'Lecture : chapter three entitled '' writing clearly and concisely

Prepared by Ali Shimal Kzar

Supervised by ASST.PROF : Huda Abd Ali Hattab

Date : 11 , Oct 22
Writing Style

The main goal of scientific reporting is to get the message across clearly. You
can do this by putting your ideas in a logical order and saying what you mean
clearly and smoothly. Setting a tone that gets across the most important parts
of your study in an interesting way will keep your readers' attention and help
.them understand what you're trying to say

Continuity in Presentation of Ideas 3.05

Words, thoughts, and thematic development should be consistent from

introduction to end. Several methods can ensure continuity. Punctuation
helps continuity by highlighting idea links. They indicate pauses, inflections,
subordination, and tempo. Use punctuation aids: Don't overuse commas or
dashes. Overuse annoys and underuse confuses readers. Punctuate to clarify
.meaning
Transitional words might also add continuity. These terms help with
complicated or abstract topics. A transitional pronoun that refers to a noun in
the previous sentence eliminates duplication. Check for clarity. Other
transition mechanisms include time links (then, next, after, while, since),
cause-and-effect links (hence, consequently), addition links (in addition,
moreover, similarly), and contrast links (but, conversely, nevertheless,
.however, although)

Smoothness of Expression 3.06

Different goals are served by scientific writing and creative writing. Creative
writing techniques like setting up ambiguity, putting in the unexpected,
leaving out the expected, and changing the topic, tense, or person all of a
sudden can confuse or upset readers of scientific prose. So, try to avoid these
.devices and try to talk in a clear and logical way
Because you know your material so well, you might not see some problems
right away, especially contradictions that the reader might pick up on. If a
colleague reads it, they might find these problems. Putting the manuscript
aside and reading it again later is usually the best way to find mistakes, things
that don't make sense, and abrupt endings. Reading the paper out loud can
.help you find mistakes
Economy of Expression 3.08

Be brief. A word-sparing author writes a more legible book and boosts its
chances of being published. Journals have a restricted number of printed
pages, thus editors ask writers to abbreviate manuscripts. Redundancy,
wordiness, jargon, evasiveness, abuse of the passive voice, circumlocution,
and poor style can be eliminated from long documents. Remove unduly
extensive descriptions of equipment, participants, or methods (beyond those
required by the reporting criteria; see Chapter 2), obvious elaborations, and
extraneous observations or asides. When appropriate, such materials may be
.archived online (see sections 2.13 and 8.03 for further details)
Long sentences and words are harder to understand. A long technical term
may be more precise than multiple short words, and scientific reporting
requires them. Each discipline should understand a paper's technical
terminology. An article that uses specialised vocabulary is insufficiently
.scholarly
Wordiness. Wordiness hinders understanding. Because to because, now to
now, and for to for or to. When the context is clear, use this study. Several
.students finished, not finished
Unrestrained wordiness leads to flowery writing, which is improper in
scientific style

Redundancy. Writers utilise repetitive jargon to emphasise. Don't use more

.words than needed

Precision and Clarity 3.09

Word choice. Make certain that every word means exactly what you intend it to mean. In
informal style, for example, feel broadly substitutes for think or believe, but in scientific
style such latitude is not acceptable. A similar example is that like is often used when
such as is meant: Correct: Articles by psychologists such as Skinner and Watson. Correct:
Like Watson, Skinner believed. Incorrect: Articles by psychologists like Skinner and
Watson. Colloquial expressions. Avoid colloquial expressions (e.g, write up for report),
which diffuse meaning. Approximations of quantity (e.g., quite a large part, practically all,
or very few) are interpreted differently by different readers or in different contexts.
Approximations weaken statements, especially those describing empirical observations.
Jargon. Jargon is the continuous use of a technical vocabulary, even in places where that
vocabulary is not relevant. Jargon is also the substitution of a euphemistic phrase for a
familiar term (e.g., monetarily felt scarcity for poverty), and you should scrupulously
avoid using such jargon. Federal bureaucratic jargon has had the greatest publicity, but
scientific jargon also grates on the reader, encumbers the communication of information,
and wastes space. Pronouns. Pronouns confuse readers unless the referent for each
pronoun is obvious; readers should not have to search previous text to determine the
meaning of the term. Pronouns such as this, that, these, and those can be troublesome
when they refer to something or someone in a previous sentence. Eliminate ambiguity by
writing, for example, this test, that trial, these participants, and those reports (see also
section 3.20). Comparisons. Ambiguous or illogical comparisons result from omission of
key verbs or from nonparallel structure. Consider, for example, "Ten-year-old were more
likely to play with age peers than 8-year-olds." Does this sentence mean that 1O-year-
olds were more likely than 8-year olds to play with age peers, Or does it mean that 10
WRITING CLEARLY AND CONCISELY year-olds were more likely to play with age peers and
less likely to play with 8-yeares Old5? An illogical comparison occurs when parallelism is
overlooked for the sake of id brevity, as in "Her salary was lower than a convenience
store clerk." Thoughtful Lts attention to good sentence structure and word choice
reduces the chance of this kind re of ambiguity. Attribution. Inappropriately or illogically
attributing action in an effort to be objective can be misleading. Examples of undesirable
attribution include use of the third person, anthropomorphism, and use of the editorial
we. Thirdperson. To avoid ambiguity, use a personal pronoun rather than the third
person when describing steps taken in your experiment. Correct: We reviewed the
.literature. Incorrect: The authors reviewed the literature

Linguistic Devices 3.10

Devices that attract attention to words, sounds, or other embellishments instead of to

ideas are inappropriate in scientific writing. Avoid heavy alliteration, rhyming, poetic
expressions, and clichés. Use metaphors sparingly; although they can help simplify
complicated ideas, metaphors can be distracting. Avoid mixed metaphors (e.g., a theory
representing one branch of a growing body of evidence) and words with surplus or
unintended meaning (e.g., cop for police officer), which may distract if not actually
mislead the reader. Use figurative expressions with restraint and colorful expressions
.with care; these expressions can sound strained or forced

Strategies to Improve Writing Style 3.11

Authors utilise different techniques to write. Author-strategy fit is more crucial than the
strategy itself. Writing from an outline, laying aside the initial draught, and requesting a
colleague to evaluate and criticise the draught are three ways to achieve professional and
.successful communication
Outlining preserves research rationale. An outline helps you identify core concepts,
define subordinate ideas, avoid tangents, and spot omissions. An outline shows the
.article's subheadings
Rereading after a few days gives you a fresh perspective. Reading aloud allows you to
hear mistakes you missed on the first read. When these difficulties are fixed, give a
polished copy to a colleague in a comparable field but not familiar with your work for a
critical evaluation. Get two peers' critiques to simulate a journal's review procedure.
These tactics, especially the last, may take more time than expected. These tactics may
.increase correctness, thoroughness, and clarity

General Guidelines for Reducing Bias Guideline

Describe at the Appropriate Level of Specificity :1

When referring to people, use accurate, unambiguous, and bias-free

language. Specificity relies on the research question and current state of
knowledge. It's easier to aggregate public data than to disaggregate it.
Women and men is more accurate than man to refer to all humans. Instead of
a broad age category, use a narrow range ("65-83") ("over 65 years"; see
Schaie, 1993). Be detailed and labeling-sensitive when characterising racial
and ethnic groups. Instead of saying Asian American or Hispanic American, say
Chinese American or Mexican American. Some individuals consider gay as
referring to men and women, while others solely to men (the terms gay men
.and lesbians currently are preferred

Guideline 2: Be Sensitive to Labels

Respect people's names; use what they want. Accept that preferences change
over time and that people in groups often disagree on labels. Determine what
is acceptable for your scenario; ask participants which designations they
.prefer, especially when debated in groups
Never classify people. In scientific writing, study subjects often lose their
individuality and are classed as objects (the gays, the elderly) or equated with
their conditions (the amnesiacs, the depressives, the schizophrenics, the LDs).
Adjectives can help (e.g., "gay men," "older adults," "amnesic patients"). Put
the person first, then the description (e.g., "people diagnosed with
schizophrenia"). F is recommended when describing disabled persons. When
reporting results, balance sensitivity, clarity, and parsimony when mentioning
''.many groups. It may be tiresome to repeat "person with

If the researcher define groups operationally early in your paper (e.g.,

"Participants scoring a minimum of X on the X scale constituted the high
verbal group, and those scoring below X constituted the low verbal group"), it
is scientifically informative and concise to describe participants in terms of the
measures used to classify them (e.g., "... the contrast for the high verbal group
was statistically significant, p =.043), provided the terms are If a label is
derogatory, discover more neutral phrases. Demented grbup is not
acceptable, but dementia group is. Abbreviations or series labels sacrifice
clarity and may offend. HVAs for "high verbal ability group" is hard to
.decipher. Group A isn't offensive or descriptive

Reducing Bias by Topic

Gender 3.12

Remember that gender refers to role, not biological sex, and is cultural. Avoid
ambiguity in sex identity or gender role by choosing nouns, pronouns, and
adjectives that specifically describe your participants. Sexist bias can occur
when pronouns are used carelessly, as when the masculine pronoun he is
used to refer to both sexes or when the masculine or feminine pronoun is
used exclusively to define roles by sex (e.g., "the nurse . . . she"). The use of
man as a generic noun or as an ending for an occupational title (e.g.,
policeman instead of police officer) can be ambiguous and may imply
incorrectly that all persons in the group are male. Be clear about whether you
.mean one sex or both sexes

Sexual Orientation 3.13

Sexual orientation is a pattern of attraction, behaviour, emotion, identity, and
social relationships. Instead of sexual preference, use sexual orientation.
Bisexuality isn't chosen, although the partner's sex may be. Guidelines for
Psychotherapy with Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Clients (APA Committee on
Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Concerns Joint Task Force on Guidelines for
Psychotherapy With Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Clients, 2000; see also
.www.apastyle.org)
When referring to homosexuals, use lesbians, gay men, bisexual men, and
bisexual women. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender communities.
Lesbians, gay men , and bisexual individuals are more accurate than
homosexual. Furthermore, the term pro- homosexuality has been and
continues to be associated with negative stereotypes, " pathology, and the
reduction of people's identities to their sexual behavior. Gay can be
interpreted broadly, to include men and women, or more narrowly, to include
.only men