-
Back to
General Index
-
Introduction
-
Know Your Audience
-
Basic grammar and spelling
-
Do not turn in a first draft!-- Ever!
-
Get and use style books
-
Avoid passive constructions
-
Avoid abusing word forms
-
Do not use more words where fewer will do
-
Use an outline to organize your ideas and writing
-
Think about the structure of paragraphs
-
Pay attention to tenses
-
Captions
-
Focus on the ideas, not the authors
-
Show us don't tell us
-
Write about your results, not your tables, figures, and statistics
-
Focus on ecological hypotheses not statistical hypotheses
-
Develop a strategy for your Discussion
-
Introductions and conclusions are the hardest parts
-
Break up large projects into small pieces
-
Make your writing flow and resonate
-
Use word processors effectively
-
Take editorial comments seriously
-
Acknowledgements
-
Literature cited
-
Source and Credits
Many theses and class papers share a common set of problems in their early drafts. In response to this observation, I began a set of notes based on my repeated comments on student writing over a period of several years. These notes eventually grew into
a document that I include as a part of course packages and give to students preparing theses. I was surprised to discover that even graduate students often find it difficult to identify problems in their writing and frequently lack tools to deal with the
m effectively. The following 21 suggestions should be relevant to both undergraduate and graduate students. Apparently few students, at any level, have received much instruction in the strategies and tactics for effective scientific writing. Though the s
uggestions I make here are based primarily on my comments on student papers and theses, they also reflect common problems in manuscripts I receive for review.
Scientific and technical writing can almost never be "general purpose"; it must be written for a specific audience. For the kinds of writing I address here, that audience will generally be the community of ecologists who read a particular- journal or s
tudy a particular subject. For class papers, this community is represented by your professor. In all cases, you must adopt the style and level of writing that is appropriate for your audience. Stylistic conventions and acceptable jargon can vary tremendou
sly from one field to another, and to some extent, from one journal to another. If you are unfamiliar with the conventions of a field, study them as they are manifested in a selection of highly regarded papers and in the ''Instructions for Authors" for ke
y journals.
The more time and emotional energy she or he spends on correcting basic English usage, the less remains for issues of content or fine-tuning. You are responsible for mastering the basics of the language; save your supervisor's time for more substantive
issues. A few glitches and non-parallel tenses will slip through your own careful editing, but there is no excuse for frequent ungrammatical sentences. Similarly, with word processors and spell-checkers having become standard writing tools, typos or othe
r spelling errors should be very rare. Use a spelling checker before submitting anything for anyone else's reading.
If you find you are about to submit a paper that you know contains poor writing, consider why you are doing so. If there is a writing problem with which you are having a hard time (for instance, organizing the structure of an argument in its most effec
tive form), it is legitimate to submit this for someone else's review with the problem highlighted as a focused request for assistance. Otherwise, submitting a piece of writing with known errors or problems means either: ( 1 ) you do not consider your wri
ting worth improving, (2) you do not respect the reader enough to present writing that is as good as you can make it, or (3) you are incapable of improving the writing. At some point, every piece of writing is as good as its writer can make it without out
side review.-That is the time to give it to your supervisor.
Most people's first drafts are terrible. I wouldn't make anyone else suffer through mine. Don't make others suffer through yours. I've read early drafts of papers by eminent ecologists whose final products are jewels of English construction. Their fir
st drafts are terrible too. "Good writing is rewriting," and you should make a serious effort at editing, rewriting, and fine-tuning before you give the manuscript to anyone else to read. There are few things more frustrating to read than a paper in which
you know there are pearls of wisdom, but where those pearls are hidden by sloppy and ambiguous writing. The chapters of my Ph.D. thesis had been through 3-5 drafts before anyone on my advisory committee ever saw them. If you need to put a piece of writin
g away for a few days before you can approach it dispassionately enough to rework it, do so. It takes much longer to read poor writing than good writing. it is a waste of an advisor's or editor's time to read material that i
Consider forming a mutual editing team with other students to review each other's work. Publication quality scientific writing is usually a product of the research community rather than the sole effort of the author(s): reviewers and editors make a big
difference to the vast majority of published papers. You should become accustomed both to reviewing other people's work and to having your own reviewed.
All aspiring ecologists should have a library of books that supports their technical communication. Distinguish between those that are primarily manuals of accepted rules, those that address how to create a draft (e.g., disconnecting the creative from
the critical voice, etc.), and those that focus on rewriting. I recommend Williams ( 1990) as a manual for rewriting. Williams focuses on how to turn a draft into a finished product.
The rule that you must avoid personal pronouns is antiquated and has been rejected by most scientific journals. If you collected the data using Smerdyakoff's Bicranial Olfactory Apparatus, there is nothing wrong with saying, "I collected the data using
Smerdyakoff's Bicranial Olfactory Apparatus." Where it would be repetitive to use personal pronouns ("I did this. I did that. I did the other thing."), or where it makes the sentence more awkward to use the active voice, you may occasionally, cautiously
use the passive voice.
Use words in the form that conveys your meaning as clearly and simply as possible. A variety of writing problems arise from using verbs and adjectives as nouns. Such word forms are called nominalizations (Williams 1990). Consider the sentence, "The low
rate of encounters was a reflection of the reduction in population density." The verbs, "to reflect" and "to reduce" are used as nouns, and the sentence is more turgid and less direct than when they are used as verbs: "The low rate of encounters reflects
a reduced population density." Some nominalizations are both useful and effective, as in "taxation without representation." Williams (1990) has an excellent discussion of useless and useful nominalizations.
Creating awkward phrases where nouns and verbs are used as adjectives or adverbs is another common problem leading to awkward and wooden writing. In his delightful critique, Hildebrand ( 1981 ) called nouns used this way "adjectival nouns." Such constr
uctions are almost invariably clumsy and unclear. For instance, unless specifically referring to a document, "the Chilko Lake park proposal" is not as good as "the proposal for a park at Chilko Lake." The first form illustrates both a nominalization ("pro
posal" as noun vs. verb) and adjectival nouns ("Chilko Lake" and "park" as adjectives modifying "proposal" rather than nouns). Table 1 provides examples of adjectival nouns culled from papers and theses I read during o
ne month. It is distressingly easy to find awkward strings of adjectival nouns in published papers, where they are common in titles. Phrases built with one adjectival noun or verb are often useful (e.g., "hair pin," "gut contents," "sampling unit"), but t
hose with more are usually awkward, rarely n
Do not use long words where short ones will do. Do not use jargon where regular language will do. Do not use special words to make your writing seem more technical, scientific, or academic when the message is more clearly presented otherwise.
When you first start a writing project, make an outline of the major headings. List the key ideas to be covered under each heading. Organize your thinking and the logic of your arguments at this level, not when you are trying to write complete, grammat
ical, and elegant sentences. Separate out the three tasks of: (1) figuring out what you want to say, (2) planning the order and logic of your arguments, and (3) crating the exact language in which you will express your ideas.
Many people find it useful when making an outline to attach page lengths and time lines to each subsection. For instance, section 2.4 may be "Evidence for differential use of canopy gaps by Clethrionomys." To this you might append, '3 more days analysi
s, 4 days writing; 10 pages." Such time estimates are usually inaccurate, but the process of establishing them is quite useful.
It is very easy to write and expand outlines with word processors. When starting a writing project, I create a file in which I first develop an outline as described above. I save a copy of the outline separately and then commence the writing by expandi
ng the outline section-by-section. I usually get ideas for later sections while writing earlier ones and can easily page down and write myself notes under later section headings. This is especially useful for filling out the structure of a Discussion whil
e writing the Results. (For instance, "When discussing the removal experiment, don't forget to contrast Karamozov's 1982 paper-- his Table 3--with the astonishing results in Figure 7.") By the time I get to writing the Discussion, the outline has usually
been fleshed out substantially and most of the topic sentences are present in note form.
Poorly structured paragraphs are one of the most common problems I find in graduate student writing. Though most graduate students can write reasonable sentences, a surprising number have difficulty organizing sentences into effective paragraphs. A par
agraph should begin with a topic sentence that sets the stage clearly for what will follow. One of my most frequent comments on student papers is that the contents of a paragraph do not reflect the topic sentence. Make topic sentences short and direct. Bu
ild the paragraph from the ideas introduced in your topic sentence and make the flow of individual sentences follow a logical sequence.
Many writers try to finish each paragraph with a sentence that forms a bridge to the next paragraph. Paying attention to continuity between paragraphs is a good idea. However, such sentences are often better as a topic sentence for the following paragr
aph than a concluding sentence of the current one. It is nice to conclude a paragraph by recapitulating its main points and anticipating what follows, but you should avoid statements of conclusion or introduction which contain no new information or ideas.
Strive for parallelism in structure at all times. When you present a list of ideas that you will then explore further ("Three hypotheses may account for these results: hypothesis 1, hypothesis 2, hypothesis 3."), make sure that you then address the ide
as in the same sequence and format in which you have presented them initially. It is both confusing and frustrating to read a list presented as "1, 2, 3, 4" and then find the topics dealt with "1, 4, 3, 2."
Think about how the structure of your paragraphs will appear to the reader who is reading them for the first time. She should not have to read the text more than once to understand it. Carefully lead the reader along so that the structure of your argum
ent as a whole is clear, as well as where the current text fits in it.
Paragraphs containing only one or two sentences are rarely good paragraphs because they can't develop ideas adequately. Two-sentence paragraphs usually represent either misplaced pieces of other paragraphs or fragments of ideas that should be removed o
r expanded.
Choppiness both within and among paragraphs often results from the ease with which we can cut and paste text on the computer. Ideas that were written separately but belong together can be moved easily. Unfortunately, they often still read as if they we
re written separately. This is a great way to structure a draft. However, you must read over such text for continuity before submitting it to others for review.
It is difficult to read for continuity on the computer screen because you can see so little text in front of you at any given moment. It is also more difficult to flip over several pages to scan for repetition, parallel structure, etc. To do a really g
ood job of proofing a paper, most writers find it necessary to read hard copy at some point during the writing/ rewriting process. Print all but final drafts on paper that has been used previously on one side.
Problems of inappropriate or inconsistent tenses are common in student writing. What you, or others, did in the past should be stated in the past tense (e.g., "I collected these data . . ."). Events or objects that continue to happen or exist can be de
scribed in the present tense (e.g., "In this paper I examine . . ."; "The data reject the hypothesis that . . ."). Events that will take place in the future can be in the future tense. Whatever tense you choose, be consistent. Be careful in using "might,"
"may," and "would" (as in "this might indicate that . . ."). They are frequently used as ways of weaseling out of making a clear statement.
Captions shouldn't merely name a table or figure, they should explain how to read it.--A caption should contain sufficient information so that a reader can understand a table or figure, in most cases, without reference to the text. While very simple t
ables and figures may require only a title for clarity, and exceptionally complex ones may require reference to the text for explanation, these circumstances are rare. Captions are often most effective when they briefly summarize the main result presented
in the table or figure (for example see the caption for Table 1). Don't leave caption writing to the end of the project; write captions when you organize your Results section and it will help you write the text.
Unless the person who reported a result is an important point in a statement, literature citations should be parenthetical, rather than in the body of the sentence. For instance, in most cases, it is preferable to write a sentence, of the form "Though
mean growth rates in Idaho were <10 cm per year (Table 2), growth rates of >80 cm are common in populations in Alberta (Marx 1982)." rather than "Though mean growth rates in Idaho were <10 cm per year (Table 2), Marx (1982) found growth rates of >80 cm to
be common in populations in Alberta." Sometimes the identity of the writer is important to the meaning of a statement, in which case emphasis on the citation is appropriate (e.g., "While Jones (1986) rejected this hypothesis, Meany's (1990) reanalysis of
his data failed to do so.").
Rather than telling the reader that a result is interesting or significant, show them how it is interesting or significant. For instance, rather than "The large difference in mean size between population C and population D is particularly interesting,"
write "While the mean size generally varies among populations by only a few centimetres, the mean size in populations C and D differed by 25 cm. Two hypotheses could account for this, . . ." Rather than describing a result, show the reader what they need
to know to come to their own conclusion about it.
Confusing and disjointed Results sections often arise because the writer does not have a clear idea of the story she/he intends to tell. The frequent consequence of this is a Results section consisting of a long, seemingly unrelated sequence of tables
and figures. We often go through a lengthy and convoluted process in understanding the content of a data set; your paper needn't document all the twists and turns of that process. Expect that you will produce many more figures and perform many more statis
tical tests than will be included in the final written product. When preparing to write your results, decide on the elements of the story you wish to tell then choose the subset of text, figures, and tables that most effectively and concisely conveys your
message. Organize this subset of tables and figures in a logical sequence; then write your story around them.
Novice writers of scientific papers frequently pay too little attention to discussing the content of tables and figures. They sometime merely present a list of references (e.g., "Table I shows this result, Table 2 shows that result, Figure I shows the
other result."). When writing Results sections you should use the tables and figures to illustrate points in the text, rather than making them the subject of your text. Rather than writing, "Figure 4 shows the relationship between the numbers of species A
and species B," write "The abundances of species A and B were inversely related (Figure 4)." Distinguish between your scientific results and the methodological tools used to support and present those results.
Most graduate students have learned the importance of having and testing clear hypotheses. Unfortunately, many focus their writing on statistical hypotheses, not ecological hypotheses. Statistical hypotheses are generally a trivial consequence of stand
ard approaches to statistical inference, such as the null hypothesis of no difference between two populations. They rarely have inherent ecological significance and are meaningful only in the context of the specific test being performed. Focus your writin
g on the ecological hypotheses underlying your research (e.g., that species A is influenced by processes X and Y in a specific way, resulting in different growth rates in habitats S and T), not the statistical null hypotheses required to test specific pre
dictions of those ecological hypotheses (e.g., there is no difference in growth rates among populations of species A in habitats S and I).
Many novice paper writers begin their Discussion section with a statement about problems with-their methods or the items in their results-about which they feel most insecure. Unless these really are the most important thing about your research (in whic
h case you have problems), save them for later. Begin a Discussion with a short restatement of the most important points from your Results. Start with what you can say clearly based on what you did, not what you can't say or what you didn't do. Use this s
tatement to set up the ideas you want to focus on in interpreting your results and relating them to the literature. Use sub-headings that structure the discussion around these ideas.
Plan on spending a lot of time on them.-- Many technical writers prefer to write their introductions last because it is to difficult to craft that balance of general context and specific focus required for a good introduction. Often it is easier to ach
ieve this after you have already worked through writing the entire paper or thesis. If you need to write the introduction first to set the stage for your own thinking, resist the temptation to perfect it. By the time you have finished the rest of the pape
r it will likely need substantial modification. The same concerns apply to conclusions, abstracts, and summaries. These components of the paper are all that many people will read, and you must get your message across in as direct, crisp, and enticing a ma
nner as possible. Plan on taking your time and giving these components several more drafts than the rest of the paper.
Don't write a thesis; write chapters or papers. Many thesis writers have a hard time starting to write because they are intimidated by the huge project looming ahead of them.
As a result, their first few months' efforts are often awkward and disjointed, as well as sparse. The thesis should be separated into small discrete sections, ideally distinct publishable papers. The overall organization of ideas should be done during
the planning stage so that when you work on individual sections you can concentrate on them.
Don't wait until you think you've completed all your analyses to start writing. "Parallel processing" of writing one chapter while you complete the analyses for others and make presentation quality figures is a good strategy for avoiding writer's burn-
out. Writing and analysis for any given chapter or paper is often an iterative process. Writing the results section of a paper is often the best way to discover the analyses and figures that still need to be done.
Probably the most frustrating and useful review I have received was from my masters advisor, Lee Gass, on a draft of a paper from my M.Sc. thesis. He said that all the key points were there and that the writing was clear, but it didn't "flow and resona
te." He sent me back to rework it, and, eventually, the published product did "flow and resonate" (at least we thought so).
Once or twice a year I come across a paper that is written so well it is a joy to read. If the content is as good as the writing, the experience of reading it can shape my thinking for some time thereafter. Papers written so well that they "flow and re
sonate" are much more likely to influence your readers than the equivalent message presented in a form that is merely clear. When you find a paper that succeeds in this study carefully how the authors constructed their arguments and used language; try to
identify what makes the paper work so well.
Computers have improved tremendously the ease with which we can edit, shuffle, rewrite, and spell-check a paper. To do this efficiently requires investing time in learning about your tools. You needn't learn how to use all the more exotic features of y
our word processor, but learn the options that are available and how to find out the details when you need them. Minimally, be familiar with basic requirements for document formatting (character and paragraph formatting, how to make lists with hanging ind
ents, page organization, etc.) and basic operating system requirements (copying and saving files, doing directory searches). The same comments apply to the use of statistical packages, graphics programs, and spreadsheets: it is often possible to get the j
ob done with little finesse in manipulating your software, but you will usually do a better job more efficiently after some investment in technical skills.
Almost everyone seems to require their own personal disaster to convince them of the need for backing up important files regularly. The frequency of "lost file" based excuses for late papers is remarkable. I save files to my hard drive frequently durin
g working sessions and at the end of each session I make a back-up copy of any file that I would mind losing. The working memory of your computer is transitory and easily purged of its contents. Individual hard and floppy disks are little better as perman
ent storage forms. Redundant copies dispersed in space and time are your main hope for avoiding disasters. When you have invested a lot in a writing project (such as a thesis that is nearing completion), keep at least one recent backup copy at home and on
e at school at all times--in addition to your working copy on a hard drive. Keep sample hard copies of recent drafts until you complete the project.
It may be clear from an editor's comments that they didn't understand the point you were making. If so, that is a clear indication that you need to improve your writing. Here is an example of my comments on an early draft of a thesis. These are among t
he most frequent recommendations I make.
"This section offers enormous opportunities for improvement. The text is choppy, both at the sentence to-sentence level and the paragraphto-paragraph level. Many different points are mixed together in a sequence that often follows no logical flow.
You should:
- Create a list of the main points that you want to make here.
- Organize them in point form in a logical sequence in which one builds on what came previously. Then restructure your text so it follows this sequence.
- Write topic sentences that state the key issue for each point succinctly and without jargon.
- Flesh out each paragraph with a carefully constructed sequence of sentences that builds the argument you want to make.
- Make sure there is adequate conceptual 'glue' between paragraphs and major sections. Lead the reader along so there are no surprising jumps in subject. The reader should anticipate your next subject before you get there."
I would like to thank the many students who inspired and gave feedback on these notes. I hope their pleasure in good writing justifies the pain of getting there. Thanks also to Lee Gass for his continuing inspiration in the use of language and to J. M.
Williams for writing a style book that is a model of clarity, grace, and common sense.
Hildebrand, M. 1983. Noun use criticism. Science t21:698.
Williams, J. M. 1990. Style: toward clarity and grace. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinios, USA.
This article is reproduced from the Bulletin of the American Ecological Society of America (June 1995).
It was written by Ken Lertzman,
School of Resource and Environmental Management,
Simon Fraser University,
Birmabu, British Colombia,
Canada V5A IS6.
Email: lertzman@sfu.ca
Applied
Ecology Research Group
