Clarify this: structuring highly readable lists (Part 2 of 2) 

Question

“I’m trying to figure out how to increase the reach of my research in fields related to mine. I think that colleagues in my (highly technical) subfield – EdTech – appreciate my work, but when I look at the papers that cite mine, it doesn’t seem to me that my work is resonating in neighbouring (highly qualitative) fields. I asked a colleague about it and she said she found my writing too dense. What can I do to make my writing more understandable within my discipline as a whole, beyond just my specialization?”

– Anonymous, Educational Technology 

Answer

I’ve written previously about the cognitive load that a reader carries when they first peruse a text, and how reducing the length of a sentence’s subject can avoid adding to an extraneous cognitive load, which in turn increases you work’s chances of being understood, remembered, cited, or implemented. When your writing is described as “too dense,” that’s a clue that you’re making your reader carry too heavy a cognitive load as they progress through your text.  

But shortening the length of your subject, and keeping your subject and verb close together – the recommendations in my previous piece on cognitive load – aren’t your only options for making your text easier to read. In last month’s “Ask Dr. Editor,” part one of my response to this question, I described how to use stylistic editing techniques – specifically, editing for emphasis – to reduce perceived density and increase readability.  

This month, I want to turn my attention to a second aspect of stylistic editing: the strategic ordering of items within lists. This recommendation draws from Joseph Williams’ Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace, an excellent (if itself dense) resource for writers seeking to improve their techniques for style.  

When ordering items in a list, Williams advises arranging the items to progress in complexity, placing the “heaviest” or most complex item at the end. When you arrange items from lighter to heavier, you make the list easier for readers to mentally process, because they aren’t carrying the cognitive burden of that “heavy” item all the way through the sentence. Consider, for example, this short list:  

• Before: “The child experimented with grains of sand, wind, and sunshine.” 

On their first pass of this list, a reader might momentarily attempt to apply “grains of” to each element: grains of sand, grains of wind, grains of sunshine. This misreading would be obvious, but it would nonetheless be a stumbling block, which a simple rephrase can eliminate:  

• After: “The child experimented with wind, sunshine, and grains of sand.”  

To determine how to revise for readability, you need to figure out which item in a list is “heaviest.” A “heavy” list item might be the longest, but it might also differ from earlier list items by being less familiar, more complex, or more abstract. Let’s look at another example:  

• Before: “Effective instructors can enhance student engagement online by hosting breakout discussions that involve collaborative problem-solving; using tools that blend synchronous interaction, multimedia content, and real-time assessment; designing experiential learning activities; and facilitating asynchronous reflection exercises that promote deep learning and metacognitive development.” 

You can reorder this list for readability simply by placing items in order of increasing word count:  

• After: “Effective instructors can enhance student engagement online by designing experiential learning activities; hosting breakout discussions that involve collaborative problem-solving; facilitating asynchronous reflection exercises that promote deep learning and metacognitive development; and using tools that blend synchronous interaction, multimedia content, and real-time assessment.” 

While that phrasing works, as it moves the reader from a four-word list item through to an 11-word list item, I prefer also considering moving from synchronous to asynchronous – which also moves us from concrete to abstract:  

• After: “Effective instructors can enhance student engagement online by designing experiential learning activities; hosting breakout discussions that involve collaborative problem-solving; using tools that blend synchronous interaction, multimedia content, and real-time assessment; and facilitating asynchronous reflection exercises that promote deep learning and metacognitive development.” 

Why do I describe this list as moving from concrete to abstract? Because “experiential learning activities” – if we’re familiar with that jargon phrase – can be easily pictured in the mind’s eye, as can “breakout discussions” and (if we’re familiar with the learning management system) “tools.” But what do “asynchronous reflection exercises” look like? It’s much easier for me to mentally picture a Zoom breakout room – a series of rectangles with little heads in them – than it is for me to picture an “asynchronous reflection exercise,” which might look like typing on a laptop, writing on a piece of paper, watching a video, or walking through a forest, depending on the instructor’s pedagogical choices.  

One last example of a revised list that moves from concrete to abstract:  

• Before: “Recommended techniques include self-regulated learning frameworks and note-taking.” 

• After: “Recommended techniques include note-taking and self-regulated learning frameworks.” 

It’s much easier for a reader to mentally process and carry a short, concrete list item like “note-taking” through the rest of the sentence than it is for them to process and carry a long, abstract item like “self-regulated learning frameworks.” By placing the heaviest item at the end of the list, dear letter-writer, you can optimize reader comprehension and reduce the perception of density in your work.  

Of course, that’s the general rule.  

There are always good reasons to break a rule. If this last example sentence is in a text that’s all about self-regulated learning frameworks, maybe you might determine that “note-taking” is, in this context, the heavier item. Or maybe you’re using the list to introduce two topics that you’ll discuss in depth, and you have some reason for note taking to be discussed second; in that instance, it would make sense for the items in your list to follow the order in which you elaborate on each topic.  

If you have a good rationale for violating this rule and not placing your list items in order of increased weight, then, please, of course: break the rule.  

But in a context in which there isn’t some particular reason why the items in your list need to be ordered in a particular way, then, I’m always going to suggest light-to-heavy. This recommended order enhances comprehension, and we need our readers to first understand our writing in order to do anything with it – whether your goal is to have them fund it, cite it, or (as has been my goal today) put it into practice.  

Plan ahead to advance your writing practice 

This spring, Writing Short is Hard is offering an eight-week facilitated section of “Becoming a Better Editor of Your Own Work.” The course runs from May 4-June 28, 2025; the early-bird pricing is available until March 15, 2025. Learn more here.