Scientometrics

, Volume 109, Issue 3, pp 2119–2122 | Cite as

Are two authors better than one? Can writing in pairs affect the readability of academic blogs?

Article

Abstract

The literature on academic writing suggests that writing in pairs leads to more readable papers than writing alone. We wondered whether academic blog posts written alone or in pairs would vary in style. We collected a corpus of 104 posts published with the LSE Impact of the Social Sciences blog. We found no differences in average sentence length between single- and co-authored posts. However, the posts written in pairs were slightly less readable than the single-authored posts, which challenges the current view on the advantages of writing in pairs.

Keywords

Academic writing Blogging Coauthorship Text Readability 

Supplementary material

11192_2016_2116_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (14 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (xlsx 14 KB)

References

  1. Bornmann, L., & Haunschild, R. (2016). Relative citation ratio (RCR): An empirical attempt to study a new field-normalized bibliometric indicator. Journal of the Association of Information Science and Technology. doi:10.1002/asi.23729.Google Scholar
  2. Flesch, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32(3), 221–233. doi:10.1037/h0057532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Frandsen, T. F., & Nicolaisen, J. (2010). What is in a name? Credit assignment practices in different disciplines. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 608–617. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.06.010.
  4. Gazni, A., & Thelwall, M. (2014). The long-term influence of collaboration on citation patterns. Research Evaluation, 23(3), 261–271. doi:10.1093/reseval/rvu014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hartley, J. (2003). Single authors are not alone: Colleagues often help. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 34(2), 108–113. doi:10.3138/jsp.34.2.108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hartley, J. (2008). Academic writing and publishing. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Hartley, J. (2016a). Is time up for the Flesch measure of reading ease? Scientometrics, 107(3), 1523–1526. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1920-7.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hartley, J. (2016b). Is it true that papers written by joint-authors are cited more than articles written by single ones? What else matters? Scientometrics, 106(2), 817–818. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1799-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hartley, J., & Cabanac, G. (2015). An academic odyssey: Writing over time. Scientometrics, 103(3), 1073–1082. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1562-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hu, Z., Chen, C., & Liu, Z. (2014). How are collaboration and productivity correlated at various career stages of scientists? Scientometrics, 101(2), 1553–1564. doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1323-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lewison, G., & Hartley, J. (2005). What’s in a title? Number of words and the presence of colons. Scientometrics, 63(2), 341–356. doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0216-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Speck, B. W., Johnson, T. R., Dice, C. P., & Heaton, L. B. (1999). Collaborative writing: An annotated bibliography. Westport CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  13. Thelwall, M., & Sud, P. (2016). National, disciplinary and temporal variations in the extent to which articles with more authors have more impact: Evidence from a geometric field normalised citation indicator. Journal of Informetrics, 10(1), 48–61. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Zhao, L. M., Zhang, Q. P., & Wang, L. (2014). Benefit distribution mechanism in team members’ scientific research collaboration network. Scientometrics, 100(2), 363–389. doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1322-7.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of PsychologyKeele UniversityStaffordshireUK
  2. 2.Computer Science Department, IRIT UMR 5505 CNRSUniversity of ToulouseToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations