Eliminating jargon is among the oldest pieces of writing advice, often interpreted as a slight towards the reader, implying that the intention is to simplify for those who struggle to keep pace. Yet, research on language response indicates nearly the opposite. Writing plainly isn’t a kindness to less capable readers; it enhances your intelligence, maintains reader engagement, and is frequently more challenging to execute than the elaborate alternative. It turns out that removing jargon is an enhancement rather than a drawback.
Using complex vocabulary can make you appear less intelligent, not more.
Let’s begin with the flattering discovery. Psychologist Daniel Oppenheimer conducted experiments where he replaced ordinary words with longer, more impressive ones, then asked participants to evaluate the author’s intelligence. The consistent result was clear: the more elaborate the language, the less intelligent the author appeared, regardless of the quality of the underlying essay. In a subsequent variant, he made the text less readable by using an awkward typeface, which was sufficient to diminish the perceived cleverness of the writer.
The explanation is straightforward. When a text is difficult to comprehend, our brains interpret that difficulty as a sign that the writer is unclear in thought or lacks substantial information. Initially, we may blame ourselves for any confusion, but soon after, we attribute the problem to the source. Oppenheimer also discovered that many students confessed to purposely opting for bigger words to project intelligence, which, according to his study, backfires. Replacing “utilize” with “use” or “commence” with “start” results in no loss except the burden of deciphering. Short, straightforward words do not come across as simplistic; they convey confidence, suggesting that the writer possesses a strong grasp of the subject and does not need to obscure it.
Jargon subtly signals to readers to disengage.
The second finding highlights the effect of jargon on readers, extending beyond mere misunderstanding. A team led by Hillary Shulman provided individuals with passages discussing science, some articulated plainly and others laced with technical jargon, and gauged their responses. The presence of jargon complicated comprehension, caused readers to feel less knowledgeable about the topic, and diminished their interest, even when each term was explicitly defined on the page.
That last detail is crucial. We often assume jargon’s issue lies in unfamiliarity with the words, believing that definitions will remedy this. However, that is not the case. Jargon conveys a quieter message beneath the surface, implying that the content is not intended for the reader, which causes them to withdraw, lose interest, and feel inadequate. The words do not merely fail to enlighten; they subtly exclude readers from the conversation.
The benefits of cutting jargon.
Combining these two insights reveals that plain language is not a compromise. Writing clearly portrays you as more competent, while also keeping your audience engaged and feeling able to follow along, which constitutes a large part of the task. The aim was never to diminish the concept; rather, it was to eliminate the barriers between a well-articulated idea and the person on the receiving end.
In practice, this entails opting for the shorter word when applicable, illustrating a complex idea with a straightforward example instead of a technical term, and, when a specialized term is genuinely the correct choice, earning it by defining it once and using it judiciously instead of scattering it for dramatic effect. Reading a draft aloud is also beneficial, as the points where you hesitate are typically the same ones where a reader will struggle. None of this implies having less to express; it is about ensuring that what you communicate resonates with its intended audience.
A couple of thoughtful caveats.
Two considerations are important to prevent overstatement. Jargon has its rightful place among specialists, where a commonly understood technical vocabulary is often quicker and more precise; a surgeon or engineer conversing with another in the field is being efficient, not pretentious. The issue arises when that vocabulary is employed with an audience that lacks shared knowledge. Moreover, “plain” does not equate to “simplistic.” Articulating something true and complex in clear language is often more challenging than obscuring it with lengthy words, as you cannot rely on vagueness to mask the gaps. This difficulty is central to the objective.
Therefore, instructing to eliminate jargon is not a call to lower standards. Instead, it reflects a respect for the reader and, as research suggests, indicates that the writer has a sufficient understanding of the subject to express it in universally accessible language. The clear version demonstrates confidence, while the ostentatious one typically obfuscates.