Eliminate excessive and unnecessary acronyms from your scientific writing
Source: https://sspinnovations.com/blog/know-your-gis-and-non-gis-abbreviations-acronyms-and-initialisms/
I can’t say that there was a specific moment when I noticed it happening more often. Either it is increasing in frequency or it is testing my patience more these days. That is the tendency for authors to introduce numerous and unnecessary acronyms in their manuscripts.
These authors abbreviate phrases, geographical locations, and scientific terminology with acronyms rather than spell them out. And, I’m not talking about such common acronyms such as DNA, NASA, and COVID-19. It can get so bad that the sentences end up looking like alphabet soup.
During Hurricane Joe’s RI, the VWS and RHUM near the storm’s center were not supportive of intensification. Instead, the RI was related to high TCHP, CBs, and UTWAA. The high SST near CH in the NAO limited the SST cooling by the hurricane, and thus enhanced the ASHE, triggering CBs.
I can imagine several reasons why authors might choose a large number of acronyms.
- Saves them the time and effort by not typing out the same words and phrases over and over again.
- Less likely to make spelling mistakes.
- Easier to see the sentence structure and identify any grammatical errors.
- Thinks the readers prefer reading fewer words.
Although these reasons may make sense at first consideration, I would argue that introducing unnecessary and uncommon acronyms makes it difficult for readers to follow the text, and because we write for our audience not ourselves, the readers should take precedence.
Spock gets it right.
Readers have to remember what the acronyms were that were introduced, and when a reader can’t remember, it slows down reading the manuscript. Also, acronyms make it difficult for readers who don’t read the manuscript linearly from introduction to conclusion, but instead skip around through the manuscript, to get the relevant information they require. A table of acronyms may seem like a good solution, but that still requires the reader encountering an acronym and not remembering what it means to have to find the table and look up the acronym.
And I’m not the only one who feels this way.
Business Writing: “Acronyms Make Me Work Too Hard!”
The Start Up: “Acronyms Are Making You Dumb.”
Zobel (2004): Writing for Computer Science
If authors desire, they can draft their manuscript with the acronyms, then do a global search of the manuscript and replace all occurrences right before submission. (Microsoft Word has the “Replace” command, often found under the “Find” command.)
Alternatively, if you have an acronym for a long name, can it just be said more simply after first introduced? For example, if you have an acronym “XYZV”, where “V” stands for “vortex”, could you introduce the full name of this vortex, then just call it “the vortex” throughout the rest of the manuscript?
If you must include acronyms, then follow these guidelines.
- If the acronym is more commonly recognized than its expanded form (e.g., DNA rather than deoxyribonucleic acid), use the acronym.
- If you use an acronym, define it upon first usage (e.g., “the relative humidity (RH) of the air”).
- Be consistent throughout the manuscript. Don’t drift in and out of the acronym.
- If you only need to use the acronym a few times, don’t introduce it at all.
- Some journals have preferred lists of acronyms. [For example, you can find the AMS list here.] Follow the journal’s guidance, if so.
All authors should rethink whether any acronym is necessary, and eliminate many, if not all, nonstandard acronyms in their manuscripts. Doing so will improve readability and make it easier on the readers.
