How to read a scientific paper worksheet PDF

Preview

Summary

This is how to read and analyse a scientific paper ...

Description

Worksheet How to read a Scientific Paper

Name: Lauren Dowdeswell

Date: 30/09/2020

Article title: Acoustic stress in domestic dogs ( Canis familiaris) living around football stadiums – Journal of Veterinary Behaviour Authors names: Vinícius Miguel Carrieri-Rocha, Marina Henriques Lage Duarte, Angélica da Silva Vasconcellos, Duarte et al., 2011 Cardoso, 2016 Owen et al., 2004 Wysocki et al., 2006 Silva and Fontes, 2019 Journal Published: 28/04/2020 Volume: 37 Pages: 27 – 35

https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S1558787820300344? token=2369219E4E6F70D126DB8EAA22B2E264F16FDB076AA5F56CD02F835F9DAE6D8EE3 4B4C18A698CFE0403B0A44644E99E7

Step 1. What is the purpose/hypothesis/aim/objective of the study? a. Write down the exact statement in which the authors describe what they were testing. (Hint: This information may be provided

“Here, we investigated whether the noise produced during

in the article as a purpose

football matches may act as a stress source for dogs living

statement or as a hypothesis).

near football stadiums.”

Include quotation marks around the exact wording and indicate page number(s).

b. Now describe the purpose of the study (as you understand it) in your own words.

The purpose of this study is to determine the correlation between the noise levels in football stadiums on match days and the sources of stress for dogs that live in the vicinity.

“Football matches, as a common urban activity, produce high levels of noise because of vehicular traffic, screams, c. What was the “gap” in the

whistles, and firework displays. Fear of noise is one of the

research that the authors were

most commonly reported behaviour problems in dogs

trying to fill by doing their study?

(Canis familiaris); however, few studies have focused on the effects of repeated expositionto noise in these animals.”

Step 2. What is/are the major finding(s) of the study? a. Make some notes about the

“Our results suggested a detrimental influence of noise

authors’ major conclusions or

from football matches on the behaviour of dogs living

findings as written in the article.

around football stadiums. These data are relevant for

Include quotation marks

public policy-making to promote preventive and mitigating

whenever you use their exact

measures, to improve the quality of life of both the dog and

wording and indicate page

the human populations in the surroundings of football

number(s).

stadiums.” To conclude, the effects of the noise from football matches on the behaviour of dogs is that it causes a great deal of

b. Now write those conclusions

fear and anxiety. Results clearly showed that they had

(as you understand them) in your

more anxiety (trembling, restlessness) than on days with

own words.

no football matches. They did find that the distance between the home and the stadium made a difference on the severity of the reactions.

Step 3. How did the authors test their hypothesis? Noise Measurement - measured between August 2016 to March 2017, comprising of five days without a match and five days with a match on at A1 stadium: and 4 days with and 4 days without in the GMP stadium. Three 15-minute measurement sessions were carried out, each one on a different street around the stadiums. a. Briefly summarize the main

Structured Interview - residents surrounding A1 who owned

steps or measurements that the

dogs were contacted and invited to take part. Each signed

authors used in their methods.

an informed consent form. They would learn about the

Try to explain in your own words

dogs and any behavioural problems and changes in mood

as much as possible.

on the days with matches. Behavioural Responses in Dogs - residents were asked about the anxiety responses of dogs on match days. They realised that the number of dogs in the households also affected the anxiety levels. They also compared male to female dogs, as well as the age of the dog and the reaction of the owners. Some dogs could react more/less to sounds because of

b. Do the authors suggest any

their genetics/ previous stresses/anxiety but these are

problems or limitations with their

variables that would be hard to control. Also, different

methodology? Do you see any

football matches would create different noises/different

problems or limitations with their

volumes. They had to try to control male/female dogs, as

methodology?

well as the ages. And the number of humans they lived with. But this is a lot of extraneous variables. They analysed the mean values of peaks of noise and equivalent noise levels for each stadium. They then came up with a list of behaviours that they were looking for, and

c. How did the authors analyse their data? What test/s did they use?

they recorded the number of times those behaviours occurred altogether. These included trembling, barking, howling and appetite loss. They did not display nonsignificant behaviours. They looked at male/female and recorded the ages to use as an extraneous variable. They also measured the behaviour occurrence on days with and without football matches to control this variable.

Step 4. How reliable are the results? There were extraneous variables which they tried to measure, such as male or female, age of dog, number of dogs in the property, number of humans in the property, how the humans reacted. This is a lot to try and control. They acknowledged that they struggled with finding people for their sample, so they couldn’t get people who were a. Do the authors suggest any

extremely close to the stadium. They also make a point of

problems with the study that

saying that when a response is extreme, it could be other

could lead to unreliable results?

factors, such as bad owners. They say that future studies should look into physiological analysis because this would give better results, as they did not look at this. Plus, because the owners are recording the behaviours, there can be some kind of bias, as they are recording what they think they see, but someone could view it as something else. They could also miss a behaviour.

Step 5. Based on your analysis, are the claims made in this journal article accurate? The purpose of this study was to determine the correlation between the noise levels in football stadiums on match days and the sources of stress for dogs that live in the vicinity. This study concluded that “the dog population of the study a. Do the conclusions made (about the results) by the author make sense to you? Are the conclusions too broad or too narrow based on what was actually done in the study?

points to a public health problem: noise pollution produced by football matches can be aversive and potentially harmful for dogs”. I feel like this is too broad. Especially because of the fact that they said that in one area that they tested, they recorded greater noise levels on days without football matches compared with match days, meaning that daily life was actually louder than the football matches, so it is not just the football matches that are causing stress to the dogs. Their results showed that some behaviours occurred a lot on days without matches, such as barking and chewing. I think the conclusion can be believed, but I do feel that they need to make it clearer that some of the dogs reacted

b. Based on the accuracy of the

more on days without matches. I do not believe that

methodology and the reliability of

football matches can be the sole blame for anxiety in dogs,

the results as described in Steps

as vehicular noises will be loud every day. I also feel like

3 and 4, do you think the

they need to analyse the results they weren’t expecting

conclusions can be believed?

more, such as the dogs reacting worse on non-match days, and the anxiety behaviours shown on days without matches.

Step 6. What is the importance of this scientific work? a. Write (in your own words) the significant contributions of the experimental work in this journal article as reported by the authors.

This report concludes that the high recordings of behavioural problems caused by loud noises from stadiums shows there is a public health problem and that the noise pollution caused by the football matches can be aversive and potentially harmful to dogs. I think this is a semi-strong study because they had two areas of measurements around two stadiums, so they could compare and make sure it wasn’t a problem in just one area. They also used different ways of measuring the

b. Re-read your notes and explain why you think this is a strong or

matches, such as structured interviews with the owners, statistical

analysis and

recording

the

noise

levels.

weak scientific article or a strong

However, I feel like there can be some issues with the

or weak scientific study

validity of the structured interviews. An owner could easily miss something, or record a behaviour as one thing when someone else would see it as another. But because they looked at different breeds, genders and ages, I think this is a strong study....