Who is the layperson and why should I write for them?

So, we frequently hear grumbling amongst researchers when they are asked to write something on their research for the layperson. And, I get it, you spend years and years becoming an expert in your field, you're on the cutting-edge, and it's annoying to have to return to the more rudimentary concepts and explain them to someone who hasn't bothered to read the foundational texts in your field!

But, as someone who has had a career writing for the layperson or educating the layperson, allow me to answer the question, "who is the layperson and why should I write for them?" To do this, I'll try to disperse some myths.

Myth #1: The layperson isn't smart.
Many researchers believe that writing for the layperson is watering down or vastly oversimplifying their research for the layperson who could never possibly understand the complexity of the research. This is a myth because the layperson is smart, the layperson has their own expertise; it's just not in your exact area. They are capable of understanding the complexity of your research, but you are going to have to educate them. To educate them, try to understand your audience better. What can you assume they already know? What concepts might they understand that you can draw on to relate to your research? What are they most interested in learning?

Myth #2: It's not worth writing for the layperson.
PIs often suggest that their grant reviewers are not laypeople, so what's the point in writing specific aims or a project overview that a layperson can understand? A couple of responses. First, are you sure that your reviewers will not include laypeople? Some agencies include patients, consumers, or other stakeholders who are laypeople as reviewers. If these folks don't understand your grant proposal, don't think they'll just chalk it up to you being so smart that it would be impossible for them to understand what you're doing. The second reason is even experts in your field appreciate you writing for the layperson, because it means you are writing in a clear and compelling manner. Even in my own field, I appreciate when a scholar lays out a theory or method that I use regularly such that a layperson could understand it because I can then draw on the way they define/describe the concepts in my own work. I can't remember a time that I was annoyed at how basic someone's description was in a grant proposal even in my own area of expertise.

Myth #3: Good research writing is complicated.
You're likely familiar with the old adage that you understand something better when you teach it. And, as a faculty researcher, you've likely experienced this; you know XX101 like the back of your hand. Now, I'm not comparing laypeople to that undergraduate who never does his/her homework and can't be bothered to show up to class on time (see myth #1). What I am saying is that when you approach research writing whether for grants or peer-reviewed journals as trying to teach your work to an audience, you will end up with a clear, compelling, and understandable text. Many of us assume that good research writing is challenging to read, and this comes from being trained to wade through a lot of bad writing by more seasoned colleagues throughout our educational and research experience. But, it's time to break this myth and say, "No, we can write about our research without exasperating and frustrating our reader, even when they're a layperson!"

I hope you will join me in this myth busting cause, for the sake of your research, for the sake of your reviewers, for the sake of the layperson!

Resources:

Writing for Lay Audiences: A Challenge for Scientists - Joselita T. Salita
Top Tips for Writing a Lay Summary - Academy of Medical Sciences
Academic and Research Paper Writing in Layman's Language - enago academy