Study Advice Service
Science Series #2
Scientific Writing Style
Author: Robyn Adams
The following guidelines are intended for use by all students, from first year undergraduate students
writing practical reports, through to postgraduate students preparing theses and papers. The intention
of these guidelines is to provide additional information on scientific writing style – students should
always adhere to the advice of their department or supervisor, as per the relevant departmental
handbook.
Scientific writing has a distinctive style: the writer needs to be CLEAR, SUCCINCT, PRECISE and
LOGICAL. In scientific writing it is also essential to consider your AUDIENCE.
Be i ng c l ea r
Research findings should be stated in clear simple English in a scientific report. Meandering,
descriptive, decorative text is inappropriate; important research findings need to be conveyed
simply, clearly and directly, so that the reader can only interpret them in one way (1).
“Science may be described as the art of systematic oversimplification” - Karl Popper
Avoid grandiloquence - the use of extravagant language. The use of long pompous words, creating a
text that is difficult to read, is unlikely to be impressive. Demonstration of understanding in clear,
simple language is more likely to help you to get good marks (1, 2).
"Contrary to what some people seem to believe, simple writing is not the product of simple minds. A
simple, unpretentious style has both grace and power. By not calling attention to itself, it allows the
reader to focus on the message."(3)
Be i ng s uc ci nc t
“The best English is that which gives sense in the fewest words” (1)
Substantial amounts of money have been spent on research - leading to millions of published journal
articles. This has placed intensive pressure on scientific journals in terms of space, and most journals
have word limits for published articles. This has lead to a succinct style of scientific writing. Scientific
writing needs to be brief - in depth concepts should not be made more complicated and confusing (1).
Web: www.hull.ac.uk/studyadvice
Email: studyadvice@hull.ac.uk
Tel: 01482 466199
1
Here are some examples of redundant and wordy phrases that can be improved (4)
Redundant phrase
Improved
Contributing factor
Factor
Exactly identical
Identical
Necessary prerequisite
Prerequisite
Smooth to the touch
Smooth
General consensus
Consensus
Costs a total of
Costs
Wordy phrase
Improved
Ahead of schedule
Early
Arrived at an agreement
Agreed
As a consequence of
Because of
At the present time
Now
Give an indication of
Show
In close proximity to
Near
Another example:
Poor: Avoid the use of redundant language in your writing, in order to avoid the problems
associated with long, repetitive sentences.
Better: Avoid redundant language.
Being precise
Choose your words carefully when you are writing science. In theory, someone who reads your
scientific report should be able to repeat your experiments. Also, your reader should know exactly
how your results relate to each other and to the results of others. The use of vague adjectives in
scientific writing is inappropriate - you need to convey your exact meaning. For example, is your
large increase a ten-fold increase or a ten thousand-fold increase? Say exactly what you mean,
avoiding any ambiguity.
Being logical
Every argument in your scientific report should be logical. An argument is a final claim that is made
based on at least one other claim. The final claim is known as the ‘conclusion’, and the claims that
are used to support the conclusion are known as ‘premises’.
In a sound argument:


the premises should be true, and
the conclusion should be assured, or very likely, based on the premises .
Poorly constructed arguments, which are called fallacies, should be avoided in scientific writing.
Listed below are some common fallacies to avoid in scientific writing:
2

Personal attacks: Don’t use a personal attack on the personality, qualifications, or
background of another to quantify your arguments. For example, ‘According to Brown et al, the
drug reduced enzyme secretion. However, this study may have been biased because it was
funded by the company that produced the drug’. Be courteous – never say that someone else
has different results to you because their work was of poor quality. You may be referring to work
completed by a close colleague of your supervisor!

Invalid argument patterns: The purpose of the following examples is to demonstrate the
importance of differentiating between causes and consequences.
Example 1.
If X then Y
‘If Mike is late, he will lose his job’
Y
‘Mike lost his job’
Therefore X
‘Therefore, Mike was late.’
Job loss is a consequence of lateness. However, this does not mean that lateness is always
the cause of job loss. Mike may have simply lost his job because he was incompetent.
Example 2.
If X then Y
‘If Mike is late, he will lose his job’
Not Y
‘Mike did not lose his job’
Therefore not X
‘Therefore, Mike was not late.’
Mike kept his job, but this does not mean that he was on time. He may have arrived late
every day for 25 years.

Ambiguity: Avoid using words that have two meanings. For example, ‘These findings are
significant’. Does this mean that you think the findings are important, or does this mean that
the findings are statistically significant? Poorly constructed sentences or paragraphs can also
cause ambiguity, for example, ‘I met the ambassador riding his horse. He was snorting and
steaming so I gave him a lump of sugar.’ (5)

Anecdotal Evidence: It is often biased, and the sample size is too small. This argument
technique is widely used in advertising campaigns, where satisfied customers give personal
testimonies.

Appeal to Authority: Frequently, famous people appear in marketing campaigns. Do actors
and sports stars really have the ability to identify the most effective type of washing powder?
Using authorities is acceptable, but ensure that the authority that you have used is an
appropriate authority.

Appeal to Common Beliefs, Practice, or Traditions: Your premise might be widely
believed, but does this mean that it is true? For example, ‘We used this extraction technique
because it was the technique that most researchers working in this field used.’ Why did you
use this extraction technique? In which way was it appropriate for your particular
experiments?
3

Appeal to Ignorance: This is where an argument is based on a lack of evidence against the
initial premise. For example, ‘There is no evidence that fairies do not exist. Therefore, it is
likely that fairies exist.’ The burden of proof is inappropriately transferred in this argument. In a
sound argument, the existence of fairies would need to be proven.

Begging the Question: A premise, and its conclusion, should be believable. Your evidence
for your conclusion needs to be stronger than your conclusion. After all, you are only able to
generate your conclusion based on your evidence. For example, ‘This compound inhibited
enzyme secretion because it is an antisecretory compound’.

Reversing Cause and Effect: Gracyk (2005) illustrates this fallacy: “Suppose there is a strong
correlation between drinking a lot of coffee and being a Type A personality……Type As work
hard to meet goals, are self-critical, have a chronic sense of time urgency and are often
impatient, often display hostility, and usually display fast movements and rapid speech. We
conclude that drinking a lot of coffee is a cause of being a Type A. Did we firmly establish that
the people in the study were Type A before they started to drink coffee? Perhaps they had this
personality type in childhood, long before they started to drink coffee. Perhaps their sense of
time urgency and need to meet goals makes them more interested in using stimulants, which
attracts them to coffee. So using the correlation to argue that coffee is a cause of personality
would be the fallacy of reversing cause and effect.”

Overlooking a common cause: Gracyk (6) illustrates this fallacy: “I notice that when I get a
sore throat, it will not be long before I get a runny nose. I conclude that sore throats are a
cause of runny noses.” Sore throats and runny noses do actually correlate, however the
common cause is actually a virus, which first attacks the throat, and then attacks the nose.

After it, therefore because of it: This is where it is assumed that a prior event was
responsible for a particular outcome, when there is no evidence. For example, ‘The cultured
cells were overgrown with bacteria following drug treatment. Therefore, the drugs must have
been contaminated with bacteria.’ Was the bacterial infection introduced via a different route?
Was it present before the drugs were added? There is no proof that the bacteria came from
contaminated drugs.

Limited Options Fallacy: This is where other possible reasons are excluded from the
conclusion. For example, ‘Citric acid had no effect on the COS-7 cells; it did not alter their
protein expression or viability.’ Failure of the citric acid to influence protein expression and
viability does not mean that the citric acid had no effects. Is it possible that the citric acid
affected the cells in other ways?
(5, 6)
It is also essential to support your arguments with relevant references.
W h o i s yo u r a u d i e n c e ?
Remember who will read your work, and why they are reading it. Will your reader understand your
explanations? Your tutor/supervisor will often understand the work already. Do your explanations
demonstrate that YOU understand everything? (1,2).
Other tips on scientific writing style

Never ignore published findings that disagree with your results. Analyse findings that
disagree with yours, and explain why your findings are different (2).

Avoid prejudicial language.
4

Consistency is very important – ensure that the same symbols and terminology are used
throughout. Writers often try to avoid repetition by using different words or phrases to refer to the
same thing. This technique, however, is not usually appropriate in scientific writing. Continue to
refer to a frequently mentioned apparatus, reagent or technique using the same word, and confirm
this in your final draft. Also ensure that your arguments are consistent.

Formulate a proofreading checklist. Check each of the items in your report, one at a time. Your
checklist may include items such as “ensure that each abbreviation is defined the first time, and
that the abbreviation is then used every time after that”. A checklist can be very useful not only for
checking consistency, but also for checking that each hypothesis has been addressed in the
discussion, that every reference has been included, and that every figure has been referred to in
the text.

Use the correct terminology. Don’t use terminology unless you understand it. If you are
struggling with terminology, find dictionaries, glossaries, and fundamental textbooks which will
help your understanding. Keeping a personal dictionary of important terminology for future
reference can also be very useful. If you use these strategies, your knowledge and
understanding of terminology within your field will improve over time.

Be aware of commonly confused words - refer to the Study Advice Service leaflet
Homophones at www.hull.ac.uk/studyadvice

Avoid the use of trade names for generic items, such as Hoover (vacuum), Gilson (pipette), or
Falcon (centrifuge tube) (2). At the same time, however, ensure that you use trade names for
specific equipment and reagents. To further explain this point, if you have used a product that is
unique to a particular manufacturer, or the product choice influences the experimental design or
the experimental results, name the product specifically. If you could have used the same product
from any company, and the choice would not have influenced your work, you do not need to give
specific details.

Avoid direct quotations - these are not appropriate for scientific writing.

The use of abbreviations in scientific writing is sometimes difficult to avoid. If abbreviations are
essential, it is best to write them in full the first time they appear in the text, followed by the
definition in brackets. After their definition, abbreviations can then be used throughout the text.
For example: ‘Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is an important mediator of
angiogenesis. There are several isoforms of VEGF, including……. ’

If you are writing a third year report, or a thesis, a list of abbreviations is usually included
somewhere at the beginning of the report.

Always remember to reference all of your sources - every piece of information in your writing,
apart from your own results, came from somewhere else. Acknowledge in your references that
someone else generated your experimental protocol, or provided an explanation for why you got
those particular results. Also, remember that referencing other authors can actually help to
strengthen your arguments.

Ensure that Latin names have been spelled properly and written appropriately. Latin names are
usually written in italics, for example Clostridium difficile. After the Latin name has been written
once, it may be written as C.difficile. The genus should be capitalised and the species should be
in lower case letters.

Model your scientific report on one or more journals in your field. Ensure that the journals that you
choose use formats which are appropriate for your report, for example, the IMRaD format. Draw
5
inspiration from journal articles which you or your supervisor/tutor feel are well presented. Read
through the articles that you have chosen, and ask yourself the following questions:
What have the authors included in the abstract/summary?
How much space is dedicated to each of the different sections?
How frequently are references used? What are the references used for?
Which techniques does the author use to keep different sections of the article brief?
How do the authors introduce their articles? Do they start broadly and then focus on
their topic? Is any knowledge assumed?
How are the methods described? How much detail is provided?
How is the data presented? Is the data described in the text? How frequently are
figures referred to in the text? How have figures and tables been labelled? Which
kinds of figures and tables are the easiest to read? Which kinds of figures show the
results most effectively?
How do the authors reach conclusions? Do they refer to the work of other authors to
provide support for their conclusions? Are any problems with the experiments
discussed? What techniques do authors use to explain results that don’t fit?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Day, R.A. (1998) How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper, Oryx Press, Westport
Barrass, R. (1995) Scientists Must Write: A Guide to Better Writing for Scientists, Engineers
and Students, Chapman & Hall, London
Lederer, D., Lederer, R., Dowis, R. (1999) Sleeping Dogs Don't Lay: Practical Advice for the
Grammatically Challenged, St Martin's Press, New York quoted in Larson, G.B. (2006)
'Concise Writing Guide', Garbl's Writing Centre, http://home.comcast.net/~garbl/stylemanual/
betwrit.htm, accessed 23/01/08
Larson, G.B. (2006) 'Concise Writing Guide', Garbl's Writing Centre, http://home.comcast.net/
~garbl/stylemanual/betwrit.htm, accessed 23/01/08
Pirie, M. (1985) The book of the fallacy: A training manual for intellectual subversives,
Routledge & Kegan Paul, London
Gracyk, T. (2003) 'Explanations of Basic Fallacies', Minnesota State University, http://www.
mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/phil%20110/fallaciesexplained.htm, accessed 23/01/08
All web addresses in this leaflet were correct at the time of publication.
The information in this leaflet can be made available in an alternative
format on request. Telephone 01482 466199.
© 01/2008
6