What's the evidence? Think before you use contractions

April 2024

Earnsy Liu looks for readily available evidence to help with the communication decisions we make every day. The evidence doesn't include anything paywalled, so while it may not reflect all of the current research available, it certainly encourages us to keep thinking and putting our readers first.

Think before you use contractions

Do you combine words when you write? For example, do you write you’re instead of you are? Plenty of advice exists on whether to use contractions. Some says to use contractions to sound natural and connect with readers (18F, n.d.; Canada.ca design system, 2024; Digital.govt.nz, 2022; plainlanguage.gov, n.d.). Most advice says to:

• use simple positive contractions — like I’m and we’ll
• avoid negative contractions — like don’t and can’t
• avoid complex and conditional contractions — like they’d and should’ve.

All that makes sense, but do contractions enhance or hinder reading? I tried to look for evidence.

Think about how contractions may affect your readers. / Image by PublicDomainPictures on Pixabay

Published research is like hens’ teeth

The only specific reference I found to published research on the topic says, ‘Contractions make your writing more accessible to the user. Research shows that that they also enhance readability’ (Danielson & Lasorsa, 1989, cited in plainlanguage.gov, n.d.). Unfortunately I could not get hold of the journal article to learn more. How was the research conducted? On whom — if the research was done on undergraduates who speak English as a first language, would the findings apply to others? What does ‘enhance readability’ mean? And do the changes to reading and writing habits in the last three decades make a difference?

Voices of experience urge caution

Some people who have worked with people of different abilities, or who have done their own research, report that contractions can be a problem. Contractions can cause difficulties for those who have English as an additional language, or who have reading challenges.

Be careful — contractions may make your information less accessible. / Image by fauzan291on Pixabay

Contractions, generally, can be tricky

Schofield (2017) tells us that written contractions can slow down people who have English as a second language, or who have reading difficulties. ‘Although some people may understand and use contractions in their everyday speech, they can take time to recognise them in writing.’ Schofield knows because she has worked as a content designer, mainly on digital services for people with disabilities and health conditions.

Similarly, Strachan (2016), a content designer who volunteers in adult literacy classes, tells us that contractions can be hard to read. ‘Readers with low literacy often don’t recognise the meaning of certain types of punctuation at a glance, [for example] an apostrophe showing possession.’

Someone responded to Strachan’s article, saying, ‘I’ve seen people of all reading abilities struggle to read and understand a lot of contractions like isn’t, can’t, don’t, didn’t, won’t, wouldn’t, couldn’t, we’ll, you’ll and who’s’ (Proctor, 2016).

I too asked a few people about contractions.

• Two people I asked were highly educated, highly skilled migrants who had worked in New Zealand for years and spoke English well. Both said they found it harder to read writing with contractions, although the exact words and context made a difference.
• Another person I asked had dyslexia and worked with children who have dyslexia. English is her first language — yet she said contractions were harder.

Negative contractions are particularly difficult

Negative contractions seem particularly difficult for readers. According to the NHS Content guide (NHS Digital service manual, 2023), ‘GDS research found that many users find negative contractions harder to read and they sometimes misread them as the opposite of what they say.’ The style guide went on to note that the NHS.UK medicines team noted that do not was ‘clearer and more emphatic’ than don’t.

Others echo the idea that negative contractions are tricky (Lord & Lanman, 2016; Strachan, 2016). A response to a GitHub question about contractions echoes the idea that negative contractions are tricky (Proctor, 2017):

Personally, I have seen people with low literacy, low vision and dyslexia struggle with all kinds of contractions. I have watched people read can’t and don’t and say can and do...

The Department for Work and Pensions found that people with learning difficulties struggled to understand negative contractions and support workers explained some people rely on reading the “not” to understand what is being said.

A few organisations like Home Office and Access UK have found this is the same with nonnative English speakers.

Joe Lanman from GDS referred to research on Verify and other places that showed “contractions are hard to read, and writing the words out in full significantly increases understanding”.

Even people with good reading skills can miss the ‘not’ in negative contractions (Lanman, 2016).

Positive contractions may be alright

Research about positive contractions seems to be lacking. Content Design London was planning to investigate (2020).

But someone observed ‘one person who found it difficult to see apostrophes and saw I’ll and we’ll as ill and well’ (Proctor, 2017).

Advice is usually to use contractions to improve tone — cautiously

We’re often told to sound natural when we write, for example:

Write like you talk is a common rule of writing readably, and the best way to do that is to use contractions. People are accustomed to hearing contractions in spoken English, and using them in your writing helps people relate to the information.

But use contractions with discretion. Just as you shouldn’t bullet everything on a page, you shouldn’t make a contraction out of every possible word. Don’t use them wherever possible, but wherever they sound natural (plainlanguage.gov, n.d.).

Digital.govt.nz (2022) gives similar advice, but more cautiously and in more detail. They believe, ‘Simple positive contractions may be fine to use. Positive contractions make text feel more conversational and friendly.’ They continue, ‘For native English speakers, contractions also make longer sentences easier to read,’ but do not refer to research. They also say to avoid negative and conditional contractions.

Contractions might not stop someone from completing a task, but the person will take longer and require more effort (Proctor, 2017).

Questions to ponder when you next write

Deciding whether to use contractions requires balancing accessibility and tone. Consider two things the next time you put pen to paper:

• Who’s the audience?
• How important is the message?

How will you balance accessibility and tone? / Image by paulbr75 on Pixabay

Who’s your audience?

Effective communication is not about personal or brand preferences. It’s about effective communication for readers.

Digital.govt.nz (2022) tells us written contractions can be harder for people who:

• have cognitive or intellectual impairments
• have low literacy
• have English as a second language
• are Deaf (because English may be a second language).

‘So, when deciding whether it’s okay to use positive contractions, consider whether the content has a primary audience of people who find more complex English sentences hard to read.’

The UK’s Department of Health (2010) says explicitly to avoid contractions when writing for people with learning disabilities.

How important is your message?

The Canada.ca Content Style Guide (2024) says to avoid negative contractions ‘when there is a critical difference between two things, for example, between doing and not doing something’ (emphasis in original). They give two examples:

Critical: Do not drive while taking this medicine.

Not critical: Most people don’t have reactions to the flu vaccine.

So what will you do?

I’ll stick to simple contractions when writing for the public, to strike that balance between tone and ease of reading. But when writing to people who I’m sure will have no trouble reading English, I’ll happily use negative contractions too.

What about you?

References

18F. (n.d.). Voice and tone. https://guides.18f.gov/content-guide/our-style/voice-and-tone/

Canada.ca design system. (2024, January 31). Canada.ca Content Style Guide. https://design.canada.ca/style-guide/

Content Design London. (2020, July 14). Testing needed. https://readabilityguidelines.co.uk/testing-needed/

Department of Health. (2010). Making written information easier to understand for people with learning disabilities. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/making-written-information-easier-to-understand-for-people-with-learning-disabilities-guidance-for-people-who-commission-or-produce-easy-read-information-revised-edition-2010

Digital.govt.nz. (2022, December 16). Grammar and punctuation. https://www.digital.govt.nz/standards-and-guidance/design-and-ux/content-design-guidance/grammar-and-punctuation/

Lanman, J. (2016, February 29). In user research for GOV.UK Verify. [Comment on the blog post “Writing content for everyone”]. https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2016/02/23/writing-content-for-everyone/#comment-955936

Lord, A. & Lanman, J. (2016, March 31). GOV.UK Verify and the government Design Standards. GOV.UK Verify. https://identityassurance.blog.gov.uk/2016/03/31/gov-uk-verify-and-the-government-design-standards/

NHS Digital service manual. (2023, August). Formatting and punctuation. https://service-manual.nhs.uk/content/formatting-and-punctuation

plainlanguage.gov. (n.d.). Use contractions. https://www.plainlanguage.gov/guidelines/conversational/use-contractions/

Proctor, S. (2016, February 23). This is a great article. [Comment on the blog post “Writing content for everyone”]. https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2016/02/23/writing-content-for-everyone/#comment-955913

Proctor, S. [@stevenaproctor] (2017, October 2). Contractions [Github discussion]. Github. https://github.com/hmrc/design-patterns/issues/130

Schofield, J. (2017, June 6). Using contractions could be making your writing inaccessible. Medium. https://medium.com/@joanne.schofield/using-contractions-could-be-making-your-writing-inaccessible-4034bb3cd76a

Strachan, R. (2016, February 23). Writing content for everyone. GOV.UK Government Digital Service. https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2016/02/23/writing-content-for-everyone/