Why are some published research articles so difficult to understand?

Some authors make their writing unnecessarily complicated, which means that their true meaning is obscured and readers must struggle to figure out what the point of a text is. Following up on our last episode about Critical Thinking, Niklas and Clay critically read and examine a piece of published, peer-reviewed writing. The authors present what seems to be an intelligent piece of writing but unnecessarily complicate the text with jargon, interruptions, prepositional phrases, and nominalization. On the surface, the text looks highly academic, but upon closer inspection and revision, we discover the authors have very little to actually say.

Our conclusion?

Some authors overcomplicate their writing to hide the deficiencies of their research, ideas, and argument or to position themselves within an academic niche. Remember, just because a piece of writing is published and is complicated does not mean that the text is good quality.

Resources

The Student Life News opinion piece - Unnecessary complexity in academic writing: https://tsl.news/opinion-unnecessary-complexity-in-academic-writing/

Critique of discourse analysis: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0957926508095894?casa_token=xedOlzzuSv0AAAAA:gGjYz4VkY-D6ns1BisibWUk917osxjaABmzbZETNz-dtkkQjbCkx_hKWUycSq5jkDD44v4HZQv1zdw

Understanding 'In-Group' Jargon: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/using_appropriate_language/group_jargon.html

Niklas has been searching high and low for a Critical Thinking test he can use in his lectures and course curriculum planning. Sure enough, he found a test, and we decided to test ourselves to see how good a critical thinker we both are.

In this episode, we examine the Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Test and walk through how we dissect and critically read a text. In the process, we examine how arguments are constructed, how rhetoric can be used to evoke an emotional response, how evidence can be used effectively or used to present a biased perspective, and how logical fallacies can easily be produced in writing. Along the way, we have some fun and try to demonstrate how to read and think critically, and why critical reading and thinking are important skills to apply in everyday situations.

Resources

Read about the Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Test: http://evolkov.net/critic.think/tests/Ennis-Weir.Critic.Think.Essay.Test.pdf

Logical Fallacies: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/logic_in_argumentative_writing/fallacies.html

Clay sits down with a friend and fellow Ph. D. researcher, James Johnson from the University of Oslo, to chat about publishing and rejection.

Rejection as a Ph. D. is difficult. Everyone knows that rejection is going to happen, but we are not always prepared for rejection when it happens. Clay and James discuss their experiences as Ph. D. candidates, the road to publication, and how it feels when research articles are rejected. Rejection might happen for a number of reasons, but there are also many ways to cope with rejection and move our research forward.

Hey! What's your research about? What methods are you using? Probably easy questions to answer, but how about this one: what is your research design?

In our experience, we don't see many people with a clearly defined research design. In fact, we think a lot of research writing struggles actually stem from people neglecting to develop their research design. One of the problems is that we focus a lot on research questions and research methods, but we do not always account for what TYPE of research we are producing. That is where the research design comes in. In this episode, Clay and Niklas take a deep dive into the differences between research design and research methods, and explain why we need a well defined research design to help connect our research questions, methods, and writing together.

Resources

What research design is right for you? See the Sacred Heart Library: https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803&p=185902  

Comparing research methods and research design:

https://pediaa.com/difference-between-research-methods-and-research-design/ 

https://essaymin.com/blog/difference-between-research-methods-and-research-design/

We've all gotten stuck in our research and writing. Being stuck sucks, and moving forward can be a challenge. In this episode, Clay and Niklas talk about why we get stuck in research and writing and offer practical approaches to getting 'unstuck'.

Many of the topics we cover in this episode are discussed in greater detail and length in other episodes in past It's going to be all write seasons. We hope you check those previous episodes out to get even more help if you are feeling stuck in your writing process.

Welcome to our fourth season!

As our semester at NMBU starts in September, we wanted to welcome listeners back, welcome new listeners, and begin the podcast season with a great topic for new students - Critical Thinking.

Critical thinking is a core of western university education, but we don't think that critical thinking is always well defined in a classroom setting. Additionally, critical thinking is more than a one-time action, but a process of ways to developing original thoughts on subject matter. When it comes to research and writing, critical thinking represents the foundation for the work we will do as students and researchers. In this episode, we dive into what we think critical thinking is and how we think you can develop your critical thinking skills.

We're really excited for this new season and look forward to upcoming episodes.

Resources

An in-depth look at the history of critical thinking: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-thinking/  

Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL) and Logical Fallicies to avoid when writing: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/logic_in_argumentative_writing/fallacies.html 

Another season is coming to an end. Niklas and Clay decided to participate in a Digital Study Hall and do a live Question and Answer Period with anyone who joined the Study Group.

Since we were not sure how many people might attend, we also solicited questions from our Writing Advisors, and from students via social media. In this season finale, we offer our take on questions from a variety of people. This episode will be more disjointed than previous episodes, but we have a lot of fun making it.

Apologies for the audio quality. We had a recording issue and tried to edit the podcast as best as possible.

Resources

Structure, Cohesion, and IMRAD:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpSOSinp2Sw

Narratives in Science:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBPzhNUAris

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxJY2yVbHRU

Narrative and Ant-Narrative in Science: https://academic.oup.com/icb/article/58/6/1224/5032878

Writing Stories in Science: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43631863?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

How can we use the 'science of stories' to produce persuasive scientific stories? https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-017-0047-7

Writing a Research Statement:

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/graduate_school_applications/writing_a_research_statement.html

It's that time of year again. The Master's thesis crunch!

We thought it was a good time to provide some ideas and advice on how to finalize your thesis with the remaining time available. Also, we talk about ways to prepare for your defence by collaborating with fellow students. If you are having troubles finding the motivation to work from home, alone, we also introduce a new service to help you connect with other students in the new NMBU Digital Study Hall.

Don't forget to visit the resources below for even more writing support.

Resources

• The Writer's Diet App: https://writersdiet.com/writers-diet-microsoft-word-app/
• Grammarly: https://www.grammarly.com/ 
• Word count tips: https://redwoodink.com/resources/10-tricks-to-reduce-your-word-count-in-academic-writing  
• YouTube tips to reduce your word count: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6_EkwGpi50&t=1s  

If you listened to our last episode on the Dunning-Kruger Effect, you might have an idea why we wanted to follow up with spotting bad science. As we mentioned in Episode 5, the general trend in science seems to be the more you know, the more you are willing to acknowledge your uncertainty...so as science readers and writers, we should also be critical of scientific publications that make highly confident claims.

Luckily for us, Andy Brunning has created A Rough Guide to Spotting Bad Science - a 12 point graphic poster to help you determine the quality of research and reports you might want to use in your own studies and writing. In this episode, we talk through these twelve points and try to give both everyday and academic examples of spotting bad sciences, to help you understand the causes and effects of misinformation.

It is worth mentioning that while science and other forms of reporting can be truthful, they may also be manipulative. We highly recommend looking reading the article title Controlling the narrative: Euphemistic language affects judgements of actions while avoiding perceptions of dishonesty. We could have dedicated a whole episode to euphemisms and jargon, and this article may be insightful for you.

Resources

The Rough Guide to Spotting Bad Science: https://www.compoundchem.com/2014/04/02/a-rough-guide-to-spotting-bad-science/

Controlling the narrative: Euphemistic language affects judgements of actions while avoiding perceptions of dishonesty

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027721000524

Do you ever feel like you don't belong? Like the ideas you have, and the research you do isn't really good enough and you are waiting for someone to find you out?

The Imposter Syndrome is a real psychological phenomenon that people face, students, Ph.Ds, and even people in their careers. Feeling like an imposter can cause anxiety, fear, and depressive thoughts, but we want you to know that you are neither an imposter, nor are you alone in feeling this way.

This episode we talk about causes of the Imposter Syndrome, why it is normal, and how understanding the Dunning-Kruger effect can explain why you used to feel confident when starting your education or research, but might now feel like an imposter. We wanted to shed light on a common phenomenon and give you some explanations about why we start to lose confidence and feel insecure or incompetent as we move further and further into our research.

This is part one of a two-part topic. In Episode 6 we will discuss how the Dunning-Kruger effect can be navigated by knowing how to spot bad science and by developing critical reading and research techniques.