Writing Clear Science

Now includes feedback on your writing Learn more...

SUBSCRIBE to the Writing Clear Science Newsletter

to keep informed about our latest blogs, webinars and writing courses.

FURTHER READING

Any suggestions or comments please email info@writingclearscience.com.au

Share +10

Never label yourself a POOR writer

Both inexperienced and experienced writers attend my writing workshops and courses to learn how to improve their writing skills. Some display a distinct lack of confidence in their writing ability and describe themselves as poor writers with statements such as, “I am not a very good writer” or “Writing is something I have never been very good at”. Not only does this lack of confidence stem from a lack of experience, but is exacerbated by professional pressure to write well.

Being aware that your writing needs improvement is necessary if you want to improve, but a lack of confidence might indicate that you regularly have negative thoughts about writing. These negative thoughts may prevent effective learning.

How low self-confidence can reduce the quality of your writing

Writing for an audience is a type of performance, similar to getting onstage to sing or act or to give a talk at a conference. Performance anxiety is common for artists and performers and is based on the fear of appearing incompetent or simply 'not good enough'.

Similarly, many writers that lack confidence may suffer from a form of performance anxiety and worry about appearing incompetent or inexperienced. Writers who regularly suffer from low-self confidence could also suffer from “imposters syndrome” which is defined as, “…a false and sometimes crippling belief that one's successes are the product of luck or fraud rather than skill”.

If you suffer from low confidence, make sure it doesn't get in the way of your learning development.

Examples of how low-confidence can adversely affect writers:

- Not applying for the ideal job. Having well-developed written communication skills is a key selection criteria for most science-based professions.

- Spending too much time editing and rewriting in an effort to be absolutely sure that each and every sentence is perfect. This habit of inefficient writing leaves less time for other tasks.

- Overusing the passive voice when presenting your conclusions or the implications of the findings of your study. While the overuse of active voice is also problematic (for other reasons), passive voice can obscure the identity of who is making certain conclusions and it may mask any unique contribution you’ve made to your work. For example, stating “It was thought that X+K = B” leaves the reader unsure whether, (a) it was the author that thought this, (b) it was another uncited author that thought this, or (c) that this statement was simply common knowledge.

- Not submitting a paper to a high-impact journal for fear of rejection or not re-submitting a paper to another journal if first rejected by the initial journal.

- Reducing the impact of your research by using overly cautious language when presenting your findings, even when you have strong supporting data. For example, writing “This study’s findings may prove to be important when considering the impact of diet on gut microflora.” instead of “Our findings are important when considering the impact of diet on gut microflora”. Writers often overuse cautious language when they fear criticism.

- Reducing the impact of your research by using overly cautious or apologetic language when describing the limitations of your study. While it is wise to always mention any factors that limit how widely your findings can be interpreted, it is important not to appear apologetic or lacking in confidence. While it is important to mention factors that might reduce the robustness of your data, it is important to be confident when discussing the design and execution of your study. If you are not confident in the design and execution of your study, then get extra feedback from your supervisor or colleagues about whether to rewrite your limitations.

Avoid labelling yourself as a poor writer

Applying labels to summarise behaviour is problematic if you want the behaviour to change. Continuing to label your skill as being ‘poor’ or ‘bad’ may reinforce negative thoughts about your writing and may it difficult for you to improve and view yourself as a ‘good writer’. Similarly, allowing your colleagues to hear you describe yourself as a poor writer, may reinforce any negative views they may have about your writing skill.

Generally-speaking, self-confidence in your writing ability will build as your writing improves. Rather than worrying about your current skill level, commit to continual self-improvement and aim to feel satisfied with what you have achieved so far.

Some suggestions on how to approach your learning development:

Acknowledge the parts of your writing that are good and gain confidence from this.
Identify the parts that need improving and work at improving these skills.
Monitor how quickly you skills are improving, pay special attention to those areas where you continue to struggle then seek feedback on how to improve these skills.
Find a good mentor who can give you constructive feedback. Avoid seeking feedback from people who tend to harshly criticise your work.

In the next blogpost I discuss how to build and maintain your confidence as a writer.

FURTHER READING

Any suggestions or comments please email admin@writingclearscience.com.au

Find out more about our new online course...

Now includes feedback on your writing Learn more...

SUBSCRIBE to the Writing Clear Science Newsletter

to keep informed about our latest blogs, webinars and writing courses.

Share +10

Eleven common mistakes when writing an abstract

An abstract is typically the summary or overview of a scientific paper, thesis or report. The purpose of the abstract is to give your reader a complete summary of your entire project. As there is a never-ending supply of papers and reports to read, you only have two chances to engage your reader and to convince them to keep reading. The first is the title (and the keywords) and the second is the abstract.

A well-written abstract will maximise the chances of your document being read, understood and even enjoyed. If writing a research paper, a well-written abstract will maximise your publication success. Not only will reviewers appreciate a good abstract, it may be the only part of the paper they are sent when invited to review a paper.

This focus of this article is to highlight what is commonly wrong with abstracts. Please note: The relevancy of some issues raised here might depend upon your discipline or document type. For example, some academic journals do not require abstracts at all or only require a very brief project overview.

These common mistakes are not listed in any particular order and some overlap:

1. Not writing a summary

The abstract should be a complete, succinct summary of your entire project. Summarising is being able to identify and highlight key points using as few words as possible.

2. Not paraphrasing your own work

Paraphrasing is when you use your own words to convey meaning from another source, with the aim of improving clarity. Paraphrasing often includes summarising. One common mistake is to copy entire sentences from different parts of the paper into the abstract. This is not summarising or paraphrasing.

3. Not summarising your entire project

A common mistake is to only include certain parts of the project in the abstract. If your paper is structured into Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion sections, then your abstract includes a summary of each section, often written as a complete paragraph or with headings. If the abstract lacks key information, for example the aim or the conclusions, the reader may not appreciate the strength of importance of your project and not be convinced to keep reading. Don’t assume your reader will search through your document for this information if they can’t find it in the abstract.

4. Using the abstract as a de facto Introduction or Discussion

After writing important introductory and conclusion explanations in the abstract, some authors then don’t include these details in the body of the document, fearing it will look repetitive. This can happen if the abstract is written before designing the rest of the document. Although drafting an abstract in the early stages of writing is a good idea, it is best to finalise your abstract when you have finished the rest of your document.

5. Including too much (or not enough) background

If the abstract is considered a de facto introduction, too much background may be included. Alternatively, a brief summary of the background might be omitted if the author assumes the audience is completely familiar with the project topic and the background. Never assume your reader knows your topic or project as thoroughly as you do; some of you readers might, but they will still need this information to appreciate what your document is about.

6. Including too many (or not enough) methods

A brief summary of the methods or procedure is important as they are a key component of any project. Given the potential complexity and diversity of a scientific study, it is easy to add too much detail about methods; an example is the unnecessary listing of all data collection instruments and their brand names. The following example from a research paper abstract is a concise summary of the methods. “Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature and meta-analyzed risk estimates from longitudinal studies reporting the association of coronary heart disease (CHD) or heart failure (HF) with risk of dementia.” Wolters F.J. et al. (2018)

7. Not explaining what your results mean

As your abstract should include a summary of all parts of your project, this includes a summary of the discussion or conclusion of your study. Some authors omit interpreting their results, expecting the reader to wait until they have read the entire document. They may not.

8. Including citations, abbreviations and detailed measurements

Standard convention is to avoid writing abbreviations, detailed measurements or citations in an abstract. In some cases, and in some disciplines, it may be difficult to avoid using abbreviations if they are used as terms, are not written in any other format, difficult to write in full or impractical to leave out.

9. Including information not presented in the paper

It may be tempting to include extra information that is not in the rest of the document but this is misleading. Stick to your key aim.

**10. Not following the Instructions to Authors of your target journal**

A journals’ Instructions to Authors are just that: instructions; they are not suggestions or simply good ideas, nor are they meant to replace a science style guide. Depending upon the extent of this omission, not following a journal’s Instructions to Authors can dramatically increase the likelihood your paper will instantly returned for further changes.

11. Not including keywords

Keywords of your study are essential to ensure that your paper is correctly indexed and so your document will be visible in different search engines. Some authors assume this step is not necessary, assuming that all terms will be visible. Keywords “help promote an article’s visibility within the publications iceberg”.

Remember:

Don't assume your readers know everything you do.
Don't assume all published papers have good abstracts.
Seek feedback before finalising your later drafts.

Any suggestions or comments please email info@writingclearscience.com.au

Find out more about our new online course...

Now includes feedback on your writing Learn more...

SUBSCRIBE to the Writing Clear Science Newsletter

to keep informed about our latest blogs, webinars and writing courses.

FURTHER READING

How to identify your target audience

When we write, we write about something (the topic) in a certain format (the document type) for a reader or group of readers (the audience). Deciding what we are writing about and what type of document to prepare is usually straightforward for most writers. However, deciding who we are writing for is not always thoroughly considered. To a large degree, the audience of a document is determined by the type of document and the subject matter but unless researchers and other science writers have a background in marketing, the concept of identifying and catering to a target audience might not be a high priority.

DOWNLOAD THE INFOGRAPHIC '6 ways to identify and cater to your target audience'

What is your focus?

A document is not simply a receptacle for words, it is a tool of communication that should perform a service for readers. Thinking about who will read our document or what they might want from our document, is something that writers might avoid if they are author-focused or project-focused. Author-focused writers have discoveries, data, knowledge and information that they need to share and primarily concentrate on getting their document published. Project-focused writers key motivation is to satisfy project, organisation, company or client objectives. Audience-focused writers design their document according to the needs of the target audience, while still satisfying their own needs as an author and addressing project and client objectives.

Decide exactly what you want to do for your audience

Unless catering to a target audience is a central objective, your document may lack some of the fundamentals of good document design. Spending the time deciding exactly what you want to do for your audience, rather than simply delivering information, will help you fine-tune the content and the design of your document.

Problems caused by not understanding your target audience

Common writing problems often reflect that a writer has not thoroughly considered who their audience is or what they need. This can cause the following problems:

- providing too much (or not enough) detail or background information

- providing too much detail on unrelated sub-topics or on a well-known topic

- using the wrong language or unfamiliar terminology

- assuming the audience’s level of interest in, or understanding of, the topic

One common mistake in science and academic writing is assuming your audience will know your topic nearly as well as you do. The problem with this assumption is that crucial background information and explanation of fundamental concepts may be omitted. Authors of research papers will often make this assumption deliberately if they are writing about a specialised topic. Yet even in these cases, it is not a good habit to omit important background information and project details that are necessary for the reader to understand the context of the research.

Get feedback

It is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that writing is simply delivering information if you are a solo writer, if you are inexperienced or if you don’t get regular feedback on your writing. If you do get regular feedback, it might not be enough if you only get feedback from people who know your topic well as you do; your colleagues or supervisors may ensure you write a scientifically-accurate document but anyone overly-familiar with your topic may not realise that what you’ve written is not clearly written or easy to read.

There are three different types of audiences to consider

An audience is a collective group of readers and for most purposes we need to think about our readers as a group and generalise about what qualities they have. I define three types of audience for most documents: the target audience, the secondary audience and the tertiary audience. For an example of this definition, refer to the diagram below that outlines the hypothetical audiences for an ecological research paper.

Your target audience is your intended audience. They are the group of readers that you want to read your document or you expect will read your document. These are the people you are designing your document for. Your target audience should understand everything you write. Some examples are research scientists writing peer-reviewed papers for their peers, students writing assignments for their lecturers or consultants writing reports for clients.

Your secondary audience are those people who still want, or need, to read your document but may have different education backgrounds or work within a different discipline to your target audience. For example, the secondary audience of an ecological research paper might be scientists from other disciplines, or other people interested in your topic or your project outcomes; for example, land managers, farmers, conservationists, journalists, science educators or students. Your secondary audience may not be thoroughly familiar with your topic but still has a strong or vested interest in your projects’ outcomes. However, it is not possible to cater to both your target audience and your secondary audience with the same document. You cannot cater to the secondary audience as you would need to provide too much detail or instruction, making it tiring for the target audience to read, or worse make the target audience feel the document is not designed for them.

You cannot explain everything for your secondary audience but you can help them navigate your document by defining your key terms and ensuring your main aim and findings are abundantly clear.

Your tertiary audience are people who will directly or indirectly benefit or be affected by your work in some way but will not read your document themselves; they will learn about your work either through the secondary or target audience of your document. Because your tertiary audience won’t be reading your document, it is crucial for you to ensure your key messages are abundantly clear so they are not mis-interpreted or mis-represented.

Key ways to identify and cater for your target audience

Think about who your readers are and whether they fit into either of the three audience categories, then focus on how to cater for the target audience. Some factors to consider:
Who will want or need to read your document? What reasons do they have for reading your document?
Who will be interested in your topic and key findings? Why will they be interested in reading your document? If they are not already interested, how do you attract them?
What is their occupation, expertise, background or level of education?
Will they be able to understand all parts of your document? If not, include sufficient detail and explanation to ensure that they do or assign them to your secondary audience.
What people need to read your document
What task(s) will your document perform for them?
How they will find out about your document?
How will they access your document?

DOWNLOAD THE INFOGRAPHIC: 6 ways to identify and cater for your target audience

Once you have clearly mapped out who you are writing to and how you will cater to them. If appropriate, ask someone from your target audience to give you feedback on a late draft of your document. You might find there are some important aspects you still need to consider.

Remember:

Do not assume your readers know everything you do.
Understand there are different types of audiences who may read your document.
Always define your key terms and explain your key concepts.
If appropriate, ask someone from your target audience for feedback on a late draft of you rdocument.

Any suggestions or comments please email info@writingclearscience.com.au

Find out more about our new online course...

Now includes feedback on your writing Learn more...

SUBSCRIBE to the Writing Clear Science Newsletter

to keep informed about our latest blogs, webinars and writing courses.

FURTHER READING