Abstract

Explaining difficult concepts to lay readers is an important discursive goal, and yet frequently the quality of explanatory writing is poor. One reason for this poor quality is that the discursive form itself is not well understood. Some studies have identified textual features of effective explanations; however, theoretical characterizations of explanatory discourse are either unnecessarily narrow or overly general. Consequently, this essay offers a new theory of explanatory discourse that is intended to guide analyses of and stimulate improvements in explanations designed for mass audiences. The theory defines explanatory discourse in terms of a particular goal; promoting understanding for lay readers of some phenomenon. This goal is distinguished from those of promoting awareness of new information, proving a claim, or encouraging agreement with a claim. The utility of the theory is demonstrated by showing how it (1) identifies those research literatures most relevant to improving the quality of written explanations, (2) organizes existing findings on explanatory effectiveness in a way that resolves controversies in the literature, and (3) suggests principles for pedagogy pertaining to explanatory writing.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
1988-01-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088388005001002
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (5)

  1. Written Communication
  2. Written Communication
  3. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. Written Communication
  5. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication

Cites in this index (6)

  1. Written Communication
  2. Written Communication
  3. Written Communication
  4. Written Communication
  5. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Show all 6 →
  1. Research in the Teaching of English
Also cites 39 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.3102/00346543049002280
  2. 10.1002/sce.3730690513
  3. 10.1037/h0046669
  4. 10.1002/sce.3730650108
  5. 10.1037/0022-0663.73.4.451
  6. 10.1002/tea.3660210706
  7. 10.1002/sce.3730690512
  8. 10.1037/0022-0663.77.5.514
  9. 10.1080/03057268308559904
  10. 10.1037/0022-0663.74.5.733
  11. 10.1002/tea.3660170306
  12. 10.1080/03057268308559905
  13. 10.1037/0022-0663.71.5.595
  14. 10.2307/2017635
  15. 10.1002/tea.3660200804
  16. 10.1007/BF00051837
  17. 10.1080/0022027830150108
  18. 10.1007/BF00120230
  19. 10.1080/0140528840060409
  20. 10.1037/0022-0663.75.3.402
  21. 10.1007/BF00121548
  22. 10.3102/00346543049002371
  23. 10.1002/sce.3730670210
  24. 10.1037/0022-0663.72.2.209
  25. 10.1037/0022-0663.76.6.1089
  26. 10.1037/0022-0663.75.3.374
  27. 10.1177/107769907905600104
  28. 10.1007/BF00414279
  29. 10.1037/0022-0663.78.2.153
  30. 10.1002/sce.3730670111
  31. 10.1080/0140528850070209
  32. 10.1080/01638537809544441
  33. 10.1037/0022-0663.76.3.513
  34. 10.1002/sce.3730650109
  35. 10.1080/0140528840060403
  36. 10.1037/h0034400
  37. 10.1037/0022-0663.77.4.481
  38. 10.1037/h0032368
  39. 10.1007/BF00120935
CrossRef global citation count: 28 View in citation network →