In-class Exercise

In image 22 there are some similarities and differences between the two multi panel figures. They had the same plants for the three labeled panels (A, B, C). The ruler is depicted in both multi-panels. However, there are some differences in the position of the ruler in the images. The type of ruler used was different and the detail of the images is different as well. Some factors that could have resulted in the differences are the specificity of how far the technological device should be in regard to the plant. Another is how detailed the image should be and what to include. In addition, in the left multi-panel one could observe that each image is a close-up to the plant and illustrates more details versus the right multi-panel figure. 

There were many differences throghout the figures. There is a distinguishable difference in the ligthing of the pictures, causing one to assume that they were taken at different times of the day. The original pictures are more blurry than the replicates, so there coulda been a different camera or lenses used. Also in panel C the plant is oriented differently in the replicate than in the original, leading one to infer that there was a discrepancy in the narrative portion of the methods. Overall these 3 differences show a lack of control in time, equipment and plant positioning.
 

The two pictures are different in that in one picture, the picture was taken from above where in the other it was taken from the side. The differences between the two photo angels causes the shadows in each picture to be very different. The first picture has much larger shadows. In the first picture, the apple is on its side. In the second picture, the apple is upright. These differences are both due to the author of the methods failing to mention the angle of the picture that they took. As well as not mentioning the orientation of the object that were taken pictures of.

The two pictures are different in that in one picture, the picture was taken from above where in the other it was taken from the side. The differences between the two photo angels causes the shadows in each picture to be very different. The first picture has much larger shadows. In the first picture, the apple is on its side. In the second picture, the apple is upright. These differences are both due to the author of the methods failing to mention the angle of the picture that they took. As well as not mentioning the orientation of the object that were taken pictures of.

Observations:

• One figure had the pictures in a column. The other figure had the pictures in a row.

• One figure had clear pictures. The other figure had one unclear picture where it is dark.

• One figure had more of an up-close picture of each person than the other figure.

• One figure had the ruler overlapping part of the eyes. The other figure had the ruler next to the eyes.

• One figure had eyebrows for all 3 pictures. The other figure did not.

• Both figures had people with different skin tones, eye shapes, and eye colors.

• One figure had the ruler placed next to the eyes at around 6-7 cm.

Inferences:

• The person writing the methods didn’t specify how to measure what they were supposed to measure.

• The person writing the methods did not explain how they created the figure.

• The person writing the methods did not explain how they took the pictures.

• The person writing the methods did not explain what to include in the pictures taken.

• The person writing the methods did not specifically say who to take pictures of.

It can sometimes be difficult to distinguish observations from inferences and other times they couldn't be farther apart. I can observe the fact that a person on the freeway might be driving a bright red Camero but I cannot infer that they usually drive over the speed limit unless I observe something else that could lead me to that conclusion. In these situations, the observation is more like a concrete fact or an accurate description while an inference is always a guess at what that observation could mean as it relates to previous observations.

Observation: something a person notices using their senses

ex) The tent is 100 feet in length and 40 feet in width.

Inference: something a person concludes based off of an observation

ex) The tent is the kind of tent used for an outdoor event and not for camping.

Observation - The flower is starting to wilt and turn brown.

Inference - The flower is not getting enough water and is dying.

An observation would be seeing hgh amounts of algea in a pond near a farm, and another observation would be that there are no fish in the pond. An inference would be that the fertilizer from the farm may have caused eutrification in the pond causing a large algal bloom which would kill all the life in the pond.

Earlier this year, whenever I would walk out to my car, I would repeatedely observe that there was a wet spot right underneath the front of the car. Considering the location of the wet spot, and where it was dripping from when I looked under the car, I inferred that I had a transmission leak. When I put my fingers in the wet spot, it left a red liquid on my finger tips, which confirmed my inference of having a transmission leak. When I tried adding more transmission fluid to it, much more fluid leaked out, so I just decided to go to the mechanic and get the line patched up.