critical review of biological research

How to critically review academic papers in Biological & life sciences

Introduction.

A critical literature review (also known as a critique, critical commentary, critical appraisal, or critical analysis) is a deep examination and critique of work. A critical review can be done as a standalone activity or as part of your research and preparation for producing an empirical literature review example. The recommendations below are intended to assist you in critically evaluating a research publication.

To critically review academic papers:

• Identify the research question and its significance : The first step in critically reviewing a research paper is to identify the research question the study aims to address. You should also evaluate the significance of the research question and its relevance to the field of study.
• Evaluate the methodology : The research methodology section of a research paper is critical to its validity and reliability. You should assess the methodology used in the study, including the sampling techniques, data collection methods, and data analysis procedures . You should also evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology and identify any potential sources of bias.
• Assess the results and conclusions : A research paper’s results and conclusions section should present a clear and concise summary of the findings. You should assess the accuracy and validity of the results and evaluate the strength of the conclusions drawn from the results.
• Evaluate the overall structure and organization : The structure and organization of a research paper are essential to its clarity and coherence. You should evaluate the paper’s overall structure, including the introduction, literature review , methodology, results, and conclusion sections. You should also assess the clarity and coherence of the paper’s argument and evaluate the quality of the writing.
• Consider the contribution to the field of study : Finally, you should consider the research paper’s contribution. This includes evaluating the originality and significance of the research question, the quality of the methodology and results, and the strength of the conclusions drawn from the results.

Examine an academic paper as an example of a critical research literature review. It is essential to evaluate its research question, methodology, results, overall structure, and contribution to the field.

• Check out our sample literature review for the Project to see how the PhD Literature review is constructed.

What is a good topic for a biology research paper?

A good topic for a biology research paper would be “The Impact of Climate Change on Biodiversity and Ecosystems.” This topic allows for an exploration of how global warming and environmental shifts affect species distribution, population dynamics, and ecosystem functioning. It offers opportunities to investigate the underlying mechanisms, potential mitigation strategies, and implications for conservation efforts. Additionally, the topic aligns with current ecological concerns and fosters interdisciplinary research design , making it relevant and impactful in the field of interesting biology research articles.

A Comprehensive Review of Recent Advancements in Biological & Life Sciences

The field of Biological & Life Sciences has witnessed significant progress in recent years due to groundbreaking research and innovative technologies. This review aims to highlight key developments across various sub-disciplines, shedding light on the cutting-edge research that has shaped our understanding of life and living organisms.

• Genomics and Gene Editing : Advancements in genomics and gene editing technologies have revolutionized our understanding of genetics and potential applications in various fields. The emergence of CRISPR-Cas9 has allowed for precise and efficient gene editing, offering unprecedented opportunities in basic research and therapeutic interventions. This section discusses the latest discoveries in genomics, epigenetics, and the ethical considerations surrounding gene editing.
• Neurobiology and Brain Research : With the advent of sophisticated imaging techniques and computational neuroscience, researchers have made remarkable strides in unravelling the complexities of the human brain. This section covers groundbreaking studies in neurobiology, synaptic plasticity, brain mapping, and the connection between neural activity and behaviour. Moreover, it delves into the advancements in brain-computer interfaces and their potential applications in healthcare and neurorehabilitation.
• Synthetic Biology and Bioengineering : The burgeoning field of synthetic biology has enabled scientists to engineer biological systems with unparalleled precision. From creating artificial organisms to synthesizing novel biomaterials, this section reviews the latest breakthroughs in synthetic biological research examples and bioengineering , emphasizing their applications in medicine, agriculture, and environmental conservation.
• Ecology and Climate Change : Climate change and its impact on ecosystems have become pressing concerns. Researchers have dedicated efforts to understand ecological dynamics and devise strategies for conservation and mitigation. This section examines the role of biodiversity, climate modelling, and ecosystem services in addressing environmental challenges and explores how interdisciplinary research is essential in tackling global ecological issues.
• Immunology and Infectious Diseases : In light of recent pandemics, immunology and infectious diseases research have garnered significant attention. Advancements in vaccine development, immunotherapies, and antiviral strategies are highlighted in this section. Additionally, it discusses how immunology intersects with cancer research, autoimmune disorders, and emerging infectious diseases.
• Biotechnology and Bioinformatics : Biotechnology continues to drive innovation across various industries, including healthcare, agriculture, and energy. This section evaluates the latest biotechnological applications, such as biopharmaceutical production, agricultural biotechnology, and biofuel production. Furthermore, it explores the crucial role of bioinformatics in managing and analyzing vast biological datasets.

Remember that critically reviewing academic papers is an iterative process. It takes practice and experience to develop a discerning eye. Over time, your ability to identify strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement in research articles will improve, contributing to the advancement of scientific knowledge in the Biological and life science research examples.

• Check out our study guide to learn more about PhD Literature review. Why is a literature review important for a PhD dissertation?

The rapidly evolving landscape of Biological & Life Sciences has transformed our understanding of life and opened new avenues for research and practical applications. This review presents an overview of recent advancements in diverse fields, highlighting the collaborative efforts of scientists worldwide. As we continue to push the boundaries of knowledge, the integration of multidisciplinary approaches will be key to addressing global challenges and improving the quality of life for humanity.

About PhD Assistance

Ph.D. Assistance offers comprehensive dissertation literature review services, utilizing academic sources like journals, textbooks, and newspaper articles to create a research framework, hypothesis, and questionnaire. These experts ensure your research work is ready for journal publication, with access to the latest reference sources. A minimum of 80 references will be used to develop a research framework. Thousands of students have benefited from our services for literature review.

• Epstein GL. Preventing biological weapon development through the governance of life science research. Biosecur Bioterror. 2012 Mar;10(1):17-37. PMID: 22455676. DOI:  1089/bsp.2011.0091
• Semilarski, Helin, and Anne Laius. “Exploring Biological Literacy: A Systematic Literature Review of Biological Literacy.”  European Journal of Educational Research 3 (2021): 1181-1197.
• Weaver, Kathleen F., et al.  An introduction to statistical analysis in research: with applications in the biological and life sciences . John Wiley & Sons, 2017.
• a sample of a literature review
• and life science titles.
• biological research examples
• critical literature review
• empirical literature review examples
• interesting biology research articles
• life science research examples
• literature review examples
• marketing literature review
• research literature review example
• systematic literature review

Quick Contact

• Adversial Attacks
• Artificial Intelligence
• Artificial Intelligence (AI) and ML ( Machine Learning )
• Big Data Analysis
• Business and Management
• Categories of Research methodology – PhDAssistance
• Category of Research Proposal Services
• coding & algorithm
• Computer Data Science
• Category of Machine Learning – PhDassistance
• Computer Science/Research writing/Manuscript
• Course Work Service
• Data Analytics
• Data Processing
• Deep Networks
• Dissertation Statistics
• economics dissertation
• Editing Services
• Electrical Engineering Category
• Engineering & Technology
• finance dissertation writing
• Gap Identification
• Healthcare Dissertation Writing
• Intrusion-detection-system
• journals publishing
• Life Science Dissertation writing services
• literature review service
• Machine Learning
• medical thesis writing
• Peer review
• PhD Computer Programming
• PhD Dissertation
• PhD dissertation Writing
• Phd Journal Manuscript
• Annotated Bibliography
• PhD Publication Support
• Phd thesis writing services
• Phd Topic Selection
• Categories of PhdAssistance Dissertation
• Power Safety
• problem identification
• Quantitative Analysis
• quantitative research
• Recent Trends
• Referencing and Formatting
• Research Gap
• research journals
• Research Methodology
• research paper
• Research Proposal Service
• secondary Data collection
• Statistical Consulting Services
• Uncategorized

We offer complete assistance for PhD scholars that comprises topic selection, research services, pilot study to a full thesis writing. We help you at any part or any phase of your dissertation, partially or completely, and we strive for perfection in it. Our services are diverse and standardised, but not limited.

Main Services

PhD Dissertation PhD Topic Selection Editing Services Literature Review Data Analysis Coursework

Quick Links

Blog Insights Our Sample works Faq

UK : +44-7537 144372

India : +91-9176966446

Landline : +91-44-42124284 (Between 9.00 am – 6.00 pm IST)

For existing clients: +91-8754446693

Customer Care: +91-9384672299

Email: [email protected]

© 2024 PhD Assistance. All rights reserved.

Write a Critical Review of a Scientific Journal Article

1. identify how and why the research was carried out, 2. establish the research context, 3. evaluate the research, 4. establish the significance of the research.

• Writing Your Critique

Ask Us: Chat, email, visit or call

Video: How to Integrate Critical Voice into Your Literature Review

Video: Note-taking and Writing Tips to Avoid Plagiarism

Get assistance

The library offers a range of helpful services.  All of our appointments are free of charge and confidential.

• Book an appointment

Read the article(s) carefully and use the questions below to help you identify how and why the research was carried out. Look at the following sections: 

Introduction

• What was the objective of the study?
• What methods were used to accomplish this purpose (e.g., systematic recording of observations, analysis and evaluation of published research, assessment of theory, etc.)?
• What techniques were used and how was each technique performed?
• What kind of data can be obtained using each technique?
• How are such data interpreted?
• What kind of information is produced by using the technique?
• What objective evidence was obtained from the authors’ efforts (observations, measurements, etc.)?
• What were the results of the study? 
• How was each technique used to obtain each result?
• What statistical tests were used to evaluate the significance of the conclusions based on numeric or graphic data?
• How did each result contribute to answering the question or testing the hypothesis raised in the introduction?
• How were the results interpreted? How were they related to the original problem (authors’ view of evidence rather than objective findings)? 
• Were the authors able to answer the question (test the hypothesis) raised?
• Did the research provide new factual information, a new understanding of a phenomenon in the field, or a new research technique?
• How was the significance of the work described?
• Do the authors relate the findings of the study to literature in the field?
• Did the reported observations or interpretations support or refute observations or interpretations made by other researchers?

These questions were adapted from the following sources:  Kuyper, B.J. (1991). Bringing up scientists in the art of critiquing research. Bioscience 41(4), 248-250. Wood, J.M. (2003). Research Lab Guide. MICR*3260 Microbial Adaptation and Development Web Site . Retrieved July 31, 2006.

Once you are familiar with the article, you can establish the research context by asking the following questions:

• Who conducted the research? What were/are their interests?
• When and where was the research conducted?
• Why did the authors do this research?
• Was this research pertinent only within the authors’ geographic locale, or did it have broader (even global) relevance?
• Were many other laboratories pursuing related research when the reported work was done? If so, why?
• For experimental research, what funding sources met the costs of the research?
• On what prior observations was the research based? What was and was not known at the time?
• How important was the research question posed by the researchers?

These questions were adapted from the following sources: Kuyper, B.J. (1991). Bringing up scientists in the art of critiquing research. Bioscience 41(4), 248-250. Wood, J.M. (2003). Research Lab Guide. MICR*3260 Microbial Adaptation and Development Web Site . Retrieved July 31, 2006.

Remember that simply disagreeing with the material is not considered to be a critical assessment of the material.  For example, stating that the sample size is insufficient is not a critical assessment.  Describing why the sample size is insufficient for the claims being made in the study would be a critical assessment.

Use the questions below to help you evaluate the quality of the authors’ research:

• Does the title precisely state the subject of the paper?
• Read the statement of purpose in the abstract. Does it match the one in the introduction?

Acknowledgments

• Could the source of the research funding have influenced the research topic or conclusions?
• Check the sequence of statements in the introduction. Does all the information lead coherently to the purpose of the study?
• Review all methods in relation to the objective(s) of the study. Are the methods valid for studying the problem?
• Check the methods for essential information. Could the study be duplicated from the methods and information given?
• Check the methods for flaws. Is the sample selection adequate? Is the experimental design sound?
• Check the sequence of statements in the methods. Does all the information belong there? Is the sequence of methods clear and pertinent?
• Was there mention of ethics? Which research ethics board approved the study?
• Carefully examine the data presented in the tables and diagrams. Does the title or legend accurately describe the content? 
• Are column headings and labels accurate? 
• Are the data organized for ready comparison and interpretation? (A table should be self-explanatory, with a title that accurately and concisely describes content and column headings that accurately describe information in the cells.)
• Review the results as presented in the text while referring to the data in the tables and diagrams. Does the text complement, and not simply repeat data? Are there discrepancies between the results in the text and those in the tables?
• Check all calculations and presentation of data.
• Review the results in light of the stated objectives. Does the study reveal what the researchers intended?
• Does the discussion clearly address the objectives and hypotheses?
• Check the interpretation against the results. Does the discussion merely repeat the results? 
• Does the interpretation arise logically from the data or is it too far-fetched? 
• Have the faults, flaws, or shortcomings of the research been addressed?
• Is the interpretation supported by other research cited in the study?
• Does the study consider key studies in the field?
• What is the significance of the research? Do the authors mention wider implications of the findings?
• Is there a section on recommendations for future research? Are there other research possibilities or directions suggested? 

Consider the article as a whole

• Reread the abstract. Does it accurately summarize the article?
• Check the structure of the article (first headings and then paragraphing). Is all the material organized under the appropriate headings? Are sections divided logically into subsections or paragraphs?
• Are stylistic concerns, logic, clarity, and economy of expression addressed?

These questions were adapted from the following sources:  Kuyper, B.J. (1991). Bringing up scientists in the art of critiquing research. Bioscience 41(4), 248-250. Wood, J.M. (2003). Research Lab Guide. MICR*3260 Microbial Adaptation and Development Web Site. Retrieved July 31, 2006.

After you have evaluated the research, consider whether the research has been successful. Has it led to new questions being asked, or new ways of using existing knowledge? Are other researchers citing this paper?

You should consider the following questions:

• How did other researchers view the significance of the research reported by your authors?
• Did the research reported in your article result in the formulation of new questions or hypotheses (by the authors or by other researchers)?
• Have other researchers subsequently supported or refuted the observations or interpretations of these authors?
• Did the research make a significant contribution to human knowledge?
• Did the research produce any practical applications?
• What are the social, political, technological, medical implications of this research?
• How do you evaluate the significance of the research?

To answer these questions, look at review articles to find out how reviewers view this piece of research. Look at research articles and databases like Web of Science to see how other people have used this work. What range of journals have cited this article?

These questions were adapted from the following sources:

Kuyper, B.J. (1991). Bringing up scientists in the art of critiquing research. Bioscience 41(4), 248-250. Wood, J.M. (2003). Research Lab Guide. MICR*3260 Microbial Adaptation and Development Web Site . Retrieved July 31, 2006.

• << Previous: Start Here
• Next: Writing Your Critique >>
• Last Updated: Sep 5, 2024 10:47 AM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uoguelph.ca/WriteCriticalReview

Suggest an edit to this guide

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Research in the Biological and Life Sciences: A Guide for Cornell Researchers: Literature Reviews

• Books and Dissertations
• Databases and Journals
• Locating Theses
• Resource Not at Cornell?
• Citing Sources
• Staying Current
• Measuring your research impact
• Plagiarism and Copyright
• Data Management
• Literature Reviews
• Evidence Synthesis and Systematic Reviews
• Writing an Honors Thesis
• Poster Making and Printing
• Research Help

What is a Literature Review?

A literature review is a body of text that aims to review the critical points of current knowledge on a particular topic. Most often associated with science-oriented literature, such as a thesis, the literature review usually proceeds a research proposal, methodology and results section. Its ultimate goals is to bring the reader up to date with current literature on a topic and forms that basis for another goal, such as the justification for future research in the area. (retrieved from  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literature_review )

Writing a Literature Review

The literature review is the section of your paper in which you cite and briefly review the related research studies that have been conducted. In this space, you will describe the foundation on which  your  research will be/is built. You will:

• discuss the work of others
• evaluate their methods and findings
• identify any gaps in their research
• state how  your  research is different

The literature review should be selective and should group the cited studies in some logical fashion.

If you need some additional assistance writing your literature review, the Knight Institute for Writing in the Disciplines offers a  Graduate Writing Service .

Demystifying the Literature Review

For more information, visit our guide devoted to " Demystifying the Literature Review " which includes:

• guide to conducting a literature review,
• a recorded 1.5 hour workshop covering the steps of a literature review, a checklist for drafting your topic and search terms, citation management software for organizing your results, and database searching.

Online Resources

• A Guide to Library Research at Cornell University
• Literature Reviews: An Overview for Graduate Students North Carolina State University 
• The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting Written by Dena Taylor, Director, Health Sciences Writing Centre, and Margaret Procter, Coordinator, Writing Support, University of Toronto
• How to Write a Literature Review University Library, University of California, Santa Cruz
• Review of Literature The Writing Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Print Resources

• << Previous: Writing
• Next: Evidence Synthesis and Systematic Reviews >>
• Last Updated: Oct 25, 2023 11:28 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.cornell.edu/bio

• Queen's University Library
• Research Guides
• Writing a Literature Review
• Search Strategies
• Evaluating Information
• Finding Articles
• Finding Books
• Reference Materials
• Streaming Video
• Citing & Citation Management
• How to Read an Article and Take Notes
• Concept Mapping and the Synthesis Matrix
• Writing the Review
• Data Repositories
• Research Data Management This link opens in a new window
• Biology Field Stations

Scope Notes and Credits

Scope Notes

The purpose of this page is to provide information about writing literature reviews in STEM fields. 

Maggie Gordon, MLIS

Literature Reviews

Literature reviews are an important step in the research process and are commonly assigned in upper-year and graduate level courses. Alternatively, you may need to include one at the beginning of a research paper or as a chapter in a dissertation or thesis. No matter your reason for conducting one, a literature review should show the reader that you have a comprehensive understanding of the published research on a particular topic . The literature review should identify what has already been done and what is still left to be explored in your topic area, which prevents duplication of research efforts. Finally, it should show that you can position your own informed perspective into the scholarly conversation  as you make connections between studies and situate them within the broader context. The literature review should not be a summary of what you have found - it should be a critical evaluation . 

The three goals of a literature review are to:

• Summarize and analyze previous research and theories
• Identify trends, important questions, common methodology, controversy, and contested claims
• Highlight any gaps that may exist in the research to date

Depending on the purpose of your literature review, you may also need to situate your own research into the scholarly conversation and justify its value. 

Getting Started

It's important to be well organized before  you start working on your lit review. It might be helpful to have the following in place:

• A plan to keep track of where you search and what you search. This can be as simple as a Word or Excel file where you list the databases that you search in and the search strings, parameters, and other filters that you've used. 
• A citation management tool such as Zotero, Mendeley, or EndNote. This will help you keep track of your references and auto-populate citations as you write your review. It can also be a great place to store PDFs of articles or book chapters that you read. For more information, see the tab on Citing & Citation Management

A sample search log: 

This can be adapted to suit your needs, for a literature review that is part of a course assignment, you likely will not need the last two columns. 

• << Previous: Citing & Citation Management
• Next: How to Read an Article and Take Notes >>

What about Systematic Reviews?

Systematic Reviews are another type of knowledge synthesis that people might refer to when talking about a literature reviews; however, they are quite different! A true systematic review must follow a rigorous methodological process and requires at least two people. Other common types of evidence synthesis include Narrative Reviews, Rapid Reviews, and Scoping Reviews. To learn more, visit our Guide to Systematic Reviews & Other Synthesis . 

• Last Updated: Oct 21, 2024 6:54 AM
• Subjects: Biology

• Biological Reviews

Latest Issues

Volume 99, Issue 5

October 2024.

Volume 99, Issue 4

August 2024.

Volume 99, Issue 3

Volume 99, Issue 2

Wiley online Library

Publications

Biological Reviews covers the entire range of the biological sciences, presenting several review articles per issue. Although scholarly and with extensive bibliographies, the articles are aimed at non-specialist biologists as well as researchers in the field. Authors are specifically instructed to be aware of this fact in their writing, and the resulting reviews serve as extensive introductions to particular fields, defining the state of the art, and drawing attention to gaps in knowledge. Articles are up to 20,000 words long and each contains an abstract, a thorough introduction and statement of conclusions.

What Biological Reviews has to offer:

• Fast publication times
• Flexible policy on nature of articles, with scope for extensive tables and illustrations
• International exposure with global circulation

Aims and Scope

Biological Reviews publishes synthetic reviews, based on the literature, covering important biological questions that are interesting to a broad readership and are timely (e.g. from a fast-moving field, or due to new discoveries or conceptual advances). A 'synthetic review' goes beyond compiling information, rather it should analyse the information and build a new theoretical or conceptual framework that can substantially reshape the area

Definition of review

Our concept of a review is one that comprehensively surveys the literature in order to answer a key biological question, or to identify new biological questions that need to be addressed to advance the field. This includes using data from the literature (for example, in meta-analyses). A review contrasts with primary research, which is the generation of new data. Thus, taxonomic or phylogenetic reviews, which draw conclusions from new data (even if made from “published” specimens or archived sequence data) typically fall out of scope as being primary research. Also out of scope are “opinion pieces” where they are based on an incomplete survey of the literature, where studies are only included that fit a specified hypothesis. Reviews suitable for Biological Reviews synthesise the literature and from this draw novel insights which contribute to the reshaping of an area. To help authors with some concrete guidance, a reviewer described what we are looking for in the following ways:

“Excellent reviews provide new conceptual insight not present in the primary literature. For example, they may bring together literature items (e.g. empirical or theoretical) that were previously disconnected to show where they do in fact overlap; or the review may generate significant new ideas and hypotheses. Such reviews are rare but, if they are readable and clear, they can form the basis for a new research direction. Good reviews explain difficult topics and make use of examples to illustrate how phenomena or theories are connected, or provide synthetic overviews of a large body of literature (empirical or theoretical). They can be the first entry into a new literature and may often allow readers to extract information or insights (e.g., about key experiments to be done) that are difficult to see from reading the primary literature or existing summaries. There are also not-so-useful reviews. These are more like summaries. They summarize recent opinions or results of one or several fields, restate conclusions that are easily gleaned from abstracts of primary research papers, and identify real, but quite obvious, gaps in knowledge. It can be very useful to write such a paper to organize one’s own thoughts, but it is typically of limited use to others.”

Biological Reviews is seeking “excellent reviews” in the description above. This goes beyond “good reviews” in the value they add by creating new insights (rather than presenting the information for readers to generate new insights).

Reviews of books are not published.

Under some circumstances, we will publish responses to previous reviews if they make the case that substantial and relevant literature exists and was missed from a previous review.

We would expect such pieces, therefore, to be “mini”-reviews. We urge authors to get in contact with the editorial team prior to submission to discuss suitability. Review style and structure

Great flexibility in length, content and presentation is allowed. The core of the review must tackle a fundamental biological problem (including allied disciplines such as ecology or palaeontology). Reviews of topics outside biology (e.g. in medicine or agronomy) will be considered only if their focus is on underlying biological questions. We occasionally publish methodological reviews and use similar criteria: is there a well-articulated biological issue addressed, and is the review synthetic, generating new insights, rather than simply listing different methods?

Whilst articles may have significant value for experts in a particular field of research, they also act as introductions to the area for people engaging with it. Authors are therefore asked to write in a way that is intelligible to the non-expert so that scientists unfamiliar with the topic can learn something from it. Articles can be extensively illustrated. All articles are subject to refereeing.

Editorial Board

Editor-in-Chief

Dr John Welch Department of Genetics, University of Cambridge Downing Street Cambridge   CB2 3EH  UK

Professor Shinichi Nakagawa, FRSN Evolution & Ecology Research Centre, EERC School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, BEES The University of New South Wales Australia

Christopher Howe Department of Biochemistry University of Cambridge Tennis Court Road Cambridge CB2 1QW UK Assisted by

Alison Cooper Editorial Committee

Paul Barrett, UK, Vertebrate Paleobiology

Steven Chown, Australia, Macroecology

David Coombes, UK, Forest Ecology & Conservation

Douglas Erwin, USA, Invertebrate Palaeobiology

Trent Garner, UK, Animal Ecology

Russell Gray, New Zealand, Animal Cognition

Christopher Huang, UK, Membrane Physiology

Michael Jennions, Australia, Behavioural Ecology

Andrew Knight, UK, Conservation Science

Tim Lewens, UK, Philosophy of Biology

Helen Mott, UK, Biochemistry & Structural Biology

Ana Rodrigues, France, Macroecology & Conservation

David Stern, USA, Developmental Biology

Henggui Zhang, UK, Systems Biology

Contact Details

Editorial Contact Information

Email: [email protected]

Production Contact Details

Joanna Glyza Bongolan

Production Editor

Email: [email protected]

• Mathematical Proceedings
• The Spirit of Inquiry
• Indices - 1821-1971

Discover our Journals & Books

From Darwin’s paper on evolution to the development of stem cell research, publications from the Society continue to shape the scientific landscape.

Mathematical Proceedings is one of the few high-quality journals publishing original research papers that cover the whole range of pure and applied mathematics, theoretical physics and statistics.

Biological Reviews covers the entire range of the biological sciences, presenting several review articles per issue. Although scholarly and with extensive bibliographies, the articles are aimed at non-specialist biologists as well as researchers in the field.

The Spirit of Inquiry celebrates the 200 th anniversary of the remarkable Cambridge Philosophical Society and brings to life the many remarkable episodes and illustrious figures associated with the Society, including Adam Sedgwick, Mary Somerville, Charles Darwin, and Lawrence Bragg.

Join the Cambridge Philosophical Society

Become a Fellow of the Society and enjoy the benefits that membership brings. Membership costs £20 per year.

Upcoming Events

To bend or to break  — new views on the hardening of metals, professor lindsay greer.

• 18:00 - 19:00 Bristol-Myers Squibb Lecture Theatre Lent Term G.I. Taylor Lecture

Kipling’s “Iron‒Cold Iron‒is master of them all” captures the familiar importance of metals as structural materials.  Yet common metals are not necessarily hard; they can become so when deformed.  This phenomenon, strain hardening , was first explained by G. I. Taylor in 1934.  Ninety years on from this pioneering work on dislocation theory, we explore the deformation of metals when dislocations do not exist, that is when the metals are non-crystalline.  These amorphous metals have record-breaking combinations of properties.  They behave very differently from the metals that Taylor studied, but we do find phenomena for which his work (in a dramatically different context) is directly relevant.

Why there’s no such thing as “the” scientific advice

Professor stephen john.

• 18:00 - 19:00 Bristol-Myers Squibb Lecture Theatre Lent Term

During the Covid-19 pandemic, U.K. policy-makers claimed to be "following the science". Many commentators objected that the government did not live up to this aim. Others worried that policy-makers ought not blindly "follow" science, because this involves an abdication of responsibility. In this talk, I consider a third, even more fundamental concern: that there is no such thing as "the" science. Drawing on the case of adolescent vaccination against Covid-19, I argue that the best that any scientific advisory group can do is to offer a partial perspective on reality. In turn, this has important implications for how we think about science and politics. 

Please Note: Due to building works, the CPS office at 17 Mill Lane, Cambridge is now closed until further notice. Business operations as usual. Please contact us by email only: [email protected]

Cambridge Philosophical Society 17 Mill Lane Cambridge CB2 1RX United Kingdom

Office Hours: (Temporarily closed) Monday and Thursday -10am-12pm and 2pm-4pm.

[email protected]

News & Events

• Henslow Fellowship
• Sedgwick Studentships
• Research Studentships
• Travel Grants
• Prize Winners