Designing an experiment that survives review
Variables, controls, replication, randomisation, and blinding — what each one is protecting you from.
- design
- controls
- replication
- +1
Curated guides, templates, and reading — the things worth knowing before you need them.
17 resources
Variables, controls, replication, randomisation, and blinding — what each one is protecting you from.
A four-step method for getting from "I like marine biology" to a question you can test with the equipment you actually have.
The three-pass method: how to decide in ten minutes whether a paper is worth an hour.
Attribution, data handling, and the grey areas that get projects disqualified.
A seven-sentence skeleton that fits the usual word limit and covers everything judges look for.
What belongs in Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion — and the sentences that end up in the wrong one.
Fifteen checks to run on your abstract before submitting it.
A fill-in template for stating design requirements, constraints, and test criteria before you build.
Sterile technique, sealed plates, and a disposal plan you can point a reviewer at.
The vocabulary of scientific caution, and why over-claiming costs more than it gains.
Turning "healthier", "faster", and "better" into something two people would measure the same way.
Block out your board before you open the design software — content first, layout second.
The distinction judges probe and most students blur.
Why chronological reviews read badly, and what to organise by instead.
A worked template, plus the four failure modes that make a hypothesis untestable.
Wording, scales, and order effects — the bias you build in before anyone answers.
Why 94% accuracy can be a terrible result, and what to compare against instead.