Are lay abstracts published in Autism readable enough for the general public? A short report.

Lay abstracts are brief descriptions or summaries of research that are targeted at a general audience. They are held as an important means for the research community to provide greater transparency to the general public and to increase visibility of the pertinent research. This study aims to examine the extent to which lay abstracts published in the journal Autism are comprehensible to a lay audience in terms of readability measures. Results showed that lay abstracts published in Autism were more readable than their corresponding abstracts but were less readable than plain English texts (e.g. news reports). To our knowledge, this is probably the first comparative study on the readability of lay abstracts. Possible explanations for and implications of these findings were offered. Research papers are sometimes hard to follow. Lay abstracts give a short account of research papers. However, it is unclear whether lay abstracts are readable to the lay people. This study examined the readability of 570 abstracts and lay abstracts published between 2020 and 2022 in the journal Autism. We found that that lay abstracts are easier to read than abstracts but are harder to read than news reports. The findings suggest that lay abstracts, on average, are hard to read for the lay people. We propose that the journal and its authors may invite reviewers from outside the research community to test whether a lay abstract is readable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]