Repost: How to Write Papers That Get Cited and Proposals That Get Funded

Excerpted from Writing Science: How to Write Papers That Get Cited and Proposals That Get Funded

Writing in Science

As a scientist, you are also a professional writer

A scientist’s success depends not only on the quality of ideas in their mind or the data in their hands, but even more on the language used to describe them. Your success, achieved by having your papers cited, hinges on influence. However, success is not just about writing per se, but about effective writing. In fact, many leaders in various fields stand out because they articulate their ideas clearly and effectively, building connections with readers.

Clear Writing and Clear Thinking: Which Comes First?

A common misconception is: to write clearly, you must first think clearly. But no matter how reasonable your thinking about a particular problem may be (or may seem), no matter how detailed your intentions and plans, the act of writing almost always rebels, filled with unexpected difficulties, detours, dead ends, and revelations. Good, clear writing—writing that educates and does not confuse—emerges from a series of struggles, or if you prefer, litigations. Usually, the terms in the above formula need to be reversed: Clear thinking can emerge from clear writing.

Focusing on clear writing forces you to think more clearly. Improving your writing will help you succeed, not only because it allows you to express your ideas more effectively and reach a wider audience, but also because it clarifies your thinking, making your science better.

The Value of Writing: Giving Science a Voice

Our careers are built step by step—our peers read our papers, use our ideas; the more papers we publish and the more citations we receive, the more successful we become. However, our work is read and cited because our ideas are well articulated and readers can understand us. Our proposals get funded because we can express our ideas to reviewers clearly, powerfully, and convincingly.

Therefore, our success comes not only from the intrinsic quality of our ideas, but also from our ability to communicate them.

Writing: An Essential Tool in Scientific Research

Although writing papers is very important, for most scientists, it is something we do after the fact. Once we have the data, we “write” the paper. This approach is unfortunate.

Writing is not just a means of communication, but a tool that needs to be honed, as complex and subtle as any technique in molecular biology. Scientists should study and develop this skill, treating writing as they would any experimental tool.

Make the Reader’s Job Easy

As an author, your job is to make the reader’s job easy. This may be the foundation of all other principles, so let’s repeat it, louder. As an author, your job is to make the reader’s job easy.

Clear writing helps readers quickly grasp your points, rather than getting lost in convoluted expression. What you provide is not a difficult puzzle, but direct and effective scientific information.

A bad first draft is the starting point for every good writer. Excellent work often comes from constant rewriting and revision. Just as an artist can never truly finish a piece but only choose to let go at some point, so it is with writing. The process of rewriting not only hones your writing skills but also deepens your thinking.

Revision is the essence of writing. Professional writers revise sentences over and over, constantly adjusting structure. Writing is painful but necessary. From a bad first draft to an excellent third draft requires countless rewrites. This cycle of revision develops both your writing skills and your thinking, moving both toward clarity and power.

Science Writing as Storytelling

A good story cannot be designed; it must be distilled

When scientists tell stories, they use a formal structure, quite different from the narrative style of journalists. However, many scientists are uncomfortable with the concept of “storytelling.” The reason is that the word “story” is often associated with fiction, while science must remain objective and dispassionate. This misunderstanding leads scientists to do a poor job of highlighting the story in their work, merely “presenting their work.” As a result, even science journalists may struggle to find a story in it.

From Scientific Data to Scientific Story

Papers build stories from data, but data itself is not the story. The core of a scientific story is extracting meaning from data, not imposing a framework before collecting data. The story should naturally emerge from the data, not be forced. Scientific stories are not fiction, but objective evaluation and interpretation of data. The most cited papers and the most funded proposals are those that tell the most compelling stories.

Why Science Needs Storytelling

Science’s ability to influence public life and policy is facing a crisis. Science is often misunderstood or even distorted, and scientists usually choose to communicate with policymakers by “stating facts,” which is no different from tourists trying to speak louder English to locals who don’t understand English. The goal of scientific writing is to turn data into understanding. Scientists are responsible not only for collecting data, but also for presenting the story within the data clearly. In a paper, data is only a supporting role; the protagonist is the problem you are solving and its significance. Effective science communication requires storytelling to help readers and decision-makers understand in a more engaging way.

Discovering New Stories at the Edge of Data, Refining Good Stories

Exploring the boundaries of data often reveals more important scientific stories. For example, Bill Dietrich, in studying the relationship between soil depth and slope steepness, focused on outliers in the data, which revealed hidden issues in geological structures and inspired new research directions. Exploring the limits of data is difficult, but it can bring new perspectives and discoveries.

Writing is a process from complexity to simplicity. Although the final product is a concise story, the process requires exploring the boundaries of data and repeated refinement. If you impose a simple story from the start, you may overlook profound meanings in the data. Deep dialogue with data not only finds answers but also broadens the context of the problem and stimulates deeper thinking.

The ultimate goal of scientific writing is to help readers understand complex issues. By listening carefully to the data, scientists can uncover the stories hidden within. During writing, repeated revision not only polishes the text but also promotes the scientist’s own thinking and academic growth. Therefore, rather than rushing to publish, take time to think and write, and let your paper tell a meaningful story. A good story can launch a career, while a mediocre one leaves you lost in the crowd.

Three Key Elements of Scientific Writing

Content: What kind of story is engaging and memorable?
Structure: How do you organize content to make it easier to understand?
Language: How do you craft the story in an engaging way?

These three elements form the foundation of scientific writing. When scientists realize that writing a paper is telling a story, they become not only better writers but also better scientists.

Making a Story Sticky

Make your story “stick”—a “sticky” idea is more likely to have an impact.

To evaluate whether a story is successful, ask yourself: How long did this story stay with me?

Some stories are engaging while reading but are quickly forgotten, like light reading on a plane. Others take root in your mind and even become classics passed down through generations. In science, our goal is to write enduring papers—those that generate long-term citations, the so-called “long-tail” papers. As someone described, a good paper “has legs” and can maintain its influence over time.

Why Are Some Ideas More “Sticky”?

In the book “Made to Stick,” Chip Heath and Dan Heath pose a key question: Why are some ideas memorable while others fade quickly? They summarize six elements that make ideas “sticky,” using the mnemonic “SUCCES”:

S: Simple — Good ideas don’t need to be complicated; they are clear and straightforward. A core idea in one sentence is more powerful than a lengthy exposition.
U: Unexpected — Surprising elements break conventional thinking and spark curiosity. For example, counterintuitive scientific findings often attract more attention.
C: Concrete — Abstract concepts are hard to relate to, while concrete examples and details make ideas easier to understand and remember.
C: Credible — Credibility is enhanced through data, authoritative references, or personal experience, making the story convincing.
E: Emotional — Evoking emotion is a powerful way to make stories memorable. Even in scientific writing, you can touch readers by relating to human well-being.
S: Stories — Finally, stories themselves are the best vehicles for information. Through narrative, complex scientific issues are transformed into forms that readers can easily absorb.