Language Creep: Is the language in forest practitioner journals getting more complicated?

Abstract

Language CreepCommunicating innovation and research results to operational managers, practitioners, and end users is one of the most important activities a forest researcher does. New knowledge is of little value to society if it is not put into practice. Researchers publish their results in scientific and applied journals as well as present their results at conferences, symposiums, workshops, and field days with the goal of communicating what they have found out and how it is a better way of doing something. When the audience is other researchers their common language does not impede the flow of information. When the audience is practitioners or operational managers, researchers should use the language of their audience to communicate effectively.Practitioner journals are published to provide information Language Creep: Is the language in forest practitioner journals getting more complicated?by Steve D'Eon 1 ABSTRACTAn examination of the length of titles for articles in scientific and practitioner forestry journals found that titles have become longer in the 35-year period from 1977 to present. The average title length in practitioner journals is approaching that of the scientific journals sampled. In comparison, titles of oral presentations targeted to practitioners have remained short. Using title length as an indicator of language there is a disjoint between oral presentations of research developments to practitioners and journal articles for the same audience. A common language is essential for effective knowledge exchange between researcher and practitioner for the new developments to be understood and applied in the correct context. Practitioner journals play an important role in knowledge exchange. Practitioner journal authors, reviewers, and editors should be leery of some potential factors impeding communication between researchers and practitioners in this media.