Nurturing students' natural writing style to better communicate research to the public

Steven Caldwell Brown

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In many institutions, students are given the instruction to model their written work on existing published work. However, scholars typically write for other scholars, and this can lead to the so-called ‘curse of knowledge’, a cognitive bias wherein experts struggle to adopt the point of view of less knowledgeable parties. Students modelling their work on that of published academic works may be jeopardising their ability to communicate science clearly to laypersons, an emerging priority in academia. This article provides a wide-ranging discussion of this issue, informed by the findings from a pilot study which suggest that laypersons perceive the writing of students to be clearer, easier to understand and more detailed than the writing of established researchers. Regardless of intended career path, it is imperative that psychology graduates be able to articulate thoughts and ideas clearly and this article highlights the tangible implications of discouraging students from assimilating into a writing style typical of scholars which may prove outdated when open-access publications become mainstream.
LanguageEnglish
Number of pages35
JournalScholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 18 Dec 2017

Fingerprint

layperson
student
open access
psychology
graduate
career
expert
instruction
ability
trend
science

Keywords

  • academic writing
  • classroom engagement
  • science communication
  • public engagement
  • knowledge transfer

Cite this

@article{9dd8f1613f934d0582dc9d81c19fd9d0,
title = "Nurturing students' natural writing style to better communicate research to the public",
abstract = "In many institutions, students are given the instruction to model their written work on existing published work. However, scholars typically write for other scholars, and this can lead to the so-called ‘curse of knowledge’, a cognitive bias wherein experts struggle to adopt the point of view of less knowledgeable parties. Students modelling their work on that of published academic works may be jeopardising their ability to communicate science clearly to laypersons, an emerging priority in academia. This article provides a wide-ranging discussion of this issue, informed by the findings from a pilot study which suggest that laypersons perceive the writing of students to be clearer, easier to understand and more detailed than the writing of established researchers. Regardless of intended career path, it is imperative that psychology graduates be able to articulate thoughts and ideas clearly and this article highlights the tangible implications of discouraging students from assimilating into a writing style typical of scholars which may prove outdated when open-access publications become mainstream.",
keywords = "academic writing, classroom engagement, science communication, public engagement, knowledge transfer",
author = "{Caldwell Brown}, Steven",
note = "{\circledC}American Psychological Association, 2018. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. Please do not copy or cite without author's permission. The final article is available, upon publication, at: [ARTICLE DOI]",
year = "2017",
month = "12",
day = "18",
language = "English",
journal = "Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology",
issn = "2332-2101",

}

Nurturing students' natural writing style to better communicate research to the public. / Caldwell Brown, Steven.

In: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 18.12.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Nurturing students' natural writing style to better communicate research to the public

AU - Caldwell Brown, Steven

N1 - ©American Psychological Association, 2018. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. Please do not copy or cite without author's permission. The final article is available, upon publication, at: [ARTICLE DOI]

PY - 2017/12/18

Y1 - 2017/12/18

N2 - In many institutions, students are given the instruction to model their written work on existing published work. However, scholars typically write for other scholars, and this can lead to the so-called ‘curse of knowledge’, a cognitive bias wherein experts struggle to adopt the point of view of less knowledgeable parties. Students modelling their work on that of published academic works may be jeopardising their ability to communicate science clearly to laypersons, an emerging priority in academia. This article provides a wide-ranging discussion of this issue, informed by the findings from a pilot study which suggest that laypersons perceive the writing of students to be clearer, easier to understand and more detailed than the writing of established researchers. Regardless of intended career path, it is imperative that psychology graduates be able to articulate thoughts and ideas clearly and this article highlights the tangible implications of discouraging students from assimilating into a writing style typical of scholars which may prove outdated when open-access publications become mainstream.

AB - In many institutions, students are given the instruction to model their written work on existing published work. However, scholars typically write for other scholars, and this can lead to the so-called ‘curse of knowledge’, a cognitive bias wherein experts struggle to adopt the point of view of less knowledgeable parties. Students modelling their work on that of published academic works may be jeopardising their ability to communicate science clearly to laypersons, an emerging priority in academia. This article provides a wide-ranging discussion of this issue, informed by the findings from a pilot study which suggest that laypersons perceive the writing of students to be clearer, easier to understand and more detailed than the writing of established researchers. Regardless of intended career path, it is imperative that psychology graduates be able to articulate thoughts and ideas clearly and this article highlights the tangible implications of discouraging students from assimilating into a writing style typical of scholars which may prove outdated when open-access publications become mainstream.

KW - academic writing

KW - classroom engagement

KW - science communication

KW - public engagement

KW - knowledge transfer

UR - http://psycnet.apa.org/PsycARTICLES/journal/stl/3/4

M3 - Article

JO - Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology

T2 - Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology

JF - Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology

SN - 2332-2101

ER -