Rameezdeen, R and Rodrigo, A (2013) Textual complexity of standard conditions used in the construction industry. Construction Economics and Building, 13(1), pp. 1-12. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
Clearly written communication aids the understanding of construction contracts, resulting in less disputation. Past research, using opinion surveys rather than objective criteria, shows that construction contracts lack clarity and standard forms have become complex over time. The study outlined in this paper uses three objective measures of clarity developed by linguists to establish the readability of construction contracts. In addition, thirty industry professionals participated in a Cloze Test which measured the level of comprehension of clauses concerning disputes. The study verifies that contract conditions are very difficult to read, with college level reading skills needed to comprehend half of the clauses. However, the hypothesis that standard forms have become complex over time was not supported by the study. The study establishes a linear relationship between readability and comprehension, proving the hypothesis that improved readability increases the comprehension of a contract clause.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | clarity; comprehension; construction; contract; readability |
| Index terms: | contract condition, construction contract, dispute, construction industry, complexity, survey |
| Subjects: | dispute resolution, contract type, contract structure, data collection methods, systems engineering, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Legal Issues, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here