The Editors' Weekly
Official blog of Canada's national editorial association
The Editors' Weekly
Navigation
  • About the Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Articles en français
  • editors.ca
  • reviseurs.ca
You are here: Home › Aaron Dalton › Empirical Editors: Curse of Knowledge
← Louise Harnby: An Editor’s Top 3
Top Three Fixes for Academic Research Grant Applications →

Empirical Editors: Curse of Knowledge

March 17, 2020 | Filed under: Aaron Dalton and tagged with: Aaron Dalton, cognitive bias, empirical editor, knowledge effect, plain language, user testing, writing drafts, writing process

This article is part of a series that draws lessons from some of the research collected in Aaron Dalton’s “Empirical Research for Editors” list.

Empirical Editors Bias
stmool © 123RF.com

Do you have the curse of knowledge?

The “curse of knowledge” is a type of cognitive bias where someone unknowingly assumes, while communicating, that their audience has the same background knowledge they do.

Of all the cognitive biases, this is the one editors are most intimately familiar with (e.g., technical editors working on user documentation, academic editors working on journal articles, fiction editors flagging regional colloquialisms). One of our primary roles is to help writers stay grounded and be realistic in their expectations of their readers. How can writers mitigate this bias?

  • Be deliberate: In my plain language courses, I teach a “think, then write, then edit” approach to drafting. In the think phase, writers must produce an audience statement. By deliberately thinking about their audience before they start writing, they increase the odds of their writing hitting the mark.
  • Gather data: To assess the knowledge level of their audience, writers should think about people they actually know. If they’re writing to other subject-matter experts, they can consider a colleague. If they’re writing to the general public, they can imagine explaining their material to a friend or family member.

    Even better, though, is hard data. An organization should have good data on their stakeholders. Publishers should have information on the consumers of different genres. The more writers know about their intended audience, the better chance they have of successfully communicating with them. In some cases, they can test drafts of their document with actual users before publishing.
  • Get professional help: This is where we editors come in. We help writers find areas affected not only by the curse of knowledge but also by other barriers to understanding. We help maximize reading fluency.

Have you encountered the curse of knowledge? Share your stories below!

Further reading

  • The curse of expertise: The effects of expertise and debiasing methods on prediction of novice performance
  • The Curse of Knowledge in Economic Settings: An Experimental Analysis
  • Expertise and estimating what other people know: The influence of professional experience and type of knowledge
  • How we know—and sometimes misjudge—what others know: Imputing one’s own knowledge to others
  • Understanding and Reducing the Knowledge Effect: Implications for Writers

___

Previous post from Aaron Dalton: Notes on Notes

The Editors’ Weekly is the official blog of Editors Canada. Contact us.

Did you like this article? Share it with your friends!

Tweet

Written by Aaron Dalton

Through an eclectic career that spanned hospitality, software localization, computer programming, and musicology, Aaron learned firsthand the power of audience-centred communication. He currently works for the Alberta Energy Regulator as an editor and plain language evangelist, where he develops and delivers staff training on effective writing.

Visit my Website Follow me on Twitter
← Louise Harnby: An Editor’s Top 3
Top Three Fixes for Academic Research Grant Applications →

One Response to "Empirical Editors: Curse of Knowledge"

  1. Gael Spivak says:
    March 28, 2020 at 3:34 pm

    This is a great post, Aaron. Thanks for putting it together.

    I see this with the subject matter experts I work with. They’re always surprised that not everyone has a their knowledge of biology! They’ve been working with other MSc and PhD colleagues for so long that they forget that not everyone has their background.

Comments are closed.

What we’re talking about

Aaron Dalton author-editor relationship authors book editors book publishing business practices communication copy editing editing editing tools editor editor's role editor advice editorial skills editors editors at work Editors Canada conference français freelance editing freelance editors freelancing French grammar interview James Harbeck language linguistics Linguistics Frankly Marianne Grier marketing networking plain language professional development proofreading publishing Rosemary Shipton révision style translation usage Wasted Words Wilf Popoff word choice writers writing

Email subscriptions

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,041 other subscribers

Most recent posts

  • “Brag docs”: An Aide-mémoire
  • Resumé Writing vs. Resumé Editing: What Do Resumé Writers Do?
  • Happy Holidays 2022
  • Freelance Tips from an Editor with ADHD, Part 1
  • Combining Careers, Part 1: Vocational Discernment

Archives by month

By author

Follow Us Online

Facebook  Twitter  Flickr  RSS Feed

www.editors.ca

The Editors' Weekly is the blog of Editors Canada.

Report an error or a typo

Email us at blog [at] editors.ca

© 2023 The Editors' Weekly

Powered by One Designs