Ralph Godfrey
ENGL 21007
10-16-2019
Lab Reports Rhetorical Analysis
Sleep is vital to a good quality of life. Everyone requires good quality sleep in order to function properly in society as it impacts mental and physical health. One way in which sleep affects physical health is by regulating the hormones in hunger and hunger satisfaction (ghrelin and leptin.) Three research teams have taken it upon themselves to improve the understanding behind the relationship between sleep and hunger hormones by conducting research of their own and sharing their work through lab reports. Three lab reports performed similar experiments onto different sub-groups with slightly different variables, extending branches of knowledge within this field. Each lab report follows the general structure of a lab report, however contain modifications of their own within different sections for the sake of organization and presentation.
The first lab report, “Light Modulates Leptin and Ghrelin in Sleep-Restricted Adults,” Report #1 looks at the affects different light modules have on middle aged adults while sleeping. The second lab report, “Short Sleep Duration Is Associated with Reduced Leptin, Elevated Ghrelin, and Increased Body Mass Index,” Report #2 is more concerned about how big of a role leptin and ghrelin play when the BMI (body mass index) fluxuates due to less sleep. The third lab report, “Ghrelin, leptin, adiponectin, and resistin levels in sleep apnea syndrome: Role of obesity,”Report #3 was looking to see the relationship between hunger hormones and subjects who specifically have a history with sleep apnea and how these two components are correlated to obesity.
All three lab reports contain abstracts, but they differentiate with their respective strutural modifications. The purpose of the abstract is to summarize the lab report and provide an overview with the purpose behind the experiment, methods and sometimes data and results. Some researchers chose to break their abstracts into smaller paragraphs with titled sections. For example in Report #2 and Report #3, the abstracts are broken down into smaller sections with labels such as: background, aims, methods and findings and conclusion. On the other hand, Report #1 chose to combine all of this information into one large paragraph without a label, therefore being shorter and less descriptive. Both abstracts structures serve the same purpose and provide similar content despite differences in size and structure. However, having labeled sections improves the organization and makes it easier for an audiecne who lacks knowledge in this field understand the concepts and science being explored in these experiments.
Another area where there are differences is in structure and organization in the methods section. After the introduction section explains the key components of the research and introduces general ideas, the methods section is used to go into full detail about the research conducted. The more complex the experiment and the more advanced the equipment, the more discriptive and more sub-sections the method section will contain. An example is Report #2 which contains: 5 sub-sections, one table, one figure and 4 sub-sub sections under the sub-section “Data Collection.” The “Data Collection” section gives an opportunity for the author to explain the data they are tracking and the purpose this data will have in analyzing and concluding the entire experiment. Report #2 has several variables as it explores beyond the two hormones ghrelin and leptin such as insulin and glucose. In order to incorporate data collection of those other hormones, they use sub sections labeled “polysomnography” and “hormone assays” to clarify not only how data for those hormones will be collected, but how they maintain relevance and are connected to ghrelin and leptin. On the other hand, Report #1 only contains 3 sub-sections labeled 2.1-2.3 as it deals with simply the modifications of different colors and brightness of lights on sleep and hunger hormones. The simplicity of this lab report compared to the other explains why this section is shorter than the other lab reports and thus requires less explination.
Each methods section starts with a general sub-section labeled “overview” or “subject” in a paragraph or two to provide context of the materials or scientific area focused on. In this sub-section is provided numbers and figures to specify the conditions of the experiment and the patients as well as general information on the history that lead up to the experiment. An example is in Report #1 where it shows the mean age in years and body mass index, “27.4 ± 8.7 years and the mean ± SD body mass index (BMI) was 25.2 ± 4.2 kg/m,2”Report #1. This background information prior to displaying data and scientifiic terms helps distinguish this important piece of data that will be reapeated throughout the lab report from the more specific numbers explored in the sub-sections that only serve small specific purposes. The first sub-section might be different in length and content from one another is how maticulous the researches were in selecting their patients. Report #2 dedicates two paragraphs, one figure and one table in the “overview” section alone, explaining the drawn out process it took to find the perfect subjects for their experiment in precise detail. Meanwhile, Report #1 and Report #3 dedicate only 1-3 paragraphs since they only required surveys and small health requirements. Each lab report also chooses to conclude their methods differenlty. In Report #2 and Report #3, the last sub-section is labeled “Statistical Analysis” to let the reader know the mathemetical process behind how the data will be interpreted. In Report #1, the last sub-section is called, “procedure,” where there are 5 paragraphs explaining how the experiment will take place given the information from “subjects” and “lighting conditions.”
Despite each lab report having organizational differences, there are sections where there aren’t any differences such as the title. All three lab reports contain similar titles to introduce their work. The title stands out from the rest of the lab report as in all three cases it is displayed in a large and bold font. Each lab report also chose to make their title lengthy. The mean word count used in the 3 lab reports was 12 words. Despite containing a higher word count, each title is straight to the point and contanins key phrases associated to the experiment. Another area where there wasn’t much differentiation other than content is the introduction. This section provides a background and gives relevance to the experiment in a broader context.
Dispite the lab reports and their differences in structure and emphasis, they each get their point across and display data and analysis in a way in which readers of many backgrounds can understand. By modifying the abract and methods section to accommodate the data and type of research conducted, it gives the author an opportunity to improve the organization of ideas so readers of all backgrounds can not only understand the contents of the lab report better, but navigate back and forth through the lab report to connect key details and terms. Report #2 throughout the entire report breaks down sub-sections and at times into sub-sub sections to emphasise key points and connect different thoughts and key factors of the experiment. Report #1 and Report #3 decide to share its lab report in bigger sections with less labels, giving the reader an opportunity for more open interpretation. Despite, the differences, it is hard to say if one way is better than another. Each lab report accomodates to the content of the research and analysis. Researche in any field of science can look to these lab reports as references to determine what style of organizaiton and structure best applies to their labs.
References:
Taheri, Shahrad and Lin, Ling and Austin, Diane and Young, Terry and Mignot, Emmanuel. December 2014. “Short Sleep Duration Is Associated with Reduced Leptin, Elevated Ghrelin, and Increased Body Mass Index.” PLOS Medicine
Figueiro, Mariana G. Plitnick, Barbara and Rea, Mark S. August 2014. “Light Modulates Leptin and Ghrelin in Sleep-Restricted Adults.” NCBI PMC.
Thorac, Ann. September 2010. “Ghrelin, leptin, adiponectin, and resistin levels in sleep apnea syndrome: Role of obesity.” NCBI PMC.
