Science writers today are better educated than those in 1940, with more physical science coursework. A study examined the academic and professional backgrounds of science writers, as well as the types of training they recommend for future science writers. The study found that science writers had less social and physical science coursework than they recommend, and were less likely to have research experience despite recommending it. This suggests science writers do not always recommend the same training they received.

1. By Michael Ryan and Sharon L. Dunwoody
Academic and Professional Training
Patterns of Science Writers
Today s science writers are
better educated than those of
1940. Writers recommend more
physical science courses for
future science writers than they
themselves had in college.
• Several researchers explored the aca-
demic and professional backgrounds of
science writers after Krieghbaum's pi-
oneer study in 1940,' but the last such
study was reported a decade ago, and no
one has examined in substantial detail
the kinds of training patterns science
writers would recommend for persons
hoping to enter the field, or determined
the extent to which science writers rec-
ommend for others the kinds of training
they had.
The methodology in this study is sim-
ilar to the mail questionnaire technique
used by Krieghbaum, the National Asso-
ciation of Science Writers, Inc,,^ John-
son,' Science Service-* and SmalP in
their studies of the backgrovnds of sci-
ence writers. The technique was em-
ployed here in an effort:
' Hillier Krieghbaum. "The Background and 1 riiniin; ol
Science Writers." JoiRNAtisM QIARTIKM. 17 15-IX (M.irch
1940)
-Results of the SASW surves were reporinl in I'lcrrc C
Fraley, "The Education and Training! ol Stuncc WriUrs."
JIM HVALISM Qi ARTiRti. 40.323-28 (Summer ISI(.3)
'Lee Z. Johnson. "Status and Attitudes ol Sciciiti.- Wrii-
ers." Joi R*LisM Qi sKTbHt. M 247-51 (Spring itV)
' Results of the Science Service survey wen- reported m
Report Confereme on the Role ol Sihiiils nl .Inuriui/niii in
the Pro/e^^ii'nal Training ol Siii'im Wriiers (S.isliin(;ioii.
D C . Science Service. 1961)
'William E Small. "1 raining of the Science Writer." un-
published M.A thesis, Michigan Stjtc I nivcrsnv IVM
•^The term "ph>sicjl science." as used in this studs, in-
cludes natural sciences, physical sciences ,ind hiologicil sci-
ences.
1) to identify the kinds of training pat-
terns followed by science writers of to-
day, when scientific investigations gen-
erally are more complex, difficult to
comprehend and widespread than they
were a decade ago;
2) to examine more thoroughly the
kinds of training patterns science writers
recommend for persons hoping to enter
the field; and
3) to determine whether science writ-
ers recommend for others some of the
same kinds of training they had them-
selves.
Early studies focused primarily on
the professional and academic training
patterns of working science writers, and
many of the "profile" questions used by
previous investigators were used here.
Two "profile" questions not fully ex-
plored in earlier studies, however, were
investigated: one was the extent to which
science writers worked in research lab-
oratories or on research projects before
entering science writing, and one related
to the specific kinds of physical*" and so-
cial science courses science writers took
in college.
Science Service and Small did ask re-
spondents to indicate in which of 10 and
23 subject areas, respectively, they had
taken college level courses, but respond-
ents in this study indicated which of 122
kinds of science courses they studied in
college.
A more thorough examination of the
•• Michael Ryan (Ph.D.. Southern Illinois tlnivcrsilv,
1971) ts an associate professor of communications.
Temple Iiniversily, and Sharon I DutiwiunJs I
N i
Ph.I) student in journahstn at Indiatia University.
This research was supported in p,irt h lunds Ironi
the Summer Research Awards pro^ir.im at lemplc
239

2. 240 JOURNALISM QUARTERLY
kinds of training patterns science writ-
ers would recommend for others was an
important aspect of this study, for as
Burkett has written, "Certainly the edu-
cation and backgrounds of those who write
most of today's science news provides
little basis for judgment [about] the best
way to prepare for a science writing ca-
reer,"^ One apparently cannot predict,
therefore, the kinds of training potential
science writers need simply by focusing
on the "profiles" of current science
writers.
Previous research was extended in this
study in that science writers evaluated
122 physical and social science content
areas in terms of importance to poten-
tial science writers, Johnson, the first
to explore the content areas science
writers would recommend for others,
asked respondents to indicate which spe-
cific subject areas they would recom-
mend; Small asked respondents to rank
29 general course content areas on five-
point scales for their importance to
others.
In no previous study was an effort
made to determine statistically whether
science writers recommend for others
the kinds of training patterns they fol-
lowed, although Johnson found some evi-
dence that science writers would not rec-
ommend for others all the kinds of train-
ing they had.
Most science writers Johnson studied
recommended that potential science writ-
ers take courses in the physical and so-
cial sciences (pre-medical and public
health courses were most frequently
recommended), but their backgrounds
emphasized the liberal arts. Approxi-
mately 85% of the science writers he
studied also recommended that potential
science writers work in a science lab-
oratory, while few of the respondents ac-
tually performed scientific work them-
selves, "Thus," Johnson said, "their
suggestions for how a science writer
should be educated differed from their
own backgrounds."^
Three hypotheses, based on indica-
tions in Johnson's data that science writ-
ers apparently do not always recommend
for others the kinds of training they had,
were tested here:
Hypothesis 1: The mean number of so-
cial science content areas in which sci-
ence writers took courses will be signif-
icantly smaller (at the ,05 level of sig-
nificance) than the mean number of
content areas they recommend for future
science writers.
Hypothesis 2: The mean number of
physical science content areas in which
science writers took courses will be
significantly smaller (at the ,05 level)
than the mean number of content areas
they recommend for future science writ-
ers.
Hypothesis 3: The proportion of sci-
ence writers having experience on a re-
search project or in a laboratory and
recommending such experience for oth-
ers will be significantly smaller (at the
,05 level) than the proportion having no
research experience and recommending
such training.
In summary, this study was designed
to answer the following research ques-
tions:
1) What academic degrees have sci-
ence writers earned, what did they major
in as graduate and undergraduate stu-
dents and how much graduate training
have they had?
2) In what physical and social science
content areas did science writers take
courses as undergraduates?
3) How many years and what kinds of
professional experience did science writ-
ers have prior to assuming their posi-
tions as science writers?
4) What special training (e,g,, pro-
fessional seminars, science writing fel-
lowships) have science writers had since
becoming science writers?
5) What academic and professional
training do science writers recommend
for others entering the field?
6) Do science writers recommend for
others some of the same kinds of train-
ing they had themselves?
' David Warren BurkeU, iVriimg Scimcr News for ihe Ma.u
Media (Houston: Gulf Publishing Company, 197.1). p. 59.
' Johnson, op. cil., p. 248.

3. Training Patterns of Science Writers 241
Method
Six-page questionnaires, cover letters
and return envelopes were mailed to
197 members of the National Association
of Science Writers, Ina (NASW). The
sample was selected from a universe of
883 persons whose names appeared on
the NASW membership list; 383 were
classified as "active," 475 were "as-
sociate" and the rest were honorary,
lifetime or affiliated members.'* The
universe was reduced to the final 197
persons by operationally defining a sci-
ence writer as any person who I) is a
member of the National Association of
Science Writers, Inc.; 2) is a resident
of the United States or Canada; 3) is
employed in a writing or editing position
on a newspaper or wire service and
whose job title indicates a specialization
in science; 4) is on the staff of a maga-
zine listed in Writer's Market 12 as a
consumer-oriented publication and whose
job title indicates a specialization in sci-
ence; and 5) is a free lance writer spe-
cializing in science. Each person in the
sample had to meet the first two criteria
and at least one of the last three.
The six-page questionnaire was di-
vided into two parts. Respondents were
requested in Part 1 to provide specific
information about their educational and
professional backgrounds and to indicate
specific physical and social science con-
tent areas in which they took courses as
undergraduate students.
The list of 122 specific content areas
was compiled from listings in two major
reference works.'"
Subject areas did not represent all
listings in the two works, as 5 listing of
"The writers Ihank Ms Rosemary Arctander. admmi^iru-
tive secretary of the National Association of Science Writers.
Inc , for providing a list of the dssocialion's membtrs
"'American Science Manpower 1970- A Rei>ori nl ilu- u-
lional Register of Si leniific and Technual Peroniiel. iiiiiin-
al Science Fuundatum (Washington. D C Nalioniil Science
Foundation, 1970). and V/< Craw-Hill tni vcloivdia nl .Si ICIK <
and Technology (New York McGruw-Hill Bnok Oimpanv.
1971).
"Conleni areas were arranged under the loilowiiiji ni.uh
headings atmospheric and space sciences. hiolDgital sciences.
chemistry, computer sciences, earlh and miirme sciences,
engineering, mathemalici, physics. anlhropolc)(;> and linyuis-
lics, economics, political science, psychology and Miemliigy
The complete list of Ihe 122 conlenl areas is ii.iilahlc im
request
all content areas would not have been
feasible. Subject titles which represented
overly specialized content areas (e.g.,
infrared astronomy, geologic mapping),
therefore, were eliminated, although re-
spondents were invited to write in the
names of any content areas they de-
sired."
Science writers were asked in Part 2
of the questionnaire to indicate which
specific course content areas and special
training programs they would recommend
for persons hoping for careers in science
writing.
Twenty-seven of 197 persons who met
the criteria for inclusion in the sample
were among 31 science writers surveyed
in a pilot test. As no changes were made
in the questionnaire or research proce-
dures, data from the 23 NASW members
who returned the pilot questionnaires
were included with data from the other
129 respondents. A total of 152 persons
in the sample of 197 responded to one of
three mailings, for a response rate of
77.2%.
Most respondents lived in the follow-
ing areas: New York, 30.9%; California,
9.4%; Washington, D.C., 8.1%; Illinois,
6.7%; Ohio, 4.7%; Michigan, A.0%, and
Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Texas and Ontario, Canada, all 3.4^0
Quebec and Alberta provinces, as well
as 12 other states, were represented, but
responses from each totaled less than
3.4^7.
Most were free lance writers (39.7%)
or newspaper reporters (23.3%), while
12.3% were newspaper editors, 4.8f'f! were
wire service reporters and editors, 4.1%
were employed by news services, 4.1%
were magazine editors, 1.4% were maga-
zine reporters and the remainder were
employed by other print media.
Data showed that 12.2% of 148 respond-
ents worked 5 years or less as science
writers (19% of 92 reporters-editors,
2% of 56 free lance writers); 29.2'^r'
worked 6 to 10 years (28% of reporters-
editors, 29% of free lance writers);
23.6% worked 11 to 15 years (26^7 of re-
porters-editors, 19% of free lance writ-
ers); and 35.1% worked more than 15

4. 242 J O U R N A L I S M Q U A R T E R L Y
lABLE I
Number of Graduate Level Courses Completed Beyond B.A. and M.A.
Number
Courses
None
1-5
6-10
More than 10
Percentage of
Reporters-
Editors
Courses
Beyond
BA.
(N = 87)
48
26
5
20
Courses
Beyond
MA.
(N = 86)
94
2
0
3
Percentage of
Free Lance
Writers
Courses
Beyond
B.A.
(N = 51)
39
16
16
29
Courses
Beyond
MA.
(N = 52)
85
4
6
5
Percentage
Courses
Beyond
B A.
(N= 138)
45
22
9
23
of Total
Courses
Beyond
M.A.
(N=138)
91
3
2
4
Note: Percentages in this and other tables do not always total 100 because of rounding.
years (27% of reporters-editors, 49% of
free lance writers).'^
Results
The B.A. was the highest degree earned
by 62.3% of 151 science writers answer-
ing the question and the M.A. was the
highest earned by 21.9%, while 13.2%
earned no academic degrees. The per-
centage who earned Ph.D., M.D. and
M.D.-Ph.D. degrees was .7% for each
group.
The breakdown by reporters-editors
(N = 93) and free lance writers (N = 58)
is as follows: percentage having no de-
gree, 12% for reporters-editors, 16%
for free lance writers; B.A., 65% for re-
porters-editors, 59% for free lance writ-
ers; and M.A., 19% for reporters-editors,
26% for free lance writers.
The most popular undergraduate ma-
jors among the 140 science writers an-
swering the question (as among science
writers surveyed in previous studies)
were English, mentioned by 26.4% (28%
of 86 reporters-editors, 24% of 54 free
lance writers), and journalism, men-
tioned by 20.7% (29% of reporters-edi-
tors, 7% of free lance writers).
Data in Table 1 show that 55.1% of the
science writers took at least one grad-
uate level course and that 23.2% took
more than 10. The most popular graduate
major reported (N = 71) was journalism,
taken by 24% 0^% of 43 reporters-edi-
tors, 11% of 28 free lance writers), fol-
lowed by English, with 11%. No other
major was mentioned by as many as 5%.
Course content areas mentioned by
more than 40% of respondents were pre-
dominately "general" or "introductory,"
as Table 2 shows. In the physical sci-
ences, general courses in biology, phys-
ics, chemistry and mathematics were
listed. Algebra and geometry were the
only non-general areas studied by more
than 40% of the respondents. In the social
sciences, all four content areas in which
courses were taken by more than 40%
of the science writers were introductory
(i.e., general courses in economics,
political science, psychology and sociol-
ogy.) All content areas in which courses
were taken by more than 20% of all re-
spondents are reported in Table 2.
As Table 3 shows, 9.2% of those sur-
veyed began working as science writers
immediately after graduation from col-
lege, 47.4%, had no more than 5 years of
professional experience before becoming
science writers and 68.6% had no more
than 10 years of professional experience
before becoming science writers.
The type of professional experience
acquired prior to entry into science
writing breaks down as follows: news-
paper reporting, 62.4% of 149 science
writers who answered the question (75%
'- Results of this study typically arc rcponed m two »,iys
1) cumulative percentages for all persons responding lo a
particular question, and 2) separate percenta^s for report-
ers-editors and for free lance writers responding to the
question

5. Training Patterns of Science Writers 243
TABLE 2
Course Content Areas Taken and Recommended, in Percent
Importers-
Editors
Free Lance
Writers
All
Respondents
Took Recom- Took Recom- Took Recom-
Courses in mend Courses in mend Courses in mend
Subject
Area
Algebra
Analytic chemistry
Anatomy
Anthropology and
linguistics
(introductory)
Archeology
Astronomy
Atomic physics
Biochemistry
Biology (general)
Botany
Calculus
Chemistry (general)
Clinical psychology
Computer science
(introductory)
Cultural, social
anthropology
Earth and marine
sciences (intro-
ductory)
Ecology (biology)
Economics
(introductory)
Experimental methods
(psychology)
Genetics
Geometry
Health, medical
economics
Immunology
Inorganic chemistry
Mathematics
(general)
Nuclear physics
Nutrition (biology)
Oceanography
Organic chemistry
Physics (general)
Physiology
Political science
(introductory)
Subj. Area
(N = 84)
55
23
19
24
5
17
5
14
56
30
33
58
6
5
16
16
7
58
4
21
42
1
6
27
46
0
5
1
25
58
12
44
Subj. Area
(N = 67)
28
5
33
67
28
63
22
28
85
27
10
82
24
63
30
55
42
64
16
49
16
28
33
10
58
25
30
28
15
82
21
51
Subj. Area
(N = 54)
59
22
24
24
4
7
9
9
57
22
44
63
15
2
7
9
4
61
13
15
48
2
2
26
44
6
0
4
28
63
28
37
Subj. Area
(N = 38)
32
8
28
63
24
41
26
18
87
18
18
79
32
58
18
55
23
71
26
49
21
16
28
21
63
18
21
24
26
84
39
55
Subj. Area
(N=I38)
56
22
21
24
4
13
6
12
56
27
38
60
9
4
12
13
6
59
7
19
44
1
4
27
46
2
3
2
26
60
18
41
Subj. y
(N=l
29
6
31
66
27
55
24
25
86
24
13
81
27
61
26
55
35
67
20
49
18
24
31
14
60
23
26
27
19
83
27
52

6. 244 JOURNALISM QUARTERLY
TABLE 2, continued
Reporters- Free Lance
Editors Writers
All
Respondents
Subject
Area
Psychology (intro-
ductory)
Public policy
Social change
Social psychology
Sociology (intro-
ductory)
Statistics
United States politics
and government
Zoology
Took Recom- Took Recom- Took Recom-
Courses in mend Courses in mend Courses in mend
Subj. Area Subj. Area Subj. Area Subj. Area Subj. Area Subj. Area
(N = 84) (N = 67) (N = 54) (N = 38) (N=I38) (N=IO5)
66
6
12
12
51
12
32
20
88
25
31
21
66
37
19
27
69
2
6
7
44
22
22
39
87
13
21
26
68
29
16
26
67
4
9
10
49
16
28
27
88
21
28
23
67
34
18
26
TABLE 3
Number of Years Worked Professionally Before Entering Science Writing
Number
Years
None
1-5
6-10
11-15
More than 15
Percentage of
Reporters-
Editors
(N = 9I)
9
36
24
18
13
Percentage of
Free Lance
Writers
(N = 50)
10
44
16
12
18
Percentage of
Total
(N=I4I)
9
38
21
16
15
of 92 reporters-editors, 42% of 57 free
lance writers); magazine writing, 18.1%
(13% of reporters-editors, 26% of free
lance writers); public relations, 17.4%
(12% of reporters-editors, 26% of free
lance writers); advertising, 4.7% (2% of
reporters-editors, 9% of free lance writ-
ers); other communications work, 22.1%
(16% of reporters-editors, 32% of free
lance writers); science or science-re-
lated fields, 18.1% (14% of reporters-
editors, 25% of free lance writers); and
other, 3.4% (no reporters-editors, 9% of
free lance writers).'^
For 42.3% of the respondents (N = 149),
professional experience included work in
a laboratory or participation in a re-
search project in some field. Fifty-one
per cent of free lance writers had lab-
oratory or research experience com-
pared to 37% of reporters-editors (N =
92).
Data indicate that 66 science writers
(46 reporters-editors, .20 free lance
writers) had some sort of special train-
ing to improve their skills as science
writers after entering the field. The spe-
cial training breaks down as follows:
Science or science writing seminars,
40% (46% of reporters-editors, 30% of
free lance writers); Columbia University
Advanced Science Writing Seminar, 14%
(11% of reporters-editors, 20% of free
lance writers); college level courses,
6% (4% of reporters-editors, 10% of free
'^PerctDlages do not total 100 becaUK many persiym
worked in tnore (hiin one area before becoming science wril-

7. Training Patterns of Science Writers 245
lance writers); Columbia program and
seminars, 11% (11% of reporters-editors,
10% of free lance writers); seminars and
college level courses, 17% (15% of re-
porters-editors, 20% of free lance writ-
ers); and special science writing fellow-
ships, 5% (7% of reporters-editors, no
free lance writers). The remaining sci-
ence writers did not specify the special
training they received.
Respondents tended to recommend
more liberal arts than anything else for
future science writers, but responses
varied widely. The median recommended
percentages were liberal arts, 40; jour-
nahsm and communication, 10; social
science, 15, and physical science, 25.
Science writers also indicated the
kinds of specialized training they would
recommend for persons hoping for ca-
reers in the field. A total of 13.6% (19%
of reporters-editors, 4% of free lance
writers) said no special training was
necessary. The percentages of 132 sci-
ence writers recommending different
kinds of specialized training follow:
Undergraduate course in science writ-
ing, 47% (43% of 83 reporters-editors,
53% of 49 free lance writers); graduate
course in science writing, 32.6% (31%
of reporters-editors, 35% of free lance
writers); science writing internship,
40.2% (35% of reporters-editors, 49% of
free lance writers); and part-time job
or summer job in science writing, 52.3%
(49% of reporters-editors, 57% of free
lance writers).
A total of 66.2% of 136 respondents
(62% of 86 reporters-editors, 74% of 50
irte lance writers) also recommended
that potential science writers engage in
laboratory work or participate in a re-
search project. And 4.4% (5% of 84 re-
porters-editors, 4% of 51 free lance writ-
ers) recommended that students take sci-
ence courses at the graduate level.
Data showing the specific course con-
tent areas science writers would rec-
ommend for others are reported in Ta-
ble 2. More than 40% suggested courses
in astronomy and genetics, and introduc-
tory courses in biology, chemistry, com-
puter sciences, earth and marine sci-
ences, mathematics and physics. As a
group, the content areas listed under the
heading "engineering" seemed to be
viewed by science writers as least nec-
essary for persons hoping for careers
in the field.
In the social sciences, all five content
areas recommended by more than 40% of
the respondents were general (i.e., in-
troductory courses in anthropology and
linguistics, economics, political science,
psychology and sociology). Only four
specific content areas (archeology, cul-
tural and social anthropology, clinical
psychology and social change) were rec-
ommended by more than 25% of those re-
sponding.
It was predicted in Hypotheses 1 and 2
that the mean number of social science
content areas and the mean number of
physical science content areas in which
science writers took courses would be
significantly smaller than the mean num-
ber of content areas they would recom-
mend for future science writers.
The mean number of social science
content areas in which courses were tak-
en was 4.9, while the mean number of
course content areas recommended was
8.4. The mean number of physical sci-
ence content areas in which courses
were taken was 8.6, while the mean num-
ber of course content areas recommend-
ed was 14.3. r-tests (r = 4.33 for social
sciences, 4.60 for physical sciences)
showed that the differences were signif-
icant. Science writers, therefore, rec-
ommended significantly more content
areas for others than they studied them-
selves.
Data did not support Hypothesis 3—
that the proportion of science writers
having experience on a research project
or in a laboratory and recommending
such experience for others will be signif-
icantly smaller than the proportion hav-
ing no research experience and recom-
mending such training. Differences, in
fact, were significant in the opposite di-
rection.
The percentage of science writers who
had research experience and recom-
mended such experience for others (N =

8. 246 J O U R N A L I S M Q U A R T E R L Y
59) was 81, compared to a proportion of
53% for science writers who had no such
experience and recommended such train-
ing (N = 75). The difference was signif-
icant (z=3.4O). Science writers who
have had some research or laboratory
experience, therefore, are more likely
to reconunend such training for others
than those who have not had such exper-
ience.
Discussion
Results of this study indicate that to-
day's science writers are better edu-
cated than those of 1940. Krieghbaum
found more than 35 years ago that 74.2%
of the 31 science writers he studied had
graduated from college, and that 25.8%
either did not attend college or attended
but did not graduate. A total of 86.8% of
the science writers in this study grad-
uated from college, and only 13.2% either
did not attend college or attended but did
not graduate.'-^
Today's science writers also seem
better educated in the area of graduate
study. A total of 21.9% in this study
earned mast»rs degrees, compared to
only 9.7% for Krieghbaum's respondents.
Furthermore, Krieghbaum found that
41.9% had taken at least one graduate
level course, compared to 47.2% for the
72 science writers Small studied, and
55.1% for the respondents in this study.
An analysis of undergraduate majors
and the kinds of science courses taken
by" science writers indicates few differ-
ences among three of the studies.
English and journalism were found
here and by Krieghbauih and Johnson to
be the most popular undergraduate ma-
jors. Krieghbaum found that 23% ma-
jored in English and 11.5% majored in
jcmrnalism (11.5% also majored in chem-
istry); Johnson found that 17 of the 66
persons he studied majored in English
and 9 majored in journalism; and this
study found that 26.4% majored in English
and 20.7% majored in journalism.
Science Service, which studied 249
science writers. Small and this study
all found that biology, physics, chemistry
and psychology were science subject
areas studied by large percentages of
science writers. Small and these inves-
tigators found that mathematics also was
studied by large percentages of science
writers.
Only mathematics was found by three
investigators—Johnson, Small and these
researchers—to be a science content
area highly recommended for potential
science writers. Astronomy, biology,
chemistry and physics were highly rec-
ommended by science writers surveyed
by Snriall and these researchers.
One surprising finding was that 84.8%
of the respondents studied by Johnson
apparently recommended that future sci-
ence writers work in a laboratory before
entering science writing, compared to
66.2% in this study who recommended
work on a research project or in a lab-
oratory.
Three hypotheses were tested in this
study, and results lend some support to
indications in Johnson's data that science
writers do not necessarily recommend
for others the kinds of training they had
themselves.
Hypotheses 1 and 2, which support
Johnson's findings, show that science
writers recommend more physical and
social science courses for future science
writers than they studied themselves.
Hypothesis 3, which was not supported
by the data, does not support Johnson's
findings. Results, in fact, show that sci-
ence writers who have worked on a re-
search project or in a laboratory rec-
ommend such experience for others sig-
nificantly more often than those who have
not worked on a research project or in a
laboratory.
Results of this study indicate, it seems,
that the academic and professional train-
ing patterns of science writers have
changed somewhat in the last decade,
but that changes center primarily around
(Please turn to page 290)
" Results of this study are compared where possible wiih
results ohtained in prior studies of the backgrounds of science
writers, but comparisons arc difficult because some queN-
tions are worded differently from stud> to study, and because
some investigators provided insufficient data on which to base
meaningful comparisons.

9. 290 JOURNALISM QUARTERLY
Relationship of listenability to the
Dale-Chall readability formula score
which determined assignment to easy
and hard categories can be looked at in
the following manner. Since the combined
easy stories led to significantly greater
comprehension gain than the combined
hard stories, and since there was no
significant interaction between modality
and readability level, it appears that over
both contents formula grade-level place-
ment predicted accurately the relative
difficulty of obtaining increases in both
listening (OR) and reading (NR and PR)
comprehension.
Also the lack of a significant differ-
ence between PR, NR and OR means
within each readability level seems to
indicate that with the kind of material
used in this study ability to re-read ear-
lier sentences did not increase reading
gain. That is, the stated assumption un-
derlying hypotheses one and two that rep-
etition accounts to a significant extent for
differences between listenability and
readability is not supported by the re-
sults.
A recent study by R.Q. Young obtained
similar results,'^ especially in terms of
OR and PR comparison at various read-
ability levels. Both studies used rela-
tively short messages written for listen-
ing. It is possible that these materials
eliminated the kinds of construction
which may have contributed to the differ-
ences found in some of the earlier stud-
ies. Further, it is conceivable that long-
er passages which would put a greater
burden on memory span would also in-
crease the importance of a repetition
factor.
These studies do show, however, that
with short news stories in modem stylc'^
repetition is as important (or unimpor-
tant) to the broadcast journalist as to
his newspaper colleague.'^ To the extent
these results are valid, the broadcast
journalist does not need to be overly con-
cerned with the adage of the trade: "Tell
'em what you're going to tell 'em. Tell
'em. And then tell 'em what you've told
•em."
"Robert Q. Young, op. cii.. It should be pointed out that
Young used a multiple-choice comprehension test in an after-
only design. His dependent variable then was comprehension,
not comprehension gain.
'* Modern newspaper style has. for the most part, adopted
many of the tenets of broadcast style: shorter sentences. les.i
anaphora and a more conversational tone.
'< Specifically the results could be summarized in the fol-
lowing way. (I) When material written "for the ear~ is used
and time of presentation controlled for. comprehension in-
crease does not differ across modalities. This reblionship
tends to hold true within readability levels as gauged by the
Dale-Chall formula. (2) The Dale-Chall readability formula
is as adeqtiate in measuring listenability as it is in measur-
ing readability. (3) More generally, the results indicate that
there is no inherent limitation of comprehension due to the
modality used by the broadcast journalist when relatively
short material is delivered at > speed similar to that used
in this experiment. Tiius the underlying assumption in regard
to the value of repetition is not supported in the present con-
text.
ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL TRAINING
PATTERNS OF SCIENCE WRITERS
(Continued from page 246)
,the extent to which science writers have
earned academic degrees and engaged
in graduate study.
Results also indicate that there is no
one path to follow for a career in science
writing. Indeed, in constructing a pro-
fessional profile, one can say only that
the "typical" science writer probably
earned a bachelors degree; majored as
an undergraduate student in English or
journalism; took courses in general bi-
ology, general chemistry, algebra, gen-
eral physics, introductory economics
and introductory psychology; took at least
one graduate level course; worked in
some professional capacity for about six
years before entering science writing;
worked at some point as a newspaper re-
porter; and never worked in a laboratory
or participated in a research project.

10. View publication stats
View publication stats