Prativa Kaspal

Dear Prativa,

Thanks very much for joining.

It seems to me that for any research topic, there are four extremes of possible audience:

(1) the audience that is most locally or directly concerned with the research subject, on the ground,

(2) the audience that is most locally or directly concerned with the research subject, academically,

(3) the broadest possible non-academic audience, and

(4) the broadest possible academic audience.

So, in principle, if time and finances are not limited, it should be possible to write four different papers for each piece of research, if one is not too busy preparing the next paper based on new research.

If written as a sequence, each paper can explicitly cite the earlier papers, and add further details and interpretation, so that the publishing sequence is clear, and there is no question of self-plagiarization.

Few researchers actually engage in each kind of writing.

Some will only publish the most academic paper for the most specialised academic audience, without testing their work in the court of popular opinion.

Others tend to publish locally, in popular media only, and never test their work in the court of academic opinion.

Not every author can be expected to master all styles, or give time to all possible audiences.

Ideally, organisations will employ people that have different talents in this regard, so that the work of the organisation as a whole reaches many different audiences.

Each researcer needs to examine his or her own needs and motives, and then look for local, regional, or international publications that they personally like and would like to publish in. Others cannot really tell us what our best publishing plan is, without knowing more about our work, needs, and motives.

These are observations based on my own experience of writing for different audiences, and working in an audience that produces both popular and academic publications.

Best regards, Peter (Admin)