Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Ohio State University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal
of Higher Education.
http://www.jstor.org
RobertBoice
FerdinandJones
WhyAcademicians
Don'tWrite
Writingforpublicationis notonlylaboriousand
slow, it may also engenderaversion:"Tellinga writerto relaxis like
tellinga man to relax while being prodded for a hernia. ... He thinks
thathis articlemustbe of a certainlengthor it won'tseemimportant.
He thinkshow augustitwilllook in print.He thinksof all thepeople
who will read it. He thinksthat it must have the solid weightof
authority. He thinksthatitsstylemustdazzle. No wonderhe tightens"
[109, p. 21]. Yet writingis one of the mostimportantthingsan aca-
demiciancan do. Publicationweighsheavilyin decisionsabout hiring,
promotion,and tenurein academicand otherprofessionalsettings[3].
Writing, morethananyotherprofessionalactivity, bringsrewardslike
visibility[59]. And writingand publicationcan providea unique and
importantkind of self-education:"I would urge you to write,not
because it is a good thing,not because it is nice to see yourname in
print,notevenbecauseitis relevantto fullmembership in our society,
butratherbecause you willreallygetto knowa fieldonlyifyou con-
tribute to it. ... Writing ultimately becomes important not only
because of whatit does forothersbut also forwhatit does forone-
self' [70, p. 4].
Nonetheless,fewof us writeforpublication[55]. The mediannum-
berof scholarlypublicationsforeventhemostprolificdisciplineslike
psychologyis zero [2]. Most academicianswho do writecontribute
infrequently; as fewas 10 percentof writersin specificareas account
forover 50 percentof the literature[17]. Whydo so fewof us write
RobertBoice is professorofpsychology,State Universityof New York,Albany.
FerdinandJonesis directorof psychologicalservicesand professorof psychology,
Brown University.
Journalof HigherEducation, Vol. 55, No. 5 (September/October
1984)
Copyright? 1984 by the Ohio State UniversityPress
568 Journalof HigherEducation
Personalityand Gender
Personalityand genderwererelativelyuncommonamong reasons
fornotwriting [11].Nonetheless,therecentliterature
on thepsychology
of writingsuggeststhatthesetwo variablescan be powerfuldetermi-
nantsof who writes.Considerfirstthe possibilityof distinguishing
writersin termsof fourenduringstylesas publishers:prolific,per-
fectionistic,silent,and mass-producers[18]. The silentcategory,not
surprisingly,comprisessomethree-quarters of physicists
sampled.This
typology corresponds with
significantly other personalityfactors.Mass-
producers,forinstance,tendto be highlycompetitive but,curiously,
do not persistin writingwhentheirarticlesare neitherwell-received
nor citedfrequently [45]. Men are morelikelyto be mass-producers
or prolificwriters;womenare morelikelyto be silentor perfectionistic
writers[72].
Whethergenderdifferences in publishingreflectinborntraitsor
situationalfactorssuchas social pressures,womenwriteforpublica-
tion less oftenthan men [30]. Consequently,womenin the sciences
and in academics may be more likelyto be unemployed,less likely
to gain prestigiousappointments,and slowerto receiveawards such
as tenure,promotion,and salaryincreasesthanmen [3; cf. 30]. The
reason,surprisingly, does not seemto be centeredsolelyin subtledis-
criminatory practices;whenmenand womendid produceresearchand
writingof equal quality,differences in academicrewardsdisappeared
[17]. And whenwomenhave written,theirarticlesmay be as likely
to be citedas are men's[72,73]. Why,then,do womenwritelessoften?
The road to gettingpublishedincludesmembership in an invisiblecol-
lege- a group of individualswho can exertenormousinfluenceon
thepopularityof topicsin journals [7]. Advantagealso mayinvolve
theMatthewEffect(Matt. 25:29 "For untoeveryonethathath,more
shall be given . . ."), or the tendencyforthose who are already estab-
lishedto reap morecitationsand recognitionfromotherswho pub-
lish associated work [63].
ExclusionaryFactors
Only a few respondents,all minorityor femaleacademicians,cited
discriminatory practicesas a reason for not writing.
Reviewingpractice. While suspicions of exclusionarypractices
remainmostlyjustthat- suspicions- themachinery forcarefulexami-
nation is being put into place. The journal reviewprocess, when
exposedto scrutiny,appearsunfair;reviewersseemmoretolerantof
572 Journalof HigherEducation
Writing as Pathological
None of thefacultysurveyedcheckedthisreason[11],butthesuspi-
cion thatwritingis inherently unhealthyseemedto lurkin theback-
groundonce respondents beganto reflecton theirfeelingsabout writ-
ing. Impetusforthisviewcomesin partfromliteraryanalysesof the
personalitiesof famouswriters[67]. Most often,assumptionsabout
pathologyand writing come frompsychoanalysts. Bergler,who coined
theconceptof writing blocks,saw all writing
as neurotic,as an attempt
to substitutea flowof wordsfortheflowof milkdesiredfroma reject-
ing mother [5]. So, theargumentcontinues,thesameneuroticreasons
thatdrivepeople to writealso make the completionof writingtasks
difficult;a writerpresumablystops writingto gain revengewithhis
or hermother[92]. Ellenberger, perhapsunintentionally, portrayssuc-
cessfulwriters likeFreudas opportunistic, and
insensitive, urgent[29].
Relativelyunskilledwriterssuch as Adler come across as healthy,
beloved, and patient.Some observers,finally,claim thatsickness-
eitherphysicalor emotional-provides thebestconditionforwriting
[79].
Empiricalstudiesprovidea morefavorable,albeitmixed,viewof
Why AcademiciansDon't Write 573
Deficienciesin Instruction
This factor,too, was not selectedas a reason but was recognized
as an importantfactorin whatmighthave helpedwithwriting.Most
of us are productsof a systemwherewritingskillsare largelyself-
taught[9]; consequently,academiciansoftenpresenttheirwork in
remarkablynaive ways [94]. We may implicitlyassume that good
writersare born and not made [108].
TeachingWriting Skills
The literatureon rhetoric and compositioncontainsa wealthofideas
forteachingwritingskills[9]. The best-knownworkin thatarea re-
sulted fromcollaborationbetweena compositionresearcherand a
cognitivepsychologist [31]. Flowerand Hayes teachheuristics as prob-
lem solvingapproachesto the writingsituation(e.g., audience), to
thegoals of writing(e.g., creatingan identity),and to thegeneration
of ideas forwriting(e.g., by usingstoredproblemrepresentations).
Once mastered,theseheuristicspresumablyhelp writersthroughthe
major process of writing:planningand organizing;translationof
mentalimages into prose; and the readingand editingof what has
been written.Curiously,moreintuitivetechniquescan also facilitate
writing,by makingwritersless self-conscious[83]. These new and
specificways of teachingskillsare graduallydisplacingtraditional
notionsabout writing.Romanticnotionsabout writersworkingwith
the aid of a muse merelydivertstudentsfromhard truthsabout the
methodicaland disciplinedwork of good writing[38, 76].
Anotherchangein theteachingof writingcomes fromsocial scien-
tistswho have masteredwritingforpublicationand who are sharing
theirskillswithcolleagues.Stolz [97] helpsprospectiveauthors,par-
ticularlywomen,deal withthe inhibitionsthattypicallydeterthem
fromwriting articles.She proposesa numberof solutions,amongthem
approximating a written draftbypresenting an oral versionto a class.
Scarrportraystheessentialqualitiesa successfulauthormustdevelop:
(a) readinessto acceptrejections;(b) readinessto submita manuscript
to other,possiblyless prominent,outlets;(c) preparednessto reply
to criticismrationally,especiallywhenit is unfair;(d) willingnessto
576 Journalof HigherEducation
References
1. Ballard, K. D., and T. Glynn."BehavioralSelf-management in StoryWriting
withElementarySchool Children."Journalof Applied BehaviorAnalysis,8
(Winter1975), 387-98.
2. Barlow,D. H. "On theRelationof ClinicalResearchto ClinicalPractice:Current
Issues,New Directions."Journalof Consulting and ClinicalPsychology,49 (April
1981), 147-55.
3. Bayer,A. E., and H. S. Astin."Sex Differentials in theAcademicRewardSys-
tem." Science, 88 (May 1975), 796-802.
4. Beaver, D. D. "On the Failure to Detect PreviouslyPublished Research."
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5 (June 1982), 199-200.
5. Bergler,E. The Writerand Psychoanalysis.Garden City: Doubleday, 1950.
6. Bernard,H. R. "Computer-assisted RefereeSelectionas a Means of Reducing
PotentialEditorialBias." Behavioraland Brain Sciences,5 (June 1982), 202.
7. Blashfield,R. K. "Reighneret al., InvisibleColleges,and theMatthewEffect."
SchizophreniaBulletin,8 (1982), 1-12.
8. Boice, R. "Increasingthe WritingProductivityof 'Blocked' Academicians."
BehaviourResearch and Therapy,20 (1982), 197-207.
9. . "Teachingof Writingin Psychology."Teachingof Psychology,9 (April
1982), 143-47.
10. . "Clinical VersusExperimentalTreatments of WritingBlocks." Journal
of Consultingand Clinical Psychology,51 (April 1983), 183-91.
11. . "FacultyDevelopmentBased AroundWritingBlock Therapies."Paper
presentedat EasternPsychologicalAssociation,Philadelphia,April 1983.
12. . "Psychotherapies forWritingBlocks." In Writing Problems,editedby
M. Rose. New York: Guilford,forthcoming.
13. . "The NeglectedThirdFactor in Writing:Productivity."College Com-
position and Communication,in press.
14. Boice, R., and P. Myers."AutomaticWriting."Unpublishedmanuscript,State
Universityof New York at Albany, 1983.
15. Bornstein,M. H. "PublicationRatesAmongDistinguished AmericanPsycholo-
gists: A Cohort Effect?" Bulletin of the BritishPsychological Society, 33
(November1980), 424.
578 Journalof HigherEducation