If I were to write an article for the NYT or another paper I would most likely end up doing many of their common practices including a strong and interesting headline and try and appeal to a large audience. I would try and include interviews from the authors of the studies for a more personal appeal. Most of the articles that we read that were based on Scientific studies, they popular reports often left out the process of the experiment and only mentioned what was included in the introduction and abstract. For many of the popular reports they did not include some important details that could help clarify specifics of the experiment that could clear up some possible  misconceptions about the study. Along with simplifying some of the scientific jargon, I think it is also important to keep your personal takes out of the popular report. I believe that when it comes to reporting on science the only important opinions to include would be the opinion of the scientists. The authors of the popular report should try and keep their reports as unbiased as the original study or else they are changing the meaning of the results of the study. Out of all the studies that were done I was the most surprised by the studies on therapy cats and therapy clowns. Both of which are terrible Ideas in my opinion. Also for both of those studies it is very difficult to get any quantitative data so both of those studies were not incredibly conclusive.