Should FixClarityPROFound in 2-4% of dissertations

Clarity Markers: Your Committee Needs to Know Who Does What

Found in 2-4% of dissertation sentences. "It was determined that..." by whom? "Data were collected..." by whom? If the actor is missing, your committee will ask.

FIX

Revise to clarify who or what performs the action.

What This Issue Is

Clarity markers flag sentences where the reader can't identify who or what performs the action. "It was determined that the intervention was effective." Who determined it? The researchers in the study you're citing? You, in your analysis? An accrediting body? The sentence withholds information your committee needs to evaluate the claim.

This problem goes deeper than passive voice, though passive voice is often the culprit. You can write active sentences that still lack clarity: "The analysis revealed three themes." Analyses don't reveal things—researchers conducting analyses do. "The literature suggests a gap." Literature doesn't suggest anything—you, having read the literature, are identifying a gap. Hiding behind abstractions distances you from your own scholarly work.

APA 7th edition explicitly recommends active voice for clarity, and your committee will enforce this. But the real reason to fix these isn't style compliance—it's intellectual precision. When you name the actor, you're forced to think about who actually did what. That thinking makes your writing more accurate, more accountable, and more persuasive.

Why Your Committee Flags It

Dangling modifiers create ambiguity about who performed the introductory action.

Before & After Examples

Before

Having analyzed the data, the results revealed three themes.

After

Having analyzed the data, I identified three themes.

"It was found" hides the source. Name the researchers who did the finding.

Before

It was found that student engagement increased during the intervention period.

After

Martinez et al. (2021) found that student engagement increased during the intervention period.

In your methodology chapter, you are the actor. Own your methods with first person.

Before

Data were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify emergent patterns.

After

I analyzed the data using Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase thematic analysis to identify emergent patterns.

"Results suggested" is vague. State what the findings actually point to.

Before

The results suggested that further research is needed in this area.

After

These findings highlight a gap in the literature on rural school leadership, warranting further investigation into how principals in low-resource districts sustain instructional reform.

Self-Check Checklist

Tap each item as you review your chapter.

Frequently Asked Questions

Yes. APA 7th edition explicitly supports first person for describing your own actions: "I conducted interviews," "I analyzed the data using..." Many doctoral programs still discourage it, but APA's position is clear. Check your program's specific guidelines—if they allow APA standard, first person is appropriate in your methodology and analysis chapters. It's far better than the awkward "the researcher" construction.
No. Passive voice is appropriate when the actor is genuinely unknown or unimportant: "The survey was developed in 2018" (when you're describing an existing instrument and the developers are cited elsewhere). It's problematic when it hides important information: "It was concluded that..." hides who drew the conclusion, which matters for evaluating the claim.
Data and findings don't show or reveal anything—people interpreting them do. Rewrite with the actual agent: "Analysis of the data showed" becomes "Smith (2020) found" or "My analysis of participant responses indicated." If you're discussing your own findings, say so directly: "Three themes emerged from the interviews" or "I identified three themes in the interview data."
They mean you're writing "Data were collected" and "Interviews were conducted" instead of saying who did these things. In your methodology chapter, you are the primary actor—you designed the study, you recruited participants, you collected data, you analyzed it. Write it that way. "I recruited 15 participants through purposive sampling" is clearer and more honest than "Participants were recruited through purposive sampling."

Check your chapter for unclear actors and agents

Upload your chapter and get instant feedback on clarity markers and 55 other checks committees care about. No credit card required.

Check My Dissertation Free

26 instant checks free. No account needed to start.