The results from four studies are reported separately to test the idea that influential articles in psychology will be more readable than less influential ones. This idea is upheld when the papers involved are ones that have been highly rated by fellow colleagues (Studies 1 and 2) but it is not supported when the papers involved are highly-cited journal articles (Studies 3 and 4).
Amin & Mabe (2000) Mayur Amin and Michael Mabe, `Impact Factors: Use and Abuse', Perspectives in Publishing, 1: 1-6. (Available from m.amin@elsevier.co.uk)
2.
Armstrong (1980) J. Scott Armstrong, `Unintelligible Management Research and Academic Prestige', Interfaces, 10/2: 80-86.
3.
Bazerman (1983) Charles Bazerman, `Scientific Writing as a Social Act: A Review of the Literature of the Sociology of Science', in Paul V. Anderson, R. John Brockmann and Carolyn R. Miller (eds), New Essays in Technical and Scientific Communication: Research, Theory, Practice (Farmingdale, NY: Baywood Publishing Company): 156-184.
4.
Bazerman (1988) Charles Bazerman, Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press).
5.
Bottle et al. (1983) R.S. Bottle, J.S. Rennie, S. Russ and Z. Sarder, `Changes in the Communication of Chemical Information I: Some Effects of Growth', Journal of Information Science, 6: 103-108.
6.
Brown & McNeil (1966) Roger W. Brown and David McNeil, `The “Tip of the Tongue” Phenomenon', Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5/4: 325-337.
7.
Das (1990) B.K. Das, `Writing and Thinking, Journal of English and Foreign Languages, 6: 1-6.
8.
Davison & Green (1988) Alice Davison and Georgia M. Green (eds), Linguistic Complexity and Text Comprehension: Readability Issues Reconsidered (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum).
9.
de Solla Price (1965) Derek J. de Solla Price, `Networks of Scientific Papers', Science, 149 (30 July): 510-515.
10.
Dorn (1985) Frederick F. Dorn, `Developing Your Publication Potential and Copyright Confidence', Journal of Counseling and Development, 63: 512-514.
11.
Elbow (1986) Peter Elbow, Embracing Contraries: Explorations in Learning and Teaching (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
12.
Elbow (2000) Peter Elbow, Everyone Can Write: Essays Toward a Hopeful Theory of Writing and Teaching Writing (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
13.
Flesch (1948) Rudolph Flesch, `A New Readability Yardstick', Journal of Applied Psychology, 32 (June): 221-223.
14.
Fowler & Fowler (1906) Henry W. Fowler and Francis G. Fowler, The King's English (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1st edn).
15.
Garfield (1992) Eugene Garfield, `Psychology Research, 1986-1990: A Citationist Perspective on the Highest Impact Papers, Institutions, and Authors', Current Contents, 41 (12 October), 155-165; reprinted in Essays of an Information Scientist (Philadelphia, PA: ISI Press), Vol. 15: 155-65.
16.
Gibson & Walk (1960) Eleanor J. Gibson and Richard D. Walk, `The “Visual Cliff”', Scientific American, 202/4 (April): 64-71.
17.
Halliday (1994) M.A.K. Halliday, Introduction to Functional Grammar (London: Edward Arnold, 2nd edn).
18.
Harrison & Bakker (1998) Sandra Harrison and Paul Bakker, `Two New Readability Predictors for the Professional Writer: Pilot Trials', Journal of Research in Reading, 21/2: 121-138.
19.
Hartley (1994) James Hartley, Designing Instructional Text (London: Kogan Page, 3rd edn).
20.
Hartley (1999) James Hartley, `From Structured Abstracts to Structured Articles: A Modest Proposal', Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 29/3: 255-270.
21.
Hartley & Trueman (1992) James Hartley and Mark Trueman, `Some Observations on Using Journal Articles in the Teaching of Psychology', Psychology Teaching Review, 1/1: 46-51.
22.
Hartley, Howe & McKeachie (2001) James Hartley, Michael J.A. Howe and Wilbert J. McKeachie, `Writing through Time: Longitudinal Studies of the Effects of New Technologies on Writing', British Journal of Educational Technology, 32/2: 141-151.
23.
Hock (1992) Roger R. Hock, Forty Studies that Changed Psychology: Explorations in the History of Psychological Research (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).
24.
Hyland (2001) Kenneth Hyland, `Humble Servants of the Discipline? Self-Mention in Research Articles', English for Specific Purposes, 20/3: 207-226.
25.
Langer & Flihan (2000) Judith Langer and Sheila Flihan, `Writing and Reading Relationships: Constructive Tasks', in Roselmina Indrisano and James R. Squire (eds), Perspectives on Writing (Newark, DE: International Reading Association): 112-139.
26.
Lea & Street (2000) Mary R. Lea and Brian Street, `Student Writing and Staff Feedback in Higher Education: An Academic Literacies Approach', in Mary R. Lea and Barry Steirer (eds), Student Writing in Higher Education (Buckingham, UK: Open University Press): 32-46.
27.
Levy & Ransdell (1995) Michael C. Levy and Sarah E. Ransdell, `Is Writing as Difficult as it Seems?', Memory and Cognition, 23/6: 767-779.
28.
Loxterman, Beck & McKeown (1994) Jane A. Loxterman, Isobel L. Beck and Margaret McKeown, `The Effects of Thinking Aloud during Reading on Students' Comprehension of More or Less Coherent Text', Reading Research Quarterly, 29: 353-367.
29.
McConnell & Gorenflo (1989) James V. McConnell and David W. Gorenflo (eds), Classic Readings in Psychology (Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart & Winston).
30.
Mahoney (1976) Michael J. Mahoney, Scientist as Subject: The Psychological Imperative (Cambridge, MA: Ballinger).
31.
Murray (2001) Rowena E.G. Murray, `Integrating Teaching and Research through Writing Development for Students and Staff', Active Learning in Higher Education, 2/1: 31-45.
32.
Pennebaker & Francis (1999) James W. Pennebaker and Martha E. Francis, Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC): A Computer-Based Text Analysis Program (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum).
33.
Pennebaker & King (1999) James W. Pennebaker and Laura A. King, `Linguistic Styles: Language Use as an Individual Difference', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77/6: 1296-1312.
34.
Popping (2000) Roel Popping, Computer-Assisted Text Analysis (London: Sage).
35.
Rose & McClafferty (2001) Michael Rose and Karen A. McClafferty, `A Call for the Teaching of Writing in Graduate Education', Educational Researcher, 30/2: 27-33.
36.
Salomone (1993) Paul Salomone, `Trade Secrets for Crafting Conceptual Articles', Journal of Counseling Development, 72/1: 73-76.
37.
Shelley & Schuh (2001) Mack Shelley and John H. Schuh, `Are the Best Higher Education Journals Really the Best? A Meta-Analysis of Writing Quality and Readability', Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 33/1: 11-22.
38.
Smith (1996) T. Raymond Smith, Writing in Psychology (New York: Wiley, 2nd edn).
39.
Tenopir & Jacso (1993) Carol Tenopir and Peter Jacso, `Quality of Abstracts', Online, 17/3: 44-55.
40.
Torrance, Thomas & Robinson (2000) Mark Torrance, Glyn V. Thomas and Elizabeth J. Robinson, `Individual Differences in Undergraduate Essay Writing Strategies: A Longitudinal Study', Higher Education, 39/2: 181-200.
41.
Turing (1950) Alan M. Turing, `Computing Machinery and Intelligence', Mind, LIX/236: 433-460.
42.
Turnbull (1961) Colin M. Turnbull, `Some Observations Regarding the Experiences and Behavior of the BaMbuti Pygmies', American Journal of Psychology, 74/2: 304-308.
43.
van Leeuwen et al. (2001) Thed N. van Leeuwen, Henk F. Moed, Robert J.W. Tijssen, Martyn S. Visser and Anthony F.J. van Raan, `Language Biases in the Coverage of the Science Citation Index and Its Consequences for International Comparisons of National Research Performance', Scientometrics, 51/1: 335-346.
44.
Wells (1907) Frederic L. Wells, `A Statistical Study of Literary Merit', Archives of Psychology, 7 (August): 1-30.
