The Literature Report - Advances in Chemistry (ACS Publications)

The Literature Report IRLENE ROEMER STEPHENS Celanese Corp., Summit, N. J.

Downloaded by YORK UNIV on June 3, 2018 | https://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: January 1, 1961 | doi: 10.1021/ba-1961-0030.ch026

1

The literature report presents all references per taining to the research problem under considera tion. It may be a bibliography, an annotated bibliography, a bibliography with abstracts, or a critical literature report. Some organizations specify the desirability of the scientist's conduct ing his own survey for, it is reasoned, he only is thoroughly acquainted with the problem and, therefore, he only can efficiently analyze the literature. In some cases, a cooperative search is specified. In other cases, the survey is conducted and the literature finally presented to the scien tist. When writing the literature report, the searcher must keep constantly in mind the pur pose of the report and the function it is to serve. Perhaps the best technical writing is being done by persons at the top of their professions who have done important work, understand its mean ing, and write about it with confidence. They are bold enough to write simple, direct English.

A fter the literature search is completed, accumulated information must be organized, correlated, analyzed, and summarized if it is to be useful. Often, interpretation is also i n order. A t the very outset, it is well to remember that the literature report is designed to meet certain definite requirements just as any structure is destined to carry its load. T h e form w h i c h the literature report w i l l take depends upon the purpose the report is to serve. It has been said that most of the structural faults of tech nical reports result from the author's being so concerned w i t h what he is writing that he neglects to worry enough about h o w and for w h o m he is writing. This brings us back to the beginning, the initiation of the search, for it is here that the foundation for the literature report is l a i d . T h e suggestion of bringing together the literature worker and the research worker on a personal basis seems likely to produce beneficial results—both to the research worker i n improving his understanding of literature searching, and to the literature worker i n a better appreciation of requirements—since man's progress is 1

Present address, Maplewood, N . J.

263 SEARCHING THE CHEMICAL LITERATURE Advances in Chemistry; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1961.


264

ADVANCES

IN CHEMISTRY

SERIES

not even bounded b y his v i v i d imagination. Such a discussion of the problem at hand is even more productive, if the scientist is experienced i n using the library effectively ( 2 0 ) . It is here, i n the preliminary discussion, that the scientist ex plains the problem. Often, the subject of the search is narrowed as a result of a mutual interchange of ideas between the scientist and the literature worker. Here we see synergism, as applied to creative thinking, in action: 2 4 - 2 = 5 (or more) (43). T h e literature worker becomes thoroughly familiar w i t h the problem. T h e n he a n d the scientist break down the problem, analyze it, digest it, a n d formulate a plan of attack. This preliminary discussion w i l l also be the basis for the decision as to the k i n d of literature report w h i c h w i l l be made. If, i n his discussion of the problem w i t h the literature worker, the scientist recognizes that the literature worker has a grasp and understanding of the subject area under investigation, it is likely that he w i l l request a critical survey and, consequently, a critical report w i t h inter pretation of accumulated references. A c c o r d i n g to many published statements of research directors, the most common and serious deficiency of chemists is the i n ability to present the results of an investigation. T h e chemist may decide that the literature worker is equipped to search out and report literature pertinent to the problem at hand. " . . . T h e chemist may very w e l l find that someone else possesses, to a degree that chemists cannot reasonably achieve, the useful skill to present chemical ideas and conclusions . . (22). The vital research function performed b y the literature worker is magnified, in the eyes of many people, when it is realized that the scientist no longer bur dened b y literature searches is n o w free to think a n d work. Hopefully, his thinking is creative i n its performance for " . . . never before i n our history has such a premium been put upon creative thinking—in both pure and applied science. Our highly competitive economy makes industrial progress essential. E a c h i n dustry strives to find ways to make its current products and methods of produc tion obsolete . . (44). T h e literature worker plays a part i n industrial progress. It grows w i t h increased participation and understanding of the research process. H e must have the quality of sympathy—the ability to consider the problem as it is presented b y the scientist and to consider the m i n d of the recipient of the report. Types of Literature

Reports

T h e form of the report is determined when the search is started. There are several possibilities. The Bibliography. A t the end of the search, one stage of intelligent appraisal of the literature on a specified subject has been accomplished—that of sorting out pertinent references. If the results of the search are to be useful, the references must be organized. Decisions must be made as t o whether references are to be presented i n topical or chronological arrangement. T h e arrangement chosen w i l l depend both o n the purposes of the search, as defined b y the scientist requesting it, and on the actual references traced. Usually some sort of classification is i n order. Annotated Bibliography. T h e annotated bibliography is identical i n its possible forms to the bibliography, w i t h the added advantage of having a descrip tive sentence or two added for each bibliographic entry. This augmentation of the title increases the value of the report and saves time for the researcher. Bibliography w i t h Abstracts. A frequently requested and very usual form of the literature report is that of the bibliography w i t h abstracts. I n its simplest form, SEARCHING THE CHEMICAL LITERATURE Advances in Chemistry; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1961.


STEPHENS

Literature Report

265

the abstract included is the abstract w h i c h appeared i n Chemical Abstracts or i n Chemisches Zentralblatt, or the author summary of articles traced through index ing tools. A subject arrangement is ordinarily specified. This arrangement re quires classification and cross-classification of the accumulated references. Ordi narily, an author index of references is advisable i n a report, no matter what its length. C r i t i c a l Literature Report. T h e bibliographic report, i n any of its forms, may best be regarded as a noncritical report. Selectivity, based on an understanding of the subject involved, is exercised i n searching. Thought is involved i n organizing and classifying the references. However, little analysis and, certainly, no interpre tation is exercised. T h e critical literature report puts more responsibility on the reporter. The crux of the matter emphasized i n the problem must be clearly stated. The accumulated references must be carefully reviewed, analyzed, and finally classified. The quality of the final report is enhanced b y a systematic stickto-itivism on the part of the writer. If it has been requested, and particularly if the researcher, himself, is preparing the literature report for his supervisor, inter pretation should accompany the report. Interpretation of literature search results presupposes a thorough acquaintance with the problem under investigation. Between the organization of the references and the final interpretation of data i n report form there is a stage of highly intelli gent appraisal. Sound and objective evaluation must be exercised. Occasionally, intuitive evaluation is involved i n making recommendations. T h e intuition re ferred to here can be described as the spontaneous, integrated result of past ex perience, logical reasoning, and personal preference (38). Hence, decisions w h i c h are based i n part upon intuition are less secure, i n general, than those based upon a simple balancing of accumulated evidences. A n y literature report should be as current i n nature as possible w i t h available periodical indexes. T h e scope of the search should be clearly defined i n the report to avoid misunderstanding the extent of the search. T h e up-to-datedness is, perhaps, more vital i n the patent search than i n any other. Yet, currency is desir able i n all searches. Certainly its importance cannot be contested i n the case of the economic literature report, alternatively referred to as the cost estimation report (41). T h e exhaustive—and exhausting—general search aimed at catching every thing on the designated subject should be current if it is to serve its purpose to the utmost, as should the processing equipment literature report. Something vital might have been written just last month—or last week, as a matter of fact. H o w disappointing and unforgivable to miss it! O f course, it is apparent that the "what's n e w " type of literature report is, by its very nature, current. In this type, current news items are selected and pre sented either as coordinated commentaries or i n order of appearance i n selected newspapers and periodicals. In the critical literature report, published abstracts are useful as guides to literature, but it is w e l l to remember that they are not authoritative. References w h i c h from abstracts appear to be pertinent to the problem should be referred to i n their original form. W h e n the final abstract is included i n the literature report, clarification and amplification of misleading or involved chemical terminology, notational systems, trivial names, and trade-mark names should be made parenthetically. T o establish these facts, one may refer to standard rules for naming organic and inorganic compounds as followed by the American C h e m i cal Society (8, 17-19). These added notations w i l l make it easier for the investi gator to interpret the data. SEARCHING THE CHEMICAL LITERATURE Advances in Chemistry; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1961.

266

ADVANCES


Who Writes the Literature

IN

CHEMISTRY

SERIES

Report?

There are many different practices i n searching the literature. Some organi zations specify the desirability of having the scientist conduct his o w n survey for, it is reasoned, he is the only one thoroughly acquainted w i t h his problem. H e , alone, w i l l recognize leads not anticipated i n the preliminary definition of the problem; thus he can exercise utmost efficiency i n cutting through irrelevant ma terial, and only he can analyze the literature resulting from an intensive search. It is reasoned that the researcher is perfectly able to do his o w n reporting as w e l l as his own literature searching (6, 51). It is thought by some that " . . . a deficiency i n skill of writing a l u c i d report on the part of technical men is more accurately the lack of ability to think at the professional level . . (29). It is supposed b y some that the habits of care i n handling laboratory materials and meticulous accuracy i n statements about quality, w h i c h are natural to the tech nologist, w o u l d enable h i m to use a similar approach i n the use of words and to obey rules for arranging subject matter. A n d so, sometimes the researcher con ducts his own survey. In this case, the literature group might carry out a preliminary bibliographic search as an aid to the scientist. In other cases, a cooperative search is specified. T h e problem is defined and discussed not only at the outset of the search, but periodically. The responsibility for the search lies w i t h the senior investigator (50). The literature group performs the mechanics but under the watchful direction of the researcher. O n other occasions, the survey is conducted and the literature organized logically, summarized, and presented to the scientist. Sometimes, w h e n specified at the outset, interpretation of traced references is appended. This latter practice is becoming acceptable as skilled scientific people move into the literature field. However, it should be emphasized that the function of the literature report most often is to present a l l references listed i n standard tools available to the searcher on a specified subject i n a logical and w e l l organized form, so that the scientist may more readily analyze and interpret reported literature i n his area of interest. Good interpretations can be produced by a nontechnical individual, if he is equipped w i t h unusual shrewdness. H e is handicapped, however, b y his depend ence upon what he is given and told—he can ask questions, but he can rarely check for himself from first principles. Experience suggests that the interpreter having sound knowledge of his subject is, on the whole, better equipped to interpret accurately and quickly and without bothering other people. H i s be setting sin—at least his temptation—is to impose upon the writing of others a technical viewpoint of his o w n . This distortion of the author's viewpoint is sometimes observed i n abstracts, where introduction of a subjective approach may not affect the facts but is likely to upset the balance of their presentation. Writing

the Literature

Report

One of the commonest and most serious faults i n technical and scientific writing is to bury the important fundamental ideas under a mass of detail. W e all say, " D o n ' t bury ideas i n excess verbiage, keep it simple!" W h e n w r i t i n g the literature report it is well to keep constantly i n m i n d the purpose of the report and the function w h i c h it is to serve. It is more important to allay doubt and avoid ambiguity than to provide variety and elegance. Both jargon and clichés are inappropriate. Jargon is nothing less than technical slang and is i n b a d taste SEARCHING THE CHEMICAL LITERATURE Advances in Chemistry; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1961.


STEPHENS

Literature Report

267

where other descriptive terms are available. Clichés indicate that the author is the servant of the language and not its master. In writing the report it is wise to remember that it must revolve around its specific purpose. It w o u l d seem to me that the best technical writing is being done by persons at the top of their professions w h o have done important work, understand its meaning, and write about it w i t h confidence. They are bold enough to write simple, direct E n g l i s h . Concepts are complex. W e should not add to their complexity with vague, indirect language. W e should write simply, clearly, coherently, accurately, i n neat, precise language; avoid ambiguities, padding, and fogging. W e should put ourselves i n the place of the chemist or executive w h o reads our report as a stranger. T h e research content is always vital and is the part that counts. Organization. O n e of the main defects of report writing results from the inability of the report writer to present facts i n logical order. Ordinarily the final products of the literature search w i l l be on cards. There are several methods of organizing the accumulated references. First of a l l , after a cursory examina tion of the references, an outline should be set up. This outline w i l l undoubtedly be revised several times i n the course of organizing the references. A n y one of three methods of organization is applicable and provides an arrangement suitable for analyzing the literature. 1. T h e subject of the reference can be indicated on the reference card, using Roman numerals or letters and A r a b i c numerals of the outline. 2. References can be randomly numbered and these numbers placed on sheets corresponding to sections of the outline. 3. "If punched cards are used to record the data collected and are coded i n accordance w i t h the outline, the cards should be numbered to correspond w i t h the bibliography, since the cards pertaining to each phase of the subject can then be sorted out as required . . ." (48). Format of the Literature Report. N o set method of arrangement w o u l d be appropriate for a l l kinds of reports. T h e format of noncritical literature reports has been briefly discussed. T h e bibliographic report w h i c h is arranged topically should be cross-referenced and should have an author index. U n d e r each sub ject, either a chronological or an alphabetical arrangement is acceptable. T h e chronological arrangement may have the greater advantage. It may be con sidered advisable to include photostats of articles w h i c h were particularly com prehensive. It is to be remembered that the scientist w i l l analyze a n d interpret the presented data. Its systematic arrangement w i l l a i d his study. The critical report may be arranged i n one of several ways. Whether refer ences i n the bibliography-with-abstracts are arranged alphabetically b y the authors name, topically w i t h references alphabetically arranged, or topically w i t h references chronologically arranged is not a vital matter so long as a consistent practice is followed. Certain essential components should be i n c l u d e d : 1. The covering memorandum. The report should be sent with a covering memo randum which outlines the problem as it was presented at the start of the search. A detailed listing of the major tools used for the search should be included. This memo randum is of the nature of an introduction. 2. Title page. 3. Table of contents. 4. Summary, abstract of contents. 5. Descriptive section. Here a description of reactions or processes involved is presented. This section will vary depending on the subject of the survey. SEARCHING THE CHEMICAL LITERATURE Advances in Chemistry; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1961.

268

ADVANCES

IN CHEMISTRY

SERIES

6. Interpretation of data, only when clearly specified. This section is sometimes ex cluded, for the scientist most often prefers to make his own interpretations based on his critical analysis of the presented data.


7. Bibliography. The bibliography is organized in one of the several arrangements described for bibliographies.

Style. Style is the mode of expressing thought in language. It is the quality w h i c h gives distinctive character a n d excellence to artistic expression. T h e effectiveness of a report depends to a large extent on the style of its architecture. Absence of clarity is a serious matter since it rebukes utilitarian standards. Clarity of thought precisely set down may result i n no more than a flat desert of undistinguished sentences, but at least there are no obscurities. Review of the Report. Systematic procedures for critical examination of the literature report should be practiced. Some consider that good writing is rewriting. Certainly revision should not be ignored as a means of making the introduction or summary more effective, nor should one ignore the possible advantage of review b y another as insurance against discontinuity and ineffective presentation. It is gratifying if the report provides answers to the problems w h i c h prompted the request for a literature survey. However, this is not the test of an effective report. Negative results are significant. W h e n questions are not answered through the literature, the investiga tor may plan his laboratory research accordingly. Conclusion T h e literature report, like any written report, is a measure of the intellect of the person writing that report. If that is so, and I believe it to be so, it behooves us to approach the written w o r d as a record w h i c h unmasks us. The writing of the literature report should be approached accordingly. Bibliography (1) Arnold, C . K., "Technical Writing Manual," Electronic Periodicals, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, 1959. (2) Barzun, Jacque, Graff, H . F., "The Modern Researcher," Harcourt, New York, 1957. (3) Bjorksten, J., Chem. Inds. 60, 407 (1947). Specifications for a good research report. (4) Cady, E . L . , "Creative Communication," Reinhold, New York, 1956. (5) Case Institute, "Chemists Profile Redrawn," Case Institute Survey, 1959. (6) Chem. & Ind. (London) 1959, 269. Technical writing; an unnecessary new spe cialism (editorial). (7) Cherry, C . , " O n Human Communication," Wiley, New York, 1957. (8) Christiansen, J. Α., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 82, 5517-22 (1960). Manual of physicochemical symbols and technology ( I U P A C ) . (9) Ellis, Α., Sci. Monthly 66, 427 (1948). Application of scientific principles of scientific publications. (10) Endeavour 9, 53 (April 1950). Accessibility of knowledge. (11) Engineer 198, 171 (July 30, 1954). The technical interpreter. (12) Fieser, L . F., Fieser, Marv, "Style Guide for Chemists," Reinhold, New York, 1960. (13) Flesch R., Lass, A . H., "The W a y to Write," 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1955. (14) Godfrey, J. W . , Parr, G . , "The Technical Writer." Wiley, New York, 1958. (15) Gunning, R., "The Technique of Clear Writing," McGraw-Hill, New York, 1952. (16) Harwell, G . C . , "Technical Communication," Macmillan, New York, 1960. (17) International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, J. A m . Chem. Soc. 82, 5575-84 (1960) Definitive rules for the nomenclature of amino acids, steroids, vitamins, and carotenoids ( I U P A C ) . (18) International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 82, 5545-74 (1960). Definitive rules for the nomenclature of organic chemistry ( I U P A C ) .

SEARCHING THE CHEMICAL LITERATURE Advances in Chemistry; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1961.


STEPHENS

Literature Report

269

(19) Ibid., 82, 5523-44 (1960). Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry, American version with comments ( I U P A C ) . (20) Killeffer, D . H., Chem. Eng. News 35, 18-19 (Aug. 15, 157). U . S. needs science writers. (21) Ibid., pp. 60-2 (April 26, 1957). Chemistry's fourth estate. (22) Killeffer, D . H., Chemist 32, 271 (1955). Working with technical writers. (23) Kobe, Κ. Α., "Chemical Engineering Reports," 4th ed., Interscience, New York, 1957. (24) Mandel, Siegfried, "Writing in Industry," Vol. I, Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, Plenum Press, Brooklyn, Ν. Y., 1960. (25) Marder, Daniel, "The Craft of Technical Writing," Macmillan, New York, 1960. (26) Marple, Η. Α., Chem. Eng. News 35, 82 (April 8; Part II, 1957). Writing for the chemical industry. (27) Mathis, Η. M., Chem. Eng. Progr. 48, 585 (1952). Plea for simplicity. (28) Nelson, J. R., "Writing the Technical Report," 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1952. (29) Nichols, W . T., Chem. Eng. News 26, 602 (1948). The technical report bugaboo. (30) Norgaard, Margaret, " A Technical Writer's Handbook," Harper, New York, 1959. (31) Piper, H., Davie, F., "Guide to Technical Reports," Reinhart, New York, 1958. (32) Rhodes, F. H., Johnson, H. F., "Technical Report Writing," McGraw-Hill, New York, 1955. (33) Sherman, Τ. Α., "Modern Technical Writing," Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N . J., 1957. (34) Singer, T. E . R., Record Chem. Progr. 18, 11-29 (1957). Need for imagination and skepticism when making literature searches. (35) Singer, T. E . R., ed., Information and Communication Practice in Industry," Reinhold, New York, 1958. (36) Soc. Tech. Writers and Editors, "Review of Literature on Technical Writing," Soc. of Technical Writers and Editors, Washington, D . C. (37) Souther, J. H., "Technical Report Writing," Wiley, New York, 1957. (38) Stanly, A . L . , Mech. Eng. 77, 778 (1955). Evaluating intangibles for executive decision. (39) Steel, Ε. M., "Readable Writing," Macmillan, New York, 1950. (40) Stephens, I. R., Ind. Eng. Chem. 48, 32A-33A (October 1956). Chemical industry cost estimating. (41) Stephens, I. R., "Technical Writing," chap, in "Information and Communication Practice in Industry," T. E . R. Singer, ed., Reinhold, New York, 1958. (42) Stephens, I. R., Reyling, P., "Editing Technical Reports," chap, in "Technical Editing," Β. H. Weil, ed., Reinhold, New York, 1958. (43) Stuber, P. J., Chem. Eng. News 33, 4930 (Nov. 14, 1955). Synergism: 2 + 2 = 5 (or more). (44) Thomas, C . Α., Ind. Labs. 6, 68 (October 1955). Creativity in science. (45) Trelease, S. F., "The Scientific Paper," Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, 1947. (46) Waldo, W . H., "Better Report Writing," Reinhold, New York, 1957. (47) Weil, B. H., ed., "Technical Editing," Reinhold, New York, 1958. (48) Weil, B. H., ed., "The Technical Report, Its Preparation, Processing and Use in Industry and Government," Reinhold, New York, 1954. (49) Weil, Β. H., Lane, J. C., Chem. Eng. News 34, 6244 (Dec. 17, 1956). Psycho logical barriers to writing. (50) Williamson, Μ. Α., Ind. Labs. 10, 33 (December 1959). Professional man and the obligation of authorship. (51) Williamson, Μ. Α., Research and Development 11, 105-6 (April 1960), 63-6 (May 1960), 91-2 (June 1960), 75-6 (July 1960). Transforming report writing from a chore to benefit. (52) Wilson J. H., Chem. Eng. News 32, 3898 (Sept. 27, 1954). Who cares who writes it. (53) Wilson, J. H., J. Chem. Educ. 34, 447-9 (1959). Our constantly changing lan guage. BASED on paper presented before Division of Chemical Literature, Symposium on Search ing the Chemical Literature, 130th Meeting, A C S , Atlantic City, N . J., Septembeer 1956. Revised 1960.

SEARCHING THE CHEMICAL LITERATURE Advances in Chemistry; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1961.

The Literature Report - Advances in Chemistry (ACS Publications)

Recommend Documents