Posters, Discussion section

Figure 9.4 Visual representation of the move structure for a typical poster Discussion section.

Consider the poster Discussion sections in excerpts 9H-9J as you answer the following questions ... 

Excerpt 9H (a poster Discussion section based on Liompart et ai 2001)... 

We conclude this part of the chapter by identifying some writing conventions that are commonly used in the poster Discussion section ... 

Citations Citations may be included in a poster Discussion section. (See the discussion of the poster Introduction section, below, for information on citations and references.)... 

Verb tense Poster Discussion sections use both past tense (to summarize findings observed in the past) and present tense (to state findings and conclusions that are expected to be true over time). Because the Discussion section focuses on conclusions, present tense is used more often. 

Voice and we Both active and passive voice may be used in the poster Discussion section. The word we should be used sparingly (and is not used in excerpts 9H-9J), but it can be used to signal a decision, interpretation, or conclusion made by the authors. 

Find instances of hedging in excerpts 9Ei—9J. Propose generalizations about when hedging is appropriate and when it is not necessary in a poster Discussion section. 

D Writing on Your Own Draft Your Poster Discussion Section... 

The poster text is divided into the same general IMRD sections as the journal article Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. Similarly, most posters include an Acknowledgments section, some have an abbreviated References section, and all have a title and author list. Most posters do not include an abstract, in part because of space limitations and in part because an abstract already appears in the conference proceedings. Like the journal article, the IMRD structure of the poster follows an hourglass shape. The top (Introduction) and bottom (Discussion) sections have a broader focus, while the middle sections (Methods and Results) have a narrower focus. Each section of the poster can be divided into individual moves or steps that guide viewers in a conventional way through the content of each section. These moves are analyzed in the next part of the chapter. 

Bulleted or numerical lists Lists are frequently used when highlighting or summarizing results. Follow the formatting guidelines presented above in the discussion of poster Methods sections. When possible, use the same type... 

The Discussion section of a poster has two major purposes (1) to interpret or explain the results presented and (2) to summarize the most important findings of the work. These two purposes form the move structure for the Discussion section (figure 9.4). 

Move 1 (Interpret or Explain Results) is often integrated into the poster Results section, thereby becoming a combined Results and Discussion (R D) section. An example of a combined R D section is shown in hgure 9.1. In such posters, interpretative remarks (Discussion) are included right along with the graphics (Results). In this way, space is conserved, and viewers can read and interpret the data simultaneously (usually easier than looking back and forth between the two sections). For instructional purposes, however, we have placed move 1 in the Discussion section, and we use a stand-alone Discussion section in the three hypothetical posters presented below. We follow this approach, in part, to maintain a clear distinction between results (just the facts) and discussion (interpretation of the facts). 

With these issues in mind, let s examine the Discussion sections of our three hypothetical posters. Each section is divided into two parts Discussion and Conclusions. Excerpt 91 uses a bulleted list to present the discussion points excerpts 9H and 9J use a paragraph format. Both styles are common and illustrate that there is no one right way to present information. Excerpt 9J also includes a scheme, which is common in posters that present a synthesis. In all three excerpts, the Conclusions sections comprise one or two sentences and are written without bullets. 

As you read through these Discussion sections, you will notice that they are quite short. Moreover, the discussion points within these sections are often used to highlight, explain, or reiterate key findings rather than to truly interpret data. In addition, unlike a journal article, few references are made to the literature. These common practices illustrate that the main emphasis in posters is to present, rather than interpret, results. This emphasis reflects both the newness of the data presented (late-breaking results may not yet be fully understood) and the interactive role of the poster (to promote an exchange of ideas and dialog). 

Bulleted or numerical lists Discussion items and conclusions may be presented in paragraph or list form. In Discussion section lists, complete sentences are more common than fragments. (See the guidelines presented in the poster Methods section for formatting these lists.) Conclusions are usually set apart from the Discussion section with a separate heading. 

Schemes are used to depict a series of steps that progress in time. (Note that schemes differ from charts, which list groups of compounds or structures that do not change in time.) Most commonly, schemes are used to illustrate chemical reactions. In such cases, schemes often include arrows (e.g., to denote a forward reaction, resonance, equilibrium, and/or electron movement), intermediates, transition states, reactants, and products. Schemes are numbered in order of appearance in the text (Scheme 1, Scheme 2, etc.). As with tables and figures, the scheme is mentioned in the text before the scheme is encountered. Schemes are perhaps most common in Discussion sections of journal articles (e.g., to illustrate proposed mechanisms) but can appear most anywhere in journal articles, posters, and proposals.

Finally, I would like to express my sincere thanks to all invited speakers who gave excellent lectures, those who presented very interesting posters, chairpersons and discussion leaders who conducted the general discussion section in marvelous fashion, and those who contributed to the vigorous discussion in the Conference. 

The scientific program, divided Into 14 sessions, Included 11 general lectures of 30 minutes, 76 oral lectures of 16 minutes and 70 posters. Due to the large number of papers the Symposium was held In two parallel sections. Poster discussions at the site of the poster exhibition were a good solution giving a chance for free discussion and evaluation of scientific progress. 

We now read and analyze excerpts from each major section of the poster, beginning with Methods (the section that you are most likely to prepare first) and continuing through the Results, Discussion, and Introduction. The title and author... 

Sentences a-c are taken from journal articles. For each, (1) indicate which poster section the information would belong in (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion) and (2) rewrite the information so that it is appropriate for a poster. 

To conclude this section and chapter, we present three sample posters (figures 10.7-10.9) created from text developed in chapter 9 and design elements discussed in this chapter. (See also figure 9.1 in chapter 9 for a fourth sample poster.) Table 10.3 summarizes some of the design elements of these posters. Full-color versions of these posters are available at the Write Like a Chemist Web site. Together, we hope that these four posters stimulate ideas for preparing your own poster. 

Four special sessions were dedicated to oral presentations and discussion of 20 selected posters. Drs. Jorge Welti-Chanes, Miang Hoong Lim, Norio Murase, and Peter Lillford were the chairmen of the oral sessions, which are included in Section 2. Short papers from poster presentations are also included. Regarding these presentations, in his report to the Central Committee, Dr. Lillford pointed out that "of particular note was the quality of short presentations and posters. The benefit of screening this material by the local organizers was evident, and Central Committee recommends that this practice be adopted in future meetings."... 

This chapter covers the literature of phospha(V)azenes with discussion of lower valent species being restricted to molecules which can be transformed, or related to a phosphorus(V) derivative. Primary literature, reviews monographs and patents are covered in order to give a global view of progress in this area of chemistry. Full manuscripts and poster abstracts from the Thirteenth International Symposium on Phosphorus Chemistry (Jerusalem, 1995) have been published. Highly focused reviews will be cited in the appropriate sections below. 

The remaining two sections are based on the symposium on Computational Polymer Science and Nanotechnology organized by Mark D. Dadmun, Bobby G. Sumpter, and Don W. Noid. A diverse and distinguished group of polymer and materials scientists, biochemists, chemists and physicists met to discuss recent research in the broad field of computational polymer science and nanotechnology. The two-day oral session was also complemented by a number of poster presentations. 

The meeting was enhanced by fifty poster presentations which served as a focus for stimulating informal discussions. The posters remained on display for the entire week, and one evening was devoted to them. The discussion that evening was amongst the most animated of the conference as participants were able to show their latest results, often preliminary, and discuss future directions for the work. Several poster results have been selected to be included in this volume in a separate section entitled POSTERS. 

---