Why are so many scientific articles difficult to read?
Linda Cooper
Wednesday, 26 March 2008 20:07 UTC
Does the fact that so few papers have made it onto the roster of “good” papers suggest that most papers are obscure and poorly written?
Over the years, I’ve searched through various journals and read several hundred papers looking for examples of well-written manuscripts. While examples of poorly written texts abound, clearly written papers are surprisingly few in number.
Perhaps, as has been suggested earlier, it will be more helpful and relevant to turn our attention to why scientific articles are so inaccessible, so poorly written.
Linda
-
Replies
Jump to resultsResults
-
Hello, Shiv, and welcome to the journal club. One can read a paper without understanding it, certainly, but then it would not be a “good” paper.
In my opinion, a paper does not have to be strictly grammatical to be understandable, although grammar is desirable because it provides a universal framework for the argument and so helps the reader by providing signposts which the reader absorbs unconsciously (because they are so familiar) and therefore support understanding of the concepts being conveyed.
Clarity of expression, obtained by keeping use of language simple, is probably the best way to write a paper that readers will understand (and hence, recommend to others, cite, and so on).
Please see here for more information and guidance about writing your paper.
Results
-
