Journal of Information Science · 2011 · 71 citations · 27 references
EducationEnglishIndividual DifferencesReading ComprehensionReading DevelopmentAcademic WritingReadingReading DifficultiesAcademic ReadabilityDifficulty Level ClassificationPrior Related KnowledgeReadabilityReadability FormulasReading Level DeterminationScientific Impact MeasurementScientific Readability
Readability formulas often overlook readers’ prior knowledge, interest, and motivation, yet academics appear to tolerate difficult abstracts. The study aims to assess abstract readability across the world’s top institutions, compare disciplines, track changes over time, and examine its link to scientific impact. The authors analyzed about 260,000 abstracts from 2000–2009, applying the Flesch Reading Ease formula to compute readability scores. The analysis revealed that abstracts are generally hard to read, with disciplines falling into two readability groups, no significant improvement over time, and the difficulty may stem from limitations of readability formulas.
This paper examines the abstracts of the articles of the five most cited institutions in the world to determine their text reading level. Around 260,000 articles were analysed during 2000—2009 and the Flesch reading ease (RE) formula was applied to calculate the difficulty level of the abstracts according to the readability scores. The present study tries to: determine the abstracts reading level; discover the difference in the abstracts reading level among various disciplines; check the changes in the reading level of the abstracts during the examined years; test the correlation between the readability of the abstracts and their scientific impact. The results revealed that the texts of the abstracts are very difficult to read. Although this fact is true for all disciplines, disciplines can be divided into two groups based on their reading level, with some clearly less readable than others. No considerable change was observed in the readability scores of the abstracts over the examined years. Although the results of this research indicate that academics always write their abstracts in a difficult manner, these findings may result from the limitations in the readability formulas. Some researchers argue that these formulas ignore the readers’ prior knowledge, interest and motivation and, based on the findings, it is clear that academics do tolerate such apparently difficult texts (RE score).
27
Rudolph Flesch · Journal of Applied Psychology · 1948 · 5.2K citations
The Principles of Readability.
William H. DuBay · 2004 · 692 citations
The measurement of readability
George R. Klare · ACM Journal of Computer Documentation · 2000 · 506 citations