{"id":73273,"date":"2024-06-24T00:06:49","date_gmt":"2024-06-24T04:06:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/world.edu\/?p=73273"},"modified":"2024-06-24T00:06:49","modified_gmt":"2024-06-24T04:06:49","slug":"what-do-you-do-for-your-reader","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/world.edu\/what-do-you-do-for-your-reader\/","title":{"rendered":"What do you do for your reader?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

I often say, following\u00a0John Wagner,<\/a>\u00a0that a paper, chapter or book ought to reduce a reader\u2019s ignorance. In other words, when they\u2019ve finished reading what you\u2019ve written, a reader ought to feel that they know more about the topic than when they started.<\/p>\n

I like the modesty of reducing ignorance. It has none of the hubris implied by the ubiquitous \u201cfilling a gap\u201d . And the idea of reducing ignorance is specific enough for you, the writer, to ask \u2013\u00a0Well what does the reader already know?<\/em>\u00a0And\u00a0What am I writing that will allow my reader to know a bit more?<\/em><\/p>\n

I\u2019ve recently heard another bit of advice that sits very nicely with this. It\u2019s from\u00a0Andrew Wilkins, talking as a journal editor<\/a>. Andrew was explaining what he thought writers needed to do. Among lots of good advice, he said that a paper ought to leave the reader feeling smarter.<\/p>\n

I like the idea of making your reader feel smarter \u2013 I like it a lot. The idea of feeling smarter leads to the same questions about what the reader already knows and what your writing will add to their existing knowledge. But it does more than this. It also speaks to how the paper is written.<\/p>\n

A reader won\u2019t feel smarter if the text is badly written. Or the argument proceeds in illogical leaps. But less obviously, the reader won\u2019t feel smarter if the paper is written in really dense prose. If it\u2019s full of obscure terms and references that they don\u2019t know. If it sets out to be so demonstrably clever that the reader hasn\u2019t got a clue what\u2019s going on. If it seems that the purpose of the paper is simply to show how clever the writer is.<\/p>\n

But a reader won\u2019t feel smarter with the alternative approach either \u2013 if the text talks down to them and is written as if the reader is a struggling high school student.\u00a0Most of our readers are either involved in scholarly work, or they are an interested member of a relevant public. In other words, we can\u2019t assume that our reader knows nothing. We have to assume our readers are familiar with the topic and make sure we recognise their existing knowledge.<\/p>\n

The reader will feel smarter if technical terms are used judiciously. If they are explained. If the complex ideas are confined to what\u2019s necessary and not used as theoretical bling. All showy glitter.<\/p>\n

And the reader will feel smarter if the text is written with an eye to keeping them on track \u2013 and interested. If the sentence syntax is varied. If the headings and categories used are well thought out and they add to what is being said.<\/p>\n

The ideas of reducing ignorance and feeling smarter are related. Complementary. And they lead to some questions that you can ask yourself as you near the end of a paper. Perhaps these are questions that you can ask a critical friend to answer before you send the paper\/chapter\/book off.<\/p>\n