1）设想论文内容
花5min看懂标题（一些定义可在前言中找）。在看正文之前， 设想如何做该实验（写成list），实验会有些什么数据，根据这些数据如何得到结论，从而可发现：
1. 是否你漏掉了关键点？
2. 他们的标题是否对你产生误导?
记住：
a）对作者所做的实验的变化做一个记录很好
b）如果看文献是为了解决自己的问题： 略读或者跳过对你不重要或者不能回答你问题的东西
2）看摘要
一般有目的，方法，结论三部分。注意找到：
a）how and why the experiments were performed. You can then tell how close your list is to theirs.
b）get a sense for the order in which experiments are going to be presented. Ignore everything else.
3）仔细阅读正文的结论部分
a）正文将告诉你为什么他们进行这个实验以及按照他们所想实验的结果可能是什么并且和你作比较。记下他们的差别以及考虑差别的原因。
The key here is to fully understand their train of thought. If you can’t figure it out, write that down, too, specifying exactly where you fell off
the train. Then move on. From here on, focus on the material you understand from the Results, and ignore what you don’t understand.
b）仔细看图及图的说明
BE CRITICAL: Assume they are trying to pull a fast one on you. Make sure that when they say something, the data actually show it.
c）问两个问题：（在“材料和方法”中寻找，别在M&M中耗时间）
1. what are the controls for that experiment?
2. How do you know that this result isn’t due to something else?
d）找出隐藏结论（一般是限于篇幅而未能发表）
Challenge yourself to find alternate explanations for the results:
1. what do you think they chose to omit?
2. Why did they omit it? （在继续读下去之前，列一个阅读所得的list）
4）looking for a clear justification for why the authors chose to do their experiments.
What is the main question that they claim to be answering?
5）Compare the authors’ main question, their data, and their conclusions.
1. did they answer their question?
2. Did they do the right experiments to address their question?
3. If your list of experiments differs from theirs, is their line of experimentation better?
4. If you had to answer this research question, knowing all that you know now, how would you do it? Maybe borrow some of their experiments? Or do exactly what they did?
6） Read the discussion
The discussion should tell you why their work is important, and how it advances the field.
评价该文很重要的一点：文中是否预料到并很好的回答了你的问题
7）Project into the future.
如果是你，下一步能做什么？有什么可提高的？有什么缺陷要弥补？如何与下一步工作衔接？
8）回顾整体风格
1. What phrases do they use to introduce their ideas?
2. How are the figures labeled?
3. Is this a well-constructed paper?
4. Is there anything in the paper you'd like to emulat