MODERATOR:
Tricia Kershaw
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

SPEAKERS:
Peter J Olson
JAMA Network

Jessica LaPointe
American Meteorological Society, 

Ketson dos Santos
University of Minnesota

REPORTER:
Kevin Gladish
Journal of Graduate Medical Education

What is the purpose of a style guide, and why do publishers invest so heavily in creating and enforcing them? This session at the 2025 CSE Annual Meeting in Minneapolis, Minnesota, examined this question as well as how to strike the right balance between uniformity of style and the individuality of an author’s voice. The three speakers’ perspectives—one as a publisher, another as a manuscript editor, and a third as an author—each offered unique experiences and expertise around what to do when a publisher’s expectations meet an author’s expression. 

The Publisher’s Perspective

The first speaker was Peter J Olson, whose experience as Freelance Manuscript Editing Coordinator at the JAMA Network offered unique insights into the intent behind style guides as well as how they can be used to best serve all parties involved. 

The session began by asking why style guides exist and how they can serve a greater purpose than simply “having rules to follow.” First, style guides create order, which helps to improve consistency, clarity, and accuracy, all of which ultimately helps with reader comprehension. Style guides also help to enhance a journal’s reputation over time, aligning with publishing and industry standards while helping to establish a unique brand. They can also tailor a journal’s content. One example is the AMA Manual of Style’s list of common abbreviations, which allows for some to be used without expanding and defining on first use. These exceptions assume that many readers in the medical field will likely know what they mean. And finally, a good style guide can save time, taking much of the guesswork out of the editing process.   

Still, manuscript editors and authors will face challenges in applying style guidelines. For example, editors often have a limited knowledge of a journal’s scientific content. Copy editors tend to be English majors who “fell backwards” into the scientific profession. (As the author of this summary, I can attest this is true.) Or they may also be freelancers who shift between multiple style sources and could interpret certain rules differently than a publisher intended. Editors might also be uncertain about when to edit with a lighter or heavier hand. Conversely, authors often have limited knowledge about various style guides and limited time to learn about the differences among them. They also might not expect their article to be edited much beyond peer review and could have concerns that style-related edits will alter their intent or data.  

Publishers can help editors by providing thorough training with realistic examples to assist in envisioning how guidelines can be put into practice. Careful use of language in the guide itself can help. Does always really mean usually? Supplemental guides can also be useful for tasks that fall outside of editorial style, such as XML coding and standard author query language.  

Since language and practices change over time, updating a style guide often will help to ensure that authors and editors stay current with evolving trends and current practices. Publishers should aim to align with authorities in the field and reach out to experts when necessary. Simplifying style rules can also help to make a style guide more accessible. When reviewing a rule, publishers can reflect on its intent. Is that intent being served, or is the rule arbitrary? Publishers can also set expectations in the author instructions and in acceptance letters, addressing the level of editing that will occur at each stage of the process. Clear communication is key.   

The Editor’s Perspective

The second speaker, Jessica LaPointe, brought her experience as Managing Production Editor at the American Meteorological Society, where she oversees remote editing teams and production workflow. She focused on how style guidelines are put into practice, including training manuscript editors and managing communication with authors.  

She began by acknowledging that the publishing process can be both confusing and frustrating for many authors. Transparency is often the first and best way to mitigate these challenges. Authors, like anyone, enjoy being in the loop, so if publishers and editors make clear what they are doing and why, authors will be much more open to changes in their work. Having robust author resources available, including manuscript structure guidelines, formatting, clear examples, and reasoning behind the guidelines, can help move the paper faster through the publication process and minimize queries later. These resources should provide enough details and examples for clarity without overwhelming authors with too much information. 

When training manuscript editors, it is important to consider how much time is available. If time is limited, or if copy editors are outsourced rather than members of an in-house team, some rules could be relaxed and nonessential ones could be reconsidered. Also, as terms change over time, it is important to be flexible as practices evolve. 

When working with authors, editors should consider the author’s point of view. They may have already been through a grueling peer-review process with multiple rounds of revision. Remember that, on some points, the author knows best. Editors should try to respect an author’s expertise in deciding whether to stand by a style rule or to be flexible. At times, allowing deviations to a journal’s style at an author’s request can make more sense, both for the sake of accuracy and for maintaining positive relationships. 

The Author’s Perspective

The final speaker, Dr Ketson dos Santos, provided his perspective as an author and professor in civil, environmental, and geo-engineering, particularly regarding the challenges that teams of authors face when working in multidisciplinary fields. He has led research teams asking such diverse questions as: What is the probability of a building collapsing due to an earthquake? And what is the best model to describe blood flow in the brain? These questions require expertise from many different fields and involve different style expectations.  

For authors, when adjusting writing style to different journals, it is helpful to first consider whether the paper is experimental research, theoretical research, or a multidisciplinary approach using both. Experimental research often requires a more rigid writing structure. Biomedical research, for example, often requires a very formal abstract (Introduction, Methods, Results, etc.), while theoretical papers tend to allow more flexibility. Authors from theoretical backgrounds may experience “culture shock” as they try to reformulate their reasoning to adjust to the abstract structure.  

Another consideration is the type of article being submitted. Is it a research article, a technical brief, or a review article? Each of these has different structural and stylistic requirements that can vary further by field and by journal. Interpreting paper length requirements can also be a challenge, as some journals communicate these limits by word count, others by character count, and still others by the number of pages. A rule that sets a maximum of 10,000 characters, for example, can pose a difficulty when the manuscript includes several equations. 

Author teams will often have different levels of writing experience among their members. Less experienced writers can be encouraged to look at journal style guidelines early, even before formulating a draft, to reduce the amount of rewriting later. To this end, guidelines should be clear, concise, and simple, not leaving too much room for complex interpretation. Finally, an author should know when to advocate for something that has been changed in the editing process, particularly when using technical terms. If the changes alter the meaning of the work or could confuse the target audience, an author may advocate more forcefully to include certain terms as written.  

In summary, a good style guide can be of great help to editors and authors, rather than a hurdle to climb. Clear, concise, and transparent communication, along with thorough training, regular updates, and an appreciation for the perspectives of the publisher, the editor, and the author, can facilitate an editing process that leads to the best work possible for everyone involved.