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