Anexperimentfails for noclear reasonSomeonementionsa rejectedpaperA PhD studentwonders whya PhDsounded likea good ideaAhumanitiesPhD says“It depends”“It’sprobablya batcheffect”Someonesays “Thisshould beeasy” (it wasnot)A gellooksalmostperfectA figurelegend islonger thanthe figureSomeonementionsethicsapprovaldelays“I swearthisworkedlast week”A theoryworksbeautifully—experimentdoes not“Let’s addit to futurework”“Thesamplesize is…limited”Someonesays “It’sconceptuallysimple”Someonementionsimpostersyndrome(indirectly)A meetingcoulddefinitelyhave beenan emailA control isadded afterseeing theresults“The dataare…moodytoday”A labnotebookentry startswith “Ithink…”SomeoneGooglestheir ownerrormessageSomeone says“This isinterdisciplinary”A sentencestarts with“In thiscontext…”A footnotebecomesessential“We don’treallyknowwhy”A citationspiralbeginsA PhDstudentexplains thePI’s ownprojectA methodonly onepersonunderstandsA reviewerasks for atotally newmethodYou forgotyourposter.“At least it’sreproduciblethis time”Someoneworks on it“over theweekend”A freezeralarmgoes offA script runsfor hours…thencrashesAdeadlinequietlypassesA PI says“Interesting…”(no follow-up)SomeoneaccidentallydeletessomethingimportantSomeonesays “Intheory, thisshould work”“We’llexplain itin thediscussion”Someonespends fiveminutes lookingfor the rightcable/adaptorCode workson onecomputeronlySomeonesays “I’llclean thedata later”Someonesays “Justone moreexperiment”Coffee istreated asan essentialreagentA documentcrashesright beforesaving“Reviewer2 strikesagain”“Let’s check thesupplementary”Someonereuses thesame slidefrom lastyearAreferencefrom 1973is crucialA sampledisappearsmysteriouslyA paper iscited withoutbeing fullyread“We’ll fixit inrevision”“Let’sjust re-run it”A figure isremade fiveminutesbeforesubmissionA Nobellaureate ismentionedcasuallyA wet labprotocolsays “mixgently”“Thisopensmany newquestions”SomeonespillssomethingexpensiveA title ischangedat the lastminute“It workedyesterday”A result iscalled“promising”Anexperimentfails for noclear reasonSomeonementionsa rejectedpaperA PhD studentwonders whya PhDsounded likea good ideaAhumanitiesPhD says“It depends”“It’sprobablya batcheffect”Someonesays “Thisshould beeasy” (it wasnot)A gellooksalmostperfectA figurelegend islonger thanthe figureSomeonementionsethicsapprovaldelays“I swearthisworkedlast week”A theoryworksbeautifully—experimentdoes not“Let’s addit to futurework”“Thesamplesize is…limited”Someonesays “It’sconceptuallysimple”Someonementionsimpostersyndrome(indirectly)A meetingcoulddefinitelyhave beenan emailA control isadded afterseeing theresults“The dataare…moodytoday”A labnotebookentry startswith “Ithink…”SomeoneGooglestheir ownerrormessageSomeone says“This isinterdisciplinary”A sentencestarts with“In thiscontext…”A footnotebecomesessential“We don’treallyknowwhy”A citationspiralbeginsA PhDstudentexplains thePI’s ownprojectA methodonly onepersonunderstandsA reviewerasks for atotally newmethodYou forgotyourposter.“At least it’sreproduciblethis time”Someoneworks on it“over theweekend”A freezeralarmgoes offA script runsfor hours…thencrashesAdeadlinequietlypassesA PI says“Interesting…”(no follow-up)SomeoneaccidentallydeletessomethingimportantSomeonesays “Intheory, thisshould work”“We’llexplain itin thediscussion”Someonespends fiveminutes lookingfor the rightcable/adaptorCode workson onecomputeronlySomeonesays “I’llclean thedata later”Someonesays “Justone moreexperiment”Coffee istreated asan essentialreagentA documentcrashesright beforesaving“Reviewer2 strikesagain”“Let’s check thesupplementary”Someonereuses thesame slidefrom lastyearAreferencefrom 1973is crucialA sampledisappearsmysteriouslyA paper iscited withoutbeing fullyread“We’ll fixit inrevision”“Let’sjust re-run it”A figure isremade fiveminutesbeforesubmissionA Nobellaureate ismentionedcasuallyA wet labprotocolsays “mixgently”“Thisopensmany newquestions”SomeonespillssomethingexpensiveA title ischangedat the lastminute“It workedyesterday”A result iscalled“promising”

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