Plain-Style Preferences of US Professionals

Background: Although plain language is almost universally promoted by teachers of professional writing, editors, and communication professionals, some have argued that the effects of and preferences for plain style in written messages differ among groups of individuals. Research questions: 1. Do professionals prefer plain style? 2a. Do preferences differ for different categories of style? 2b. Do preferences differ for different groups of workers? Literature review: Style, the word- and sentence-level elements in a written text, is a critical element of plain language. There is evidence that plain style, however, affects readers differently based on their level of subject matter knowledge. Plain style is even criticized by a few. There is a long history of tensions surrounding linguistic prescriptivism, the notion that one manner of language use is superior to all others. Further, readers’ preferences for writing style, plain or otherwise, may not be consistent across occupational positions, education levels, nationalities, personality types, or genders. Research methodology: We conducted a quantitative study of preferences for two major style categories (conciseness and word choice) using an online survey instrument. The student-recruiter technique provided us with usable responses from 614 working adults in the US. Using that data, we calculated proportions of respondents, with confidence intervals, who chose the plain-style options. We also used statistical tests to explore associations between preferences and respondent characteristics. Results and conclusions: Our findings support an overwhelming preference for plain style among US professionals who are native speakers of English. Reader preferences were stronger for elements associated with word choice than with conciseness. Those with lower education levels and blue-collar occupations had lower preferences for plain style. The study had two major limitations: 1. We investigated only two aspects of plain style rather than the full range of elements that make up plain language. 2. Our data-collection instrument presented readers with an artificial rather than an authentic reading experience. Future research may investigate the role of personality on stylistic preferences and the attributions readers make about writers based on their style.

[1]  Russell Willerton Plain Language and Ethical Action: A Dialogic Approach to Technical Content in the 21st Century , 2015 .

[2]  Alissa J. Hartig,et al.  Plain English and legal writing: Comparing expert and novice writers , 2014 .

[3]  Julie E. Boland,et al.  If You’re House Is Still Available, Send Me an Email: Personality Influences Reactions to Written Errors in Email Messages , 2016, PloS one.

[4]  H. Tan,et al.  When the Use of Positive Language Backfires: The Joint Effect of Tone, Readability, and Investor Sophistication on Earnings Judgments , 2014 .

[5]  S. Evans Perspectives on the Use of English as a Business Lingua Franca in Hong Kong , 2013 .

[6]  Kim Sydow Campbell,et al.  Linguistics and Writing: A Reassessment. , 1993 .

[7]  J. Suchan,et al.  An Analysis of Communication Efficiency Between High-Impact and Bureaucratic Written Communication , 1989 .

[8]  Qin Zhang,et al.  Trends in Industry Supervisors’ Feedback On Business Communication Internships , 2009 .

[9]  R. Petelin Considering plain language: issues and initiatives , 2010 .

[10]  M. Wolf,et al.  Working memory and the design of health materials: a cognitive factors perspective. , 2009, Patient education and counseling.

[11]  J. Hagge,et al.  Linguistic Politeness in Professional Prose , 1989 .

[12]  P. Glick,et al.  Images of occupations: Components of gender and status in occupational stereotypes , 1995 .

[13]  Lay people's language problems , 2010 .

[14]  Rachelle R. Greer Introducing Plain Language Principles to Business Communication Students , 2012 .

[15]  David L. Conrad,et al.  24 Business Communication Skills: Attitudes of Human Resource Managers versus Business Educators , 2011 .

[16]  Srivatsa Seshadri,et al.  Professionals and Professors: Substance or Style? , 2000 .

[17]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  Language style matching in writing: synchrony in essays, correspondence, and poetry. , 2010, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[18]  Kevin L. Blankenship,et al.  The Role of Different Markers of Linguistic Powerlessness in Persuasion , 2005 .

[19]  Sarah Steiner Gender, Genre, and Writing Style in Formal Written Texts , 2014 .

[20]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[21]  Kim Garwood Metonymy and Plain Language , 2013 .

[22]  Maxine Hairston,et al.  Not All Errors are Created Equal - Nonacademic Readers in the Professions Respond to Lapses in Usage , 1981 .

[23]  Carla J. Groom,et al.  Gender Differences in Language Use: An Analysis of 14,000 Text Samples , 2008 .

[24]  Geoffrey K. Pullum 50 years of stupid grammar advice , 2009 .

[25]  Joseph M. Williams The Phenomenology of Error. , 1981 .

[26]  Anne Haas Dyson,et al.  On Saying It Right (Write): "Fix-Its" in the Foundations of Learning to Write. , 2006 .

[27]  Jan H. Spyridakis,et al.  Plain Language in Environmental Policy Documents: An Assessment of Reader Comprehension and Perceptions , 2012 .

[28]  Randy Hines,et al.  Do Communication Students Have the “Write Stuff”?: Practitioners Evaluate Writing Skills of Entry-Level Workers , 2009 .

[29]  T. Chartrand,et al.  The antecedents and consequences of human behavioral mimicry. , 2013, Annual review of psychology.

[30]  Larry Beason,et al.  Ethos and Error: How Business People React to Errors , 2001, College Composition & Communication.

[31]  Jefrey S. Naidoo,et al.  Rhetorical Move Structure in High-Tech Marketing White Papers , 2017 .

[32]  Kristen K. Shanine,et al.  Student‐recruited samples in organizational research: A review, analysis, and guidelines for future research , 2014 .

[33]  J. Gilsdorf,et al.  Language in Change: Academics' and Executives' Perceptions of Usage Errors , 1990 .

[34]  W. Robinson,et al.  Similarities and Differences in Perceptions and Evaluations of the Communication Styles of American and British Mangers , 2002 .

[35]  I. Barnard The Ruse of Clarity , 2010 .

[36]  Steven Pinker,et al.  The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person's Guide to Writing in the 21st Century , 2014 .

[37]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A META-ANALYSIS , 1991 .