“We’ll fixit inrevision”Someonesays “It’swell knownthat…”A hypothesisis refinedafter seeingthe resultsSomeonementionsbatcheffectsA meetingcouldhave beenan emailFundingagencyacronym isused withoutexplanationA labmeetingruns overtime“This ispreliminary”“This isoutside thescope ofthe study”“Reviewer2” ismentionedA figure isdescribedas “self-explanatory”“Thesamplesize islimited”“This willstrengthenthe paper”Adeadlineis missed“Due to timeconstraints…”SomeonementionsbioinformaticstroubleshootingA statisticaltest ischosenpost hocA methodisdescribedas “robust”A reviewerrequestsmorereferences“Thisopensmany newquestions”“Let’sdiscussthisoffline”A PhDstudentexplains aseniorauthor’s work“Itworkedonce”A controlexperimentis addedlateA figure wasremade atthe lastminuteA grant isdescribed as“competitive”“This should bestraightforward”A datasetisdescribedas “messy”Anexperimentis describedas “tricky”A protocol isfollowed “withminormodifications”“Wealmostgave upon this”A PI says“Interesting…”A timeline isdescribedas“ambitious”“The dataspeak forthemselves”A methodonly oneperson in thelabunderstandsSomeonementionsworking onthe weekend“The resultsarereproducible…mostly”A figurelegend islonger thanthe textA study isdescribedas “proofof concept”Someonementionsimpactfactor“We needmoredata”A result iscalled“unexpected”Coffee istreated asa researchtoolA methodsectionreferencesanother paperfor detailsAdeadlineisextendedSomeoneapologizesfor toomany slides“We don’tfullyunderstandthemechanism”“We had tooptimizethisextensively”Someonementionslack offundingSomeonementionssamplestorageissuesA negativeresult iscalled“interesting”“Statisticallysignificant”isemphasizedSomeonementionsresubmissionSomeonereferencesSupplementaryFigure 12“We areunderpowered”Someonementions arejectedmanuscriptAcollaborationis called“veryproductive”Someonesays “Intheory…”A reviewerasks for anunrelatedexperimentSomeonementionsethicsapprovaldelays“We’ll fixit inrevision”Someonesays “It’swell knownthat…”A hypothesisis refinedafter seeingthe resultsSomeonementionsbatcheffectsA meetingcouldhave beenan emailFundingagencyacronym isused withoutexplanationA labmeetingruns overtime“This ispreliminary”“This isoutside thescope ofthe study”“Reviewer2” ismentionedA figure isdescribedas “self-explanatory”“Thesamplesize islimited”“This willstrengthenthe paper”Adeadlineis missed“Due to timeconstraints…”SomeonementionsbioinformaticstroubleshootingA statisticaltest ischosenpost hocA methodisdescribedas “robust”A reviewerrequestsmorereferences“Thisopensmany newquestions”“Let’sdiscussthisoffline”A PhDstudentexplains aseniorauthor’s work“Itworkedonce”A controlexperimentis addedlateA figure wasremade atthe lastminuteA grant isdescribed as“competitive”“This should bestraightforward”A datasetisdescribedas “messy”Anexperimentis describedas “tricky”A protocol isfollowed “withminormodifications”“Wealmostgave upon this”A PI says“Interesting…”A timeline isdescribedas“ambitious”“The dataspeak forthemselves”A methodonly oneperson in thelabunderstandsSomeonementionsworking onthe weekend“The resultsarereproducible…mostly”A figurelegend islonger thanthe textA study isdescribedas “proofof concept”Someonementionsimpactfactor“We needmoredata”A result iscalled“unexpected”Coffee istreated asa researchtoolA methodsectionreferencesanother paperfor detailsAdeadlineisextendedSomeoneapologizesfor toomany slides“We don’tfullyunderstandthemechanism”“We had tooptimizethisextensively”Someonementionslack offundingSomeonementionssamplestorageissuesA negativeresult iscalled“interesting”“Statisticallysignificant”isemphasizedSomeonementionsresubmissionSomeonereferencesSupplementaryFigure 12“We areunderpowered”Someonementions arejectedmanuscriptAcollaborationis called“veryproductive”Someonesays “Intheory…”A reviewerasks for anunrelatedexperimentSomeonementionsethicsapprovaldelays

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