We will first be analyzing a lab report by P. R. Kennedy, R. A. E. Bakay, etc.  One of the first elements mentioned in the “Technical Communications” textbook was the Title.  Some of the key takeaways from the textbook of what makes a title effective is if it clearly and accurately reflects the document’s purpose and subject.  The title of this first lab report is “Direct Control of a Computer from the Human Central Nervous System” . One more thing that makes for an effective title is if it’s able to inform readers what the document covers without being overly long.  This first title successfully completes both of these requirements making it a very effective title by clearly explaining what the lab report was about, making sure that the audience knows what they should expect from this document.  The second element that was mentioned was the abstract, an effective abstract provides a brief summary of the entire document.  This allows readers to quickly understand the main purpose, methods, results, and conclusion of the lab report.  An abstract must be concise and should not be an in depth description of the document.  The abstract provided in this lab report also fits these requirements, it is short and detailed providing information on the main purpose of the document.  Although the description is a little complex due to there being words that many readers may not understand.  This is the case because the intended audience is supposed to be people who are actively searching for this specific information.  Meaning that most readers will already know and are familiar with this terminology.  The third element described is the Introduction.  In an introduction it must explain why the document was written and the background information that is needed to understand it.  For an introduction to be considered effective it must also define the problem, purpose, and scope of the report.  Allowing the reader to know what to expect from the rest of the document.  From the first sentence of this lab report it follows this outline but describing what is locked-in syndrome and how these patients go through life.  Then the author explains the devices that have been created in order to help patients with this syndrome.  Towards the end of this introduction the problem and purpose of this document was explained, telling us that these devices are slow and aren’t as precise as “directly recording neural activity from the human cortex.” meaning that it would be much faster to take the information from the human brain in order for patients with locked-in syndrome to communicate.  The rest of the introduction explains how they will be able to use a device in order for the patients to share their desired thoughts with others in order to make it easier for them to communicate.  Also giving an in depth description on how the device functions and giving lab results through testing with rats and monkeys.  The fourth element is Means and Methods, meant to explain how the research was carried out, providing the procedures, materials, tools, and processes used.  When writing the means and methods the information should be detailed enough for others to understand or replicate the work.  Within the lab report we are analyzing the methods are organized and clear.  Providing us with a sub title that tells the reader what step is being described.  We are provided with a description of how they implemented the device and the way they were able to allow the patient to receive information.  Then showing how the device allows the patient to communicate with others. 

 Then moving on to the next section according to Markel and Selber, the results section of a lab report should present the data collected from the experiment clearly and objectively without interpreting the results. The section should focus on what happened during the experiment and include observations, data measurements, or experimental outcomes.  In Kennedy’s report, the results section presents the outcome of experiments in which neural signals from implanted electrodes were used to control a computer cursor. The study demonstrated that a paralyzed patient could learn to generate neural signals from the motor cortex that could be interpreted by a computer to move a cursor and eventually type words using a keyboard interface.  The results are reported primarily through descriptions of the patient’s ability to control cursor movement and perform tasks using the brain-computer interface. The report explains how the implanted neurotrophic electrode recorded neural activity, which was transmitted and processed to control computer functions.  

When creating your discussion Markel and Selber suggest that you should interpret the results and explain their significance.  The discussion should analyze whether the results support the hypothesis, discuss their importance, and address possible limitations or sources of error.  For example, within Kennedy’s report, the text discusses the ways in which the intracortical electrodes are capable of receiving detailed neural signals, which can be used for more precise control of the computers. Additionally, the author discusses the medical impact that this technology may have, such as for those who are severely paralyzed and are unable to communicate. All of this demonstrates the manner in which the results are presented and how they are connected to the overall purpose for developing such interfaces. Although the text does not delve deeply into the manner in which the experiment may be limited and the types of errors that may be present, it does fulfill the purpose that was explained within the text.

In a lab report, the conclusion summarizes the main findings of the research while also stressing the importance of the findings without introducing any new information. Chapter 19 suggests that the conclusion of a lab report should include a repetition of the main findings of the research while also stressing the importance of the findings. Kennedy’s conclusion repeats the main findings of the research while also stressing the importance of the findings. Specifically, the conclusion repeats the idea that the neural signals from the human brain can be used to control a computer system directly. Additionally, the conclusion stresses the importance of the findings by noting the ability of the technology to help those with severe neurological disabilities to communicate effectively. While the conclusion of the lab report is not long, it meets the guidelines set by Technical Communication by stressing the importance of the findings of the experiment.

Markel and Selber discuss the section that involves acknowledging the support that was obtained from individuals or institutions that did not qualify to be authors of the research report. Kennedy’s research report has an acknowledgement section that acknowledges the research support obtained from various institutions. The research report obtained support from various institutions, including the National Institutes of Health. The inclusion of the acknowledgement section follows the guidelines of technical writing as it acknowledges the institutions that helped with the research.  

According to Markel and Selber, the references section should include all the literature cited by the author in the report with a consistent citation style to help the reader locate the literature used for the research. Kennedy’s lab report includes a section on the references that cite literature on the research done on neural recording, neuroprosthetics, and brain-computer interface research. These references give background information on the research done for the experiment and how the research builds on the background research done in neuroscience and biomedical engineering. This section follows the guidelines set in Chapter 19.  This first lab report followed and fulfilled the requirements for each element that was described in “Technical Communication”.  With each element, title, abstract, introduction, means and methods, results, discussion, conclusion, acknowledgements, references containing and following what is said in the textbook chapter 19.  One minor difference from the textbook guidelines is that the results rely more on descriptive explanation than on extensive quantitative data or visual figures. Despite this, the report still effectively communicates the findings and their importance in the development of brain-computer interface technology.

The second lab report I will be analyzing is one that is created by real students, although not as interesting or professional as the first it provides a different view on what else these elements can contain.  The title of this second lab report was “Perception of Different Sugars by Blowflies”.  Just like the first lab report this title was also simple and provided the reader with what the purpose of this lab report was.  If you were searching for a lab report that contained this main idea you wouldn’t need to read anything else but the description to know that you were at the right place.  The title meets the essential requirement of accurately representing the content of the report.  The abstract provides a concise summary of the experiment, including its purpose, methodology, results, and general conclusion. According to Technical Communication, a good abstract enables readers to make a quick evaluation of whether the text is pertinent to their interests. The student’s abstract does this by briefly describing the purpose of examining the taste responses of blowflies and the results obtained.  One of the positive aspects of this abstract is that it is objective and does not include any unnecessary detail. It is written based on what was done and what was discovered, rather than discussing any theory. This is because it is recommended that abstracts should be factual and a condensed version of the entire report.  The positive feature of this abstract is that it is objective and does not contain any extra information. It has been written according to what has been done and what has been found, without discussing any theory. This is because it is suggested that the abstract should be factual and a condensed version of the entire report.  However, the abstract can be improved by adding more numerical data. Although the abstract is a summary of the results, the addition of numerical data will make it more precise and clear. Numerical data is a requirement for any technical writing, and although statistics are limited, it will improve the abstract.  The introduction establishes background information about taste receptors in blowflies and explains why studying their feeding behavior is scientifically relevant.  The students introduction fulfills most of the requirements that were provided by Markel and Selber.  Firstly, it gives a scientific context by describing how insect taste receptors work. This is to help readers who are not familiar with the field of entomology to understand the purpose of the experiment. Secondly, it clearly describes the research question or hypothesis being tested by the experiment. This is to meet the requirement of a good introduction by describing the purpose of the report.  One area of improvement is the structural preview. Although the introduction clearly states the purpose and hypothesis of the report, it does not clearly indicate how the report is organized. It is suggested that a sentence such as “This report describes the procedures used, presents the results, and discusses their implications” be included.  The student’s mean and method provides a clear list of materials and outlines step-by-step procedures in chronological order.  One of the strong points of this section is the logical explanation of the processes. The explanation of the processes is done in a way that the reader can follow the experiment from the beginning to the end. This is good for transparency. The language used is simple and neutral without any comments or opinions.  However, some details could be further clarified. For example, though the steps have been given, further details could be provided with respect to the timing, measurement, and environmental controls. While presenting technical documents, it is always advisable to include specific details with respect to measurement and controls. Some lack of precision could limit the replication of the experiment by another researcher.  Despite this, the Methods section largely meets the criteria set out in Chapter 5 for clarity, completeness, and organization. It gives sufficient information for general understanding and reflects an awareness of the conventions of scientific reporting. 

In this report, the results section clearly explains how blowflies responded to different sugars and saccharin. The author reports that flies responded strongly to high concentrations of sugar and that sucrose required the lowest concentration to trigger feeding behavior, while glucose required the highest concentration. The section also notes that almost no flies responded to saccharin, indicating that it did not stimulate feeding behavior. The report also includes statistical results such as a t-test showing significant differences between sugar responses and saccharin responses.  In addition to written explanations, the results are supported by Table 1 and graphical figures, which summarize the number of flies that responded to each chemical tested.  Overall, the results section meets the requirements of Markel and Selber because it presents experimental outcomes clearly, includes quantitative data, and uses figures and tables to organize the results.

In the discussion part of the lab report presented above, the reasons for the different reactions of the flies to the sugars are given. The author interprets the results by explaining that the flies react to sucrose easier than to glucose due to the difference in the size of the molecules. Moreover, the author also refers to scientific research to explain the mechanisms of the functioning of the sugar receptors in the flies. Therefore, the discussion part of the lab report meets the requirements given by Markel and Selber.  Although the report does not have a separate section that is defined as the “Conclusion,” the last paragraphs of the discussion can be defined as the conclusion. The author is summarizing the following: “flies have specialized taste receptors that allow them to distinguish between nutritious sugars and potentially harmful substances such as salts or toxins. This selectivity enables the fly to find appropriate food sources to ensure their survival.” Even though the conclusion is not a separate part of the discussion, it can be defined as being used for the conclusion. This report can be defined as partially following the guidelines that were set forth in the textbook.

This report includes a short acknowledgments section in which the author thanks a professor for assistance with statistical analysis and acknowledges the lab partners who helped conduct the experiment.  This section clearly fulfills the purpose described in Chapter 19 because it gives credit to individuals who contributed to the project. This lab report has a section called “Literature Cited” that contains several scientific studies on insect physiology, biology textbooks, and previous studies on the insect sense organs. These references are used to validate the explanations given in the discussion section of the report. The references used are properly formatted and clearly show the authors’ names, titles of the publications, publishers, and dates of publication. This is as expected according to the textbook on how to properly cite references used in the report.

The student lab report demonstrates an incorporation of the fundamental structural components discussed and emphasized in the book “Technical Communication.” The title is unique and related to the content of the report, the abstract briefly describes the experiment performed, the introduction provides sufficient context and purpose for the report, and the Means/Methods section provides an adequate explanation of the process followed.  The results section is clear as the results of the experiment are presented, as well as the tables and figures. The discussion section is where the results are discussed as well as the biological principles. The acknowledgments section is where the contributors are acknowledged. The literature cited is where the complete reference to the sources is given. One difference from the text is that there is no conclusion. However, the ideas are still being communicated. The format is appropriate for a scientific lab report.  The student has demonstrated an excellent grasp of the technical structure of a report. From a technical communication point of view, the student has satisfied the fundamental criteria of technical communication, which include the need for the report to be clear, organized, and considerate of the audience. The report follows the traditional format of a lab report and adheres to the principles discussed in Chapter 5.

Reference:

https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~anandk/neuro/neurotrophic%20electrode.pdf

https://www.aasalabs.org/storage/app/public/sample_report/7962173471635846295.pdf