The Elevator Talk (<interactions> XIII.3, May-June 2006) is a brief abstract that describes your research and why it’s important. After several rounds of practice, most researchers can develop an Elevator Talk that is understandable to a lay audience. However, if someone asks a researcher to go into any more detail, I have found that prior problems of clarity and jargon rear their ugly heads. Here are some tips for further discussing your research past the 30-second stage.
Continue to resist rewriting a paper designed for another audience. Academic writing stresses the statement of background information first, then methodology, data analysis, and finally results. Writing for a practitioner audience turns this formula upside down: State your results first, and fill in background information as necessary. While methodology is least important in this style of writing, it helps to discuss how you came up with a theory or developed a prototype. Using action words will help readers paint in their minds the proverbial picture of what you do.
Keep your statement focused by describing one main piece of research. Do not describe ancillary or related projects, give a history of previous projects, or provide detailed background information about your field. For starters, you don’t have the space! However, if your research consists of multiple projects, that’s finejust state that fact clearly up front. If you start talking about one project, and then another, and yet anotherall without any contextreaders will become confused.
Set the context for your research by indicating how it fits into your subdiscipline. This is very important to help the reader understand where your work is coming from. But keep this brief! Limit your background-information discussion to a maximum of two or three sentences.
Define the key question(s) you are trying to answer in your work, and why such questions are important for your field. Spend more time on the latterassume your reader will always be thinking, "What’s in it for me?"
Your conclusion should discuss new insights and outcomes anticipated as a result of your work. However, if you have not clearly set the context for your research at the start, readers might think that you are continuing to describe your research. Avoid this confusion by being very clear that you are discussing potential applications and outcomes from your work.
About the Author:
Carolyn Gale has more affiliations than she can keep track of, but has general interests in learner-centered design and science communication. She teaches communication courses as a visiting scholar at Stanford University, co-owns a graphic design firm, and is cofounder of a global network of research communication consultants.
©2006 ACM 1072-5220/06/1100 $5.00
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee.
The Digital Library is published by the Association for Computing Machinery. Copyright © 2006 ACM, Inc.