37

A new study in PLOS ONE1 concludes that even novice MS Word users perform better than expert LaTeX users in document creation.

I have read the article and I feel like I have identified some flaws in their approach and design but I figured this community would be the best positioned to rigorously evaluate these results.

Based on this study can we conclude that Word works better than LaTeX?

  1. Markus Knauff & Jelica Nejasmic. 2014. An Efficiency Comparison of Document Preparation Systems Used in Academic Research and Development. PLOS ONE DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0115069

UPDATE

Since the question has been closed, but it's clear that there is interest to discuss the topic, I've set up a chat room for discussion.

UPDATE 2

I have created a meta question to clarify the reason why this question was closed when other similar questions remain open.

UPDATE 3

People in glass houses... The article had to be republished a few months later due to publishing errors whilst using Arbortext :-)
see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0125830
DQdlM
  • 1,733
  • 5
    thanks for sharing! To give an answer, I'll first have to read the article... My personal experience (I'd consider myself an experienced user in MS Office as well as in LaTeX): if you want to make custom formatting, MS Word is much more intuitive especially for a beginner, in LaTeX you can loose a lot of time there. I've lost a lot of time and nerves with malfunctions of early versions of MS Word, but LaTeX can also create a lot of headaches (and did that for me) if you try to customize it, and are no expert.. If you need consistent formatting/layout, LaTeX might be more powerful. – MostlyHarmless Dec 26 '14 at 19:27
  • 2
    Look at the criteria for evaluating efficiency:(1) number of spelling and grammatical mistakes;(2) number of formatting errors\typos;(3) amount of written text (in symbols and words) produced within 30 minutes. It's all about getting the document typed quickly with less mistakes. Word has spell check\grammar checks and less to type (eg can type % with one keystroke) of course it performs better. Using LaTeX is not about speed; it's about creating a beautiful looking documents with the ability to change formatting easily, (eg fonts\line spacing); For looks,formulas,Tikz, Word can't compete. – DJP Dec 26 '14 at 20:15
  • 8
    We discussed this in the chat room a bit. The article is really not very well written in terms of comparison and I think they have a presupposition about LaTeX = mathy stuff. But to be fair, many of us already agree that quick and dirty tasks are better suited for MS Word. So in that sense the article is a tautology with a very bad experiment design. For example, nobody thinks that typing straight into Word would beslower than TeX usage. You don't need an article for that. But document preparation is a delicate business and Word is anything but that. – percusse Dec 26 '14 at 20:15
  • 3
    Although this is a fine topic for discussion (and I started the one in chat) I don't think it's appropriate for a question on the site, certainly not at this time. If there's interest (based on upvotes to this comment?), I'll create a dedicated chat room for discussion. I'd also be interested in ideas for other experiments on the topic. – Alan Munn Dec 26 '14 at 20:17
  • 1
    Need to read it first, too, but a first glance about what kind of texts they tested with are not where I place most of the LaTeX advantages. It sounds like the three test texts were: "(1) simple continuous text; (2) text with tables; and (3) mathematical text with several equations."The idea is that it should take about 30 minutes to (re-)create document. This cuts out a lot of main advantages. It makes the goal be an ad hoc text, so there's no real chance to think and plan what you're going to do. The automatic reformating of references, indexing, bibliography, etc., are also maybe missing. – jon Dec 26 '14 at 20:17
  • @AlanMunn I think this topic can generate discussion but I don't see why there cannot be an evaluation of the results of the study based on factual information about TeX and Word (i.e., a non-opinion answer). I am not looking for rants or opinions but rather an analysis of the findings based on expert experience. – DQdlM Dec 26 '14 at 20:29
  • 1
    @KennyPeanuts What source of factual information would we have access to viz a viz the issue addressed in the paper (productivity)? Absent any competing study (and I doubt there is one) at best we could suggest ways to design a better experiment, but largely we would end up with things like "But what about X?, that certainly is more efficient in LaTeX" which are simply opinions. – Alan Munn Dec 26 '14 at 20:32
  • 1
    @AlanMunn If I knew the answer I wouldn't have to ask the question but I seem to be getting the sense that the productivity metrics used in the paper are not appropriate to evaluate LaTeX. So it seems that there could be an objective answer referencing why this is not an appropriate test of LaTeX. – DQdlM Dec 26 '14 at 20:38
  • 13
    I love the idea that what is stopping the efficient use of taxpayer money in terms of research output is the inefficiency of researchers' editing software. Does anybody seriously believe that research would proceed significantly faster if only researchers were able to type it up quicker? – cfr Dec 26 '14 at 20:38
  • 9
    @cfr IcertainlydothatswhyIeschewallspacesandpunctuationItsmuchmoreefficient. – Alan Munn Dec 26 '14 at 20:40
  • 10
    I think this is off topic. Or, if you prefer, opinion-based. There can be no “answer”, but only a discussion, which is surely outside the scope of this site. – egreg Dec 26 '14 at 20:40
  • 1
    @egreg I respect the feelings of the community and if it stays closed so be it but it doesn't seem any more "opinion based" than the top-voted-question-of-all-time on this site. http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/94889/how-can-i-explain-the-meaning-of-latex-to-my-grandma – DQdlM Dec 26 '14 at 20:58
  • 3
    @Joseph Wright & Co: This question got more than 70 views in less than an hour, 22 comments and one answer. You can not deny people are interested. And what are you doing? You close it. -- A poor decision. – Keks Dose Dec 26 '14 at 20:59
  • 2
    @KeksDose People are interested, I agree. However, there are two problems here for me. First, this looks strongly like an area of opinion rather than having a concrete (factual) answer or answers. Secondly, the site is about technical expertise on TeX not on any way of measuring productivity. I can imagine lots of ways of defining and measuring productivity, for example, but know that it's not my area. I've only voted to close to 'tidy up' the close reason: it got closed as off-topic but opinion-based seems marginally better. Note that people can always vote to reopen. – Joseph Wright Dec 26 '14 at 21:04
  • @KeksDose I'd suggest a meta thread on whether this question is (a) on-topic and (b) objectively answerable. (As I said, with my mod hat one I'll close or reopen based on overall opinion rather than my own.) – Joseph Wright Dec 26 '14 at 21:05
  • 2
    @JosephWright I understand your approach, but what do you think will visitors conclude if the moderator of the most important site about LaTeX refuses to discuss an article in a journal about LaTeX? – Keks Dose Dec 26 '14 at 21:20
  • @KeksDose As I've tried to say, the StackExchange model doesn't work for discussion: you want a threaded approach such as a mailing list or Usenet. The best we have here is a chat room: we could talk in the general room or set up a dedicated space. – Joseph Wright Dec 26 '14 at 21:26
  • A dedicated chat room has been set up to talk about this area: http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/19762/discussion-of-plos-paper-on-latex-productivity – Joseph Wright Dec 26 '14 at 21:31
  • Great Question! let the haters hate. – Denis Aug 22 '16 at 05:59

1 Answers1

39

This article is an astonishing piece of reckless stupidity. The test was:

The participants were instructed to reproduce the source text within thirty minutes.

So the hard truth is: With MS Word you can better and faster copy off your neighbor than with LaTeX. And the spell checker of Word is better than the spell checkers of the group of LaTeX users was.

The article more or less asks how long the European Union will go on with burning money by letting people use LaTeX.

Why is the setting of the test so stupid? Because LaTeX and TeX are not made to reproduce a given layout of a page or a table. Professionals who use LaTeX, including me, don't earn their living by reproducing different layouts and texts, but write themselves, mostly using the same layouts over and over again.

And the authors had nobody using Emacs -- obviously there wasn't even one professional LaTeX user.

Based on this study you only can conclude that the authors better look for something else to make a living than writing articles. There is nothing more to say about it.

UPDATE

There is a proverb in German, roughly translated: »God punishes minor sins immediately.« It isn't meant seriously. Throw a malicous snowball at somebody who is not aware of it and while throwing, you slip and fall over. Things like that.

And now read, what happened to the »study« about LaTeX, written with something else:

This article was republished on March 30, 2015, to correct the sizing and placement of the figures; none of the article content was changed. The publisher apologizes for the original layout errors. Please download this article again to view the corrected version.

Thanks to KJO for pointing me to this wonderful correction.

Keks Dose
  • 30,892
  • This isn't an answer, but just some opinions about the paper. – Alan Munn Dec 26 '14 at 20:22
  • 5
    I think the article is OK but not very informed, looks at only one angle which the TeX users don't care about. – percusse Dec 26 '14 at 20:22
  • 22
    Any reasonable "professional LaTeX user" would surely be using Vim, not Emacs. ;-) – Paul Gessler Dec 26 '14 at 20:25
  • 1
    @AlanMunn The OP asked whether we can give a damn for this article and I say, it's not worth it. – Keks Dose Dec 26 '14 at 20:29
  • 7
    But you sound like you gave a good damn about it judging by the tone. So I'd propose we just close this one as opinion based because their conclusions are hilarious. So we really don't need to bother – percusse Dec 26 '14 at 20:32
  • 7
    @percusse Given the battleground that academic publishing has become, it may be useful to have an expert response to the article on this site that others can point to when this paper is inevitably used to undermine LaTeX use in curricula etc... – DQdlM Dec 26 '14 at 20:40
  • 3
    @percusse I don't share your views upon closing and deleting questions and answers. This here is a good place to discuss the article! – Keks Dose Dec 26 '14 at 20:42
  • 2
    @KennyPeanuts Don't worry TeX was/is around for decades. It has seen WordPerfect, Word, this, that. Trust us if there was anything better we would move on. Nobody thinks \expandafter is intuitive :) – percusse Dec 26 '14 at 20:43
  • 3
    @KeksDose I agree it is a good place but not for discussing it. That's for forum-like environments. The answer to the title is either a yes or no. And since we don't have scientific evidence, it is just opinions. – percusse Dec 26 '14 at 20:44
  • 2
    @percusse I don't think this will kill TeX but I think you are underestimating the resistance that can be faced when trying to expand its use in education. I am confident that I will have to answer to this paper the next time I argue to include LaTeX exposure at my institution. – DQdlM Dec 26 '14 at 20:50
  • 6
    Doesn't this site cover opinions, too? From How can I explain LaTeX to my Grandma? to Nice Scientific Pictures to Show Off. But maybe this question has been answered already in Why Should I Use LaTeX. – DJP Dec 26 '14 at 20:52
  • @KennyPeanuts If you wish we can always cook up documents that will baffle Word users so I have absolutely no problem having this put before me for a rebuttal. We have been subjected to these arguments (at least I) for a decade now and I never felt like I'm loosing an argument. MS Word is very difficult to defend and I'm using it everyday too so don't get me wrong it has a purpose. However, the article specifically defends it the worst possible domain where TeX clearly dominates. – percusse Dec 26 '14 at 20:53
  • 1
    Solely looking at the track record tells us something. One is not updated since decades, the other one is being actively developed by hundreds of people and still lacks proper usage. That means one of them got things right. How would this article come about it? – percusse Dec 26 '14 at 20:54
  • 4
    I'll have to read the article and all related discussions when I get home, but this experiment seems truly absurd. "And, second, preventing researchers from producing documents in LaTeX would save time and money to maximize the benefit of research and development for both the research team and the public." I just... I just can't read that with a straight face – Sean Allred Dec 30 '14 at 20:57
  • 3
    Most Word users do not know anything LaTeX, whereas LaTeX users were/are often advanced Word users. Then, is not so "striking result" that LaTeX users are highly satisfied with their system if they are still using it. What makes me smile are the "psychological disorders"hypothesis to explain this fact, think nothing about that LaTeX users have been forced for years to countless comparisons of every aspect of both systems, and besides theories of cognitive dissonance, their opinion might have a more solid ground than that small experiment. – Fran Dec 24 '15 at 04:10