Is it okay to criticize authors because of how poorly their paper is written?

Question

I am currently reading a paper in my area which is very poorly written in my opinion. It is hard to understand the bigger picture of the paper. Now, I am just a student and my opinions might not be of that value but it is really difficult to understand the paper. It appears that everything in the paper is only implicitly stated. I took help of other better researchers (postdocs, profs) but they also face the difficulty of getting it properly. The authors of the paper are established researchers and the results are really great. But, I really want to tell them how bad the paper is so that when they write their next paper they also think about the readers. I wonder if their advisees also turn out like them. I just want to write a mail to them and tell them how a paper is written but I do not know if they will take it as constructive criticism. I am really mad.

Answer 1

As a reader

Its worth asking what you stand to gain or lose by emailing the authors or not doing so. A published paper is not going to change, so you have no chance that you will change the paper at this point. It is also not likely that the authors thank you for your completely out of the blue and unsolicited feedback on something outside of the science, so you are not going to impress anyone. There is some (but very small) chance that your feedback means that their writing will improve in subsequent papers, but for that to be the case, your feedback would need to go beyond just "I can't understand your writing", and contain constructive feedback, including specific suggestions for what particular parts of the writers style could be improved, and how they might go about doing that. Take it from someone who has provided feedback on a lot of writing - this is hard and long work. The only other benefit is that you will feel like you have done "something" about the thing that is making you mad, even if that something doesn't actually achieve anything.

On the other hand, you are likely to associate yourself with negative emotions in the minds of the authors - the best you can hope for is that they forget you. They don't need to be deliberately vindictive or retaliatory - this can be entirely subconscious. This can be true irrespective of whether they take your advice on board (or even thank you with the conscious part of their brain). This is just human nature. This could be particularly harmful if they are big names in the field.

This is not to say you should never disagree with a big name, or provide them with feedback at appropriate times. Good scientists will welcome feedback particularly on the science as it will lead to avenues for new investigation. But what is achieve must always be balanced against the downsides.

As a reviewer

As a reviewer of the paper as part of the peer review process things are slightly different. Generally, journals will provide fairly specific guidance on how to feedback on guidance. Usually you are not supposed to feedback on "style", but only those things that genuinely hamper your ability to understand the paper. You might say:

Assessing the work was difficult because I found the way it was written difficult to follow. For example, the meaning of 'Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.' was unclear.

You should also comment where things are genuinely ambiguous – for example:

The sentence 'Cras suscipit massa ipsum, ac tempus massa viverra et.' could be read as meaning either 'Nullam nec varius odio.' or 'Mauris sed ante posuere, euismod urna id, rhoncus erat' and which is not clear from the context.

If there are many typos in the text, point this out if it makes the text difficult to follow.

Be aware that it is not acceptable anymore to tell the authors to have a native speaker proofread the text. This is because:

• a) You have no idea if a native speaker has already proofread the text.
• b) Many non-native speakers are actually better at technical writing in English than many native English speakers.

In both cases it is never acceptable to criticize the authors. Make sure always that your are criticizing the paper, not the authors. The difference might seem meaningless, but it is vitally important.

Answer 2

Historical context: It's by no means unusual for important papers to be difficult to understand. It's rare that the seminal papers in a subject are the place to go to learn that subject. For example, few people choose Einstein's original papers as their place to go to learn relativity. Few people go to Feynman's original paper on path integrals to learn that. Few people go to Dirac's original paper to learn about the Dirac equation. A lot of people will read these articles for personal reasons or historical reasons. But they are not likely to be the text for those learning those subjects.

There are a few possible contributing reasons for this, some of them these:

• The first explanation may arise from the process the author used to get there. This is often not the easiest to understand explanation.
• The journal probably has some harsh limits on word count, diagrams, tables, etc.
• There has not been a process of refining notation for ease of reading.
• There may be language issues if the authors are not native speakers of the language they are publishing in.

So, there is quite a lot of room for writing pedagogical versions of research papers. If you have talent for writing clear prose that gets the idea across, maybe there is a future for you in writing textbooks. Or at least review articles that wind up on every grad student's desk for the next thirty years. I recall a Physics Reports issue on Yang Mills theory that nearly every grad student in particle physics had a copy of.

So a poorly written paper that yet has interesting results might be viewed as an opportunity to produce a better written, possibly expanded, version for a journal somewhat more focused on instruction. You might even get a collab with one or more of the authors of the article that confused you.

That is, turn an annoyance into an opportunity. Much like an oyster turns a grain of sand into a pearl.

Answer 3

From How to Win Friends and Influence People:

• The easiest way to make enemies is to criticize them.
• Criticizing people puts them on the defensive. They will dig in their heels and rationalize their actions.
  • Just consider, how often do you see people respond to criticism with "Yeah, I was wrong. I'll do better next time"? Then compare vs. the number of times people respond with "I did nothing wrong, but you did X, Y, and Z".
  • Abraham Lincoln is one of history's greatest leaders. In 1863, during the American Civil War, the South launched an invasion of the North that was repelled at the Battle of Gettysburg. Because the Southern general (Robert E. Lee) had appeared hitherto invincible, this was a major victory for the North, but the Northern general (George G. Meade) failed to pursue and destroy Lee's army. Lincoln was upset, and wrote a critical letter to Meade that you can read here. The most remarkable thing about this letter however isn't how restrained it is, but rather that Lincoln never sent it. He knew he wasn't there, he didn't see the battle and death firsthand, or know what it's like to trudge across soggy ground under threat of enemy fire, and he knew all these things didn't apply to Meade. Therefore he shouldn't criticize.
• If you absolutely must criticize, praise first. Wax lyrical about how the results are really great, and then say you wished the paper were better written so you could've understood it quicker.

Answer 4

Papers are not written for students but for experts in the field. It is not uncommon for a bachelor thesis (depending on subject of course) to work out all the details in a paper and show that the student managed to work through it in a couple of month. This working out things, helps you to slowly become an expert in your chosen field. So long story short, my answer is: absolutely no.

What as a student of course you can do is point out errors (if there are) in the publication.

Answer 5

As a student, you're unlikely to be the intended audience of the paper. They may in fact be thinking of their readers; it's just not you. From the context, I'm assuming that the paper is a technical, academic one written by professors of some sort. The authors' goal was probably to announce results in their field to their peers, maybe stake out some territory, improve their odds of tenure or funding, and so on. For publication in a research journal, the authors are presumably writing for an audience of researchers in the same field who already have a substantial background in the subject and are already familiar enough with the area to automatically connect the dots themselves. It could also just be a bad paper; I don't know you or the authors or even the paper involved.

Regardless, I don't think anything would be served by "tell[ing] them how a paper is written." To be honest, I would respond to a unsolicited, angry message like that by summarily throwing it in the garbage, regardless of whether it was from a student or an established professor or a Nobel prize winner. You probably would too, and it's reasonable to do so. It's not even harsh but honest criticism; it's just being angry that someone didn't write the paper that you wanted them to write.

If you like the ideas of the paper but think their presentation is too opaque, you could contact the authors and ask for clarification directly or suggest they write a lighter survey paper. You could even write it yourself. If you do in fact know how a paper should be written, polishing up someone else's badly-phrased good idea for a different audience can be a valuable thing; that's kind of what textbooks are.

Answer 6

Just write to the authors with all the questions you have about their paper: "Do I understand correctly that...?", "What exactly do you mean by...?", "One page X are you implicitly referring to Y?", etc. Do not hesitate to ask follow-up questions until you are sure you understand. Having to answer all these questions will punish the authors for their bad writing!

Answer 7

You said you sought help from postdocs and professors, but they also faced the difficulty of understanding that paper. This makes me think that the paper is indeed poorly written.

Had your senior colleagues not stumbled on that paper, my sympathies would still be with you. In my opinion (with which some will disagree), a good paper must be written in a language understandable to a graduate student, ideally to an advanced undergrad.

I know an outstanding scholar who is having problems with writing clearly. This is not his fault but his problem of quite a psychological nature: it is difficult for him to model inside his mind how difficult his writings may be for a beginner or for a colleague from an adjacent area. On the other hand, I also knew people for whom writing solely for the anointed was a method of self-affirmation -- which, again, has a lot to do with human psychology.

For whatever reason an author is unable to write clearly, it will be useless to preach to them. Don't waste your time. Also, you may anger the author -- which will do you no good, especially at the start of your career.

Instead, you may send them a polite e-mail, praising their publication, and humbly asking to help you better grasp their so great and important result. After this, the author will probably respond and help you go through his so great and outstanding and ingenious work. Praise is more efficient than reproach.

Answer 8

I generally agree with most of the answers. If you write some people and say "Your paper is terribly written", nothing good will come of that.

But, if you write them and say, "This result is amazing! I struggled a bit with this bit... if I paraphrase that with , is that correct?".

Then i think it might be appreciated, and maybe even borrowed.

In big labs, students/postdocs can be the main authors of papers and the group leader may barely comment on the paper before publication. Depending on the language This might result in "unpolished" writing.

Answer 9

It's always tempting to immediately critique mercilessly (for me mostly to boost my ego), but first stop and consider why you're reading the paper in the first place. Clearly you're interested in the topic and content they're writing about and in understanding and replicating their results.

Kindness is King. If this is why you're interested in the paper then think, could there be potential opportunities for collaboration? Could an author on this paper be a future author on a paper you're hoping to publish? If so, then you don't want to ruin relationships now. It's always good to build interest and respect for another person's work whatever stage. You'll find you can make a lot more collaborations and faster progress this way, and a lot more people are willing to collaborate (however big their name) than you might think.

If you're hoping to discuss more with the author, I've found it particularly effective to send an email expressing thanks for their work (Say "Thank you for your paper..." as an email header or something similar). Express honestly what you liked, and/or any intentions for possible citation by your own upcoming work (if that's your true intent). I've seen these kinds of emails are very often replied to, and authors are generally fairly open about responding to concerns for a reply or maybe two.

If you're just upset for personal reasons (i.e., maybe the paper is from a well-known university that you were not accepted to, and you feel you could have written something better) then you're going to find you may be very miserable in a winner-takes-all academic environment. Hopefully this isn't the case.

Why might well-known authors allow this? Other than what @BobaFit said, some professors are far too busy to comb through student's work, or choose to let them publish their level of work in order for them to grow on their own. Sometimes it's used as a strategy (unfortunately) to claim some space so as not to give away too many ideas or keep competing labs away from their knowledge. This allows them to publish more papers in the space without worrying as much about competition. Yes, there are fields where publishing is that competitive and moves that fast.