Journal Article•
The Science of Scientific Writing
TL;DR: The authors argue that complexity of thought need not lead to impenetrability of expression, and demonstrate a number of rhetorical principles that can produce clarity in communication without oversimplifying scientific issues.
Abstract: Science is often hard to read Most people assume that its difficulties are born out of necessity, out of the extreme complexity of scientific concepts, data and analysis We argue here that complexity of thought need not lead to impenetrability of expression; we demonstrate a number of rhetorical principles that can produce clarity in communication without oversimplifying scientific issues The results are substantive, not merely cosmetic: Improving the quality of writing actually improves the quality of thought
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: This paper found that award-winning articles are more readable, as measured by indexes focusing on sentence and word length, than nonwinning articles, and identified and analyzed other characteristics of more readable journal articles and discussed the importance of good writing.
Abstract: This is a study of the readability of articles in four marketing journals: Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Journal of International Marketing, and Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. For each journal, the authors compare articles that have won an award with articles that have not. The authors find that award-winning articles are more readable, as measured by indexes focusing on sentence and word length, than nonwinning articles. The authors also identify and analyze other characteristics of more readable journal articles and discuss the importance of good writing.
72 citations
Cites background from "The Science of Scientific Writing"
...The structure of the sentence is more apt than long words to be the prime readability problem (Gopen 2004; Gopen and Swan 1990)....
[...]
...Readers store information in long-term memory, link new information to prior knowledge, and use metacogniton to think about and plan the learning process (DuBay 2004; Gopen and Swan 1990)....
[...]
TL;DR: A comprehensive protocol for the design, application, and communication of PVAs (DAC-PVA), which has 3 primary elements, which defines what a useful PVA is and highlights important aspects that need to be considered during these processes; and the third element focuses on communication of PVA to ensure clarity, comprehensiveness, repeatability, and comparability.
Abstract: Population viability analyses (PVAs) contribute to conservation theory, policy, and management. Most PVAs focus on single species within a given landscape and address a specific problem. This specificity often is reflected in the organization of published PVA descriptions. Many lack structure, making them difficult to understand, assess, repeat, or use for drawing generalizations across PVA studies. In an assessment comparing published PVAs and existing guidelines, we found that model selection was rarely justified; important parameters remained neglected or their implementation was described vaguely; limited details were given on parameter ranges, sensitivity analysis, and scenarios; and results were often reported too inconsistently to enable repeatability and comparability. Although many guidelines exist on how to design and implement reliable PVAs and standards exist for documenting and communicating ecological models in general, there is a lack of organized guidelines for designing, applying, and communicating PVAs that account for their diversity of structures and contents. To fill this gap, we integrated published guidelines and recommendations for PVA design and application, protocols for documenting ecological models in general and individual-based models in particular, and our collective experience in developing, applying, and reviewing PVAs. We devised a comprehensive protocol for the design, application, and communication of PVAs (DAC-PVA), which has 3 primary elements. The first defines what a useful PVA is; the second element provides a workflow for the design and application of a useful PVA and highlights important aspects that need to be considered during these processes; and the third element focuses on communication of PVAs to ensure clarity, comprehensiveness, repeatability, and comparability. Thereby, DAC-PVA should strengthen the credibility and relevance of PVAs for policy and management, and improve the capacity to generalize PVA findings across studies.
69 citations
01 Jun 2013
TL;DR: The role of such popular geological story-telling is less about delivering specific information about Earth science issues and more about establishing the credentials of "brand geoscience" in the public's mind as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Geoscientists are increasingly being encouraged to present their work to the wider public, and even to advocate more directly its policy dimensions. For those involved in geoconservation, that often entails communicating geological information to people who have little or no Earth science background. A review of current science communication thinking indicates that improving the geo-literacy of the ‘ordinary person in the street’ is unlikely to be achieved simply by educating them with basic ‘geo-facts’. Instead, genuine and effective public engagement is more likely to come from conveying the deep-seated ‘context’ of our geological knowledge, and by presenting the wider culture within which Earth scientists work. This inculcation of a popular ‘geo-culture’ can take its cues from mass-media representations of Earth science (‘disasters and dinosaurs’) by recasting geological issues, concepts and knowledge in terms of messages that have strong narratives, dramatic incident and human interest. Ultimately, the role of such popular geological story-telling is less about delivering specific information about Earth science issues and more about establishing the credentials of ‘brand geoscience’ in the public's mind.
63 citations
06 Oct 2016
TL;DR: The role of such popular geological story-telling is less about delivering specific information about Earth science issues and more about establishing the credentials of "brand geoscience" in the public's mind as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Geoscientists are increasingly being encouraged to present their work to the wider public, and even to advocate more directly its policy dimensions. For those involved in geoconservation, that often entails communicating geological information to people who have little or no Earth science background. A review of current science communication thinking indicates that improving the geo-literacy of the ‘ordinary person in the street’ is unlikely to be achieved simply by educating them with basic ‘geo-facts’. Instead, genuine and effective public engagement is more likely to come from conveying the deep-seated ‘context’ of our geological knowledge, and by presenting the wider culture within which Earth scientists work. This inculcation of a popular ‘geo-culture’ can take its cues from mass-media representations of Earth science (‘disasters and dinosaurs’) by recasting geological issues, concepts and knowledge in terms of messages that have strong narratives, dramatic incident and human interest. Ultimately, the role of such popular geological story-telling is less about delivering specific information about Earth science issues and more about establishing the credentials of ‘brand geoscience’ in the public's mind.
61 citations
TL;DR: The authors analyzed 12 currently popular technical communication textbooks for their treatment and discussions of the types of writing that engineers produce, revealing a persistent bias toward humanities-based styles and genres and a failure to address the forms of argument and evidence that our science and engineering students most need to master to succeed as rhetoricians in their fields.
Abstract: Twelve currently popular technical communication textbooks are analyzed for their treatment and discussions of the types of writing that engineers produce. The analysis reveals a persistent bias toward humanities-based styles and genres and a failure to address the forms of argument and evidence that our science and engineering students most need to master to succeed as rhetoricians in their fields. The essay ends with recommendations and calls upon instructors to reenvision the service course in technical communication.
60 citations
References
More filters
Book•
07 Aug 2002TL;DR: The Style: Ten Lessons in clarity and grace as mentioned in this paperocusing on the single most serious problem that mature writers face: a wordy, tangled, too-complex prose style, is a useful resource for any mature writer.
Abstract: In his preface, Joseph M. Williams says that Style: ten lessons in clarity and grace focuses on “the single most serious problem that mature writers face: a wordy, tangled, too-complex prose style.” His book deals with that problem admirably. Indeed, the advice and examples furnished by Williams are varied and sophisticated enough to make it a useful resource for any mature writer — even the mature writer whose prose is clear and concise.
381 citations