A control isadded afterseeing theresultsAreferencefrom 1973is crucialA citationspiralbeginsSomeonesays “It’sconceptuallysimple”Someoneworks on it“over theweekend”Someonesays “Intheory, thisshould work”“Let’s addit to futurework”Coffee istreated asan essentialreagentAhumanitiesPhD says“It depends”A gellooksalmostperfectSomeonesays “I’llclean thedata later”A paper iscited withoutbeing fullyread“Thisopensmany newquestions”A Nobellaureate ismentionedcasuallySomeonementionsimpostersyndrome(indirectly)A footnotebecomesessentialSomeone says“This isinterdisciplinary”Someonereuses thesame slidefrom lastyear“It workedyesterday”A meetingcoulddefinitelyhave beenan emailA freezeralarmgoes off“At least it’sreproduciblethis time”A wet labprotocolsays “mixgently”Anexperimentfails for noclear reasonSomeoneaccidentallydeletessomethingimportant“Thesamplesize is…limited”Someonesays “Thisshould beeasy” (it wasnot)“We’ll fixit inrevision”You forgotyourposter.“Let’s check thesupplementary”A title ischangedat the lastminuteSomeonementionsethicsapprovaldelaysA figurelegend islonger thanthe figureSomeonesays “Justone moreexperiment”A PI says“Interesting…”(no follow-up)“The dataare…moodytoday”A figure isremade fiveminutesbeforesubmission“We’llexplain itin thediscussion”AdeadlinequietlypassesA PhD studentwonders whya PhDsounded likea good idea“Reviewer2 strikesagain”A reviewerasks for atotally newmethodA methodonly onepersonunderstands“Let’sjust re-run it”A theoryworksbeautifully—experimentdoes notA script runsfor hours…thencrashesA sampledisappearsmysteriously“I swearthisworkedlast week”SomeonespillssomethingexpensiveSomeoneGooglestheir ownerrormessageA PhDstudentexplains thePI’s ownprojectSomeonementionsa rejectedpaperCode workson onecomputeronlySomeonespends fiveminutes lookingfor the rightcable/adaptorA documentcrashesright beforesavingA labnotebookentry startswith “Ithink…”“It’sprobablya batcheffect”A result iscalled“promising”A sentencestarts with“In thiscontext…”“We don’treallyknowwhy”A control isadded afterseeing theresultsAreferencefrom 1973is crucialA citationspiralbeginsSomeonesays “It’sconceptuallysimple”Someoneworks on it“over theweekend”Someonesays “Intheory, thisshould work”“Let’s addit to futurework”Coffee istreated asan essentialreagentAhumanitiesPhD says“It depends”A gellooksalmostperfectSomeonesays “I’llclean thedata later”A paper iscited withoutbeing fullyread“Thisopensmany newquestions”A Nobellaureate ismentionedcasuallySomeonementionsimpostersyndrome(indirectly)A footnotebecomesessentialSomeone says“This isinterdisciplinary”Someonereuses thesame slidefrom lastyear“It workedyesterday”A meetingcoulddefinitelyhave beenan emailA freezeralarmgoes off“At least it’sreproduciblethis time”A wet labprotocolsays “mixgently”Anexperimentfails for noclear reasonSomeoneaccidentallydeletessomethingimportant“Thesamplesize is…limited”Someonesays “Thisshould beeasy” (it wasnot)“We’ll fixit inrevision”You forgotyourposter.“Let’s check thesupplementary”A title ischangedat the lastminuteSomeonementionsethicsapprovaldelaysA figurelegend islonger thanthe figureSomeonesays “Justone moreexperiment”A PI says“Interesting…”(no follow-up)“The dataare…moodytoday”A figure isremade fiveminutesbeforesubmission“We’llexplain itin thediscussion”AdeadlinequietlypassesA PhD studentwonders whya PhDsounded likea good idea“Reviewer2 strikesagain”A reviewerasks for atotally newmethodA methodonly onepersonunderstands“Let’sjust re-run it”A theoryworksbeautifully—experimentdoes notA script runsfor hours…thencrashesA sampledisappearsmysteriously“I swearthisworkedlast week”SomeonespillssomethingexpensiveSomeoneGooglestheir ownerrormessageA PhDstudentexplains thePI’s ownprojectSomeonementionsa rejectedpaperCode workson onecomputeronlySomeonespends fiveminutes lookingfor the rightcable/adaptorA documentcrashesright beforesavingA labnotebookentry startswith “Ithink…”“It’sprobablya batcheffect”A result iscalled“promising”A sentencestarts with“In thiscontext…”“We don’treallyknowwhy”

Nobel Dinner - 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 control is added after seeing the results
  2. A reference from 1973 is crucial
  3. A citation spiral begins
  4. Someone says “It’s conceptually simple”
  5. Someone works on it “over the weekend”
  6. Someone says “In theory, this should work”
  7. “Let’s add it to future work”
  8. Coffee is treated as an essential reagent
  9. A humanities PhD says “It depends”
  10. A gel looks almost perfect
  11. Someone says “I’ll clean the data later”
  12. A paper is cited without being fully read
  13. “This opens many new questions”
  14. A Nobel laureate is mentioned casually
  15. Someone mentions imposter syndrome (indirectly)
  16. A footnote becomes essential
  17. Someone says “This is interdisciplinary”
  18. Someone reuses the same slide from last year
  19. “It worked yesterday”
  20. A meeting could definitely have been an email
  21. A freezer alarm goes off
  22. “At least it’s reproducible this time”
  23. A wet lab protocol says “mix gently”
  24. An experiment fails for no clear reason
  25. Someone accidentally deletes something important
  26. “The sample size is… limited”
  27. Someone says “This should be easy” (it was not)
  28. “We’ll fix it in revision”
  29. You forgot your poster.
  30. “Let’s check the supplementary”
  31. A title is changed at the last minute
  32. Someone mentions ethics approval delays
  33. A figure legend is longer than the figure
  34. Someone says “Just one more experiment”
  35. A PI says “Interesting…” (no follow-up)
  36. “The data are… moody today”
  37. A figure is remade five minutes before submission
  38. “We’ll explain it in the discussion”
  39. A deadline quietly passes
  40. A PhD student wonders why a PhD sounded like a good idea
  41. “Reviewer 2 strikes again”
  42. A reviewer asks for a totally new method
  43. A method only one person understands
  44. “Let’s just re-run it”
  45. A theory works beautifully—experiment does not
  46. A script runs for hours… then crashes
  47. A sample disappears mysteriously
  48. “I swear this worked last week”
  49. Someone spills something expensive
  50. Someone Googles their own error message
  51. A PhD student explains the PI’s own project
  52. Someone mentions a rejected paper
  53. Code works on one computer only
  54. Someone spends five minutes looking for the right cable/adaptor
  55. A document crashes right before saving
  56. A lab notebook entry starts with “I think…”
  57. “It’s probably a batch effect”
  58. A result is called “promising”
  59. A sentence starts with “In this context…”
  60. “We don’t really know why”