|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Key Takeaways
- Prefer active voice as your default in academic writing: it is clearer, more direct, and easier to read than passive constructions.
- Passive voice is not incorrect; it serves specific purposes, such as emphasizing the object of research, omitting an unknown actor, or achieving an objective tone in Methods sections.
- The appropriate choice of voice depends on what you want to emphasize in a sentence and which section of your paper you are writing.
- Consistency, conciseness, and clarity should guide every voice decision when in doubt.
Contents
- Glossary of Key Terms
- Introduction: Why Voice Matters in Academic Writing
- What Is the Difference Between Active and Passive Voice?
- When Should You Use Active Voice?
- When Is Passive Voice the Right Choice?
- Voice Recommendations by Paper Section
- Common Errors Associated with Passive Voice
- How Do You Identify and Revise Passive Voice?
- Does Voice Convention Differ Across Academic Disciplines?
- Is It Acceptable to Use First Person in Academic Writing?
- Quick Decision Guide: Active or Passive?
- Frequently Asked Questions
Glossary of Key Terms
| Term | Definition |
| Active voice | A sentence construction in which the grammatical subject performs the action expressed by the verb (e.g., “We collected the samples”). |
| Passive voice | A sentence construction in which the grammatical subject receives the action, typically requiring a form of the verb “to be” plus a past participle (e.g., “The samples were collected”). |
| Agent (actor) | The person or entity performing the action in a sentence. |
| Auxiliary verb | A helping verb used to form tenses or the passive voice, such as “is,” “was,” or “were.” |
| Nominalization | The process of converting a verb into a noun (e.g., “analyze” becomes “analysis”), which can obscure the action in a sentence. |
| Dangling modifier | A word or phrase that modifies the wrong subject, often caused by omitting the implied agent in a passive construction. |
| First-person pronoun | “I” (singular) or “we” (plural), used in active constructions to identify the researcher as the actor. |
| IMRaD structure | The standard format for scientific papers: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. |
| Subject | The noun or noun phrase that performs (active) or receives (passive) the action of the verb in a sentence. |
Introduction: Why Voice Matters in Academic Writing
The choice between active and passive voice is one of the most fundamental stylistic decisions in academic and scientific writing. Although some disciplines have defaulted to the passive voice as a marker of objectivity for a long time, leading journals, university writing centers, and style manuals consistently recommend prioritizing active voice wherever appropriate.
This guide explains the structural difference between the two voices, outlines when each is the better choice, identifies common errors to avoid, and provides practical strategies for editing your own writing.
What Is the Difference Between Active and Passive Voice?
Sentence Structure
The two voices differ in how they arrange the subject, verb, and object of a sentence.
- Active voice follows the order: Subject (actor) + Verb + Object.
- Passive voice follows the order: Object (receiver) + Auxiliary verb + Past participle (+ “by” + agent, optionally).
| Feature | Active Voice | Passive Voice |
| Word order | Subject acts on object | Object receives action |
| Auxiliary verb required? | No | Yes (“is,” “was,” “were,” etc.) |
| Agent (actor) | Named as the subject | Omitted or placed in a “by” phrase |
| Typical length | Shorter | Longer |
| Clarity | Higher | Can be lower if agent is unclear |
| Tone | Direct, dynamic | Formal, impersonal |
Side-by-Side Examples
| Passive Voice | Active Voice |
| Exploratory interviews were completed by six participants. | Six participants completed exploratory interviews. |
| The samples were collected from six counties in California. | We collected samples from six counties in California. |
| It was demonstrated that the efficiency of the reaction was notably increased. | We demonstrated that our selected combination of catalysts notably increased the efficiency of the reaction. |
| The entrance exam was failed by over one-third of the applicants. | Over one-third of the applicants failed the entrance exam. |
| Action on the bill is being considered by the committee. | The committee is considering action on the bill. |
In each case, the active version is shorter, places the actor first, and expresses the action more directly. Active sentences also require fewer words because auxiliary verbs are unnecessary.
When Should You Use Active Voice?
Active voice is the recommended default for most academic writing. Use it in the following situations.
To Produce Clear, Concise Sentences
Active constructions reduce word count and eliminate the auxiliary verbs required by passive constructions. Shorter sentences are easier to process and reduce the cognitive load on readers.
- Passive: “In this comparison of recycling standards, it is demonstrated that a country’s recycling performance can change significantly depending on which standard is applied.”
- Active: “This comparison of recycling standards demonstrates that a country’s recycling performance can change significantly depending on which standard is applied.”
The active version removes the awkward “it is demonstrated” construction, making the sentence both shorter and more direct.
To Emphasize the Actor or Researcher
When attributing contributions, findings, or arguments to specific researchers, the active voice places them at the center of the sentence. This is especially valuable in Introduction and Discussion sections.
- Passive: “The methods and principles by which each process in product synthesis could be analyzed were proposed by Choudhary.”
- Active: “Choudhary proposed the methods and principles by which each process in product synthesis could be analyzed.”
Literature reviews and discussion sections depend on clear attribution. The active voice makes it unambiguous who contributed what.
To Create Engaging, Narrative Writing
Active voice places researchers back into the action of their own research, making papers more accessible and engaging. High-impact journals increasingly encourage this approach. Readers connect more readily with writing that reads as a story of discovery rather than a detached report.
To Avoid the Passive Trap in Discussion Sections
The Discussion section is where researchers interpret their findings and advance arguments about their implications. Defaulting to passive voice here can make strong conclusions feel tentative or unclear. Active voice signals confidence and ownership of the argument.
- Passive: “It is suggested that the results indicate a significant relationship.”
- Active: “Our results indicate a significant relationship.”
When Is Passive Voice the Right Choice?
Passive voice is not incorrect. It serves legitimate and important functions in academic writing. Use it deliberately in the following circumstances.
When the Agent Is Unknown or Unimportant
If the identity of the actor is irrelevant or unknown, the passive voice is perfectly appropriate. Forcing an active construction in such cases produces awkward or misleading sentences.
- Appropriate passive: “My car was stolen on Sunday night.” (The thief is unknown.)
- Appropriate passive: “CD4+ and CD8+ T cells were significantly reduced in DOCK8-deficient mice at 7 dpi.” (What is reducing the cells is not yet established.)
To Emphasize the Object or Action
When the object of research, the procedure, or the outcome is more important than who performed it, lead with that object by using the passive voice.
- “The interviews were conducted by two researchers who had no relationship with New York City.” (The focus is on how the interviews were conducted, not on who conducted them.)
- “This research was approved by the ethics committee of the Institute of Gerontology.” (The approval itself is the key information.)
To Achieve Objectivity in Methods Sections
The Methods section describes procedures in a replicable, objective way. Readers already understand that the authors performed these procedures; naming “we” repeatedly can feel redundant. Passive voice is widely accepted, and often preferred, in this section.
- “Test tubes were filled with 20 ml of solution and stored at -5°C.”
- “Colloidal CdSe-Au NRs were synthesized according to standard protocols.”
- “Blood pressure and resting heart rate were measured 2, 4, and 6 hours post-intervention.”
To Avoid Repetition of the Agent
If you have recently named the actor in the surrounding text, repeating the agent in every sentence is unnecessary and disruptive to flow. The passive voice allows you to reference the action without redundancy.
To Avoid First-Person Pronouns Where Required
Some disciplines, journals, or instructors still discourage first-person pronouns. In these contexts, passive voice provides a grammatically correct alternative to “I” or “we.” However, this convention is shifting: many leading journals, including Science and Nature, now actively encourage first-person active constructions. Always check the target journal’s style guidelines.
- “Atlas.ti software was used for qualitative data analysis.” (Avoids both “we” and the awkward “the researchers.”)
To Maintain Consistent Focus in a Passage
When a passage focuses on a specific topic, shifting the subject for each sentence can disrupt continuity. Passive voice allows you to keep the topic as the sentence subject throughout.
- Example: “Chronic fatigue syndrome can lead to sleep problems. The exact cause is unknown; instead, it is believed to be a complex, multi-factor condition.”
Voice Recommendations by Paper Section
The appropriate choice of voice often depends on which section of your paper you are writing. The following table summarizes typical conventions, though individual journal guidelines always take precedence.
| Paper Section | Recommended Voice | Reason |
| Abstract | Active (primary) | Conciseness and impact; readers skim abstracts quickly. |
| Introduction | Active (primary) | Attribute prior research clearly; establish your own contribution. |
| Methods | Passive (accepted) | Emphasizes procedures over actors; standard convention in many fields. |
| Results | Both, as appropriate | Passive to describe findings objectively; active to note what data show. |
| Discussion | Active (primary) | Interpret findings with confidence; claim your contributions directly. |
| Conclusion | Active (primary) | Emphasize accomplishments and future directions with clarity. |
This table reflects current recommendations from major journals and writing resources. It is not a rigid rule: a Methods sentence that needs to emphasize an unusual procedural choice may benefit from the active voice, while a Discussion sentence focused on what was found (rather than who found it) may use passive voice appropriately.
Common Errors Associated with Passive Voice
Writers who overuse passive voice often produce specific, identifiable errors. Recognizing these patterns makes editing more efficient.
Dangling Modifiers
A dangling modifier occurs when a modifying phrase connects to the wrong subject, often because the intended subject (the researcher) has been omitted in a passive construction.
| Problem | Sentence |
| Dangling modifier | “To examine cell cycle progression, mice were pulsed sequentially with EdU…” |
| Revision (active) | “To examine cell cycle progression, we sequentially pulsed mice with EdU…” |
In the original sentence, the modifier “To examine cell cycle progression” logically modifies the researcher, not the mice. Switching to the active voice restores the correct relationship.
Ineffectual Nominalization
Nominalization converts a verb into a noun (e.g., “analyze” becomes “analysis,” “conclude” becomes “conclusion”). While nominalizations have legitimate uses, overusing them in passive constructions weakens sentences by hiding the true action.
| Problem | Example | Revision |
| Nominalization (passive) | “Genotyping of cases was carried out using various GWAS arrays.” | “Cases were genotyped using various GWAS arrays.” OR “We genotyped the cases using various GWAS arrays.” |
| Nominalization (active) | “We obtained new benthic and planktic radiocarbon measurements.” | “We measured radiocarbon decay from new benthic and planktic samples.” |
In both examples, converting the nominalization back to a verb produces a cleaner, more direct sentence. Notice that the second example is already in active voice: nominalization is a problem regardless of voice.
Useful Nominalizations
Not all nominalizations are errors. When a nominalization refers back to a previous sentence (acting as a cohesive device), it is both appropriate and stylistically valuable. Do not revise these automatically.
- Example: “Each circuit configuration was chosen randomly… For each implementation, detection events were counted…” The word “implementation” refers back to the previous process and keeps the passage coherent.
Overuse of “It Is” Constructions
Phrases such as “it is demonstrated,” “it is suggested,” and “it is worth noting” are common passive fillers that add words without adding meaning. Replace them with direct active alternatives wherever possible.
| Weak passive construction | Stronger active alternative |
| “It is demonstrated that…” | “[Subject] demonstrates that…” |
| “It is suggested that…” | “We suggest that…” OR “[Data] suggest that…” |
| “It was found that…” | “We found that…” OR “The analysis revealed that…” |
| “It is worth noting that…” | “Notably,…” OR “[Subject] shows that…” |
How Do You Identify and Revise Passive Voice?
Active voice is usually preferred; here is a practical process for auditing your own writing and making targeted improvements.
Step 1: Find Passive Constructions
- Search your document for forms of “to be” followed by a past participle: “was collected,” “is used,” “were conducted,” “has been approved.”
- Look for sentences where the actor appears in a “by” phrase at the end, or where the actor is omitted entirely.
- Use your word processor’s Find function to search for “was,” “were,” “is,” “are,” “been,” and “being.”
Step 2: Assess Each Passive Sentence
Ask the following questions for each passive construction you identify:
- Is the agent (actor) unknown or genuinely unimportant?
- Is the object or procedure the main point of this sentence?
- Would naming the agent create awkward repetition?
- Does my journal or discipline discourage first-person pronouns?
If the answer to any of these is yes, the passive voice may be appropriate. If the answer to all is no, convert to active voice.
Step 3: Convert to Active Voice
To convert a passive sentence to an active one:
- Identify who or what performs the action (the agent).
- Move the agent to the subject position at the start of the sentence.
- Remove the auxiliary verb (“was,” “were,” etc.) and use the main verb directly.
- Place the original subject (now the object) after the verb.
| Step | Passive | Active |
| Original | “The data were analyzed by the research team.” | |
| Identify agent | “The research team” (in “by” phrase) | |
| Rewrite | “The research team analyzed the data.” |
Step 4: Check Journal Guidelines
Before finalizing your paper, review the target journal’s author guidelines for specific recommendations on voice, use of first person, and section-by-section conventions. Different journals in different disciplines have different preferences. When in doubt, prioritize consistency, conciseness, and clarity.
Does Voice Convention Differ Across Academic Disciplines?
Yes, conventions vary by field, and the shift toward active voice is more advanced in some disciplines than others. The table below provides a general overview.
| Discipline Area | General Convention | Notes |
| Natural sciences (biology, chemistry, physics) | Passive historically dominant; active increasingly encouraged | Major journals (Science, Nature) now encourage active voice, especially outside Methods. |
| Social sciences (psychology, sociology) | Active voice widely accepted | APA style (7th edition) explicitly recommends active voice for clarity. |
| Humanities (history, literature, philosophy) | Active voice standard | Arguments are attributed directly to authors or scholars. |
| Engineering and applied sciences | Mixed; passive common in Methods | Active voice growing in Results and Discussion sections. |
| Medical writing | Passive still prevalent, but shifting | Clinical trial reports often use passive; review articles increasingly use active. |
The overarching trend across all disciplines is toward greater use of active voice, driven by the recognition that clarity and accessibility benefit all readers, including peer reviewers and editors who often decide the fate of a submission.
Is It Acceptable to Use First Person in Academic Writing?
Yes, in most contemporary academic contexts, using “I” or “we” is not only acceptable but recommended when it accompanies active voice constructions.
The Shift Away from Avoiding First Person
Earlier academic writing conventions, particularly in the sciences, discouraged first-person pronouns in favor of an impersonal, “objective” style. This convention has been substantially revised. Researchers writing in first person are now seen as taking appropriate ownership of their work, which increases accountability and transparency. High-impact journals including Science and Nature publish papers using “we” routinely in active constructions.
When First Person Is Especially Valuable
- In Discussion sections, to assert your interpretation: “We argue that…” OR “We conclude that…”
- When describing decisions made during research design: “We chose this method because…”
- In Introduction sections, to signal your contribution: “In this paper, we examine…”
- When avoiding first person would require awkward third-person constructions: “the authors” or “the researchers” as a reference to yourself.
When to Avoid First Person
- When your journal or instructor explicitly prohibits it.
- In Methods sections where passive voice is conventionally accepted and avoids redundancy.
- When the focus genuinely should be on the procedure or the finding, not the researcher.
Quick Decision Guide: Active or Passive?
Use the following table as a quick reference when deciding between voices.
| Situation | Recommended Voice | Example |
| You want to credit a specific researcher or finding | Active | “Smith and colleagues demonstrated that…” |
| The actor is unknown or irrelevant | Passive | “Samples were collected from rural areas.” |
| You are describing standard lab procedures in Methods | Passive | “Cells were incubated for 24 hours at 37°C.” |
| You are interpreting results in Discussion | Active | “Our results suggest that X influences Y.” |
| You want to emphasize that research was approved or validated | Passive | “This study was approved by the IRB.” |
| Your sentence contains a dangling modifier | Active | “To investigate X, we performed Y.” |
| You want to emphasize research findings over the researcher | Passive or Active | “The increased risk of X is associated with Y.” OR “The data show that X is associated with Y.” |
| You are writing the abstract, introduction, or conclusion | Active (primary) | “This study examines the relationship between X and Y.” |
Frequently Asked Questions
Is passive voice always wrong in academic writing?
No. Passive voice is a legitimate grammatical structure that serves specific purposes in academic writing, including emphasizing the object of research, acknowledging an unknown agent, and maintaining an objective tone in Methods sections. The key is intentionality: use passive voice when it genuinely serves the sentence, not as a default style.
Why do so many academic papers use passive voice?
The convention developed from a belief that passive voice creates objectivity by removing the researcher from the narrative. While this was long considered standard, especially in the sciences, the consensus has shifted. Most contemporary guidance recommends active voice as the default, reserving passive for specific situations where it adds clarity or is required by convention.
How does active voice improve the readability of a research paper?
Active voice reduces sentence length, eliminates auxiliary verbs, makes clear who performed each action, and produces a more direct narrative flow. Readers, including peer reviewers, process active sentences more quickly and with less cognitive effort. Clearer writing also reduces the risk of ambiguity, which is critical in precise scientific reporting.
When should the passive voice be used in scientific writing?
Passive voice is most appropriate in the Methods section of a scientific paper, where the standard practice and the object of study are more important than the identity of the researcher. It is also appropriate when the agent is genuinely unknown or unimportant, when emphasis must fall on the action or result rather than the actor, and when using it avoids awkward repetition of a recently named subject.
Does APA style recommend active or passive voice?
The APA Publication Manual (7th edition) explicitly recommends using the active voice for most writing to improve clarity and directness. It also supports the use of first-person pronouns (“I,” “we”) in active constructions. However, APA acknowledges that passive voice is appropriate when the focus is on the object of the action rather than the performer.
How do I convert passive voice to active voice in academic writing?
To convert a passive sentence to active voice: (1) identify who or what is performing the action, often found in a “by” phrase or implied by context; (2) move that actor to the subject position at the start of the sentence; (3) remove the auxiliary verb and use the main verb in its active form; and (4) place the original subject (now the object) after the verb. For example: “The data were analyzed by our team” becomes “Our team analyzed the data.”
Can I mix active and passive voice in the same paper?
Yes, and in fact you should. Most academic papers use both voices strategically across different sections. A well-written paper might use active voice throughout the Introduction, Discussion, and Conclusion to assert claims and attribute findings, while using passive voice in the Methods section to describe standard procedures. The goal is not uniformity but clarity: choose the voice that best serves each sentence.
Does using first person with active voice affect scientific objectivity?
No. The idea that first-person active constructions undermine objectivity is a misconception. Objectivity in research comes from rigorous methodology, transparent reporting, and sound reasoning, not from grammatical distancing. In fact, using first person can improve scientific writing by making it clearer who made decisions, who is responsible for interpretations, and what specifically the researchers contributed.
Comment