When writing for an audience of your peers or a non-specialised audience, how you write matters as much as what you write. Communicating your message with integrity is a way to enhance trust in your publication and ensure that you are conveying your message effectively and respectfully. In this series on Communicating with Integrity, we discuss some of the key factors to incorporate when preparing your manuscript.

Previously, we have discussed how trust can be built through transparency, and how to ensure we maintain trust when communicating with a non-specialised audience.  In this article, we discuss why word choice matters. Terminology matters for the reproducibility of your research, as well as for any communities you are referring to in your writing. Failure to write with integrity can have unintended consequences on how your research is received and interpreted.

The following is based on the recommendations from the Coalition for Diversity & Inclusion in Scholarly Communication (C4DISC) Guidelines on Inclusive Language and Images in Scholarly Communication [1], which Karger recommends referring to when preparing a manuscript.

Be specific about who is involved in the study.

When reporting demographic variables, consider whether these variables are relevant to the study. If an individual’s race, gender identity or sexual orientation is not relevant to the study, consider whether these demographics should be included at all.

Where it is relevant to include demographic information, be specific. The use of ambiguous or general terms when describing individuals can reduce the reproducibility of research and may offend the people involved. It is important to be specific about the population you are describing, for example, do not say ‘Central American people’ if you mean “Mexican men”.

If people have not been given the opportunity to self-describe their gender identity, race or ethnicity, such demographics should not be assumed from the sex assigned at birth or nationality. Asking people to self-describe the terms they use is the most accurate and specific way to capture relevant information.

Use inclusive language when describing individuals.

Inclusive language should communicate to and about people with respect. Language is constantly evolving, and once commonplace terms may now offend. As above, when referring to a specific population be specific about who the population is and use appropriate terms, for example, “70-80 years old people” is preferable to “older people” which itself is preferable to “the elderly.”

In referring to a specific population, give priority to community-adopted terms and where possible, allow people to self-describe and use that term in your manuscript. When describing health conditions, look to the community for the preferred terminology whether this is identity-first or person-first terminology. For example, “person with cancer” or “person with obesity” is preferable to “cancer patient” or “obese person,” however, “autistic person” is generally considered preferable to “person with autism.” What we say matters as much as how we say it. How you communicate can contribute to reinforcing or dismantling stigma, discrimination or Eurocentrism. The above is a very short overview of just some of the key concepts, and we would recommend the resources available below for more information.

Resources

1. Introduction. In: Guidelines on Inclusive Language and Images in Scholarly Communication [Internet]. Coalition for Diversity and Inclusion in Scholarly Communications; 2022. Available from: https://c4disc.pubpub.org/pub/8olmuvdm (Accessed 8/1/2025)
2. https://www.england.nhs.uk/learning-disabilities/about/get-involved/involving-people/making-information-and-the-words-we-use-accessible/ (Accessed 8/1/2025)
3. Weghuber, D., et al., (2023), Championing the use of people-first language in childhood overweight and obesity to address weight bias and stigma: A joint statement from the European-Childhood-Obesity-Group (ECOG), the European-Coalition-for-People-Living-with-Obesity (ECPO), the International-Paediatric-Association (IPA), Obesity-Canada, the European-Association-for-the-Study-of-Obesity Childhood-Obesity-Task-Force (EASO-COTF), Obesity Action Coalition (OAC), The Obesity Society (TOS) and the World-Obesity-Federation (WOF). Pediatric Obesity, 18: e13024. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijpo.13024
4. Heidari, S., Babor, T.F., De Castro, P. et al. Sex and Gender Equity in Research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Res Integr Peer Rev 1, 2 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0007-6

(Featured image declaration: by WOKANDAPIX from Pixabay)