Common Voice and Sentence Structure Mistakes in Research Writing

Voice and sentence structure problems in research writing rarely appear in isolation. A passive construction hides a buried verb inside a nominalisation, wrapped in a forty-word sentence with a misplaced modifier. Examiners experience these as 'unclear writing' without always naming the underlying grammar. This guide catalogues the most common voice and sentence structure mistakes in theses, dissertations, and journal papers—with before-and-after fixes you can apply during revision.

Mistake 1: Passive voice chains

Error: 'The samples were collected and were then analysed, and significant results were obtained.' Fix: 'We collected samples, analysed them, and obtained significant results.' Multiple passives in one sentence compound readability problems.

Mistake 2: Empty 'it' and 'there' openings

Error: 'It is important to note that there are several limitations.' Fix: 'Several limitations apply to this study.' Empty openings delay the main point and often hide passive constructions.

Mistake 3: Nominalisations burying action

Error: 'The implementation of the analysis was conducted.' Fix: 'We implemented the analysis' or 'We analysed the data.' Turning verbs into nouns—implementation, analysis, consideration—weakens prose regardless of voice.

Mistake 4: Mixed voice within sentences

Error: 'We collected the data, and the analysis was performed using SPSS.' Shift from active to passive mid-sentence without reason. Fix: 'We collected the data and analysed it using SPSS.'

Mistake 5: Agent omission when accountability matters

Error: 'Errors in transcription were discovered during review.' Fix: 'During review, we discovered transcription errors.' When research integrity or methodology transparency requires naming who acted, omitting the agent is a voice mistake with substantive implications.

Mistake 6: Overlong sentences combining too many clauses

Error: 50-word sentences with three passive clauses, two citations, and a however. Fix: split into two or three sentences, each with one main idea. Length amplifies voice problems.

Mistake 7: Weak linking verbs replacing strong action verbs

Error: 'The results are indicative of a trend.' Fix: 'The results indicate a trend.' 'Is indicative of' is a nominalisation plus weak linking verb. Prefer direct verbs.

Mistake 8: Inconsistent voice across parallel lists

Error: 'The study aims to measure attitudes, assessing behaviour, and evaluation of outcomes.' Fix: parallel active infinitives or gerunds: 'to measure attitudes, assess behaviour, and evaluate outcomes.' Parallelism rules apply regardless of voice choice.

Mistake 9: Passive in strong claims

Error: 'It is suggested that the findings have implications for policy.' Fix: 'These findings have implications for policy.' Hedging plus passive double-softens claims that discussion sections should deliver with appropriate confidence.

Mistake 10: Ignoring field-specific voice conventions

Error: converting every methods sentence to active first person in a journal that publishes impersonal passive methods. Fix: read target publications and match voice patterns in each section. Mistakes include both over-passive and over-active extremes.

Sentence structure audit workflow

1. 1Highlight sentences exceeding 30 words—consider splitting.
2. 2Mark passive constructions and categorise as keep or revise.
3. 3Circle nominalisations and rewrite with verbs.
4. 4Check parallel structure in all lists.
5. 5Read aloud and fix any sentence you cannot parse in one breath.

Tools and their limits

Grammarly and similar tools flag some passive voice but miss nominalisations, empty openings, and discipline-specific conventions. Hemingway Editor highlights long sentences. Neither replaces human judgment about when passive serves your field.

Expert sentence-level editing

Professional academic editing addresses voice and sentence structure together—producing research prose that is grammatically correct, structurally clear, and conventionally appropriate for your discipline.