Abstract
The Flesch Reading Ease measure is widely used to measure the difficulty of text in various disciplines, including Scientometrics. This letter/paper argues that the measure is now outdated, used inappropriately, and unreliable.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Badarudeen, S., & Sabharwal, S. (2010). Assessing readability of patient information materials. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 468, 2572–2580.
Barbic, S. P., et al. (2015). Readability assessment of psychiatry journals. European Science Editing, 41(1), 3–10.
Dale, E., & Chall, J. S. (1948). The concept of readability. Elementary English, 26, 19–26.
Didegah, F., & Thelwall, M. (2013). Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties? Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 861–873.
Flesch, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32(3), 221–233.
Harris, R. (1996). Variation among style checkers in sentence measurement. Text Technology, 6(2), 80–90.
Hartley, J. (1994). Designing instructional text (3rd ed.). London: Kogan Page.
Hartley, J. (2015). Making writing readable. The Psychologist, 28(4), 254–255.
Klare, G. R. (1963). The measurement of readability. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Mailloux, S. L., Johnson, M. E., Fisher, D. G., & Pettibone, T. J. (1995). How reliable is computerized assessment of readability? Computers in Nursing, 13(5), 221–225.
McLaughlin, G. (1969). SMOG grading—A new readability formula. Journal of Reading, 22, 639–646.
Menoni, V., Lucas, N., Leforestier, J. F., Dimet, J., Doz, F., Chatellier, G., et al. (2010). The readability of information and consent forms in clinical research in France. PLoS One, 5, e1056.
Paudyal, P., Capel-Williams, G. M., Griffiths, E., Theadom, A., Frew, A. J., & Smith, H. E. (2015). Readability, presentation and quality of allergy-related patient information: A cross sectional and longitudinal study. Journal of Allergy and Therapy, 6, 213. doi:10.4172/2156121.1000213.
Sydes, M., & Hartley, J. (1997). A thorn in the Flesch: Observations on the unreliability of computer-based readability formulae. British Journal of Educational Technology, 28(2), 143–145.
Taylor, W. L. (1953). “Cloze procedure”: A new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly, 30, 415–433.
van Wesel, M., Wyatt, S., & ten Haaf, J. (2014). What a difference a colon makes: How superficial factors influence subsequent citation. Scientometrics, 98, 1601–1605.
Zhou, S., Green, P. A. & Jeong, H. (2016, in preparation). How consistent are the best-known readability equations in estimating the readability of design standards? (Copies available from pagreen@umich.edu).
Acknowledgments
I am extremely grateful to Guillaume Cabanac for submitting this paper to Scientometrics for me.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2123-y.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hartley, J. Is time up for the Flesch measure of reading ease?. Scientometrics 107, 1523–1526 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1920-7
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1920-7