization, ineffective document design, and lack of attention to convention may cast doubt on your authority and expertise, and thus on the value of your work.

Also note that traditionally, writers in the sciences have used passive voice to de-emphasize their role in the process and emphasize the materials and actions they used. However, this convention is changing; active voice is clearer and more concise. If you’re writing for publication in a specific venue, or to report your work to a particular organization, check out style conventions that other writers are applying.

How to Improve Lab Report Writing: Best practices to follow with and without AI-assistance

Imagine you’re a scientist who just made a ground-breaking discovery! You want to share your breakthrough with the world, but how? By writing a comprehensive lab report, of course. Communicating your research clearly and consistently is a crucial part of becoming a true researcher or increasing your academic literacy.

Lab reports are fundamental to scientific research, serving as a crucial means to communicate findings, methodologies , and conclusions. A well-written lab report is the key to unlock the door to scientific communication, allowing you to document your methods, present your findings, and have your work reviewed and replicated by others in the field.

But don’t be intimidated – writing a lab report is like following a recipe, with clearly defined sections and a standard format. So put on your lab coat, grab your pen (or laptop), and let’s dive into the exciting world of lab report writing!

Table of Contents

What are Lab Reports

Lab reports are detailed documents that describe and analyze an experiment or scientific study that was conducted. It outlines the methodology, results, and conclusions of an experiment or research study. Furthermore, it formally communicates the scientific process and outcomes clearly and concisely. The purpose of a lab report are as follows:

Overall, lab reports are crucial for documenting, communicating, analyzing, and disseminating scientific research in a standardized and reproducible manner, ultimately driving the progress of science. However, an excellent lab report should have the following elements:

Because several elements of a lab report overlap with those of a research paper , they are often confused with each other. While both involve scientific writing, their purposes differ significantly.

Difference Between a Lab Report and a Research Paper

Research papers and lab reports are often conflated, leading to confusion. While a research paper presents new knowledge or theories, a lab report focuses on the specifics of an experiment and its results. Furthermore, lab reports are shorter than a research paper. Quite often, mentors or course instructors provides an experimental design and procedure. As a result, lab reports require less effort as your major task revolves around writing about how you performed the experiment and assessed the outcome. Contrastingly, a research paper requires more effort as you have to build an argument, combined with in-depth research and analysis of the data sources. Therefore, lab reports are usually shorter and easier to write as compared to a research paper.

Challenges in Writing Error-free Lab Reports

Writing error-free lab reports can be a daunting task, even for experienced researchers. Although manual writing and reviewing processes have been the traditional approach for report writing, they are subject to some limitations as follows:

1. Human Error

Even the most meticulous researchers can make mistakes or overlook errors, particularly when dealing with lengthy or complex reports.

2. Inconsistency

Without standardized templates or automated checks, formatting, terminology, and organizational structure can vary significantly between reports, even within the same research group.

3. Inefficiency

Manual writing, editing , and reviewing processes can be time-consuming and labor-intensive, potentially slowing down the dissemination of research findings.

4. Limited Scalability

As the volume of research and the number of lab reports increase, manual approaches become increasingly challenging and unsustainable, particularly in large research institutions or collaborative projects.

5. Lack of Real-time Collaboration

Traditional manual writing and reviewing processes often involve back-and-forth exchanges, making real-time collaboration and simultaneous editing difficult.

Furthermore, the above mentioned challenges can hinder the accurate and timely dissemination of research findings. Overcoming these hurdles is crucial to effectively communicate your scientific work. However, as these challenges become increasingly pronounced, highlighting the potential benefits of incorporating technological solutions to streamline the lab report writing process becomes necessary.

Traditional vs. AI-assisted Lab Report Writing

There are several differences between the traditional approaches to lab report writing and AI-assisted lab report writing in terms of the process, challenges, and potential outcomes.

While AI-assisted lab report writing can streamline certain processes and augment human capabilities, it is essential to strike a balance between leveraging AI’s strengths and maintaining human expertise, critical thinking, and oversight. The ideal approach may involve iterative collaboration between AI and human researchers, with AI handling data-intensive tasks and humans providing subject matter expertise, interpretation, and final review. Here are some best practices for integrating AI into the lab report writing process.

• Familiarize yourself with your institution’s policies and guidelines regarding the use of AI tools in academic work or in writing assignments.
• Utilize tools like TrinkaAI for proofreading , editing, and detecting plagiarism to refine your content.
• Clearly distinguish AI-generated content through proper citations, quotations, or other methods recommended by your institution.
• Critically evaluate and verify AI output before incorporating it into your lab report to ensure accuracy and relevance.

Although AI tools offer several benefits in writing lab reports, there are several ethical challenges associated with its use. Here are some tips for enhancing lab report writing with AI-assistance while minimizing ethical considerations.

1. Define Roles:

Establish distinct roles for AI and human writers. AI can be used for tasks like data analysis, literature review, and preliminary draft generation, while human experts should focus on critical thinking, interpretation, and final review. Furthermore, researchers/human experts must ensure the data used to train the AI model is accurate, unbiased, and representative of the research topic.

2. Maintain Transparency:

Disclose the use of AI in the research process, including the model’s capabilities, limitations, and potential biases. Additionally, document the AI model’s architecture, training data, and parameters to ensure reproducibility and facilitate peer review. Moreover, confirm if your institution or funding body permits the use of AI in report writing and clearly attribute the contributions of the AI model and human authors in the report.

3. Ensure Subject Matter Expertise:

Ensure that the AI model is trained on relevant scientific literature and data specific to the research domain. Human experts can curate and validate the training data. Therefore, verify and fact-check the information generated by the AI model against authoritative sources.

4. Address Ethical Considerations:

Adhere to ethical guidelines for AI-assisted writing, addressing concerns like authorship attribution, plagiarism, and bias. Also, scrutinize the generated content for potential data manipulation and address the ethical concerns related to its use.

5. Assure Quality:

Implement quality assurance measures, such as peer review, fact-checking, and plagiarism detection, to ensure the accuracy in the final report. Implement measures to detect and prevent plagiarism, as AI models may inadvertently reproduce copyrighted content. Furthermore, maintain human oversight and review throughout the AI-assisted writing process to ensure accuracy, relevance, and coherence.

6. Training and Education:

Provide training and education to human writers on how to effectively collaborate with AI systems, understand their capabilities and limitations, and interpret their outputs.

By following these practices, researchers can leverage the benefits of AI while maintaining high standards of quality, ethics, and transparency in their research report writing.

By combining the strengths of AI and human expertise through clear role definition, iterative collaboration, subject matter expertise, ethical guidelines, quality assurance, and proper training, researchers can streamline the lab report writing process while maintaining high standards of quality, accuracy, and scientific rigor.

Mastering lab report writing is a valuable skill for researchers across all levels. Whether you choose traditional methods or embrace AI-assisted approaches, understanding the fundamentals and best practices will lead to clearer, more impactful lab reports. Ready to craft a dynamic lab report? Kickstart your next project now!

Frequently Asked Questions

The structure of a lab report typically includes the title, abstract, introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion, conclusion, and reference.

There are several types of lab reports, each serving different purposes and formats depending on the specific requirements of the experiment and the field of study. Some common types are Formal Lab, Informal Lab Reports, Research Reports, Case Studies, Review Papers, Technical Reports, Field Trip Reports, and Posters and Presentations. Each type of lab report has its own format and style, tailored to the specific audience and purpose of the report.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• AI in Academia
• Industry News

Controversy Erupts Over AI-Generated Visuals in Scientific Publications

In recent months, the scientific community has been grappling with a growing trend: the integration…

Achieving Research Excellence: Checklist for good research practices

Academia is built on the foundation of trustworthy and high-quality research, supported by the pillars…

EU AI Act: Charting a new course for AI governance and research

In a landmark move, the European Union (EU) is set to introduce the world’s first…

• Old Webinars
• Reporting Research

AI for Accuracy in Research and Academic Writing

Importance of Achieving Accuracy in Research Challenges Faced by Researchers Various Capabilities of AI Tools…

• Publishing Research

Upholding Academic Integrity in the Age of AI: Challenges and solutions

In today’s academic landscape, one of the most pressing challenges is ensuring academic integrity. With…

AI Assistance in Academia for Searching Credible Scholarly Sources

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

The Laboratory Report

The Laboratory Report 1,2

Authors: M. C. Nagan and J. M. McCormick

Quick Links

Introduction

The research paper is the primary means of communication in science. The research paper presents the results of the experiment and interpretation of the data, describes the rationale and design of the experiment, provides a context for the results in terms of previous findings and assesses the overall success of the experiment(s). Scientists working in industrial laboratories do not write as many journal articles as their colleagues in academia, but they routinely write progress reports, which take the same form as a journal article. So no matter what your career goals are, it is important that you become familiar with this style of writing.

There are set rules for preparing a journal article (or a laboratory report). The style requirements vary only slightly from journal to journal, but there are far more similarities than differences in the scientific writing style.  If you are writing an article for publication in a particular journal (or preparing a laboratory report in the style of a particular journal) you should consult the Instructions to Authors section of the journal’s website (this information is also included in the journal’s first issue of each year).

There are several style guides 3, 4   and articles 5 to help scientists and students prepare their manuscripts.  The most useful of these to chemists is the American Chemical Society’s (ACS) ACS Style Guide, which may be found in the Truman library or may be purchased from the ACS web site . Because of the variation in journal styles, and the requirements for a specific course, your instructor will inform you of specific style requirements for his or her class. This guide is based on the Journal of the American Chemical Society style, 6 and is meant to provide a good starting point for writing a laboratory report.  It is not meant to be the definitive style guide; you must adjust your style to your audience and the journal in which your results will be published.

General Editorial Issues

Although we shouldn’t, all of us are swayed by first impressions.  How your paper appears to the journal editor or reviewer is their first impression of your science, and it will color their impression of your results, if you let it.  Nothing is worse than a sloppily prepared paper with no page numbers, a font that can’t be read or which is full of grammatical errors.  Remember that everyone will assume that if you did not take the time to write your paper carefully, you did not take the time to do your science carefully.

The following are some general editorial guidelines to follow that will leave a good first impression with your readers.

General Stylistic Issues

Uniformity of style is the key to scientific communication. The journal editors, the referees who review a manuscript, and the journal readers who are interested in the results presented in a paper all expect certain things to be present in a manuscript and that they are in a certain order.  Just like the sloppy-looking paper, a paper that does not adhere to the expected style reflects poorly on the author, no matter how good the science is.

Organization/Components

Sections should appear in your paper in the order described below. All sections but the title have the section explicitly labeled, usually in bold letters to differentiate it from the rest of the text, and left aligned on the page. A blank line should appear after the last word of the section to separate the various sections, but a line should not be placed after the section title.

Please note that you should not physically assemble your paper in this order. Instead, it is suggested that you compose: a) Materials and Methods, b) Figures, Figure Legends and Tables, c) Results, d) Discussion, e) Conclusions, f) Introduction and Schemes, g) Abstract, and h) Title. Then put all the sections together in the final paper in the order outlined above.

A template is available to help you organize your report.  Click here to learn more about it.

Subsections

It may be helpful to organize sections further into subsections. These subsections should have their own titles that are italicized and followed by a period.

Description of Paper Components

Title/Title Page

A title reflects the emphasis and contents of the paper. It tells the reader the paper’s topic and it also entices the reader to continue reading further. Therefore, it is not uncommon for the title to reveal the results or major conclusions of the experiment. Examples are given below. The title should be on its own page (the title page), left-aligned at the top of the page, in bold letters.  Note that in some journals the title’s font size is 2 points larger than the text (i. e., 14-point, if the rest of the paper is in a standard 12-point font).  However, this is not standardized and you should check with your instructor for which format he/she wants you to follow.

The title must be brief (2 lines maximum) and grammatically correct. Under the title, write your name and your professional address in italics ( Department of Chemistry, Truman State University, 100 East Normal, Kirksville, MO 63501 ).

The abstract is a one-paragraph summary of the paper that is written in the present tense. As the abstract is the only part of the paper that is entered into article databases, it should be able to stand alone, separate from the paper. The first one to three sentences of the abstract should briefly introduce the reader to the problem studied. Next, the scientific approach, major results and primary significance of the findings should be presented. The abstract is generally 150-200 words (less for shorter papers). This section is normally written after the body of the paper. Because the abstract is separate from the paper, all abbreviations should be written out, or defined, and any references should be written out in full.  An example of how a reference might appear in an abstract is

Note that in some journals that inclusion of the title in a reference is not required ( vide infra ).

The introduction should present the scientific problem at hand to the reader. Explain to the reader why the experiment was conducted, how it was designed and perhaps, if appropriate, what was found. Literature that is relevant should be incorporated and will help the reader understand the context of your study. A good rule of thumb is to start at the most general topic and progressively move towards the specific. Here is a general outline for an introduction:

In this section, consider including figures, schemes and equations that complement the text.

While this is similar to the information that you should have written your notebook, the introduction to a paper is different than the background that you included for an experiment (or experiments) in your notebook.  Remember that you are trying to reach a larger, more general audience with your paper, and the introduction must be structured to draw the reader in and help them focus on your important results.

Experimental

The experimental section of your paper should be a logical, coherent recount of the experiment(s) conducted. This section should be complete enough for a trained scientist to pick up your report and replicate your experiment. The experimental section in a laboratory report is more concise than the corresponding section in the laboratory notebook. It should not be a step-by-step procedure of the activities carried out during the laboratory period.

The first paragraph of the experimental section contains information on key chemicals used in the procedure.  When the chemicals are used as received, there will usually be a statement to that effect and further details are not usually necessary.   You will list the chemical supplier’s name and the substance’s purity will be noted in cases where the chemical is hard to find, it is of a special purity or if there is only one supplier.  Do not list lot numbers. If a starting material was synthesized according to a literature procedure, then state this in the opening paragraph and reference the procedure. If purification or drying of the compounds is required, it is described here, also.

The first paragraph often will also list the instruments used to characterize the newly synthesized substances. All instruments and equipment should be specified including the model number of the instrument and the name of the manufacturer (serial numbers are not included). When a spectroscopic or physical method is the focus of the report, it will be described in its own subsection. You are not required to write the experimental in this fashion. 

For common techniques, laboratory textbooks should be referenced. However, if a previously published procedure was modified, then this is stated and only the modifications performed are included. If the procedure is your own, then outline the procedure with the main points, including details that are critical to replicating the experiment. These might include the type and size of your HPLC column, the buffer or the concentrations of chemicals.

When the syntheses of substances are reported, the synthetic procedure used to make each substance is described in its own separate paragraph. The paragraph begins with the name of substance, or its abbreviation (if the abbreviation was defined earlier in the paper), in bold face. If numbers are assigned to the compounds, these are also included (in parentheses). Often the synthesis will be written out, even when a literature procedure was followed. The mass and percent yields must be reported. Some of the new compound’s characteristics are included at the end of the paragraph describing its synthesis. These include: melting point range (and literature value, if known), elemental analysis (both calculated and found), selected peaks from the mass spectrum (with assignments), selected IR peaks (also with assignments), and any NMR peaks with their chemical shift, multiplicity and integration (you will often find the observed coupling quoted and the assignment of the peaks).  The following is an example of how to report a compound’s synthesis.

The experimental section has two quirky wrinkles on the general scientific style.  These are:

In the Results section, the results are presented and summarized in a reader-friendly form. Raw data are not presented here. For instance, it is appropriate to include the average calculated concentration of a solution but not the original absorbance values that were collected from the spectrophotometer; that information is best left in your laboratory notebook.

Graphs and tables often make the data easier to interpret and more understandable (click here to review graph preparation). A graph is presented in the paper as a figure . In general, a graph or table is an appropriate representation of the data when more than 2 or 3 numbers are presented. Data that are presented in the form of a graph or table should be referred to but should not be repeated verbatim in the text as this defeats the purpose of a graph. More information on figures and  tables is presented later.

The Results section also reports comparable literature values for the properties obtained and/or calculated in the paper. Observation of trends in the numerical data is acceptable. However, interpretation of the trend should be saved for the Discussion section.

Remember, do not simply report your numerical results.  The Results section must have a narrative that describes your results.  This narrative can include a description of the data (such as spectra or data in graphs), what problems were encountered during data acquisition (and how they were resolved, or not) and a general description of how the raw data were processed to give the final results ( not a step-by-step description of everything you did).  The reader wants to know what you did, how you did it, what problems you encountered and finally what your results were.  Each of these topics must be addressed in the Results section in a way that is clear, yet concise.

This is the section where the results are interpreted. This section of the paper is analogous to a debate. You need to present your data, convince the reader of your data’s reliability and present evidence for your convictions. First, evaluate your data. Do you have good, mediocre, terrible, or un-interpretable data? Evaluate your results by comparing to literature values or other precedents. Explain what results should have been obtained and whether you obtained these expected values. Note that even if expected results were not obtained, you did not fail. Unexpected results are often the most interesting. Perhaps your hypothesis was not correct. Why is this? What new hypothesis do your data suggest? If you feel that your results are not reliable, you need to explain why. Use statistical analysis or chemical principles to support your claims. Was there a systematic error? Is the error due to the limitations of your apparatus? Does your data look the same to within a standard deviation? Evaluate the statistical significance of your data (click here to review the statistical treatment of data). After validating your data, you should interpret your results; state what you believe your results mean. How do your results help us understand the scientific problem? What do your results mean in the context of the bigger picture of chemistry, or of science? How do your results relate to the concepts outlined in the introduction? Do not assume that your experiment failed or was successful. You need to prove to the reader, with logical arguments and supporting evidence, the value of your study.

The conclusions that you wrote in your laboratory notebook are a good starting point from which to organize your thoughts.  Your paper’s discussion section is structured very similarly to the conclusions section in your notebook, and it might be good idea to review that now (click here to review the structure of the conclusions in the laboratory notebook).

Conclusions

The Conclusions section is typically a one-paragraph summary of your laboratory report. Here you summarize the goal(s) of your experiment, state whether you reached that goal, and describe briefly the implications of your study. Note that in some chemistry sub-disciplines it is acceptable to combine the Discussion and Conclusions sections. Consult your course syllabus or check with your instructor on the specific format to be used in your class.

Acknowledgements

The Acknowledgements section is where you thank anyone who helped you significantly with the project or with the manuscript. For instance, you would thank your laboratory partners if they’re not authors on the paper, anyone who helped with the design of the experiment or the preparation of the paper. You might also include funding sources such as a Truman State University summer scholarship or a National Institutes of Health grant.

Most of the ideas presented in your paper are probably not exclusively yours. Therefore, you should cite other people’s work wherever appropriate. However, you do not need to cite information that is common knowledge or is exclusively your idea. The References section is a compilation of all citations made within the paper. It is not a bibliography and therefore should not list sources that are not directly referred to in the text.

References Format

The format of references varies amongst journals. For your chemistry laboratory reports, you should follow, by default, the ACS guidelines as outlined in The ACS Style Guide and Journal of the American Chemical Society , JACS (all examples given in this handout conform to JACS format). If your professor requires you to conform to a specific journal’s format, look at articles from that journal or refer to the journal’s “Instructions to Authors.” The specifications for most ACS journals are:

Types of References

Articles . Journal articles are the primary source found in laboratory reports. An example is given below. Notice that the authors’ initials are given instead of the first and middle names. Also, there is no “and” before the last author’s name. Some journals require that the article’s title be included in the reference (check with your instructor to see if he/she wants you to use this style).  When included, the article’s title should start with a capital letter but the other words in the title, unless they are proper nouns, should not be capitalized (see below). The journal title is abbreviated (click here for a list of the ACS abbreviations for common journals). Also, the year and the comma after the year are in bold. Lastly, the reference has inclusive pagination (first and last pages are given)

The following are examples of the same journal article with the first given in style where the article’s title is included in the reference, while the second is in the style where the article’s title is omitted.

Books. Books should be cited in the following manner:

Computer Programs. Citations for computer programs vary. If a person in academia wrote the program, there is often a journal-article source. In other cases, the program is simply distributed by a company.

Websites. Journal articles are much preferred over websites. Websites are dynamic and are usually not peer reviewed. One of the only instances when a website is an acceptable reference is when it is referring to a database (however, an article is usually associated with the creation of the database). If you must use a website, the reference should include a title for the site, the author(s), year of last update and URL. It is unacceptable to use a website as a reference for scientific data or explanations of chemical processes.

Tables, Schemes and Figures

Tables, schemes and figures are all concise ways to convey your message.  As you prepare these items for your report, remember to think of your reader.  You want them to derive the maximum amount of information with the minimum amount of work. Pretend to be the reader and ask yourself, “Does this enhance my understanding?”, “Can I find everything?”, “Can I read it without being distracted?” Poorly prepared tables, schemes and figures will reflect badly on your science, and you as a scientist, so think carefully about these items as you prepare your report.

A table is a way to summarize data or ideas in a coherent, grid-like fashion. This is not simply output from a spreadsheet! You should prepare the table in a word-processor so that its formatting matches the rest of your report.  In general, tables have no more than ten rows and columns to avoid overwhelming the reader.  One common exception is in review articles (such as in Chemical Reviews ) where an author is attempting to summarize results from an entire field.  Another common exception is in the reporting of X-ray crystallography data.  These tables have their own special formatting rules, and will not be discussed here.

Tables are referred to in the text as “Table #”. Tables, schemes and figures are labeled separately, with Arabic numbers, in the order they are referred to in the paper. Tables have a table caption, which in some journals appears above the table, while in others it appears below.  In either case, the table caption is always on the same page as the table.

Don’t use lines or boxes in your table except where absolutely necessary. Use spaces between your columns instead (helpful hint: it is better to use your word processor’s table formatting tools than trying to get the columns to line up using tabs or spaces). All column or row headings should have clear subtitles and units if needed (usually in parentheses). Any numbers that are presented should have proper significant figures, and an indication of the error should be shown (click here to review how to report uncertainty in one’s data). An example table is given below.

A scheme is usually a sequence of two or more chemical reactions that together summarize a synthesis. A scheme may also show the steps in a purification with each step or reaction giving the reactants, products, catalysts, and yields.  A scheme that shows a chemical reaction may also show possible intermediates. Note that mechanisms are not usually conveyed using a scheme because they are more complicated and illustrate where electrons are proposed to move.  Mechanisms are most often placed in a figure.

It is a common convention in a scheme to write a bold number underneath chemical species referred to in the text.  Note that for the first occurrence of the bold number in the text, the chemical’s name is given, but after that only the bold number is used to identify it. This method of defining abbreviations for compounds can also be done in the experimental section, if there is no scheme.  This is very useful when a compound’s name is long or complicated.

The one-step yield is usually written to the right of the equation, although it is also proper to write the yield under the arrow.  Note also how the reaction conditions can be summarized (i. e., the first step below), which saves the reader from flipping to the experimental section for these details.

Each scheme also has a caption, which is included under the scheme.  The caption should briefly  summarize what is in the scheme.  If the scheme is from another source, the reference to this source should appear at the end of the caption.

The following is an example of a scheme that might appear in a synthetic paper.  The text below it shows how the scheme could be referred to in the body of the paper.  

Benzamide (1) was refluxed under aqueous acidic conditions for 1 hour to yield benzoic acid (2) . Acid (2) was then refluxed with SOCl 2 to yield benzoyl chloride (3) .

Sometimes a scheme may be used to illustrate a non-chemical process or how an instrument’s components are connected.  These could also be presented as figures, and there is no definitive rule that will tell you when to use a scheme and when to use a figure.  When in doubt, think of the reader and use the method that conveys the most information in the most easily understood format

Figures fall into two broad categories; those that are pictorial representations of concepts that are presented in the text, and those which summarize data. Again, it is critical to your report that your figures are clear, concise and readable, and that they support the arguments that you are making.  Remember that you must refer to and discuss every figure in the text!  If a figure is not mentioned, you don’t need it!

Figures that are pictorial representations of concepts usually appear in the Introduction , but it is also appropriate to include them in the Discussion . Use this type of figure to make your writing more concise (remember the conversion factor: 1 picture = 1 kword).  Remember, humans are very visually oriented and we can grasp complex concepts presented as picture more easily then when they are presented in words or as mathematical formulae.  Some examples of concept figures include:

Graphs are figures that present data.  You use a graph when you have more data than will fit in a table.  The general rules for preparing good figures for your notebook also apply in a laboratory report (click here to review graph preparation).  Formatting tips: do not use colored backgrounds or gridlines, and do not draw a box around the graph.

You may find it more concise to combine all your data into one graph. For example, it may be appropriate to put six lines with absorbance as a function of time, with varying concentrations of a reactant on the same graph rather than constructing six different graphs. However, when doing this, be careful not to over-clutter the graph.

Standard curves should not be included in this section unless that was the primary goal of the experiment. They should be put in the Supporting Information .

Figures have figure captions compiled in the Figure Legend section, located on a separate page at the end of the paper. Journals chose this format because of typographical issues, and it has been retained despite its inconvenience to the reader.  Each figure should appear on its own page in the order is it is discussed in the text. Figure captions appear in the Figure Legends section and do not appear on the same page as the figure. However, in the bottom, right-hand corner of the page the following identifying text appears:

Figure Legends

All figure legends (captions) should be found in the section entitled “Figure Legends”. The format for a figure legend is usually: “Figure number” (italics and bold), a short title (followed by a period) and then a description of what is in the figure. All figure legends are compiled on the same page separated by a blank line. Be sure to define in the caption any symbols used in the figure, and note whether lines that pass through data points are fits, or “guides to the eye”.

Supporting Information

This section (also known as Supplemental Material ) is where you can include information that may be helpful, but not essential, for evaluation of your data. Items in this section may include calibration curves, and spectra (from which you extracted only one absorbance value for your analysis).  Figures or tables of data whose contents were summarized in the text, or which were not critical to the conclusions, are also to be placed in the supporting information.  An example of this type of material is the table of atom positions generated in an X-ray crystal structure.

What is the background in a lab report?

Background sentences: state why you want to do the experiment, why is it relevant, what other kinds of similar experiments have been done in the past. Goal: In one sentence, state what you are going to do in the experiment and what you hope to find. This is probably the most important part of the introduction.

What are the 5 parts of a lab report?

Sections of a laboratory report: A typical report would include such sections as TITLE, INTRODUCTION, PROCEDURE, RESULTS, and DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION.

How do you write a lab report step by step?

A lab report is broken down into eight sections: title, abstract, introduction, methods and materials, results, discussion, conclusion, and references. The title of the lab report should be descriptive of the experiment and reflect what the experiment analyzed.

Do you do labs in AP Physics?

Inquiry-based laboratory investigations are integral to the AP Physics 1 and 2 courses because they provide opportunities for students to apply the seven science practices (defined in the curriculum frameworks) as they identify questions, design experiments, conduct investigations, collect and analyze data, and …

How do you write a lab activity in physics?

• I. Title Page. Name of lab, name of student, period, date, instructor.
• II. Introduction. Describe what concept the lab explores, and presents the objectives and purpose of the lab.
• IV. Methods / Procedure.
• V. Results / Data.
• VI. Discussion / Analysis.
• VII. Conclusions.

How do you start a lab report?

The introduction of a lab report states the objective of the experiment and provides the reader with background information. State the topic of your report clearly and concisely (in one or two sentences). Provide background theory, previous research, or formulas the reader should know.

How long does it take to write a lab report?

Answers and Replies Gen-chem, maybe 1-2 hours on reports. O-chem, 2 hours. In HS, my lab-partner wrote up our lab reports.

What are the 7 parts of a lab report?

A typical lab report would include the following sections: title, abstract, introduction, method, results and discussion. Title page, abstract, references and appendices are started on separate pages (subsections from the main body of the report are not).

How do you write a university lab report?

• an abstract, outlining in brief what was done and what was found.
• a point-by-point description of the experimental method followed (a bit like following a recipe)
• a clear presentation of all of the results observed, some of which may be placed in an appendix to the main report.
• a discussion of those results.

Are lab reports double spaced?

Your report must be TYPED, DOUBLE SPACED (except title and literature cited sections), with 1.0 inch margins. All section headings should be typed in all capitals. Indent each new paragraph, rather than skipping two more lines. All papers will contain excellent SPELLING and GRAMMAR.

What is experimental design in physics?

An experimental design is the list of steps you take to do an experiment, and it is in the order that you do them in. They must include every step and be very detailed. An Experimental Design is divided into two sections: Materials and Methods.

What should a physics lab have?

These may include glass beakers, test tunes, items scales, lenses, heat lamps, magnets, balls, pendulums inclined planes etc. A physics lab may also include some more sophisticated equipment, such as voltammeter, electroscope, potentiometer, telescopes, microscopes, spectroscopes; electromagnets etc.

Why is a lab report written in the 3rd person?

Write in the third person – Scientific experiments demonstrate facts that do not depend on the observer, therefore, reports should avoid using the first and second person (I,me,my,we,our, OR us.)

How do you write a conclusion for a physics lab report?

When writing a conclusion you should: briefly restate the purpose of the experiment (i.e. the question it was seeking to answer) identify the main findings (i.e. the answer to the research question) note the main limitations that are relevant to the interpretation of the results.

What goes in the discussion of a lab report?

The discussion should contain: Summarize the important findings of your observations. For each result, describe the patterns, principles, relationships your results show. Explain how your results relate to expectations and to references cited.

What is a hypothesis in a lab report?

A hypothesis is a tentative statement that proposes a possible explanation for some phenomenon or event. A useful hypothesis is a testable statement that may include a prediction.

Can I pay someone to do my lab report?

If all this has you saying, “Can I pay someone to write my lab report?”. The answer is – yes! That’s exactly where we come in. Being a lab report writing assignment, we can help you with all the lab report help you need to submit an impressive piece of work.

Are lab reports hard?

Labs are up about 4 hours a piece for each report per week, plus lab time, when I was taking them. They weren’t hard so much as tedious- you have to be thorough in your reports if you expect As. The classes themselves weren’t so bad, but the homework could also be time consuming.

How many words should an introduction be in a lab report?

Introduction (Approx. word count: 200) Provides background information needed for the reader to understand the context and purpose of the experiment.

What are the 8 major sections of a lab report?

• Title Page. Include your name, your student number, the date, and the title of the experiment.
• Introduction.
• Materials and methods.
• Discussion.
• Conclusion.
• References.

What is the most important part of a lab report?

The results section contains all of the data collected in your study and is possibly the most important section of the report. This section usually contains graphs and charts displaying your findings, accompanied by brief paragraphs explaining the graphs and analyzing the data.

What are the 9 components of a lab report?

• Title Page.
• Methods and Materials (or Equipment)
• Experimental Procedure.

Can you use bullet points in a lab report?

Never use bullet points in the lab report. You may refer to section numbers in the body of the text, for example: Table 2 shows the acceleration found in each trial, along with the mean acceleration.

What are the general rules in writing scientific report?

A scientific report is written in several stages. We write the introduction, aim, and hypothesis before performing the experiment, record the results during the experiment, and complete the discussion and conclusions after the experiment.

What makes a good scientific report?

Objectives (as outlined in the Introduction) and scope of the investigation. A brief reference to the Materials and Methods. A summary of the results and conclusions – a brief but thorough statement of the outcome/s of the experiment.

Privacy Overview

Two Fralin Biomedical Research Institute postdoctoral associates awarded American Heart Association fellowships

The awards will help Karthi Sreedevi and Samar Antar advance their academic careers while conducting research related to cardiovascular disease.

Leigh Anne Kelley

19 Mar 2024

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Copy address link to clipboard

Karthi Sreedevi’s research focuses on heart disease — the leading cause of death in the United States. A weakened heart can’t pump enough blood to meet the body’s need for oxygen and nutrients. “My long-term goal is to understand how the heart muscle works efficiently in energy production and functions normally under stress.”

She wants to become a global expert in cardiac glycobiology — the study of carbohydrates, sugar chains, or glycans — and improve the lives of heart disease patients.

Samar Antar is investigating pulmonary arterial hypertension, which affects the lungs and the right side of the heart, and a rare disease known as idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, a condition marked by scarring of lung tissues over time. Pulmonary fibrosis can lead to heart failure and other lung diseases.

The two early career scientists at Virginia Tech were awarded American Heart Association Postdoctoral Fellowships for two years. The competitive fellowships help support academic trainees conducting cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, or brain health research.

The scientists will receive stipends for their work under the mentorship of world class health researchers at the Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at VTC.

Sreedevi joined Junco Warren ’s lab in December 2021. Warren is an assistant professor at the Fralin Biomedical Research Institute whose research interest focuses on metabolic reprogramming in heart failure. “Dr. Warren’s mentorship has rapidly developed my leadership of research projects,” Sreedevi said.

Sreedevi, who has two young children, was also awarded the Virginia Tech Research and Innovation Postdoctoral Scholarship and the Graduate Women in Science National Fellowship Honorary award in 2023. The awards provide additional training and support for career development. “I really admire her as a researcher and as a mother,” Warren said. “She’s an excellent postdoc.”

Antar studies the mechanisms that lead to lung fibrosis and inflammation. She was drawn to the field while pursuing a doctoral degree in pharmacology, where she was investigating the effect of cancer treatment on fibrosis.

“A normal lung is supposed to be soft and stretchy to help you breathe normally,” Antar said. In patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, the lungs become stiff and thick. “Over time, these changes make it more difficult for the patients to breathe properly. It’s like trying to blow up a balloon that’s been crumpled and doesn’t want to expand.”

Her research investigates the role of two proteins, Id1 and Id3, in pulmonary fibrosis. She is working in the lab of Yassine Sassi , assistant professor at the Fralin Biomedical Research Institute. “Samar is a truly exceptional scientist,” Sassi said. “The American Heart Association Postdoctoral Fellowship will help her to achieve an important milestone in her career path to an independent researcher.”

In this report

• Yassine Sassi , assistant professor, Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at VTC, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine
• Junco Warren , assistant professor, Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at VTC, Department of Human Nutrition, Foods, and Exercise, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences

540-526-2002

John Pastor

(540) 526-2222

• Cardiovascular Science
• Center for Vascular and Heart Research
• College of Agriculture and Life Sciences
• Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at VTC
• Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at VTC - top news
• Health Sciences and Technology (Roanoke)
• Office of Postdoctoral Affairs
• Roanoke, Va.
• Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine

Related Content

TeleSymbiosis

March 18, 2024

• Jean-Baptiste Labrune Former Research Affiliate
• Hiroshi Ishii Jerome B. Wiesner Professor of Media Arts and Sciences; Associate Director, MIT Media Lab
• Lucy Li Research Assistant
• Alaa Algargoosh Postdoctoral Fellow

Share this article

This project is part of the HPI-MIT Designing for Sustainability Program . It runs from 2023 to 2024, led by principal investigators from both institutes:

Prof. Hiroshi Ishii , Jerome B. Wiesner Professor of Media Arts and Sciences at MIT, Associate Director of the MIT Media Lab, and Head of the Tangible Media Group.

Prof. Bert Arnrich , Head of Digital Health - Connected Healthcare at HPI.

The project is implemented by a multidisciplinary team of researchers from both institutions, including Dr. JB Labrune, Lucy Li and Cristine Chen from the MIT as well as Dr. Julia von Thienen, Luca Hilbrich, Philipp Steigerwald, Tim Strauch, and Cato Zantman at HPI, alongside a number of close collaborators including Holly McKee and Kim-Pascal Borchart at HPI and Alaa Algargoosh at MIT.

The project aims to assist creators in developing more sustainable designs. For this purpose, the project develops Sustainability Labs: interactive rooms that serve as design studios. Currently, prototype labs are being developed at both HPI and MIT. They can be utilized independently at each location, while also providing a bridge between the two institutes, facilitating remote collaboration. These labs serve two primary purposes. Firstly, they provide a dedicated space for creators to design a wide range of solutions, while guiding them towards more sustainable design outcomes, irrespective of the specific design objectives. Secondly, these labs function as research hubs where design teams can be observed, and various interventions can be tested through randomized experiments to optimize sustainability support.

The labs are constructed as creative studio spaces in the tradition of reactive rooms, incorporating two main features:

• Automated Sustainability Assessment and Feedback : Computing technologies are employed to examine the design process for sustainability considerations. By recording and analyzing design team conversations, the system provides feedback to creators on how well their design considerations address sustainability aspects such as the natural environment, social equality, and the use of innovation for pro-environmental change. This automated feedback aims to highlight strengths and weaknesses in the sustainability performance of design concepts.
• Technology-Mediated Naturescape : The project integrates natural elements into the workspace through technology. This NatureScape immerses creators in simulated natural environments within the studio space. By experiencing nature through sounds and tangible objects reflecting natural parameters like wind, creators are prompted to consider nature more consistently in their creative process. Additionally, the NatureScape serves as a feedback mechanism, responding dynamically to design decisions by simulating natural phenomena such as thunderstorms or silenced bird calls, thereby reinforcing sustainable design choices.

Overall, Sustainability Labs leverage automated feedback and technology-mediated representations of nature as catalysts for sustainable design. By combining these two approaches, the project aims to foster a creative environment where sustainability considerations are integrated into the design process, ultimately leading to more environmentally responsible and innovative solutions.

VALUE-DRIVEN APPROACH

The project aims to enable the integration of non-human entities into the design process, particularly focusing on sustainability-oriented participatory design. The project seeks to address the challenges of incorporating more-than-human stakeholders, such as flora and fauna, into the design process, recognizing their importance in creating sustainable solutions. Through the concept of TeleSymbiosis, which involves connecting with nature at a distance, the project aims to promote mutualistic mindsets (where humans and non-humans mututally benefit from one another), fostering beneficial relationships between designers and nature. In this realm, key objectives of the project include:

• Introducing a framework for evaluating the engagement of non-human stakeholders in the design process as a metric for sustainability.
• Proposing methods to engage distant non-human stakeholders in creative processes, including automatic feedback, ambient stimulation, and tangible interactions.
• Testing and evaluating prototypes of Sustainability Labs, which incorporate these methods, to advance environments for sustainable co-creativity.

Following these approaches, the project aims to broaden the scope of participatory design by incorporating more-than-human perspectives, promoting sustainability-oriented mindsets, and leveraging technology to facilitate meaningful interactions between humans and nature in the design process.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

The project takes inspiration from a spectrum of design traditions.  

• Participatory Design and More-Than-Human Design (MTHD): Drawing from the principles of participatory design, the project emphasizes involving stakeholders beyond humans, acknowledging the importance of non-human entities in the design process. More-Than-Human Design (MTHD) expands the scope of participatory design to include non-human stakeholders, fostering a holistic approach to design that considers the needs and perspectives of multiple entities involved, up to the system level of considering ecosystems.
• Umwelt, Fûdo, and Mesology: These concepts challenge anthropocentric perspectives by highlighting the perceptual worlds of different organisms, emphasizing the interdependence between humans and non-humans, and exploring the socio-cultural aspects that shape human-environment interactions. Integrating these ideas into design methodologies facilitates a deeper understanding of the relationship between humans and the natural world.
• Shakkei, Mâ, and Fang: Borrowing from traditional East Asian garden design principles, concepts like shakkei (borrowed scenery), Mâ (empty space), and Fang (creative imitation) inspire the integration of nature into artificial environments. By recreating nature indoors and incorporating elements of natural landscapes into design, the project aims to foster connections with nature over distance, promoting sustainable design practices.
• Biophilic Design and Human-Nature Interaction: Biophilic design seeks to create spaces that enhance human well-being by fostering a connection with nature. By mimicking nature indoors across various sensory channels, Sustainability Labs can promote creativity, well-being and well-intending, while enhancing sustainable design outcomes. Human-Nature Interaction (HNI) explores the potential for collaboration between humans and non-human entities, leveraging technology to facilitate meaningful interactions and promote environmental stewardship.

These theoretical frameworks inform the project's approach to sustainable design, emphasizing the importance of inclusivity, ecological mindfulness, and interdisciplinary collaboration. By integrating insights from participatory design, ecological philosophy, traditional design principles, and biophilic design, the project seeks to advance sustainable design practices that benefit both humans and the broader natural world.

SYNERGISTIC ACTIVITIES

The project offers educational opportunities linked to the research topic, inviting guest speakers, and ensuring that their expertise is accessible to the public. Additionally, it delves into concepts and definitions of sustainability , explores both human-based and automatic methods for measuring sustainability in design , and compiles research batteries for the measurement of mindset factors associated with sustainability. The project furthermore develops resources for designers such as process models and methods to facilitate sustainable design.

Radical Atoms: Beyond Tangible Bits, Toward Transformable Materials

Hiroshi Ishii, Dávid Lakatos, Leonardo Bonanni, Jean-Baptiste Labrune

Some Challenges for Designers of Shape Changing Interfaces

J. Zigelbaum Labrune, J.B. .

Alaa Algargoosh wins two prizes at the 2023 MIT Research Slam competition

Alaa Algargoosh, a postdoctoral fellow in the Opera of the Future group, won two prizes at the 2023 MIT Research Slam Competition.

Hiroshi Ishii receives Japan ACM SIGCHI Chapter Lifetime Community Contribution Award

Ishii gave his award lecture "Evolving Visions" at the International Symposium on Human-Computer Interaction virtually on February 11, 2022.

Recommended

Microsoft hires renowned deepmind founder who has warned ai could cause ‘catastrophe on an unimaginable scale’.

• View Author Archive
• Email the Author
• Follow on Twitter
• Get author RSS feed

Contact The Author

Thanks for contacting us. We've received your submission.

Microsoft hired renowned artificial intelligence pioneer Mustafa Suleyman – the co-founder of the Google-owned DeepMind research lab who has warned the emerging technology could a “catastrophe on an unimaginable scale.”

Suleyman, 39, will report directly to Microsoft boss Satya Nadella and will run the company’s consumer AI division, the company said. He will lead Microsoft’s efforts to build out its Copilot AI chatbot and to integrate AI features into the Bing search engine and Edge browser.

“I’ve known Mustafa for several years and have greatly admired him as a founder of both DeepMind and Inflection, and as a visionary, product maker, and builder of pioneering teams that go after bold missions,” Nadella said in a blog post Tuesday announcing the hire.

Prior to joining Microsoft, Suleyman headed up Inflection AI, a startup co-founded by tech titan Reid Hoffman and fellow researcher Karén Simonyan that had raised $1.5 billion to date. Most of Inflection’s employees, including Simonyan, will join Suleyman at Microsoft.

The hiring was seen as a major coup for Microsoft as it looks to beat chief rival Google and others in the race to develop advanced AI. Microsoft is a chief investor in OpenAI, the firm best known for creating the ChatGPT chatbot and the Sora text-to-video generation tool.

However, Suleyman has repeatedly urged caution and the need for safe development of AI.

In his 2023 book “The Coming Wave,” Suleyman argued that AI, synthetic biology and other burgeoning technologies could allow “a diverse array of bad actors to unleash disruption, instability, and even catastrophe on an unimaginable scale.”

AI’s potential to fuel the spread of misinformation and cause economic upheaval are among his concerns. In an interview with the FT last year, Suleyman warned that AI could upend the white-collar work and create “serious number of losers” in the job market who “will be very unhappy, very agitated.”

At the same time, Suleyman expressed optimism about AI’s potential benefits if it is properly harnessed, writing that such tools could help “usher in a new dawn for humanity” and “help run our businesses, treat our ailments, and fight our battles,” according to the Wall Street Journal’s review of the book last fall .

Suleyman’s arrival at Microsoft is another blow for Google, which acquired his previous startup DeepMind in 2014 but has struggled to find its footing in the race to profit from AI.

Last month, Google suffered an embarrassing misfire after its Gemini chatbot began generating ahistorical or factually inaccurate pictures such as Black Vikings and Native American Founding Fathers. The company was forced to disable Gemini’s image generation tool and apologize.

Google is said to be in talks with Apple on a deal that would see its Gemini chatbot installed on iPhones in the future.

The negotiations are already drawing criticism from antitrust watchdogs who point out that Google and Apple have faced regulatory scrutiny over a similar deal for online search .

European Laboratory for Structural Assessment: Reaction Wall facility

The ELSA Reaction Wall is used for tests on full-scale specimens for the safety assessment of structures against earthquakes and other natural and man-made hazards.

The ELSA reaction wall is a facility of unique dimensions and capabilities in Europe and worldwide, capable of conducting experimental tests on full-scale specimens for the safety assessment of structures against earthquakes and other natural and man-made hazards.

By means of computer controlled hydraulic actuators it is possible to expose full-scale structures to loads of dynamic strong forces and control the resulting movements with high precision. The wall and the floor are designed to resist the forces which are necessary to deform and seriously damage the full-scale test models of structures.

The ELSA Reaction Wall is the largest facility of its kind in Europe and one of the largest in the world - only exceeded in Japan.

Take a virtual tour

Transnational Access to ELSA

The Joint Research Centre gives leading researchers from across Europe and beyond access to its world-class facilities and laboratories, enabling state-of-the-art experimental research, collaboration and capacity building with a European dimension. Access of users to the ELSA Reaction Wall is regulated by the framework for access to Joint Research Centre physical research infrastructures .

Recent projects

Slabstress: slab structural response for seismic european design.

The SlabSTRESS project investigated the behaviour of a full-scale reinforced concrete flat slab building under both gravity loads and seismic lateral actions. The two-storey structure had 9.0 m × 14.5 m plan dimensions, three bays in the loading direction and two orthogonally. This layout enabled to test simultaneously interior, edge and corner slab-column connections. The test campaign included pseudo-dynamic tests at the serviceability and ultimate limit states and quasi-static tests with increasing cyclic displacement. SlabSTRESS provided an in-depth understanding of the role of individual slab-column joints and their interaction with the overall response of the structure to different levels of lateral actions.

SlabSTRESS photo reportage

SlabSTRESS on ResearchGate

EQUFIRE: Multi-hazard performance assessment of structural and non-structural components subjected to seismic and fire following earthquake

The EQUFIRE project studied the post-earthquake fire performance of a four-storey three-bay steel frame with concentric bracings in the central bay, with a view to improving existing design guidelines and future standards. Tests were performed at the ELSA Reaction Wall and at the furnace of the Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing (BAM). The experimental activities at the ELSA Reaction Wall comprised pseudo-dynamic tests on a full-scale specimen of the first storey of the building, while the upper three storeys were numerically simulated. Conventional and earthquake-resistant fire protection systems were tested.

EQUFIRE photo reportage

EQUFIRE on ResearchGate

SERFIN: Seismic retrofitting of RC frames with RC infilling

The SERFIN project studied the effectiveness of seismic retrofitting of multi-storey multi-bay reinforced concrete frame buildings by converting selected bays into new walls through infilling with reinforced concrete. A full-scale model, consisting of two four-storey (12m tall) three-bay (8.5m long) parallel frames with the central bay infilled with a reinforced concrete wall, was tested with the pseudo-dynamic method. The frames were designed and detailed for gravity loads only and were typical of similar frames built in Cyprus in the 1970’s. Different connection details and reinforcement percentages for the two infilled frames were used in order to study their effects on the structural response.

SERFIN test report

RETRO: Assessment of the seismic vulnerability of an old RC viaduct with frame piers and study of the effectiveness of different isolation systems through pseudo-dynamic test on a large scale model

The RETRO project aimed at studying the seismic behaviour of existing reinforced concrete bridges and the effectiveness of innovative retrofitting systems. Two specimens (scale 1:2.5), a frame pier of 2 levels (height 5.8 m) and a frame pier of 3 levels (height 10.3 m), have been built and tested using the continuous pseudo-dynamic method with the non-linear substructuring technique, including the modelling of the remaining entire viaduct to which they belong. Two test configurations have been considered: 1) retrofitted viaduct using friction pendulum isolators, and an 2) as-built configuration.

RETRO test report

DUAREM: Full-scale experimental validation of dual eccentrically braced frame with removable links

Conventional seismic design is based on dissipative structural response, which implicitly accepts structural damage under the design earthquake, thus leading to significant economic losses. The DUAREM project aimed at reducing the repair costs and downtime of a structure hit by an earthquake through the concept of removable dissipative members and re-centring capability of the structure. The concept was implemented in a dual structure that combined i) steel eccentrically braced frames with removable bolted links and ii) moment resisting frames. The feasibility of the concept was validated through pseudo-dynamic tests of a full-scale model.

DUAREM test report

Technical capacity

ELSA operates a 16 m-tall, 21 m-long reaction wall, with two reaction platforms of total surface 760 m 2 that allow testing real-scale specimens on both sides of the wall. The actuators control system is designed in-house to perform tests with the continuous pseudo-dynamic method with substructuring, that permits testing elements of large structures, bidirectional testing of multi-storey buildings, and testing of strain-rate dependent devices.

Areas of research

ELSA has been supporting research related to the structural/seismic safety of structures, including:

• reference tests on reinforced concrete buildings with and without infill wall panels;
• reference and pioneering tests on full-scale bridges, including irregular configurations, isolation and asynchronous input motion using the pseudo-dynamic method with non-linear substructuring;
• tests on models of parts of monuments for the development of assessment methods and protection techniques;
• reference tests on concrete-steel composite structures;
• experimental tests on fibre-reinforced concrete composite structures;
• reference tests on models representative of existing vulnerable structures for the development of conventional or novel techniques and the calibration of European codes for assessment, strengthening and repair;
• development of the continuous pseudo-dynamic method, allowing more efficient seismic testing of large-scale specimens; development of base isolation and energy dissipation systems;
• experiments on active and semi-active control of wind- or traffic-induced vibrations.

The pseudo-dynamic test technique

In addition to static and cyclic tests on large structures and components, the facility is equipped for the pseudo-dynamic test technique that enables the simulation of earthquake loading of full-scale buildings.

The structure to be tested is fixed to the horizontal floor. Once the test structure is in place, the force that an earthquake would generate is applied through hydraulic jacks acting between the structure and the vertical wall, subjecting the structure to loads equivalent to those caused by the earthquake. The earthquake experiment takes place in extreme slow motion - one to two hours rather than the 10 to 30 second duration of a real earthquake -  allowing progressive damage and structural deformations to be accurately observed and recorded.

International collaboration

The ELSA facility is used within the framework of European Union wide integrated research programmes and is also available to external customers for performing demonstration and qualification tests on large-scale prototypes and/or validation of innovative constructions. This offers a major opportunity to the European construction industry to enhance its competitive position in world markets, especially in countries with high seismic risk.

Thanks to its recognition as a large-scale facility through the HCM, TMR and IHP programmes, the ELSA laboratory has been able to host a large number of users in the framework of European programmes. Around 100 international users benefit every year from the ELSA infrastructure and users from new Member States have had increased access to ELSA during FP7. In the FP7 SERIES project, ELSA hosted 30 users from nine European countries. 25 users from seven countries were hosted for the Horizon 2020 SERA project.

ELSA established scientific co-operation agreements with leading international research institutions in the field (China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, USA, etc.). These activities create a stimulating environment for exchanging knowledge and expertise and gives the opportunity to users of ELSA to establish contacts and collaborations, as well as broad exposure to the most prominent scientific developments at European and world level.

Share this page

Where is customer care in 2024?

Customer care leaders are facing their greatest challenge in decades. They must prepare their organizations for an AI-enabled future while simultaneously meeting tough commercial targets and rising customer expectations. Our latest global survey suggests that many companies are struggling on all these fronts.

About the authors

This article is a collaborative effort by Eric Buesing , Maximilian Haug, Paul Hurst, Vivian Lai, Subhrajyoti Mukhopadhyay, and Julian Raabe , representing views from McKinsey’s Operations Practice.

Major disruptions are always painful, and the transition from a care paradigm dominated by human agents to one steered by AI technologies may be the biggest disruption in the history of customer service. Can organizations find a route to hyperefficient, digitized customer care while retaining the personal contact and responsiveness that customers require?

Right now, many customer care leaders feel trapped in no-man’s-land. Technology has enabled them to evolve their operations significantly, and the traditional call center environment is rapidly becoming a thing of the past. Yet when these digitally enabled models underperform—and they often do—companies need to master entirely new approaches to performance improvement alongside their traditional tool kits.

Customer care in the spotlight

The key findings in this article are based on McKinsey’s fourth global survey of customer care executives. This survey was our largest yet, gathering the views of more than 340 leaders at the director, senior director, vice president, and C-suite levels. Respondents came from companies with annual revenues of $100 million to $10 billion plus, representing every major industry segment.

To make matters worse, executives say that most of the challenges highlighted in our last survey  are still present today (see sidebar, “Customer care in the spotlight”). Those challenges include rising call volumes, high levels of employee attrition, and persistent talent shortages. Meanwhile, some of the largest consumer-facing technology organizations in the world have become exceptional at digitally enabled customer care, which is lifting customer expectations everywhere, piling further pressure onto customer care staff and leadership at other companies.

Our survey reveals three major themes that are top of mind for customer care leaders. First, their priorities are shifting, from an overwhelming focus on customer experience to a multidimensional approach that also emphasizes revenue goals and technology transformation. Second, they are working hard to build future-ready AI-enabled ecosystems for their operations. Finally, they are boosting their capabilities by investing in employee upskilling programs and building stronger outsourcing relationships.

Would you like to learn more about our Operations Practice ?

Reprioritizing core operations.

When we began monitoring the sentiment of customer care leaders in 2016, their priorities were clear. Customer experience came first, followed at a distance by operational improvement, technology transformation, and revenue generation—in that order.

Over the past seven years, those priorities have converged (Exhibit 1). Revenue generation, which was mentioned by about one in 20 customer care leaders in our first survey, has been rising steadily in importance ever since. It is now a priority for a third of customer care leaders. But over the past two years, technology enhancements and operational improvements have seen the fastest increases. The expectation that customer care functions can do it all and do it well has never been higher.

Leaders also understand that they need to engage with their customers to delight them. Currently, only 11 percent of respondents say reducing contact volume is important to them, a 20-percentage-point drop over 12 months. Indeed, 57 percent of leaders expect call volumes to increase by as much as one-fifth over the next one or two years.

Separate research suggests that these leaders are right to stay focused on direct personal interaction, even when many of their customers are young digital natives. In a recent McKinsey survey of 3,500 consumers, respondents of all ages said that live phone conversations were among their most preferred methods of contacting companies for help and support. That finding held true even among 18- to 28-year-old Gen Z consumers, a cohort that favors text and social messaging for interpersonal communications.

There’s also evidence that younger consumers are getting tired of the digital self-service paradigm. One financial-services company reports that its Gen Z customers are 30 to 40 percent more likely to call than millennials, and they use the phone as often as baby boomers. Premium-segment customers of all ages also prefer the phone, with many saying that live phone support is part of the premium service they are paying for.

These findings don’t point to a future of phone-only customers, however. While customers of all generations prioritize support from a real person, they also want the flexibility to use different channels according to their needs. Digital-chat services have achieved a high level of acceptance across generations, and email remains important, especially for older consumers (Exhibit 2).

The need to excel in service across multiple channels creates extra challenges for customer care leaders, especially when budgets are tight. And 37 percent of respondents in our survey say that cost is still a key priority. This tension is driving companies to look for ways to control the customer care costs that go beyond call volume reduction, with automation and outsourcing the most frequently cited levers.

Creating a future-ready AI ecosystem

The tensions in modern customer care are clearly seen in companies’ approaches to advanced digital technologies. Our survey demonstrates that digital has already become a decisive differentiator. Among respondents who report that their operations are delivering better-than-expected performance, more than half have high levels of digital integration. Banking, telecommunications, and travel and logistics are among the leading industries in this regard.

Those high performers are in the minority, however. Only 8 percent of respondents from North America report greater-than-expected satisfaction with their customer performance. In Africa, Europe, and the Middle East, the figure is 5 percent. Among organizations reporting that performance was in line with or lower than expected, more than 80 percent also say their levels of digital integration are partial or low.

Leaders agree that they need to get digital right. More than half of the respondents to our survey expect the share of inbound contacts that take place through digital channels to exceed 40 percent in the next three years.

Artificial intelligence will play a decisive role in future customer care ecosystems. Respondents to our survey are already deploying AI tools in a variety of applications, including chatbots and automated email response systems, training and support for call center agents, back-office analytics, and decision making.

Over the past 12 months, the availability of powerful generative AI (gen AI) tools, especially large language models (LLMs) that can parse and respond to unstructured text or speech, has opened new possibilities for technology in customer care. More than 80 percent of respondents are already investing in gen AI, or expect to do so in the coming months, with leaders highlighting a wide range of potential applications.

One European subsidiary of a global bank replaced its well-established rules-based customer chatbot with a new system based on gen AI technology. Seven weeks after launch, the AI chatbot was 20 percent more effective at successfully answering customer queries than the old tool. The bank has already identified a road map of improvements that could double its performance in the coming months.

Early adopters are extremely ambitious about the potential of gen AI. The executive in charge of customer care at one major global organization told us that they expect 100 percent of customer interactions to be AI-enabled in the coming years, using a combination of technologies including new virtual assistants, agent-assist tools, and AI-powered voice analytics.

For most companies, however, the gen AI customer care revolution is still in its early stages. Leaders highlight multiple issues that are making it hard for them to integrate these technologies into their existing processes and workflows. The issues include technical challenges regarding deployment and scaling; concerns about safety, security, and governance; and difficulties in defining the desired outcomes from, or business case for, gen AI investments (Exhibit 3).

Learn more about Customer Care

Rethinking skills.

Today, customer care organizations lack many of the critical skills they need to deliver excellent service and navigate the transition to a digitally mediated, AI-enabled world. In part, that’s because customer care leaders have been running to stand still. Record levels of staff attrition following the COVID-19 pandemic meant that supervisors spent much of their time interviewing and bringing new staff up to speed. They spent less time mentoring their established teams, a problem exacerbated by the introduction of hybrid and remote working arrangements. Some agents and team leaders have spent years working with little interaction or coaching from their managers.

Staff turnover has now slowed, and two in three leaders in our latest survey say upskilling and reskilling are critical priorities. Companies highlight a range of benefits that accrue from effective upskilling and reskilling programs, including improvements to employee morale, increased productivity, and faster adoption of new technologies and working methods. Meanwhile, technology is changing upskilling programs. Twenty-one percent of leaders tell us that they are already using AI-based tools to train and support their customer care staff.

AI-based agent support systems are already becoming a key tool for companies seeking to offer extremely effective personal service to demanding customers. These systems can help agents resolve complex queries the first time, simultaneously reducing care costs and boosting customer experience.

One global construction equipment company, for example, uses a gen AI system to help its call center staff navigate thousands of pages of technical-support documentation. The system selects the appropriate steps to resolve a customer’s problem in seconds, based on free text questions entered by the agent and background information such as the serial numbers of vehicles and parts. The tool has cut average call resolution times from around 125 minutes to a few seconds, and it is currently saving customers €150,000 to €300,000 per day in reduced asset downtime.

Elsewhere, companies are using AI to transform the way they manage and support their customer care agents. New AI-based tools can optimize call volume forecasting, for example. This approach helped one company improve forecast accuracy by seven percentage points, while halving the work required to manage team capacities and schedules. The change improved customer service levels by more than 10 percent, while cutting staffing and overtime costs by more than 5 percent.

Companies are also looking outside their organizations for innovative ways to fill capability gaps. Outsourcing, once viewed primarily as a way to reduce costs, is increasingly seen as an effective source of additional skilled capacity and innovation capabilities. Fifty-five percent of the companies in our survey currently outsource part of their customer care operations, and 47 percent of those organizations expect to increase their outsourcing over the next two years.

Outsourcing relationships are becoming deeper too, with respondents telling us that they are now using their business process outsourcing for a range of activities that extends far beyond traditional call and email handling. They include content management and digital-marketing services, payments handling, and the development of AI-based customer care tools. Following the blueprint established by major players in the industrial products, medical device, software, and e-commerce sectors, some companies are now working with outsourcing partners to set up global innovation hubs that will drive the development of next-generation customer care technologies.

Our survey suggests that customer care organizations are running at two different speeds. In the fast lane, top performers have seized the opportunities presented by advances in digital technologies. With ruthless prioritization, they are investing capital to drive efficiency and service excellence across the customer journey. The best have already reshaped their organizations around highly integrated digital platforms. One high-performing company with more than 5,000 service agents is on track to deliver 75 digital-experience improvements this year, for example.

Other companies are still in the slow lane, struggling to fit a patchwork of digital point solutions into legacy care ecosystems. Unsure where to put their dollars, they are trapped in a cycle of continual system adaptation with no clear destination or road map.

In 2024, both types of organizations may need to shift their positions on the road. Gen AI is raising the bar for performance, productivity, and personalization in customer care, and tomorrow’s fully AI-enabled care organizations will operate very differently from those of today. It’s time for companies to look at their care ecosystems with fresh eyes. They should formulate an independent perspective on the changing expectations of their customers and the role of advanced AI in their organization. The future of customer care is calling. Leaders should answer with a bold vision and an aggressive time line for change.

Eric Buesing is a partner in McKinsey’s Charlotte office, where Paul Hurst is an associate partner; Maximilian Haug is an associate partner in the Boston office; Vivian Lai is a consultant in the New York office; Subhrajyoti Mukhopadhyay is an expert in the Chicago office; and Julian Raabe  is a partner in the Munich office.

The authors wish to thank Jorge Amar, Brian Blackader, Marcela Guaqueta, Suryansha Gupta, and Josh Wolff for their contributions to this article.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

The state of customer care in 2022

How AI is helping revolutionize telco service operations

How AI-driven nudges can transform an operation’s performance