Videos

There are four key components in the introduction section of a scientific research article. [The first page of a published scientific article showing key sections: title, article info, abstract, and introduction. The Introduction section zooms into full screen view.] Let’s imagine that a researcher is writing an article about varroa mites in honeybee colonies. This writer would start their introduction section by letting the reader know that the varroa mite is a parasite that feeds on honeybees. This is the BROAD TOPIC of this research article. Then, the writer explains that varroa mite infestations weaken honeybee hives and contribute to their collapse. These infestations limit the ability of beekeepers to produce honey. This specific information about varroa mites highlights the PROBLEM that this research will explore, which is the second key component of the introduction. By outlining the problem in this way, the reader immediately knows why they should care about varroa mites and varroa mite infestations. Next, the writer will then outline how other researchers have attempted to address this problem. For example, some researchers have looked at efficacy of mechanical adjustments to colonies as one way to reduce varroa mite populations. Other studies have explored the use of synthetic chemical treatments to reduce these mite populations. Our writer will then indicate the RESEARCH GAP in research by telling the reader what hasn’t been done. The writer explains to the reader that “The beekeeping industry has developed many treatments to reduce the presence of varroa mites in honeybee colonies, including behavioural modifications, mechanical adjustments, synthetic chemical treatments, and natural chemical treatments. However, limited research has investigated the effectiveness of natural chemical treatments.” This last sentence highlights the gap in research, which is the third key component in the introduction section. The writer will then indicate the fourth key component, which is the PURPOSE of their study. When writing about the purpose, the writer shifts the language of their research question: “What natural chemical treatments strategies are most effective for reducing the presence of varroa mites in honeybee colonies?” They shift the language of their research question from a (Research) question into a (Purpose) statement. In this varroa mite article, they would include the sentence “The purpose was to determine which natural chemical treatment strategies are most effective for reducing the presence of varroa mites in honeybee colonies.” So, when you are writing or revising the introduction section of a scientific research article, be sure to explicitly include these four key components: the broad topic, the problem, the gap, and the purpose statement.

MATERIALS, PROCEDURES, and ANALYSES: These are the 3 key components in the methods section in a scientific research article. Let’s examine these components by looking at excerpts from a fictional scientific research article about varroa mites in honeybee colonies. In the methods section, the writer starts by describing their MATERIALS – both the equipment that they used and the bee colonies that they examined. They write, “In this study, we tracked the efficacy of natural chemical treatments across 20 bee colonies in Guelph, Ontario.” Our treatment types included essential oil (thyme), sucrocide spray, oxalic acid trickling, and formic acid strips.” The writer would then provide specific information about the field sites, the colonies, and the equipment used across the four different treatment types. Next, the writer would describe the treatment types that they carried out in this study. They divide their PROCEDURES into four sections – one for each of the four treatment types. When explaining their fourth treatment method, their application of formic acid strips, we might read the following sentence: “We applied Mite Away Quick Strips (46.7% formic acid) to the brood chamber of 2 of the colonies and removed the strips after 7 days.” Finally, this writer then describes the statistical ANALYSIS that they performed. They tell the reader, “We used R to calculate the mean reduction of mites for all treatments and compared results from treated colonies to our control colonies.” When writing or revising your methods section, it can be helpful to write up your methods using the SUB-HEADINGS “materials,” “procedures,” and “analyses” to guide your writing process and to make sure you include all essential information for each of these three key components.

There are three key components in the results section of a scientific research article: DATA, FIGURES & TABLES, and PATTERNS & TRENDS. To illustrate these key components, we’ll examine excerpts from a fictional scientific research article about varroa mites in honeybee colonies. This article examines which natural chemical treatment strategies are most effective for reducing the presence of varroa mites in honeybee colonies. In the results section, the writer describes their data in words. For example, they note that “Sucrocide spray was the least effective treatment method for reducing the presence of varroa mites (Figure 1).” This text provides the reader with specific information about this treatment method and its efficacy. The reference to Figure 1 is in parentheses so that the reader can opt to look at the figure to see the data for themselves. [Different examples of pie charts and bar graphs.] The writer also includes figures to visually illustrate specific data. In this varroa mite article, the writer has included Figure 1 as a bar graph called “Varroa Mite Reduction and Natural Chemical Treatments.” [A bar graph showing a rising trend.] This graph indicates the efficacy of each treatment type, providing the reader with a visual representation of data that illustrates comparisons and relationships. Finally, the writer indicates what patterns and trends they’ve observed. They note, “Of the natural chemical treatments tested, formic acid was the most effective treatment for reducing the presence of varroa mites. In colony 1, formic acid strips reduced the mite population by 62%. Similarly in colony 2, formic acid strips reduced the mite population by 60%.” Here, the writer directs the reader’s attention to an important similarity between two colonies. By providing your results through three key components – data, figures and tables, and patterns and trends – you offer your reader multiple ways to engage with and understand the findings of your research.

To illustrate the six key components of the discussion section, we’ll examine excerpts from a fictional scientific research article about varroa mites in honeybee colonies. The writer starts their discussion with an ANSWER to their RESEARCH QUESTION by noting which two natural chemical treatments are effective. They state, “Our findings indicate that formic acid strips and oxalic acid trickling are effective natural chemical treatments for reducing the presence of varroa mites in honeybee colonies.” Next, the writer provides a summary of their KEY FINDINGS by focusing on which of the two treatments are most effective: “Formic acid treatment was the most effective treatment for reducing the presence of varroa mites in honeybee colonies. This finding suggests that this treatment is an effective option for Ontario beekeepers.” After providing the key findings, the writer begins to INTERPRET their INDIVIDUAL FINDINGS. The writer provides explanations for the similarities and differences that they observe. For example, they note that, “Although oxalic acid is stronger than formic acid, formic acid strips were 14% more effective than oxalic acid trickling in reducing varroa mite populations. One reason for this observed difference may be that formic acid can penetrate the wax of the brood chamber whereas oxalic acid cannot.” The writer also COMPARES their findings to OTHER STUDIES. They state, “Our findings with respect to natural chemical treatments are similar to those of Buzz et al. (2021). Buzz et al. (2021) compared the efficacy of sucrocide spray treatment to formic acid treatment and found that formic acid treatment was more effective for reducing mite populations. These similarities suggest that formic acid treatments are an effective option that beekeepers can use to protect their colonies.” Note here that the writer moves beyond stating that their research is similar to that of others. [Laptop screen showing the text “These similarities suggest that formic acid treatments are an effective option that beekeepers can use to protect their colonies.”] They also indicate what these similarities suggest about the results. In addition to highlighting what they found, the writer also ACKNOWLEDGES their LIMITATIONS. They note, “As our study took place during a single season, we did not have the opportunity to determine how temperature impacts treatment efficacy.” [Text on screen “SUGGEST FUTURE RESEARCH.] The writer concludes by indicating how this research can be addressed by future researchers, noting, “Further research is needed to determine how seasonal temperature impacts the efficacy of treatment types.” In their discussion section, the writer uses the six key components to guide their writing process. They answer the research question, summarize the key findings, interpret the individual findings, compare these findings to other studies, acknowledge limitations, and suggest future research. By addressing the six components, the writer helps their reader understand what their findings mean and how these findings contribute to the research field.

Genre analysis is a critical reading practice that you can use when you’re preparing to write a research article. [The first page of a published scientific article showing key sections: title, article info, abstract, and introduction.] The scientific research article is one genre of writing, and it comes with specific conventions and characteristics that you can get more familiar with by analyzing the structure and style of articles in your own field. Genre analysis involves finding examples of writing in your field and reading closely to examine the patterns and trends that you notice. A useful starting place is finding a well-written, well-cited article in your field. [Web of Science database with search entries listed and the cursor movement tracking to the “Export” tab on the top toolbar.] As a researcher, you’re reading all the time. However, you’re typically reading for content – not for structure and style. [A published journal article with the left-hand navigation pane open and the cursor moving over the article’s sub-headings.] So, you may not pay attention to the overall organization, paragraph structure, and other aspects of the articles that you’re reading. [The Introduction section of a published journal article with three main sections: introductory paragraph, a numbered list of “reasons,” and a concluding paragraph.] Genre analysis, in contrast, involves adopting a new type of reading practice in which you’re thinking about the ORGANIZATION of each section, the FUNCTION of each paragraph, and the SIGNAL PHRASES that writers use to introduce key information and transition to new topics. [A red circle draws emphasis around key phrases in the Introduction: “greatest threat,” “several reasons,” “crucial factor,” “Therefore.”] While you may start with one article, a key to genre analysis is to look at multiple examples [A cursor clicks through journal titles listed on a database.] so that you can see a variety of different styles and structures and identify what techniques and approaches you’d like to use in your own work. You can also use this reading practice to identify what aspects of an article you don’t find effective as a reader and that you want to avoid in your own work. Genre analysis is a useful way to familiarize yourself with the specific expectations for research articles in your field and to strengthen your own writing.

When you’re moving from taking notes to writing your first draft, you don’t need to start with the introduction. [Two computer screen document pages side-by-side with the left-hand page showing the document’s navigation pane, called “Bookmarks” in this image, and the right-hand page showing the first page of a published scientific article showing the title and article info, plus the abstract and introduction.] As we know, a typical research article introduces an introduction, method, results, and discussion. [A cursor moves over the corresponding sections on the navigation pane.] However, just because an article starts with the introduction section and ends with the discussion doesn’t necessarily mean you have to write in this order. Many writers in the sciences intentionally avoid this linear approach. [A box with the heading OUTLINE with 4 headings listed below: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion. A red arrow points to the word Methods.] When you’re moving from your outline to your draft, consider where you want to start. Many writers will start with the methods section. Because the methods section is the most descriptive one, starting with it can be a nice way to ease yourself into the writing process. Another advantage to starting with the methods is that you can work on writing this section while you’re analyzing and collecting your data. Other writers will start with the results section. They may craft the tables or figures for their work and then reference these visuals as they start to write their results. Thinking about what data you plan to showcase for your reader and how you plan to visualize it can help you decide what to include and focus on in your research article. There are many ways to approach drafting a research article, so don’t feel that you as the writer need to proceed in the same order as the reader.

Tip One – Be specific. Be specific when you describe your materials, your procedures, and your statistical analysis. Imagine a scientist who’s not familiar with your experiment and write for this scientist. One strategy for imagining your document from the perspective of the reader is to take a break between writing and revising so that you can approach your document with fresh eyes. Another strategy is to read your document our loud or have your computer read your document out loud for you so that you notice different things. However, imagination can never replace the perspective of a real reader. Consider showing your draft to someone who’s not familiar with your experiment and asking them to identify places where they need more context or information to understand what you did.

Tip Two – Consider Your Audience. Think about what other scientists need to know about your materials and your procedures. You don’t need to include information that any scientist can safely assume that you would use. For example, chemists don’t typically provide descriptions of basic equipment like pipettes or flasks. However, if you’re using something more specialized, like a chromatograph, you can provide a detailed description of the make, manufacturer, and production location to give your reader as much information as possible.

Tip Three – Avoid Repetition. Although providing comprehensive descriptions is important, sometimes you can shorten your methods section and avoid repetition by referring to researchers in the field. For example, you can preface a description in your methods section with a phrase like ‘using the method of Singh et al.’ to refer to an established method in the field developed or implemented by other researchers. In this way, you can then avoid describing the entire method and instead focus on what adjustments you made for your specific study.

Tip Four – Make Use of Photos. One of the ways that you can make writing your methods easier for yourself is by taking photos when you’re in the lab or when you’re in the field. You can then use these photos of your experimental setup or your field site as references during the writing stage. These photos can help jog your memory and help ensure that your descriptions are precise. In some cases, you may want to include figures in the methods section that show your experimental setup or your field site. However, be sure to save any figures that include results for your results section.

Tip Five – Write in the Past Tense. Although you want other people to be able to follow your procedures, you don’t want your procedures to read like a recipe book where you’re giving instructions to the reader like “Apply Mite Away Quick Strips to the brood chambers of 2 of the colonies. If this language sounds familiar, that’s because you may have encountered it in a lab manual, which is designed to be instructional. If you’re new to writing research articles, keep in mind that the lab manual that provides instructions for an experiment is different from the research article that documents the experiment. Lab manuals are written for students to be able to follow an experiment whereas research articles are written for other researchers in the field. So, in a research article, you would write “we applied Mite Away Quick Strips to the brood chambers of 2 of the colonies” or “Mite Away Quick Strips were applied to the brood chambers of 2 of the colonies.”

Tip One – Choose Your Visuals Carefully. If you’re including a table or figure in your work, you must refer to that table or figure in your writing. If you’ve included a table or figure in your article and you don’t make reference to it in your writing, add a reference in, or consider whether you need that visual after all. To decide whether to use a table or a figure, think about whether you want your reader to be able to see precise value or to be able to easily spot trends and relationships among variables. If precise values are important, use tables. If trends are important, use figures. Both tables and figures are helpful for readers of research articles because they can examine these visuals at their own pace. However, if you’re giving a poster presentation, or completing your oral defense for your thesis with slides that show your results, figures are often the better choice because your audience won’t have time to carefully look through a table. With a figure, audiences can more easily spot the important patterns and trends in your data.

Tip Two – Label Your Visuals Effectively. Label your tables and figures effectively so that readers can view them independently of your text. Sometimes, readers will look at tables and figures in an article to decide whether they want to read an article in full. Giving your tables and figures effective labels allows readers to investigate the visuals before reading the full text. Many style guides have helpful guidelines for labelling, so take a look at a guide such as Scientific Style and Format: The CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers or the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. These manuals include examples of well-labeled tables and figures.

Tip Three – Avoid Repeating Your Methods. Only mention your methods – the steps that you undertook – when you are trying to situate the reader and help them understand the results that you are about to describe. It’s okay, for example, to mention a test that you performed at the beginning of a paragraph to situate the reader. Once you’ve done so, you’ll quickly want to move on to describing your results so that you can avoid repeating your methods.

Tip One – Include Specific Limitations. When we’re writing a discussion section, we may be hesitant to include limitations. We may worry that by mentioning a limitation, we’ve brought it to the reader’s attention when the reader wouldn’t have thought of it otherwise. We may worry that by drawing attention to a limitation, we’re making our research look weak. While some readers may not notice our limitations until we point them out, overall, academics are trained to read critically. Academics are often thinking about potential limitations as part of their critical reading practice. While we want to indicate how our research contributes to the field, we want to be cautious about overestimating or overstating our research findings. Because readers are trained to read critically, you’ll want to be thinking about potential objections or potential questions about your work. Write these potential objections or questions down, consider which ones are most relevant, and acknowledge them as part of writing your limitations. Acknowledging limitations qualifies your contribution in a meaningful way and strengthens your writing.

Tip One – Include Specific Limitations. When we’re writing a discussion section, we may be hesitant to include limitations. We may worry that by mentioning a limitation, we’ve brought it to the reader’s attention when the reader wouldn’t have thought of it otherwise. We may worry that by drawing attention to a limitation, we’re making our research look weak. While some readers may not notice our limitations until we point them out, overall, academics are trained to read critically. Academics are often thinking about potential limitations as part of their critical reading practice. While we want to indicate how our research contributes to the field, we want to be cautious about overestimating or overstating our research findings. Because readers are trained to read critically, you’ll want to be thinking about potential objections or potential questions about your work. Write these potential objections or questions down, consider which ones are most relevant, and acknowledge them as part of writing your limitations. Acknowledging limitations qualifies your contribution in a meaningful way and strengthens your writing.

Tip Three – Use Signal Phrases. Throughout your discussion, use signal phrases to highlight your key components. Here are a couple of examples of signal phrases that you can use. “Our findings indicate that” is a simple phrase that you can use to provide your answer to the research question. “One limitation of this study is” is a direct way that you can acknowledge your limitations. These phrases are easy for your reader to spot and also easy for reviewers and editors to see. When you’re reading other research articles, take a look at where and how writers are signalling their key components so that you can get a sense what techniques work well for you as a reader.

Tip Four – Choose Verbs Carefully. In the discussion section, choose verbs that accurately reflect your level of certainty about your findings. In research writing, you’ll often see verbs like “suggests,” “indicates,” and “shows.” You’ll rarely see the verb “proves” because of the extreme level of certainty associated with this word. Within the sciences, you’re working within a tradition where you’re incrementally building upon the findings of others, and within this tradition, it can be perceived as arrogant at best or actively dangerous at worst to overstate your research findings, particularly if you’re making claims that your data don’t support. Modal verbs like “can” and “may” qualify our level of certainty. Outside of academia, modal verbs can sometimes be viewed negatively because they can be seen to undermine the force of our statements or make our claims seem uncertain or weak. However, within research writing, modal verbs are more acceptable because we’re being cautious. It’s important to be cautious because people may make major policy decisions or undertake particular treatment plans because of our research, so choose verbs that accurately reflect your certainty and consider that using modal verbs to qualify your level of certainty can help you advance ideas carefully while acknowledging a continued need for research. However, keep in mind that modal verbs can also be overused, so think carefully before you use one. If your findings are novel, don’t let a modal verb detract from that. In the discussion section, choose your verbs carefully and revise if necessary. Word choice matters.

Welcome to the Storytelling in Science Writing module. My name is Chris Greyson-Gaito and I will be your facilitator. I am a former writing support teaching assistant at the University of Guelph who mentored students through the writing process in all disciplines. Currently, I am a researcher who uses mathematical modelling to explore food webs and ecological-economics. In this module, we will explore how to incorporate story and narrative into your scientific writing. I hope by the end of this module you will understand that scientific writing can be engaging and fun. We will go through three techniques from the TV and film scriptwriting industry that will help you write engaging scientific articles and theses. First, we will use the And, But, Therefore structure to write in an engaging manner. Next, we will create loglines to identify the single problem of your paper. Finally, we will explore storyboarding to help structure your paper. I hope you enjoy this module. Thank you.

Before we get into the And, But, Therefore (or ABT) technique, let’s first understand the structure of most stories by going through a silly story that I created. Chris is happily and slowly working on his PhD. But one day, pirates steal Chris’s computer. Chris cannot complete his PhD without a computer so he must venture out and retrieve his computer. On his journey, Chris meets a cat that can make fireballs. They become firm friends. After battling dragons and knights, Chris and the cat find the pirates and take back the computer. Chris returns home with his computer and the cat. The cat helps Chris with his PhD. Everything seems to be going well, but the cat has a sinister motive for befriending Chris. Let’s go through each part of this silly story to unpack the structure. At first, the main characters are introduced in their normal day-to-day lives. At the beginning of our story, we are introduced to Chris who is quietly working on his PhD. Then something occurs that spurs the action of the story. Usually, there is a problem that the main characters have to solve. In our story, the problem is that pirates have stolen Chris’ computer. The story then follows the main characters through their journey (physical or mental) to solve the problem. During Chris’ journey, he meets a friendly cat and, with the cat, battles a dragon, a knight, and finally the pirates. By the end of the story, the problem has been solved and often the main characters return to their normal day-to-day lives but with new insights/knowledge/friends/items, etc. In the story, Chris returns to writing his PhD but now with a friendly cat to keep him company. Sometimes, a story ends with a teaser (a cliff hanger) for the next story. At the end of our story, we find out that the cat has a sinister motive for befriending Chris but we are not told what this motive is. This is the teaser (or cliff hanger) for the next story to pick up on. This narrative structure can be distilled even further into the And, But, Therefore structure that was developed by Randy Olson. Randy Olson was a marine biologist who became a filmmaker. His excellent book “Houston, we have a narrative” draws on his experience of being a scientist and a filmmaker. This book introduces the And, But, Therefore technique (and many other techniques). The And section of the structure introduces generally known facts. In a story, the And section is where the main characters are introduced. The But section establishes a tension, a conflict, or a problem. In a story, the But section is where the characters first encounter the problem and where the characters must journey to solve the problem. Finally, the therefore section provides the solution to the tension, conflict or problem. The Therefore section also ties all narrative strands together. In a story, the Therefore section is where the problem has been solved, the characters have returned, and potentially the next story is introduced with a teaser. Many stories use this And, But, Therefore structure. Arguably too, all scientific articles and science theses inherently have And, But, and Therefore sections. When science writers acknowledge this fact and actively incorporate the And, But, Therefore structure in their writing, articles and theses become easier to understand and more interesting. Let’s explore how the And, But, Therefore structure applies to scientific writing. Back to the web page.

In this video, I will show you three different methods for creating storyboards. Two of these methods are using templates that we have created for you. These templates are a fillable pdf and a presentation. The final method is using a corkboard and cue cards. However, there is no correct method for storyboarding. Instead, use whatever method works best for you and adapt the method for your needs. Really, the most important aspects of storyboarding are identifying your scenes or paragraphs, identifying the message of each scene, and ensuring that the flow of scenes makes sense. Let’s start by using the fillable pdf that we have created as a template for you to make your own storyboards. In this fillable pdf template, we have created tables for each section of a scientific article. We have tables for the introduction, the methods, the results, and the discussion sections. Within each table, each column is a scene where you can enter the point or message of your scene, the known information that sets up the scene, and the new information that the scene provides. We have also provided extra scenes in case you need more than four scenes per section. As an example, I will fill in the first scene column of the introduction as if I was storyboarding for the article “Hardwood content impacts the parasitoid community associated with Eastern spruce budworm (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae)”. My message for this scene is simply that there are massive outbreaks of spruce budworm caterpillars because the first scene in the introduction should be quite broad but still related to my research question which was “how do hardwood trees impact parasitoid communities?” The known information is that spruce budworm caterpillars cause extensive forest damage. Although, you may not personally know that spruce budworm caterpillars cause extensive forest damage, my target audience of forest researchers and managers will know this. The new information for this scene is that we need to find methods to reduce the severity of spruce budworm caterpillar outbreaks. This is new because it follows from the known information and I want to use this new information to set up the next scene. So that’s an example of filling in a single scene. Let’s look at a completely filled out storyboard. Remember that as you fill out a storyboard or start writing, you can move around scenes or add new scenes. For the sake of an example, I will exchange scene 2 with scene 3. Now, I know this new order does not make sense, but I know that because I can move the scenes around and because I have carefully thought about the flow of ideas using the known to new technique. Finally, you will notice in the methods and results section, that I did not add information in the known and new sections. This is because information in the methods and results sections are usually given chronologically or the flow of information is a lot more obvious. You are welcome to add thoughts to the known and new sections for the methods and results scenes but you may not find it useful. Let’s move onto the second method. Here, we will be using presentation slides to create a storyboard. In fact, my PhD supervisor is always asking me and my fellow laboratory colleagues to create presentation storyboards because he thinks presentation storyboards (and storyboarding in general) really helps to hone and improve your story in any research article. We have again created a presentation template for you to create a storyboard. In this presentation template, we have created individual slides for a single scene in each of the introduction, methods, results, and discussion acts. As you create your storyboard, you will need to duplicate these template slides to create new scenes. Again, in each scene slide, we have added sections for you to add the point or the message of the scene, and the known and new information in the scene. As an example, I will create a scene slide for the second scene in my introduction. My point for this scene is that hardwood trees could reduce severity of spruce budworm caterpillar outbreaks. This is my point because my research question is “how do hardwood trees impact parasitoid communities” and so I must introduce hardwood trees in the context of spruce budworm caterpillar research. My known information is actually a copy of the new information in the previous scene because the new information in the previous scene is now the known information that sets up this scene. My new information is that researchers think that hardwood trees could help reduce the severity of spruce budworm caterpillar outbreaks because I plan to provide ideas and evidence in this scene to show research on hardwood trees and spruce budworm caterpillar outbreaks. Let’s see the whole storyboard filled out. I have multiple scenes for each section and I can move scenes around if I want. Finally, let’s look at one method to create a physical storyboard. For this method, you will need a corkboard (or a large piece of cardboard), lots of cue cards, and lots of pins. On this corkboard, find a way to denote the different acts of a scientific paper. Now use the cue cards as your scenes. On each cue card write the point or message of your scene, and the known and new information. Pin up your scenes and move your scenes around as I am doing right now. So that’s three potential methods for creating a storyboard. Again, find the method that works best for you and feel free to adapt the method for your needs. You may also find that you like the digital and physical versions for different reasons. For example, having a physical version above your computer is nice to continually look over as you write but creating a digital storyboard may be easier for you.

Well, we have reached the end of the Storytelling in Science Writing module. We have learned that scientific articles are structured similar to a story, that using the And, But, Therefore structure can create an engaging narrative, that loglines can help identify the single focus of your scientific articles, and that storyboarding can help with structuring your writing. Before I go, I want to leave you with some closing thoughts. These techniques and storytelling in general are not just useful for writing scientific articles or theses. You can use storytelling in your posters, your presentations, any grant or scholarship applications, and in elevator pitches. For anyone who doesn’t know, elevator pitches are a short summary of your research that you might say to another colleague that you have just met. They are called elevator pitches because the idea is that you enter an elevator with an important researcher in your discipline. They ask you what research you do. You have the time it takes to get to the floor you are both going to (two minutes) to tell them about your research. The And, But, Therefore and logline techniques are perfect for an elevator pitch because these techniques force you to summarise your research in an engaging way. With these final thoughts, I wish you all the best for using storytelling in your science writing.