Reading a Paper and Its Supporting Information · seed 1 · A4, ink-friendly. The answer key prints on its own page for grown-ups.
En anglais

Claims in, evidence out

Science · Chemistry · ages 22-23
Name ______________________   Date ____________

  1. What does reading laterally mean?

    • Reading every page of one paper slowly
    • Checking other trusted sources
    • Skipping methods and trusting the headline

  2. What must hold for a room-temperature conductor claim to stand?

    • A bold headline in a popular outlet
    • Repeatable results on a pure sample
    • Praise from the authors for their own method

  3. A yield table shows 95 per cent conversion, and the discussion says the reaction runs through a radical mechanism. The table alone proves that mechanism.

    Circle one:   True   False

  4. A paper claims a product with 12 hydrogens, but its proton NMR integrals add up to 14. What do you conclude?

    • The structure claim needs checking
    • The spectrum proves the claim
    • Extra integral means a higher yield

  5. A rival idea says trace copper in the base, not the palladium catalyst, drives a coupling. If the rival is right, what should a run with no palladium give?

    • No product at all
    • Product, much as before
    • A different product entirely

  6. A paper reports a new catalytic reaction. Which check fits the supporting information?

    • Counting how many figures the paper contains
    • Test its data and controls against the claim
    • Memorizing the authors and their affiliations

  7. Two papers report different yields for the same reaction. How do you pick a side?

    • Back the paper you happened to read first
    • Back the paper with the most authors
    • Weigh the evidence behind each yield

  8. A catalysis paper shows two strong supporting runs but no test without the catalyst. What is missing, and why does it matter?

    • A no-catalyst run to rule out background
    • A longer title, since short titles hide weak work
    • More authors, since small teams err more
LightMySky · lightmysky.comW1-mt_8t32DdAY44-s1

Answer key

For grown-ups. Fold this page away before handing over the rest.

Claims in, evidence out W1-mt_8t32DdAY44-s1

  1. Checking other trusted sources · Outside checks beat inside repetition for testing a claim.
  2. Repeatable results on a pure sample · Repeatability, purity, and an exact evidence match carry the claim.
  3. False · Conversion shows how much product formed, not how it formed, so the discussion outruns the data.
  4. The structure claim needs checking · Integrals count hydrogens, so two extra means either the structure is wrong or the sample holds an impurity.
  5. Product, much as before · If copper in the base does the work, removing palladium changes nothing, so product still forms.
  6. Test its data and controls against the claim · The evidence behind the headline lives in the supporting files.
  7. Weigh the evidence behind each yield · Neither reading order nor author count is evidence; the runs, characterisation and controls behind each yield are.
  8. A no-catalyst run to rule out background · Without the blank run, the catalyst gets credit the background may deserve.
Worksheet · LightMySky