Last Rites for Readability Formulas in Technical Communication
- 1 July 1999
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
- Vol. 29 (3), 271-287
- https://doi.org/10.2190/6ewh-j5c5-av1x-kdgj
Abstract
Some reading researchers and technical communicators assume the efficacy of readability formulas. Reading researchers use such formulas to equalize the reading difficulty of texts used in experiments. Results of an informal Internet survey indicate that some professional writers and editors use readability formulas that are integrated into word-processing software. This article proposes that readability formulas fail to predict text difficulty. The results of an experiment demonstrate that “text difficulty” is a perception of the reader and therefore cannot be objectively calculated by counting syllables, word length, sentence length, and other text characteristics.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Nominalizations vs. Denominalizations: Do They Influence What Readers Recall?Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 1998
- On The Language InstinctPublished by American Psychological Association (APA) ,1994
- A procedure for determining the level of abstraction of science reading materialJournal of Research in Science Teaching, 1991
- The Readability Controversy: A Technical Writing ReviewJournal of Technical Writing and Communication, 1990
- READABILITY FORMULAS: AN OVERVIEWJournal of Documentation, 1987
- How Consistently Do Readability Tests Measure the Difficulty of Newswriting?Newspaper Research Journal, 1984
- Is Reading Rate Constant or Flexible?Reading Research Quarterly, 1983
- Measurement of the effects of purpose and passage difficulty on reading flexibility.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1981
- Efects of Quantification in Scientific WritingJournal of Communication, 1976
- The Relative Influence of Material and Purpose on Reading RatesThe Journal of Educational Research, 1959