Reviewing a manuscript and found myself saying something I often say: “Help the reader feel supported as the read through your work.”
Why make it hard?
Why be a riddler?

If your manuscript uses multiple terms in reference to the same construct, that’s confusing.

If you are constantly referencing things from earlier in the piece, it might be a sign that a reorganization could help.

If you feel like it would be clearer if you referenced things from earlier but don’t want to be redundant, it might be a sign that a reorganization could help.

If you including charts or graphs, please make sure your axis labels are consistent with the variable names you use in the text. This is a biggie. Why. Be. The. Riddler?

And hi! A correlation matrix is a great addition to help us get a sense of what’s happening in the data. But please please include the variable names on both the rows and the columns. If I’m counting the number of rows to figure out what column 4 means, I don’t feel supported.

I want to feel like I’m reading a piece of work that someone put together with an audience in mind. Not just for themselves. Cause we don’t do science for ourselves. It is a collaborative exercise, and we wanna feel like you understand that.

Help us feel supported