October, 2014
Revised July, 2019
While academic writing is to be a terse, succinct expression of the information given, excellence in writing nevertheless requires the writer to be a skilled presenter of integrated material. Sometimes, when I read a paper I cannot help but think about cookies. WHAT?! Let me explain.
My kids love chocolate chip cookies. We work to see how many individual cookies we can get from a batch of cookie dough. But some people prefer a cookie bar to an individual cookie. The ingredients are the same; the composition of the dough is the same; the only difference is that one method presents the final product in one continuous form while the other method results in smaller, bite-sized chunks of cookie.
To me, writing an academic paper is kind of like preparing a batch of cookies. The information can be presented in one continuous, integrated body of information (like a cookie bar), or it can be presented in chunks, like the individual cookie. Both methods work; both methods produce the same results. BUT – what is important to remember is that a cookie bar approach is the preferred method of information presentation. Sure, we can drop a bit of information here, another piece of data there, but have we truly integrated what we are presenting or are we simply scooping up bits of research and throwing them on the cookie pan of the paper?
Don’t get caught in the cookie scoop mentality. Your job is to show that the information you have gathered fits with previous research, others’ opinions, and your own information. A + B may result in C, or it may end up aligning more closely with D. But A should never just be dropped into the paper to stand all alone. Here’s what I mean.
Stress has the ability to affect an employee’s mental and physical health. De Dreu et al. (2004) conducted a study on the effects of conflict on personal well-being. The study found that conflict that is not mediated does affect long-term health of the employees in that workplace. In addition to De Dreu et al., Volmer et al. (2012) conducted a similar study on the relationship of prolonged exposure to stress on employees and its effect on their personal lives. The researchers found that prolonged untreated exposure to stress does have a negative effect on the personal lives of employees.
The author wants to talk about stress’s effect on mental and physical health. It is clear that he has done some research on the topic. He uncovered a study by De Dreu et al. (2004) and also a study by Volmer et al. (2012). Each study has similar outcomes – long-term exposure to stress can lead to deficits in health and functioning. But that’s where his integration ends. He makes a statement: stress has the ability to affect an employee’s mental and physical health.
Using our cookie analogy, that’s like saying, “I plan to make cookies.” Then, the author tells us what De Dreu et al. (2004) said about stress and health. Boom – he dropped a scoop of cookie dough on the pan. Next, the author decides to support De Dreu et al. (2004) by telling us what Volmer et al. (2012) said on the subject. Boom – another scoop of cookie dough. And the result? We have Statement A, supported by Statement B, also supported by Statement C, but the only thing connecting B to C is that little phrase, “In addition to…” Yes – we are still working with cookie dough, and yes, we plan to put that dough on the same pan as the earlier scoop of dough, but that’s where the connection ends.
Not only did the author fail to integrate his two authors and discuss their similarities, he failed to fully explain how stress affects mental and physical health. Unmediated conflict and prolonged exposure are two scoops of cookie dough. They are separate, and not continuous, pieces of information. A more succinct, and synthesized re-write of this paragraph would include not only what each individual study looked at, but an explanation of how that information supports the author’s claim. Furthermore, the author should attempt to explain why he makes the claim, “In addition to…”This is integration. You don’t have to sacrifice synthesis in order to meet the demands of succinctness. (And by the way, here’s some extra flavor for your cookie: “in addition to” is a poor transition phrase; instead, try words like “furthermore,” “likewise,” or “similarly.”)
So, here’s a SUGGESTED RE-WRITE:
Researchers have emphasized the ability stress has to affect an employee’s mental and physical health (De Dreu et al., 2004; Volmer et al., 2012). Unmediated conflict (De Dreu et al., 2004) as well as prolonged exposure to stress (Volmer et al., 2012) are two stressors that can and do impact healthy functioning.
This simple re-wording of the paragraph’s contents resulted in a greatly reduced word count (99 to 51) and yet did not sacrifice any of the author’s intent. Sadly, the shorter re-write also contains everything the author had to say on the subject, and leaves the reader with questions: “What kind of effect?” “What does he mean by ‘personal well-being’ or ‘personal lives’? “What does healthy functioning look like?” It’s as though he told us, “Hey! I made cookies! Come get some!” We run into the kitchen to find only two cookies. What a disappointment! Instead of a full batch of cookies, the author baked only two cookies and hid the rest of the dough, forcing the reader to hunt for the information the author should have provided. This author sacrificed in two ways – 1) He failed to integrate information, and 2) he left out important synthesizing information in an attempt to remain concise. The result was 99 words of almost useless material.
Bottom line? Academic writing is all about making a cookie bar rather than an individual cookie. All the same goodness, gooiness, and texture, just more of it in one place, and no hidden bowls of cookie dough. Happy eating!
For more help with writing flow, synthesis, and succinctness, contact me at keresa@uniquelykeresa.com or on Facebook at Uniquely Keresa Dissertation Consulting & Editing Services.
Kerry’s Best Chocolate Chip Cookies
Preheat oven to 375 degrees
1 c. brown sugar, packed
½ c. white sugar
2 sticks (1 c.) margarine or butter, slightly softened
2 eggs
1 tsp. vanilla
2-3 c. flour, depending on consistency desired
1 tsp. baking soda
1 tsp. salt
1-2 c. chocolate chips, as desired
nuts, as desired
Cream together sugars and butter until smooth. Mix in eggs and vanilla until incorporated. Add baking soda, salt, and flour (1 c. at a time until desired consistency – do not use less than 2 c. or more than 3 c.). Mix by hand until dough is stiff. Fold in chocolate chips and nuts. Chill for best results. Scoop individual cookies onto baking stone or cookie pan, placing 1-2 inches apart (less stiff dough will spread more), or place in a greased baking pan for cookie bars.
Bake cookies for 10-12 minutes until golden brown. Enjoy!
Comments