Based on 709,577 abstracts published between 1881 and 2015 from 123 scientific journals, a study argues that the readability of research papers in science is steadily decreasing.
Article The readability of scientific texts is decreasing over time
I am eager to know what is your take on it and, more importantly, how would you relate it to your own work.
Thanks.
"Readability" has no clear definition; we all have our own idea of what it is. To me, readability in the field of research papers is not so much about the grammar, but much more on the motivations for the work being solid (without it, it makes no sense to keep on reading), a clear and lucid presentation of the research question and of the tools used, as well as the derivations of results, illustrations, serious comparisons with what came before, and so on.
I for one - with a quite long experience of having to referee nearly 300 papers - can say that I find readability in decline. Quite often when I read I see in front of me a very nervous scientist who dares not write a lot about the motivations for the paper (because it takes up too much space), and the analysis (whichever its kind) is also shallow. Most focus is on RESULTS, GRAPHS - whether they tell you something, or not. But if the results from whatever activity is not clearly stated, or compared in detail with previous ones, the paper will remain a shallow one, as well as being isolated from the core of the subject, since it is not rooted anywhere.
Hi,
I find these findings correct. When reading research papers from the 1980s and 1990s I find them much more readable than papers from the 2000s. In the earlier papers the use of words, and the structure of sentences are more appealing than in the latter years, and the reading experience as a whole is nicer than reading research papers of the recent decade.
Yes the readability is declined and the ethical plagiarism is growing stronger with cooked up values
"I for one can say" - I think that's not too hard to grasp, even though there is a pause in the middle. :-)
Or is my phrasing a sign of exactly the decline I'm talking about? ;-)
There are some quite annoying aspects in modern-day publishing:
(a) Papers are supposed to have extraordinary news value, so much so that authors are not allowed to put these news into any perspective - as editors think that historical overviews (surveys) are a waste of space - so many papers become disconnected from the past. In 20 years time, therefore, those newer papers will not be understood, because there are - on purpose - holes drilled in the timeline of the research development. I find this alarming, in fact.
Dear MP, I did read it as "I for one can say" :) but then I wonder why I was confused about it. Sorry for that. And thanks for pointing out the intricacies involved. The plot is thickening :)
Yes the readability is decline, I observed research paper of recent decade have nothing new just paraphrasing or interpretation of already existing information that leads to low interest of readers.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publisher