在SCI论文中讨论异常数据是一个重要的环节，因为它有助于提高研究的可信度和透明度。所以当我们实验中遇到所谓的一场数据时，不能简单的选择忽略，而是要认真比对和重复实验。同时采用以下方法来帮我们在论文中进行讨论。
1. 识别异常数据：首先，通过统计方法、可视化工具或领域知识来识别数据集中的异常值。这有助于区分正常数据和潜在的问题数据。
2. 验证数据来源：确认异常数据的来源，检查数据收集和记录过程中是否有错误或不一致之处。
3. 透明报告：在论文中透明地报告所有数据，包括异常值。不应当隐瞒或删除异常数据，除非有充分的理由证明这些数据确实是错误的。
4. 解释异常数据：在论文的“结果”或“讨论”部分，对异常数据进行解释。说明为什么这些数据与预期不符，以及它们对研究结果可能产生的影响。
5. 进行敏感性分析：通过排除异常数据重新分析，展示结果的稳健性。这有助于证明研究结论不依赖于特定的异常数据点。
6. 讨论潜在的解释：探讨可能导致异常数据的各种原因，包括实验误差、测量误差、样本变异性或实际的生物学/物理/化学变异性。
7. 指出研究局限性：在讨论部分，指出包括异常数据在内的研究局限性，并说明这些局限性如何影响研究结果的解释。
8. 提出未来研究方向：基于异常数据提出未来研究可能需要探索的领域或问题。
9. 遵循期刊指南：不同的SCI期刊可能对异常数据的处理和报告有不同的要求，因此在撰写前应仔细阅读并遵循相关指南。
10. 保持客观和批判性：在讨论异常数据时，保持客观和批判性的态度，避免对数据进行无根据的解释或推断。
示例：
Section: Results
In the analysis of our experimental data, we identified several outliers that deviated significantly from the general trend observed in the dataset. These outliers were detected using a boxplot analysis, which flagged data points that were more than 1.5 times the interquartile range away from the quartiles. Upon further investigation, we found that these outliers were not the result of experimental errors but rather represented genuine variations within our sample population.
Section: Discussion
The presence of outliers in our dataset prompted a careful examination of the experimental conditions and the possibility that these points could indicate a unique subpopulation within our study. To ensure the robustness of our findings, we conducted sensitivity analyses by recalculating the results with and without the inclusion of these outliers. The core conclusions drawn from our study remained consistent, demonstrating the reliability of our results despite the presence of these anomalous data points.
We acknowledge that the inclusion of these outliers could potentially influence the interpretation of our results. However, we argue that their inclusion provides a more comprehensive view of the data, as they may represent real biological variability. It is also possible that these outliers could be indicative of an unaccounted variable or a novel phenomenon worthy of further investigation.
In future studies, we recommend that researchers pay close attention to such outliers and consider employing more sophisticated statistical methods to understand their underlying causes. Additionally, the use of larger sample sizes and more rigorous controls may help to elucidate the significance of these outliers in the context of the broader dataset.
We would like to emphasize that while these outliers do not detract from the overall significance of our findings, they do highlight the need for a cautious interpretation of the data. Our study underscores the importance of transparency in reporting all data points, including those that may initially seem atypical.
转自科研人SCI微信公众号，仅作学习交流，如有侵权，请联系本站删除！
