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