Practice technical paper writing style: passive voice in methods, hedging language, precise quantification, self-explanatory figures, and positioning contributions in related work.
0 / 10 completed
1 / 10
'_____ voice in methods sections' — which voice is conventional in academic methodology writing?
Passive voice is conventional in methods sections ('samples were prepared', 'the model was trained') to focus on the process rather than the actor, maintaining objectivity.
2 / 10
'Hedging language' in academic writing includes words like:
Hedging words ('suggests', 'indicates', 'appears to', 'may') express appropriate epistemic caution — acknowledging that results support a conclusion without claiming certainty beyond what the data shows.
3 / 10
'Precise quantification' means writing '3.2× speedup' rather than:
'Much faster' is vague and unacceptable in technical writing. '3.2× speedup' is precise, reproducible, and directly comparable to other published results.
4 / 10
'Figures must be _____.' What property ensures a figure communicates independently?
Figures must be self-explanatory — the caption and figure together should communicate the key finding without requiring the reader to search the body text for context.
5 / 10
'The related work section _____ the contribution.' What is the purpose of the related work section?
The related work section positions the paper's contribution relative to prior work — showing what is novel, what problem it solves differently, and why existing work does not already address it.
6 / 10
During a code review of Alex's PR for the new caching layer, Sarah comments: 'This implementation seems overly complex. Could you explain the rationale behind using a thread-local cache instead of a shared one?' Which phrase best reflects the tone and purpose of Sarah's comment regarding technical paper writing style?
Sarah's comment seeks justification for a technical decision – specifically, the choice of thread-local caching. A well-written technical paper (and code review) demands that design choices are explained with a focus on potential drawbacks and trade-offs, not just stating they 'work'. Option 2 demonstrates this by highlighting the consideration of concurrency, a key aspect often discussed in related work or justification sections. Options A, C, and D are either overly dismissive, focused on outcomes rather than rationale, or suggest a different priority (simplicity) without addressing the core issue.
7 / 10
You're drafting the description for a Pull Request to add support for JWT authentication to your API. You want to clearly communicate the impact of this change. Which sentence best demonstrates the use of precise quantification and avoids ambiguous language?
Precise quantification involves stating the magnitude of an effect using metrics. 'Increasing its security posture by approximately 25%' provides a measurable impact and grounds the change in a tangible value. Option 1 is too vague, Option 3 uses a quantifiable metric (25%) to describe the improvement, while Options A and D are simply descriptive without providing any concrete detail or evidence of the change's effect.
8 / 10
During a Slack discussion about optimizing database queries, Ben says: 'We should definitely look into using indexes.' Which statement best represents the use of hedging language in this context?
Hedging language involves softening assertions with words like 'potentially,' 'may,' or 'could' to acknowledge uncertainty. 'We should *consider* using indexes...' acknowledges that adding indexes isn't guaranteed to improve performance and requires further investigation. Options A is too definitive, Option 3 is more cautious but still asserts a clear recommendation, and Option 4 presents an unqualified opinion. This reflects the need for measured statements in technical documentation and discussions.
9 / 10
You're writing the conclusion of a paper detailing improvements to your distributed logging system. You want to state that the changes resulted in a significant reduction in log volume but acknowledge potential limitations. Which sentence best illustrates this approach?
This sentence acknowledges both the positive outcome (reduced log volume) and potential limitations. It avoids overstating the results – 'significantly reduced' is more cautious than 'dramatically.' Option 3 provides a specific number which isn't warranted in a conclusion, and Options A and D are overly promotional or simply descriptive without acknowledging further work.
10 / 10
Maria is reviewing David's code for a new API endpoint. She writes in the commit message: 'Implemented endpoint to retrieve user data based on ID.' Which aspect of technical paper writing style does this comment primarily demonstrate?
The comment 'Implemented endpoint to retrieve user data based on ID' provides a succinct overview of the change. This is key in technical writing – clarity and conciseness are prioritized. While other options might be relevant for more detailed documentation or code review discussions, this comment exemplifies the focused summary needed when describing changes in a PR message or similar context.
What will I practice in "Technical Paper Writing Style Vocabulary"?
This is a Research English exercise set. It walks through 10 scenario-based multiple-choice questions built around real usage of research english terminology that IT professionals encounter on the job.
Is this exercise free to use?
Yes. Every exercise on CoderSlingo, including this one, is free to complete with no account, sign-up, or paywall.
How many questions are in this exercise?
This set contains 10 questions. Each one shows immediate feedback and a detailed explanation after you answer, so you learn the correct usage right away rather than waiting for a final score.
Do I need prior experience to complete this exercise?
No prior experience is required. Each question includes a full explanation covering the reasoning behind the correct answer, so the exercise itself teaches the research english vocabulary as you go.
Can I retry the exercise if I get questions wrong?
Yes — use the "Try again" button on the results screen to reset your answers and go through all the questions again. There is no limit on attempts.
Is my progress saved?
Your answers and score for the current session are tracked in the browser as you go. No account or login is needed, and there is nothing to install.
What if I don't understand a term used in a question?
Read the explanation shown after you answer each question — it breaks down the correct term in plain English with a real-world example. You can also check the site Glossary for quick definitions.
How is this different from reading a blog article on the topic?
Exercises like this one are interactive drills that test and reinforce specific vocabulary through multiple-choice questions, while blog articles explain concepts in prose. Practising here after reading builds active recall, not just passive recognition.
Where can I find more Research English exercises?
See the Research English exercises hub for the full set of related pages, or browse all exercise categories from the main Exercises index.
Can I use this exercise to prepare for a technical interview?
Yes — research english vocabulary comes up often in technical discussions and interviews. Pair this exercise with our dedicated Interview Preparation section for role-specific practice.