Lesson 1: Selecting a topic/ appropriate sources
A. SELECTING A TOPIC
1. Pick a subject you like.
a. Keeps the interest up; you’re more likely to want to spend time
writing the paper!
2. Ask an interesting question.
a. Don’t pick a phenomenon (e.g. “low pressure.”)
b. Don’t pick a region of the world (but can compare 2 regions)
3. Go to the library and page through peer-reviewed journals.
a. Monthly Weather Review, Weather and Forecasting, Journal of
Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, Bulletin of the American
Meteorological Society, Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences,
Journal of Climate, Journal of Hydrometeorology
b. Search databases
i. AMS, MGA (links are on SO470C web site)
4. Avoid a topic that is too broad.
a. Tornadoes in Africa
b. El Niño and rainfall
c. Drizzle
d. Hurricanes
e. Lake-effect snow
5. Avoid a topic that is too narrow.
a. Dendritic snow crystal habits in at 7:02 pm on 5 Feb 2010
outside 5th Wing of Bancroft Hall
b. Wind field of the Bowdle, SD tornado as observed in the
18:32:10 UTC 0.5° NEXRAD scan
6. Do not choose a topic you’ve done before.
a. Your paper will sound stale.
b. You can, however, choose to build on something you’ve done
before.
7. Gather your own data
a. Surface, rainfall, snow, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc
b. Analysis of gridded upper-level and surface data available from
a variety of “reanalysis” web sites
Examples:
-Synoptic characteristics of heavy Mid-Atlantic snow events: A case study
comparison between two events with similar outcomes (heavy snow)
-Relationship between tropical cyclone activity and climate indices
-Environmental parameters common to tornado-producing supercell
thunderstorms
APPROPRIATE REFERENCES
The references must be peer reviewed by scientists. No websites.
Use recent sources (post 2000)
Full spectrum
Best
- Peer-reviewed journal articles (electronic or paper format)
- Published conference proceedings (= peer reviewed)
- Books (= peer reviewed)
- Technical reports (written by scientists; usually read over by at least one
person before publishing)
-Textbooks- Information likely peer-reviewed and correct, but at a much too
basic level for this course.
- Government agency websites (Content is usually reviewed by someone in
the office)
-University websites- Data and information displayed may be preliminary,
and not correct.
-Museum websites- All over the spectrum, but information is unlikely peerreviewed
- Newspapers (May be read/edited, but not by scientists)
- NGO (Non-governmental Organization) websites (Ex: World Wildlife
Fund. Information may be biased or inaccurate.)
- Company websites- Information on science likely biased or incorrect
-Personal websites – (Joe Schmoe’s tornado page) Goodness only knows
what’s on those sites.
Worst
How do you avoid websites? Use databases (AMS, MGA). Google Scholar