Because science writing is so broad, providing a comprehensive picture of the aspects of, strategies for, and types of science writing is beyond the scope of this introductory website. This literature review highlights the key features of science writing emphasized in various peer reviewed journal articles on the subject. Common themes include the importance of scientific writing to scientific progress and to society, writing as an essential part of the scientific process, dynamism of science writing, and the qualities of good science writing.
Each of the sources reviewed prefaced their discussion by pointing out the centrality of effective writing and communication to scientific progress and to society at large. Scientific progress is dependent upon collaboration between disciplines and involves building upon previously existing knowledge in order to discover new knowledge. In many cases, the ability of scientific knowledge to benefit the society is dependent on communicating that knowledge to a relevant audience. In their article "Knowledge Management and Pharmaceutical Development Teams: Using Writing to Guide Science," Bernhardt et al (2000) use an instance of faulty drug labeling as an example of an instance in which science writing can have serious consequences for human life (p. 24).
Bernard et al (2000) also present a compelling argument for the integration of writing into the scientific method rather than its traditional use as a "simple recording activity" that takes place at the very end of a scientific process (p.26). This approach, they claim, can enhance collaboration, communication, and eventual outcomes within a technical organization, while also allowing professional writers and scientists alike to form documents that have enhanced clarity and are better suited for their intended audiences. Doing so enables writing to be not just a way of communicating scientific information, but also a "way to guide the writing and the teamwork,"enabling team members to engage in "substantive conflict and to reach consensus on difficult issues" (p.26).
In "Writing and Conceptual Learning for Science," Gere et al (2019) similarly advocate for the integration of writing/scientific writing into the scientific process. They discuss the results of numerous research studies in which students in technical disciplines engaged in a practice called "writing to learn," in which students are made to record concepts they have been taught. They demonstrate how the writing process helps learners conceptualize and organize information, thereby enhancing retention and understanding. In "The Scientific Style Manual: A Reliable Guide to Practice,"Harmon and Gross (1996) write that "writing a scientific article is not a matter of faithfully reconstructing the process of discovery, but an essential part of the creative process itself" (p. 66).
Thus, writing is relevant not just to the communication stage of science, but also to the education and collaboration stages.
In "The Scientific Style Manual: A Reliable Guide to Practice," Harmon and Gross (1996) discuss how, while many scientific research articles follow a standard IMRAD (introduction, methods, results, analysis, discussion) format, style, and conventions, even for this limited genre of science writing, have changed significantly since such their introduction. They write "the scientific argument is the product of more than three centuries of evolution, the first ones having appeared in 1665” (p. 62). A prime example is the increasing emphasis modern science writing places on the use of visuals in scientific texts. They also acknowledge how different genres of science writing vary significantly in terms of their audience approach and purpose, stating that each genre "has its own quite separate conventions, its own process of literary reasoning, and its own standard of argument” (p. 66)
In his article “Disciplinary Style Manuals as Reliable Guides to Scientific Practice,” Hagge (1997) points out that though science writing is quite broad, and different writing strategies must be applied in different contexts, there are several important aspects of good science writing that are consistent across all these contexts (p. 134). In particular, Hagge writes that science writing must be “clear, concise, and well organized” and that data presentation should be restricted to “relevant, manageable bits of data” (p. 134). Hagge also points out the importance of readability, plain language, and accessibility (through the use of various headings and subheadings) across all science writing categories (p. 134).
Introduction to Science Writing
References for Science Writing