Reading official letters and being able to react to them appropriately is part of the daily life of every adult in many countries. Although the history of the plain language movement dates to the past century, it is only now that efforts are being made in Poland to adapt official documents to their audience. In this paper, we describe the results of a study (N = 685) in which we examined how particular linguistic forms and text structure affect the reception of an official-looking text – comprehension as well as emotions experienced, trust in the office, feelings of helplessness in the situation of reading the writing, and many other variables. Based on Imbir’s (2016, New Ideas in Psychology, 43, 39–49), two-system theory of emotions, we aim to examine how emotions – triggered by these complex stimuli – affect their processing. We hope that the results of our interdisciplinary research will answer the questions and hypotheses posed by researchers and find application in the reforms currently underway. We believe that by linking findings from cognitive psychology, the psychology of emotions and linguistics, we will also expand knowledge in the broad discussion on overcoming barriers between administrative offices and target audiences.

This article aims to introduce new insights to further the understanding of easy language (EL) and plain language (PL) as examples of tailored language and place them within a broader context of linguistic varieties. We examine EL and PL in relation to standard language, and we consider the degree of conscious effort required in tailoring and the compliance with the codified norms of standard language. Both EL and PL are used in asymmetric communication: PL to mediate between specialists and the general public and EL in communication with people with language barriers. We argue that while these varieties have similar purposes and methods, they also have significant differences; for example, the tailoring moves in opposite directions, as PL seeks general comprehensibility and EL aims to reach special and vulnerable groups. The differences between PL and EL are primarily linked to social prestige and the potential risk of stigma related to their use.

Language for all is a method developed in the Netherlands for providing information in such a way that as many intended readers as possible both comprehend and accept this information. Readers include people with a large variety of reading abilities including people with low literacy skills. Language for all can be characterized as a more accessible variant of plain language with some characteristics of easy language.

In three studies the comprehension and acceptance of and preference for texts written in Language for all was evaluated, comparing original texts with a version in Language for all.

Information written in Language for all was significantly better understood and accepted, and was preferable to the original version.

In conclusion, Language for all is a promising effective, inclusive, and comprehensive method to provide information to people with and without low literacy skills. Further research is recommended.

Clinical research is complex, and research-related terms can be challenging to understand. Clear, supportive communication with patients, potential study participants, and their caregivers must be prioritized by healthcare providers as well as investigators and their research teams. In clinical research, health literacy best practices support the ethical tenets of respect, justice, and beneficence. Plain language advances the understanding of informed consent documents, as well as comprehension of educational information, recruitment materials, study instructions, and study results summaries, among others. Further, a more collaborative research partnership is fostered when study participants are given understandable materials, while a lack of understanding can delay accrual and decrease adherence. We launched a pilot initiative to develop a consensus-driven, plain language clinical research glossary to promote clarity, consistency, and transparency across clinical research stakeholder groups. The resulting resource, described herein, is intended to be used widely to support a greater understanding of clinical research and empower study participants. Considerations for expansion are also discussed.

The Science Writing Initiative for Trainees is a science communications internship program for biomedical graduate students and postdoctoral fellows at the Medical University of South Carolina. Interns serve as an amateur press corps, writing news stories and press releases about recent high-impact research articles. Since 2016, 25 interns have written more than 100 EurekAlert! press releases that have received more than a half million views. Interns learn to explain science across the translational spectrum and to convey findings in plain language to a lay audience, serving as ambassadors for science.

In many countries in continental Europe the simple present is extensively used in main clauses in legislative texts to express obligation. Several English-speaking legal systems have witnessed an increased usage of the simple present in legal English over the last few decades, largely at the expense of shall. I examine the continuing debate among law scholars and writers of legal drafting manuals over the adoption of the simple present in prescriptive texts in English. I conclude by observing that the decision in some countries to do away with shall would appear to be linked principally to socio-pragmatic factors relating to the way this modal auxiliary is perceived in many parts of the English-speaking world today, that is, as being outdated and smacking of “legalese”, a style of legal writing that plain language exponents have been trying to eliminate.