The readability of articles in tourism journals

Annals of Tourism Research

Volumn 52, Issue , 2015, Pages 161-179

  Dolnicar, Sara ^a   Chapple, Alexander ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84937762718     PISSN: 01607383     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.annals.2015.03.003     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Armstrong J.S. Unintelligible management research and academic prestige. Interfaces 1980, 10(2):80-86.
2. Bauerly R.J., Johnson D.T., Singh M. Readability and writing well. Marketing Management Journal 2006, 16(1):216-227.
3. Bottle R., Rennie J., Russ S., Sardar Z. Changes in the communication of chemical information I: some effects of growth. Journal of Information Science 1983, 6(4):103-108.
4. Crosier K. How effectively do marketing journals transfer useful learning from scholars to practitioners?. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 2004, 22(5):540-556.
5. DuBay, W. H. (2004). The principles of readability. Impact Information, available at: Last accessed 10.2.2015. http://www.impact-information.com/impactinfo/readability02.pdf.
6. Farr J.N., Jenkins J.J., Paterson D.G. Simplification of Flesch reading ease formula. Journal of Applied Psychology 1951, 35(5):333-337.
7. Flesch R. A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology 1948, 32(3):221-233.
8. Gazni A. Are the abstracts of high impact articles more readable? Investigating the evidence from top research institutions in the world. Journal of Information Science 2011, 37(3):273-281.
9. Goodsell, M. (1978). The readability and presentation of medical literature (M.Sc. thesis). London: The City University.
10. Hartley J., Pennebaker J.W., Fox C. Abstracts, introductions and discussions: how far do they differ in style. Scientometrics 2003, 57(3):389-398.
11. Hartley J., Sotto E., Pennebaker J. Style and substance in psychology: are influential articles more readable than less influential ones?. Social Studies of Science 2002, 32(2):321-334.
12. Hayes P.M., Jenkins J.J., Walker B.J. Reliability of the Flesch readability formulas. Journal of Applied Psychology 1950, 34(1):22-26.
13. The International Federation of Audit Bureau of Circulations (IFABC) (2012). Circulation data for national newspapers, available at: Last accessed 10.2.2015. http://www.ifabc.org/resources/data-reports%2065/data-reports-65.
14. Klare G.R. The measurement of readability 1963, The Iowa State University Press, Iowa.
15. Klare G.R. The measurement of readability: Useful information for communicators. ACM Journal of Computer Documentation 2000, 24(3):107-121.
16. Loveland J., Whatley A., Ray B., Reidy R. An analysis of the readability of selected management journals. The Academy of Management Journal 1973, 16(3):522-524.
17. Metoyer-Duran C. The readability of published, accepted, and rejected papers appearing in College & Research Libraries. College & Research Libraries 1993, 54(6):517-526.
18. Naftulin D.H., Ware J.E., Donnelly F.A. The Doctor Fox lecture: A paradigm of educational seduction. Journal of Medical Education 1973, 48(7):630-635.
19. Oliver B., Dallas M.J., Eckman M. Communication of empirical knowledge: an investigation of readability and quality of research in textiles and apparel. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 1998, 16(1):27-35.
20. Parker H.J., Teddlie J.C., Chan F. Readability and text analysis of rehabilitation journals. Journal of Rehabilitation 1988, 54(2):70-76.
21. Peterson M.J. Comparison of Flesch readability scores with a test of reading comprehension. Journal of Applied Psychology 1956, 40(1):35-36.
22. Roberts J.C., Fletcher R.H., Fletcher S.W. Effects of peer review and editing on the readability of articles published in Annals of Internal Medicine. Journal of the American Medical Association 1994, 272(2):119-121.
23. Sardar, Z. (1975). Noise in written communication (M.Sc. thesis). London: The City University.
24. Sawyer A.G., Laran J., Xu J. The readability of marketing journals: are award-winning articles better written?. Journal of Marketing 2008, 72(1):108-117.
25. Shelley M.C., Schuh J.H. Are the best higher education journals really the best? A meta-analysis of writing quality and readability. Journal of Scholarly Publishing 2001, 33(1):11-22.
26. Stremersch S., Verniers I., Verhoef P.C. The quest for citations: drivers of article impact. Journal of Marketing 2007, 71(3):171-193.
27. Swanson C.E., Fox H.G. Validity of readability formulas. Journal of Applied Psychology 1953, 37(2):114-118.
28. Todd P.A., Guest J.R., Lu J., Chou L.M. One in four citations in marine biology papers is inappropriate. Marine Ecology Progress Series 2010, 408:299-303.