Worked examples make scientific ideas easier to follow. They can also mislead if readers cannot tell whether a value comes from an experiment, a supplied report or the writer’s imagination. The label is part of the explanation, not an optional footnote.
Say where the numbers came from
The Singapore Statement on Research Integrity identifies honesty and accurate research records as responsibilities of research. In educational writing, an analogous practical step is to make the origin and status of an example unmistakable.Singapore Statement on Research Integrity (2010) (opens in a new tab)
Use a direct opening such as “In this hypothetical example, the values are chosen to demonstrate the calculation.” If numbers are transcribed from a real report, identify that document instead and preserve its units and qualifications.
A calculated value can belong to either category. A calculation from invented inputs remains hypothetical; a calculation from reported measurements remains dependent on those measurements and the stated assumptions.
Do not use a realistic-looking lot number, named laboratory or signature block merely to make an invented example feel authoritative. Such details can cause a screenshot or excerpt to be mistaken for a real record.
Give the example enough structure to check
| Entry | Illustrative amount |
|---|---|
| Opening recorded amount | 12 mg |
| First recorded use | 2 mg |
| Second recorded use | 3 mg |
| Calculated balance | 7 mg |
The arithmetic is 12 − 2 − 3 = 7 mg. The example demonstrates a ledger calculation only. It is not a measurement of a remaining container, a recommended experimental quantity or a result for any Novum product.
If an observation later gave 6.6 mg, the illustrative difference from the ledger would be 0.4 mg. That difference would identify a reconciliation question; it would not by itself establish evaporation, degradation or any other particular cause.
The same discipline applies to percentage examples. Define the numerator and denominator, show the operation and state what the result means within the imagined scenario. Avoid giving the output more precision than the teaching purpose requires.
Keep examples separate from recommendations
A convenient numerical choice is not an acceptance criterion. If a table uses 98% to explain a percentage, readers should not be left thinking that 98% is a universal quality threshold.
Similarly, a fictional sample size or observation period does not establish a suitable study design. The example can illustrate a relationship while leaving the design decision to evidence and the specific research question.
Avoid mixing real and invented rows without row-level labels. If a comparison needs both, identify exactly which values are transcribed and which are constructed, and explain why they appear together.
Check how a reader could misinterpret it
Read the example without the surrounding article. Can a reader still tell that the values are illustrative? Do the heading, caption and units communicate the intended lesson without implying an actual experiment?
Check the arithmetic independently and test whether rounding changes the point being taught. A mistake in a simple teaching example can distract from the concept and propagate when the numbers are reused.
Keep hypothetical values out of product specifications, factual summary boxes and structured result fields. Those locations often carry an expectation that the numbers describe real materials.
A well-labelled example can be precise and useful without pretending to be evidence. Its purpose is to teach a reasoning step that readers can later apply to genuine data with the appropriate context.
Sources and further detail
- Singapore Statement on Research Integrity (2010) (opens in a new tab)
Statement inspected for honesty and accurate records. All numbers in this article’s ledger are original hypothetical teaching values, not research data.
Sources checked 20 September 2026. Editorial examples are illustrative unless a supplied document or published study is explicitly identified. This article has not undergone independent scientific peer review.