A datasetisdescribedas “messy”A reviewerasks for anunrelatedexperimentA result iscalled“unexpected”“We had tooptimizethisextensively”A statisticaltest ischosenpost hoc“Itworkedonce”A figurelegend islonger thanthe text“We don’tfullyunderstandthemechanism”“This ispreliminary”Someonesays “Intheory…”“We needmoredata”SomeonementionsresubmissionA hypothesisis refinedafter seeingthe results“Thisopensmany newquestions”A negativeresult iscalled“interesting”Someonementionssamplestorageissues“This willstrengthenthe paper”Adeadlineis missedA figure isdescribedas “self-explanatory”A methodisdescribedas “robust”“Wealmostgave upon this”A grant isdescribed as“competitive”A study isdescribedas “proofof concept”“Due to timeconstraints…”Coffee istreated asa researchtoolA figure wasremade atthe lastminuteA meetingcouldhave beenan emailA timeline isdescribedas“ambitious”SomeonementionsbatcheffectsFundingagencyacronym isused withoutexplanation“Statisticallysignificant”isemphasizedSomeonementions arejectedmanuscriptAcollaborationis called“veryproductive”“We’ll fixit inrevision”A methodsectionreferencesanother paperfor details“Let’sdiscussthisoffline”SomeonereferencesSupplementaryFigure 12“The dataspeak forthemselves”“The resultsarereproducible…mostly”A PI says“Interesting…”SomeonementionsimpactfactorSomeonementionsworking onthe weekend“This should bestraightforward”“This isoutside thescope ofthe study”SomeonementionsbioinformaticstroubleshootingA protocol isfollowed “withminormodifications”A reviewerrequestsmorereferences“Thesamplesize islimited”A methodonly oneperson in thelabunderstandsSomeoneapologizesfor toomany slides“We areunderpowered”“Reviewer2” ismentionedA PhDstudentexplains aseniorauthor’s workA labmeetingruns overtimeAdeadlineisextendedSomeonementionslack offundingA controlexperimentis addedlateSomeonesays “It’swell knownthat…”Anexperimentis describedas “tricky”SomeonementionsethicsapprovaldelaysA datasetisdescribedas “messy”A reviewerasks for anunrelatedexperimentA result iscalled“unexpected”“We had tooptimizethisextensively”A statisticaltest ischosenpost hoc“Itworkedonce”A figurelegend islonger thanthe text“We don’tfullyunderstandthemechanism”“This ispreliminary”Someonesays “Intheory…”“We needmoredata”SomeonementionsresubmissionA hypothesisis refinedafter seeingthe results“Thisopensmany newquestions”A negativeresult iscalled“interesting”Someonementionssamplestorageissues“This willstrengthenthe paper”Adeadlineis missedA figure isdescribedas “self-explanatory”A methodisdescribedas “robust”“Wealmostgave upon this”A grant isdescribed as“competitive”A study isdescribedas “proofof concept”“Due to timeconstraints…”Coffee istreated asa researchtoolA figure wasremade atthe lastminuteA meetingcouldhave beenan emailA timeline isdescribedas“ambitious”SomeonementionsbatcheffectsFundingagencyacronym isused withoutexplanation“Statisticallysignificant”isemphasizedSomeonementions arejectedmanuscriptAcollaborationis called“veryproductive”“We’ll fixit inrevision”A methodsectionreferencesanother paperfor details“Let’sdiscussthisoffline”SomeonereferencesSupplementaryFigure 12“The dataspeak forthemselves”“The resultsarereproducible…mostly”A PI says“Interesting…”SomeonementionsimpactfactorSomeonementionsworking onthe weekend“This should bestraightforward”“This isoutside thescope ofthe study”SomeonementionsbioinformaticstroubleshootingA protocol isfollowed “withminormodifications”A reviewerrequestsmorereferences“Thesamplesize islimited”A methodonly oneperson in thelabunderstandsSomeoneapologizesfor toomany slides“We areunderpowered”“Reviewer2” ismentionedA PhDstudentexplains aseniorauthor’s workA labmeetingruns overtimeAdeadlineisextendedSomeonementionslack offundingA controlexperimentis addedlateSomeonesays “It’swell knownthat…”Anexperimentis describedas “tricky”Someonementionsethicsapprovaldelays

Nobel dinner: Academic Bingo - Call List

(Print) Use this randomly generated list as your call list when playing the game. There is no need to say the BINGO column name. Place some kind of mark (like an X, a checkmark, a dot, tally mark, etc) on each cell as you announce it, to keep track. You can also cut out each item, place them in a bag and pull words from the bag.


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
  1. A dataset is described as “messy”
  2. A reviewer asks for an unrelated experiment
  3. A result is called “unexpected”
  4. “We had to optimize this extensively”
  5. A statistical test is chosen post hoc
  6. “It worked once”
  7. A figure legend is longer than the text
  8. “We don’t fully understand the mechanism”
  9. “This is preliminary”
  10. Someone says “In theory…”
  11. “We need more data”
  12. Someone mentions resubmission
  13. A hypothesis is refined after seeing the results
  14. “This opens many new questions”
  15. A negative result is called “interesting”
  16. Someone mentions sample storage issues
  17. “This will strengthen the paper”
  18. A deadline is missed
  19. A figure is described as “self-explanatory”
  20. A method is described as “robust”
  21. “We almost gave up on this”
  22. A grant is described as “competitive”
  23. A study is described as “proof of concept”
  24. “Due to time constraints…”
  25. Coffee is treated as a research tool
  26. A figure was remade at the last minute
  27. A meeting could have been an email
  28. A timeline is described as “ambitious”
  29. Someone mentions batch effects
  30. Funding agency acronym is used without explanation
  31. “Statistically significant” is emphasized
  32. Someone mentions a rejected manuscript
  33. A collaboration is called “very productive”
  34. “We’ll fix it in revision”
  35. A method section references another paper for details
  36. “Let’s discuss this offline”
  37. Someone references Supplementary Figure 12
  38. “The data speak for themselves”
  39. “The results are reproducible… mostly”
  40. A PI says “Interesting…”
  41. Someone mentions impact factor
  42. Someone mentions working on the weekend
  43. “This should be straightforward”
  44. “This is outside the scope of the study”
  45. Someone mentions bioinformatics troubleshooting
  46. A protocol is followed “with minor modifications”
  47. A reviewer requests more references
  48. “The sample size is limited”
  49. A method only one person in the lab understands
  50. Someone apologizes for too many slides
  51. “We are underpowered”
  52. “Reviewer 2” is mentioned
  53. A PhD student explains a senior author’s work
  54. A lab meeting runs over time
  55. A deadline is extended
  56. Someone mentions lack of funding
  57. A control experiment is added late
  58. Someone says “It’s well known that…”
  59. An experiment is described as “tricky”
  60. Someone mentions ethics approval delays