Exercise 1

Theres a simple exercise you can apply to test your own fears. On a sheet of p a per, note the precise thought you have when the fear of publishing sweeps over you. Is it that you are a bad writer? Is it that you think people will dismiss your work outright? Is it perhaps a fear that they will criticize it for being shallow? Or that maybe they will steal your ideas and claim them as their own? Now, how strongly do you believe these thoughts right now? 100 per cent? 70 per cent? Write it down. Recording your fears is a positive step in your own publishing development. It means you are no longer procrastinating meekly, but are actually taking steps to overcome the most significant inhibitor facing new authors fear. Make sure you use the opportunity to commit all your fears to paper, however foolish they may seem. Some day, when you feel like sharing them, you may be surprised to see how many of them appear on other peoples lists. The next step is to examine each fear more carefully and subject it to analysis. Lets take a few of them and see how they might stand up to closer inspection.

I CANT WRITE! THEYLL DISMISS MY WORK OUTRIGHT! PEOPLE WILL STEAL MY IDEAS I DONT KNOW WHERE TO START!

Exercise No. 2
This simple exercise helps us assess the baseline quality of any article whatever the subject and whatever the background of a reader. Pick up, at random, any journal in any subject area. Choose an article, again at random, about anything at all. You will be assessing the article using five criteria:
1. Purpose: 2.

clearly stated on the first one or two pages?

logically flowing from point to point with signposting, such as subheadings, introductions and conclusions to sections?
Key points:

clearly specified, with special attention to who the implications are for and what readers can do next?
3. Implications: 4. Readability: jargon-free,

familiar words, reasonably short sentences, easy to follow

theme
5. Appeal:

Would you like to go back and read the article more thoroughly?

Allow yourself precisely 5 minutes for the exercise. Scan the paper and, under each heading, make a couple of notes. At the end of the 5 minutes, review your notes. Do your own notes tell you, without any doubt, what the article is about, what are its main points and what are its implications? Could you understand what the author was saying even if you did not understand the nuances of the subject area? Most importantly, would you go back and read it thoroughly? Any article that has not met these five criteria in 5 minutes is a poor-quality article. Whatever the originality or usefulness of its message, if a quick scan cannot bring those points home immediately to the reader, the article fails. Why does it fail? Because it is less likely to be read by a reader, who seeks information now, not in a few months time when they have worked up the energy to tackle it again. By doing this exercise the reader will not understand the authors subject in detail; indeed, it may take hours and several rereading for the reader to absorb all the meaning. It may take days or weeks before the reader has truly come to grips with the enormity and complexity of the research and begins to use it. But the exercise

only models what we readers you, they and I do all the time. We scan, we browse, and we sift. As a brief aside, I often find it surprising how many people doing this exercise comment: Its not my field, but the author made it sound so interesting that I would definitely read it again. Unfortunately, those comments are too often balanced against the ones that say: No idea what this person is droning on about or why. I would dread having to read it in depth.

Exercise No. 3
But how can you be sure its not just you who thinks its interesting? How will you know if it is interesting to your reader? The only way to find out what people want or think is to ask them. Its that simple, and that difficult. Many authors, particularly new ones, are nervous about exposing their work to others. Weve been through many of their reasons for this in the initial chapters of this book, but its worth reminding ourselves now that it is often this fear that prevents people from asking for constructive criticism. Note, in 20 words or less, what is it that will seize your readers attention? What is it that is interesting about your paper? Once you know, youll be able to communicate it to your reader. Now try the 5-minute test. Pick up, at random, any journal in any subject area. Choose an article, again at random, about anything at all. Look for:

Purpose:

clearly stated on the first page?

Key poi nt s : logically

flowing from point to point with signposting, such as subheadings, introductions and conclusions to sections? clearly specified, with special attention to who the implications are for and what they can do next?
Implications: Readability: jargon-free,

familiar words, reasonably short sentences, easy to

follow them?
Appeal:

would you like to go back and read the article more thoroughly?

Note all these points, and do the exercise in 5 minutes or less. Make a habit of regularly making a 5-minute scan of articles. You will quickly see which authors can survive a scan and encourage their readers to think: Yes, Id Really like to give this some serious thought and those which seem to pay scant Attention to the communication process. Once you understand this, you can apply the technique to your own work.