(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
Someone mentions batch effects
A grant is described as “competitive”
“The data speak for themselves”
Someone mentions bioinformatics troubleshooting
A method is described as “robust”
Someone mentions lack of funding
Someone mentions impact factor
A result is called “unexpected”
A method section references another paper for details
“The sample size is limited”
“This is preliminary”
“Due to time constraints…”
A statistical test is chosen post hoc
A deadline is missed
A collaboration is called “very productive”
A PI says “Interesting…”
Someone apologizes for too many slides
“This opens many new questions”
“The results are reproducible… mostly”
A deadline is extended
A protocol is followed “with minor modifications”
A figure was remade at the last minute
“Statistically significant” is emphasized
A meeting could have been an email
Someone mentions resubmission
“We’ll fix it in revision”
“This should be straightforward”
A figure is described as “self-explanatory”
“We almost gave up on this”
A study is described as “proof of concept”
Someone says “In theory…”
“It worked once”
“We don’t fully understand the mechanism”
A negative result is called “interesting”
“Let’s discuss this offline”
Someone mentions working on the weekend
“We are underpowered”
Someone references Supplementary Figure 12
A method only one person in the lab understands
“We had to optimize this extensively”
A hypothesis is refined after seeing the results
A control experiment is added late
A reviewer requests more references
Someone says “It’s well known that…”
“This will strengthen the paper”
Coffee is treated as a research tool
A figure legend is longer than the text
An experiment is described as “tricky”
“We need more data”
Someone mentions ethics approval delays
A PhD student explains a senior author’s work
A reviewer asks for an unrelated experiment
“This is outside the scope of the study”
Someone mentions sample storage issues
A dataset is described as “messy”
Someone mentions a rejected manuscript
A lab meeting runs over time
Funding agency acronym is used without explanation
