Journal of Technical Writing and Communication Jan 1975

Your Interim Report—Did You Time it Rightly?

J. W. Broer

Abstract

A scientist working on a research project of planned duration T—which includes a publication at the end—benefits from describing his work in an interim report. To obtain maximum verbal self-stimulation from his writing act, he should choose a time at approx 0.4T after the start of the project. A mathematical model of the situation leads to this rule of thumb. The description involves an assumed two-stage nature of research (stage I: defining the problem; stage II: solving it). The stages consist of random (Poisson) time sequences of thought flashes—“why-pulses” and “therefore-pulses.” The model fits a problem in nuclear physics, whose solution when translated back produces the timing fraction 0.4. The assumed statistical nature of brain activity is supported by evidence from other fields.

Journal
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Published
1975-01-01
DOI
10.2190/dnmq-r72y-tqh2-jdwh
CompPile
Open Access
Closed
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

References (7) · 1 in this index

  1. Bloomfield Leonard (1939)
    Linguistic Aspects of Science
  2. 10.1080/00182494.1967.10593838
     ↗
  3. For the curious: the problem may be found in, for instance, Evans Robley D., The Atomic Nucleus, McGraw-Hill,…
  4. 10.1126/science.174.4010.722
     ↗
  5. Dennett D. C. (1969)
    Content and Consciousness, an Analysis of Mental Phenomena
Show all 7 →
  1. 10.1126/science.173.3992.164
     ↗
  2. Menzel (1972)
    Unplanned acquisition of information in the experience of polymer chemists: A P…
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
CrossRef global citation count: 0 View in citation network → Build reading path →