TY - JOUR
T1 - Marketing Ideas
T2 - How to Write Research Articles that Readers Understand and Cite
AU - Warren, Nooshin L.
AU - Farmer, Matthew
AU - Gu, Tianyu
AU - Warren, Caleb
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors thank the faculty and doctoral students who participated in the studies. They also thank Merrie Brucks, Mark Houston, Zachary Estes, Peter McGraw, Melanie Wallendorf, Jesper Nielsen, Anastasiya Potcheptsova Ghosh, Jennifer Savary, Nathan Warren, Justin Luzader, and Josh Edwin for feedback. The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Publisher Copyright:
© American Marketing Association 2021.
PY - 2021/9
Y1 - 2021/9
N2 - Academia is a marketplace of ideas. Just as firms market their products with packaging and advertising, scholars market their ideas with writing. Even the best ideas will make an impact only if others understand and build on them. Why, then, is academic writing often difficult to understand? In two experiments and a text analysis of 1,640 articles in premier marketing journals, this research shows that scholars write unclearly in part because they forget that they know more about their research than readers, a phenomenon called “the curse of knowledge.” Knowledge, or familiarity with one’s own research, exacerbates three practices that make academic writing difficult to understand: abstraction, technical language, and passive writing. When marketing scholars know more about a research project, they use more abstract, technical, and passive writing to describe it. Articles with more abstract, technical, and passive writing are harder for readers to understand and are less likely to be cited. The authors call for scholars to overcome the curse of knowledge and provide two tools—a website (writingclaritycalculator.com) and a tutorial—to help them recognize and repair unclear writing so they can write articles that are more likely to make an impact.
AB - Academia is a marketplace of ideas. Just as firms market their products with packaging and advertising, scholars market their ideas with writing. Even the best ideas will make an impact only if others understand and build on them. Why, then, is academic writing often difficult to understand? In two experiments and a text analysis of 1,640 articles in premier marketing journals, this research shows that scholars write unclearly in part because they forget that they know more about their research than readers, a phenomenon called “the curse of knowledge.” Knowledge, or familiarity with one’s own research, exacerbates three practices that make academic writing difficult to understand: abstraction, technical language, and passive writing. When marketing scholars know more about a research project, they use more abstract, technical, and passive writing to describe it. Articles with more abstract, technical, and passive writing are harder for readers to understand and are less likely to be cited. The authors call for scholars to overcome the curse of knowledge and provide two tools—a website (writingclaritycalculator.com) and a tutorial—to help them recognize and repair unclear writing so they can write articles that are more likely to make an impact.
KW - citations
KW - methods
KW - readability
KW - relevance
KW - text analysis
KW - writing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85105755765&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85105755765&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/00222429211003560
DO - 10.1177/00222429211003560
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85105755765
SN - 0022-2429
VL - 85
SP - 42
EP - 57
JO - Journal of marketing
JF - Journal of marketing
IS - 5
ER -