The meaning of readability and its importance to librarians are disncssed. Flesch's formulae for measuring reading ease and human interest are examined and used to test the readability of fourteen library journals. Results show most to be rather dull and difficult. Readership could be increased by the application of the principles of more readable writing.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Flesch, R.F.What can you do about readability? Wilson Libr. Bull.15 May 1941, 752-754
2.
Dale, E. and Chall, J.S.A formula for predicting readability. Educ. Res. Bull.271948, II-20, 37-54.
3.
Gray, W.S. and Leary, B.What makes a book readable. Chicago, Univ. Chicago Press, 1935, 14.
4.
4 Ibid. 36.
5.
Gray and Leary, op cit, 130. See also McLaughlin, G.H.What makes prose understandable? U C L Doct. Diss., 1966.
6.
McLaughlin, G.H.Proposals for British readability measures. (In Downing, J. and Brown, A. L. eds. Third International Reading Symposium. Cassell , 1968.)
7.
See Klare, G.R.Measures of the readability of written communication: an evaluation. J. Educ. Psychol.431952, 385-399.
8.
See note 6.
9.
Gilliland, J.Readability. Univ. London Press, 1972 , 67.
10.
Flesch, R.F.A new readability yardstick. J. Appl. Psychol.321948, 221-233.
11.
Klare, G.R. and Campbell, L.R.Measuring the readability of higb school newspapers. Iowa, Quill and Scroll Foundation, 1967, 4.
12.
See Hayes, P.M., Jenkins, J.J. and Walker, B.J.Reliability of the Flesch readability formulas . J. Appl. Psychol.341950, 22-26; and England, G.W., Thomas, M. and Paterson, D.G.Reliability of the original and the simplified Flesch Reading Ease formulas . J. Appl. Psychol.37 April 1953, III-113.
13.
Klare, G.R.The measurement of readability. Iowa State Univ. Press , 1963, 110
14.
14 McLaughlin, G. H. Proposals for British readability measures, loc. cit.
15.
Bernstein, M.R.Relationship between interest and reading comprehension. J. Educ. Rts.49 December 1955, 283-288.
16.
Flesch, R.F.Dissenting opinion on readability. Elementary English261949, 332.
17.
Flesch, R.F.Measuring the level of abstraction, J. Appl. Psychol.341950, 384-390.
18.
Jenkins, J.J. and Jones, R.L.Flesch's "Measuring the level of abstraction ". J. Appl. Psychol.351951, 69.
19.
Flesch, R.F.Reply to criticism by Jenkins and Jones. J. Appl. Psycbol.351951, 69.
20.
Gillie, P.J.A simplified formula for measuring abstraction in writing. J. Appl. Pscyhol.411957, 214-217.
21.
See Farr, J.N. , Jenkins, J.J. and Paterson, D.G.Simplification of Flesch Reading Ease formula . J. Appl. Psychol.351951, 333-337.
22.
22 Flesch, A new readability yardstick, loc. cit.
23.
Similar findings were reported by Watson, D.E., Rundquist, R.M. and Cottle, W.C.What's wrong with occupational materials? J. Counselling Psycbol.61959, 288-291, and by Yamamoto, K.College bulletin: for whom? College and Univcrsity, 411966, 340-347.
24.
Flesch, R.F.A new way to better English, New York, Harper, 1958, 134.
25.
Brooks, R.A.An investigation of the relationship between reading interest and comprchension . Ohio State Univ. Doct. Diss., 1971 .
26.
Bernstein, loc. cit.
27.
Ludwig, M.C.Hard words and human interest: their effects on readership. Journalism Q.261949, 67-71.
28.
Schramm, W.Measuring another dimension of newspaper readership. Journalism Q.241947, 293-306.
29.
Shnayder, S.W.Relationships between reading interest and reading comprehension. (In J. A. Figurel ed. Reading and realism, 1968Proceedings, Newark, Delaware, Int. Reading Assn, 1969, 698-702).
30.
Flesch, A new readability yardstick, loc. cit.
31.
31 Flesch, Reply to criticism by Jenkins and Jones, loc. cit.
32.
Funkhouser, G.R. and Maccoby, N.Communicating specialized science information ro a lay audience. J. Communication, 21 (I) 1971, 60.
33.
New York, Harper, I95I.
34.
34 op. cit.
35.
Farr, J.N. and Jenkins, J.J.Tables for use with the Flesch readability formulas. J. Appl. Psycbol.33 June 1949, 275-278.
36.
The measurement of readability, op. cit., I06
37.
Flesch, How to test readability, op. cit.
38.
See articles by Feld, B.Empirical test proves clarity adds readers . Editor and Publisher, 81 April 1948, 38; by Lyman, H.B.Flesch count and the readership of articles in a Midwestern farm paper. J. Appl. Psychol.331949, 78-80; and by Murphy, D.R.How plain talk increases readership 45%-66%. Printers' Ink , 2201947, 35-37.
39.
Psychological writing, easy and hard. Am. Psychologist, 21947, 230-235.
40.
How to test readability, op. cit. 44.
41.
The measurement of rcadability, op. cit. I8I
42.
Ludwig, loc. cit., I7I
43.
Shnayder, loc. cit., 700.
44.
Swanson, C.E. and Fox, H.G.Validity of readability formulas. J. Appl. Psychol.371953, 114-118.
45.
45 Proposals for British readability measures, loc. cit.
46.
The relationship of style difficulty to immediate retention and to acceptability of technical material. J. Educ. Psychol.461955, 287-295.
47.
loc. cit., 69.
48.
See note 39.
49.
op. cit., 5.
50.
What can you do about readability? loc. cit. , 753.
51.
Robinson, H.A.Readability of educational materials. (In W. M. LiftonEducating for tomorrow . New York, Wiley, 1970, 119-130.)
