They say fences make for better neighbors. But the opposite is true with communications: You want as few barriers between you and your audience as possible.
One of the most common roadblocks in science communication is jargon.
A 2017 paper highlights this trend, and says scientists are even using more jargon when communicating amongst themselves! The authors studied 123 scientific journals, from 1881 to 2015, and concluded that research papers are getting harder to read.1
“Our analyses show that this trend [increasing readability] is indicative of a growing use of general scientific jargon,” write the authors. “These results are concerning for scientists and for the wider public, as they impact both the reproducibility and accessibility of research findings.”
A more recent paper says that papers that use jargon in the title and abstract have fewer citations.2 The authors recommendations are “urge scientists to restrict jargon to sections of the paper where its use is unavoidable.”
Using a lot of jargon increases your readability, which I covered here. Jargon also can be a foreign language to the general public, increasing confusion over your presentation.
My analogy for jargon is this: Each time you use a word that is more difficult for your audience, you lay down a brick. With each new jargon word, you add a new brick. And that’s how communications walls (or fences) get built, one brick at a time, shutting down the transfer of information. Some bricks are bigger than others…and some are even boulders.
Another way of thinking of jargon is that is slows down your receiver’s brain. Think of the word “input.” It’s not a difficult word in theory. When an agronomist thinks of input, they are usually thinking seed, water, etc. Data scientists might think of input as a part of a calculation. But most of the public is thinking “feedback” or “contribution.” Right there, you’ve created a short disconnect to your audience, which slows their understanding, even with a simple word.
Example: If you’re talking about gardening and say, “considering your inputs is important.” Right there you have thrown out a jargon term, albeit a simple one. It’s best to refer to the direct input – seed, water, soil, whatever you mean. And if you mean them all, state them all. It’s a better alternative than to confuse your audience with the jargon “input.”
Example: I once was interviewing a scientist about biofuels. They spoke quickly, which was difficult enough over the phone. But then they said, “C four” (this is how my brain heard it). Right away I was confused. What did they mean? Based on my personal background, I knew C4 was part of a chemical formula. I knew C-4 was an explosive. But I had not yet learned of the fascinating world of C3, C4 and CAM with relation to photosynthesis. You can imagine how far behind my brain was from this fast-speaking scientist as I tried to figure out the meaning of “C four” within the context of our conversation. I had to interrupt and ask for clarification.
The best way to get around the jargon issue when communicating to the public is simple: don’t use jargon. At the very least if you must use jargon – acknowledge and explain. It’s not easy to give up old habits, but this blog is here to help! Many of the bloggers I’m privileged to work with have told me that not only have they enjoyed blogging – and getting correct information out to the public – but they’ve learned a lot about editing in the process.
Let’s look at a few of the biggest jargon offenders, with a few different alternatives.
- Amendment: Most people associate this word with legal documents. Use addition, fertilizer.
- Mitigate: Use reduce, avoid, relieve, curb, soften, ease, lessen, or prevent. They might not be an exact fit for your topic, but they are close.
- Remediate: Use repair, fix, improve.
- Ameliorate: Use improve, cushion, resolve.
- Modality: Use technique, method.
- Nexus: Use intersection, link, connection.
- Model/ing: This word alone, in the context of science communications, needs a little bit of explanation. You’re not just creating a model. You’re creating a model to help predict/manage or some other action, so always use those qualifiers, like predictive-model or mathematical model. Otherwise, your listeners’ brains will bring up the image of Tara Banks – or the latest super model.
- Elucidate: find, clarify, determine.
By simplifying the language you use to explain your (complicated) research to the public, you improve your science communications.
If you have a pet peeve jargon word, please leave it in the comments below, and it could be part of a future blog!
One final thought on jargon. Granting bodies receive a lot of proposals. The readers often fit the profile of the average college graduate, and member of the public. If you reduced the amount of jargon in your grant proposal, could you get more approvals?
Written by Susan V. Fisk, BS(Chem), M.Ed., MBA. Copyright by author.
Do you want more help with your science communications? Contact me at TrulyRelatableScience@gmail.com for estimates on editing your professional web pages, public presentations, grant proposals, or to Zoom into your classroom/lab for a workshop!
Read more #SciComm blogs:
Relatable Science 
5 thoughts on “Clean out your “jargon” closet!”