Making research papers clearer
Professor Linda Cooper writes at her Time for a Change blog on Nature Network about initiatives in which authors write a one-page initial summary to explain their research paper to a wide audience. She makes the argument that clearer writing of the paper itself serves a better purpose, for the following reasons:
Scientists need to communicate clearly --"when scientists write manuscripts that accurately communicate their important findings, then everyone benefits including the researcher’s colleagues, educated readers, science journalists, and civil society. In other words, it isn’t the journalist’s role to reinterpret a scientist’s writing; scientists should learn how to communicate effectively in the first place."
Explain specialized terminology -- "a relatively easy thing to do. More egregious are articles that contain lapses in logic, assumptions about what readers know, and omissions of essential information. These issues can be easily addressed by careful editing" [by the journal office].
Compressed language -- "it’s not obvious why this should necessarily lead to poor writing. Several editing techniques exist to make writing more efficient by eliminating clutter and simplifying awkward constructions. Better editing also gives the writer space to include information that is essential for the non-specialist to understand the author’s story."
The crucial question is whether research articles can be made more accessible. Professor Cooper writes that "little will be gained if researchers fail to conquer errors of style and are simply made to write more. Greater effort by both authors and journals – rather than Authors’ Summaries – will go a long way to increasing a paper’s readability. Authors could do more to revise their manuscripts while journals could apply more rigorous writing standards. Delaying the publication of papers until they meet established criteria for clear and accessible writing could provide a strong incentive for scientists to write with greater care."
Please add your views to those being expressed by scientists at Time for a Change blog.
In addition, Dr Martin Fenner and Dr Richard Grant have started a 'good paper journal club' at Nature Network, to promote good scientific writing by posting examples of well-written papers, and by discussion of these papers. Please do join this group, add examples of papers you consider to be well-written, and comment on those examples arlready under discussion.
