The stereotype goes that scientific information is technical, dry, and boring. After all, everyone has dragged themselves through a too-dense manuscript or fought sleep during a slow presentation at some time. But scientific communication, especially via the written word, is an integral skill. As such, scientists need to practice and develop their writing skills—from grammar and syntax to storytelling and narrative—to convey their message to in-field peers and the general public.
Why Scientific Communication Matters
Good communication is more essential than ever, as the 21st century continues to bring ever-increasing information dissemination speed and breadth. However, scientists often do not receive formal training in communication, whether verbal, visual, or through the written word. As a result, they tend to communicate in data points without providing important context or forming a cohesive narrative. In today’s academic community—and in society at large—scientists need to be able to tell a story in order to convey the full meaning of their work.
Learn more about the importance of scientific storytelling in this article.
The Fundamentals of Academic Science Writing
A narrative is key to contextualizing scientific research for the reader.
Learning how to write effectively starts with good fundamentals, and lots of practice. It also requires an understanding of how academic writing has shifted from the stereotypes found in textbooks and old manuscripts. Today’s academic writing moves away from passive voice, encouraging scientists to take ownership of what they have done. It also emphasizes clarity through simplicity in syntax and jargon. To showcase their work in a hypercompetitive academic environment, scientists need to be as good with their words as they are with their hands and minds. As such, scientists should regard themselves as professional writers—or professional writers in training at the very least.
Explore this topic further in this article.
How to Build a Scientific Narrative
Scientists need to be good storytellers in order to be effective communicators, and a good story requires a strong narrative. But what does that mean? Francis Bacon, the science philosopher, said that science relies on thematic organization and a logical narrative flow, referring to experimentation without direction as “mere groping in the dark.” As such, a strong narrative takes the reader on a journey, explaining why a study was undertaken, how that influenced experimental design, steadily building proof with thematically linked data, and bringing all of that together to make a convincing argument.
Learn more about scientific narrative building in this article.
The Key to Writing an Engaging Scientific Introduction Section
Good writing can engage the audience in a deeper way, showcasing the scientist’s passion for their research.
Scientific literature has never been published at greater rates or in greater quantities. Scientists therefore need to make their work stand out—which means making a good first impression. But many tend to think that first impressions are limited to the title and abstract, downplaying the importance of the introduction. However, this section is where authors provide background information, showcase their writing and argumentation skills, and first engage the audience in a deeper way—free from the formalities and constraints of the title and abstract. To put it another way, if the title and the abstract serve as the hook and the bait, then the introduction is the process of actually reeling the fish into the boat.
To learn more about writing an introduction section, read further.
A Good Scientific Results Section is More than Just Data
Many scientists may have been told in high school that the results section should only present the data and contain nothing else. But this premise, ostensibly meant to reduce bias, misses the forest for the trees. A results section that is only a list of numbers, graphs, and facts—one that provides little context or rationale—can be confusing, boring, and difficult to parse. Further, by decontextualizing the data, an author can actually introduce bias rather than remove it. When presenting their results, scientists need to exercise discretion and understand nuance. They need to frame their results within context.
Discover more about the keys to a good results section in this article.
Developing scientific communications skills takes time and effort. It is a continuous process, honed through experience, trial, and repetition. Subscribe to The Scientist for more primers and guides on scientific communication and other beyond-the-bench skills.
