Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-md8df Total loading time: 0.998 Render date: 2021-12-05T06:13:00.739Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

6 - Communicating Ideas in Writing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2019

Joanna M. Setchell
Affiliation:
Durham University
Get access

Summary

The ability to write is an essential component of research. We write to communicate with readers. Our readers include funding bodies, thesis examiners, manuscript editors, reviewers, or readers of a journal. In each case, we write to convince a reader of our argument. In reports, we also write to allow a reader to check and interpret our findings for themselves. Good writing conveys information to readers as clearly and simply as possible. Poor writing obscures meaning, frustrates the audience and puts them off reading our work. Poorly crafted writing can make the reader suspect that our science may also be confused. To avoid this, write clearly, simply, precisely and concisely. Writing takes practice. In this chapter I cover general points, which apply to all scientific writing. I begin with advice on drafting, and the need to revise, obtain feedback and revise your draft again. This iterative process can come as a surprise to students accustomed to submitting work for a deadline, then forgetting about it. I then cover general style, followed by specific topics including structure and clarity.

Type
Chapter
Information
Studying Primates
How to Design, Conduct and Report Primatological Research
, pp. 67 - 96
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barron, AD, Brown, MJ. 2012. Science journalism: Let’s talk about sex. Nature 488: 151152. https://doi.org/10.1038/488151a. Explains that maintaining a consistent and objective message when communicating with journalists can improve the way in which our results are covered.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salita, JT. 2015. Writing for lay audiences: a challenge for scientists. Medical Writing 24: 183188. https://doi.org/10.1179/2047480615Z.000000000320. Includes a useful table of terms that have different meanings for lay audiences.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sumner, P, Vivian-Griffiths, S, Boivin, J, Williams, A, Venetis, CA, Davies, A, Ogden, J, Whelan, L, Hughes, B, Dalton, B, Boy, F, Chambers, CD. 2014. The association between exaggeration in health related science news and academic press releases: Retrospective observational study. British Medical Journal 349: g7015. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7015. Shows that exaggeration in news coverage is linked to exaggeration in press releases and that we have the opportunity to improve reporting by improving press releases.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glasman-Deal, H. 2009. Science Research Writing for Non-Native Speakers of English. London: Imperial College Press. Dissects each section of a standard report, with grammar and vocabulary. Aimed at authors with English language ability of intermediate level or above and also useful for native speakers who are not confident in their writing. Recommends some things I don’t agree with, like use of the passive voice, and including methods and discussion in the results.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trenga, B. 2006. The Curious Case of the Misplaced Modifier: How to Solve the Mysteries of Weak Writing. Cincinnati, OH: Writer’s Digest Books. A concise and simple guide to writing well, including how to identify and avoid the passive voice, vague phrasing, and sentences that are too long.Google Scholar
Clymo, RS. 2014. Reporting Research: A Biologist’s Guide to Articles, Talks, and Posters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Provides a longer list of misused words.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fedigan, LM. 1982. Primate Paradigms: Sex Roles and Social Bonds. St. Albans, VT: Eden Press. Includes extensive discussion of value-laden and androcentric terminology.Google Scholar
Fedigan, LM. 2001. The paradox of feminist primatology: The goddess’s discipline? In: Creager, ANH, Lunbeck, E, Schiebinger, L (eds.). Feminism in Twentieth Century Science, Technology and Medicine. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. pp. 4672. A reflection on androcentrism and gender bias in primatology.Google Scholar
Fedigan, LM, Jack, KM. 2013. Sexual conflict in white-faced capuchins: It’s not whether you win or lose. In: Fisher, ML, Garcia, JR, Chang, RS (eds.). Evolution’s Empress: Darwinian Perspectives on Women. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 281303. A review of sexual conflict in capuchins that avoids assumptions about which sex has an advantage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, CM. 2017. Primate crop feeding behavior, crop protection, and conservation. International Journal of Primatology 38: 385400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764–017-9951-3. Includes the need to use neutral language when describing primate crop-feeding.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlsson Green, K, Madjidian, JA. 2011. Active males, reactive females: Stereotypic sex roles in sexual conflict research? Animal Behaviour 81: 901907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.01.033. Shows the prevalence of stereotypes in the sexual conflict literature.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, MN, Birckhead, JL, Leong, K, Peterson, MJ, Peterson, TR. 2010. Rearticulating the myth of human–wildlife conflict. Conservation Letters 3: 7482. doi:10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00099.x. Argues that the phrase human–wildlife conflict is detrimental to human–wildlife coexistence.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Almossawi, A. 2014. An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments. Victoria, Australia: Scribe Publications. A short illustrated introduction to logical reasoning and common errors.Google Scholar
Clymo, RS. 2014. Reporting Research: A Biologist’s Guide to Articles, Talks, and Posters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Includes a lot of useful advice on communicating clearly with your audience, with a rather old-fashioned, historical approach.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, SA. 2009. How citation distortions create unfounded authority: analysis of a citation network. British Medical Journal 339: b2680. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2680. Examines the influence of citation distortions on science.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hailman, JP, Strier, KB. 2006. Planning, Proposing, and Presenting Science Effectively. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Appendix A covers how to write clearly.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, JR, Matthews, RW. 2014. Successful Scientific Writing: A Step-By-Step Guide for the Biological and Medical Sciences. 4th edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Includes exercises to improve your writing. Enlivened with amusing quotations and cartoons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orwell, G. 1946. Politics and the English Language. www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_polit [Accessed 3 January 2019]. Essay including six rules for writing.
Simkin, MV, Roychowdhury, VP. 2003. Read before you ref! Complex Systems 14: 269274. Estimates that only about 20% of authors who cite a paper have actually read it.Google Scholar
Strunk, W Jr. 1920. The Elements of Style. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Howe. A classic guide to US English. First published privately in 1918. Now in the public domain and freely available on the Internet. Don’t follow the advice to use masculine pronouns.Google Scholar
Strunk, W Jr, White, EB. 1959. The Elements of Style. New York: Macmillan. Several subsequent editions. Expanded version of Strunk’s original volume.Google Scholar
Trenga, B. 2006. The Curious Case of the Misplaced Modifier: How to Solve the Mysteries of Weak Writing. Cincinnati, OH: Writer’s Digest Books. A concise and simple guide to writing well, including how to identify and avoid the passive voice, vague phrasing, and over-long sentences.Google Scholar
Truss, L. 2003. Eats, Shoots and Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation. London: Profile Books. An entertaining approach to punctuation.Google Scholar

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×