Hey there writers!
I hope you are taking care of yourself this week, this month, this semester.
I am back to talk about some fundamentals of book writing.
Specifically, I am going to cover how to transform a published article into a chapter of your monograph.
I’ve been wanting to do this episode for quite some time, as many of the clients I work with start their book writing journey here.
I’m going to give you a few main strategies that will help you approach this often-unwieldy process in a more focused way.
FYI, a lot of what I’m going to say is also relevant to turning a dissertation chapter into a book chapter.
But, before I get into the weeds of this topic, I want to answer some basic questions I am often asked about this, which maybe have also crossed your mind:
First, is using work you’ve already published considered self-plagiarism?
And second, how much of your book can come from previously published materials?
So first off, no, this is definitely not self-plagiarism. You must be open and upfront with everyone about the fact that a chapter is based on already-published material.
This is something you state in your proposal.
One of the last things you do before a book is published is get permissions from the original journals to republish the material.
It’s extremely common practice, and I’ve never heard of anyone getting turned down for it.
Secondly, I don’t know if presses give exact percentages.
But if I had to guess, I would say that it’s perfectly fine for one-quarter to one-third of your book to come from previously published work.
For both of my books, two of the four empirical chapters were largely based off of published journal articles.
In fact, I encourage authors to publish an article or two from their project with the aim of eventually transforming those into book chapters.
This is very much in line with my philosophy of double- or triple-purposing your time and effort whenever possible.
I know many academics who, out of fear of self-plagiarism, try to keep their books and articles totally separate.
So they end up working twice as hard—and often taking twice as long—when they could be reusing many ideas and writing that really shines because you’ve honed it already.
I also think it’s easier to do it this way than to take a book chapter and try to turn it into an article.
At the same time, taking something that was written for a very particular purpose and audience, and transforming it into a chapter that fits into a bigger, cohesive whole is not a walk in the park.
That’s exactly what we’re going to unpack today.
Step 1: How Does this Piece Fits into the Whole of Your Book?
So let’s get into the first step, which is to consider how this piece fits into the larger whole of your book project.
As you know, a journal article must fit within a very specific set of expectations and constraints.
It’s super formulaic, with clear sections like an introduction, a methods section, lit review, findings and discussion, and conclusion.
This formulaicness is actually quite appealing to a lot of scholars, especially those who do quantitative work.
I mean, how many times have we seen people publish an article. Then they change a few variables from the same dataset and turn out a completely different article from it?
Obviously, my qualitative bias is showing, because this is probably just how quantitative work is done. But I digress.
The point is that journal articles are necessarily narrow and limited in scope.
But when you start thinking about transforming it into a book chapter, the purpose shifts in a really fundamental way.
It’s no longer about this one piece standing on its own. Instead, it becomes one part of a much larger narrative arc that unfolds across an entire book.
So, if you have some articles that you think could really work—in whole or in part—for a book chapter, start by figuring out a few key things.
First, ask yourself, “What specific role does this chapter play in this book?” If you can’t answer this question, then perhaps it doesn’t have a role to play and should be left out.
Second, “What is the argument that this chapter is making? And, correspondingly, how do I need to shift the article’s current argument to make this work?”
And third, “How does this chapter help prove the book’s overarching argument?” This question assumes that you know what this is. You might not yet, but at least sketch out some initial ideas because your chapters need to have a main idea to hang onto.
If you can answer these three questions, then you’re pretty clear on the purpose of the chapter.
But you need to start by considering how this one piece fits into the larger whole.
Step 2: Broaden Your Audience & Writing Style
Now, the next step I’m going to recommend is not something I ever heard people talk about when I was working on my first book.
And I don’t even hear that many people discussing it now, but I think this is something that’s pivotal to making a meaningful transition between article and chapter.
It is to finetune the tone with which you write to fit the needs of your book’s audience, rather than your article’s audience.
So, some of you might be asking: aren’t these one and same? Definitely not!
The audience for an article is comprised of your peers. They are subfield experts and people who want to become subfield experts.
They are already a captive audience. Their focus is on the theory and methods and data analysis—not on your writing style.
They’re also often looking to challenge the gaps you say you’re filling and to poke a hole in your argument.
The tone of a journal article is typically dry and very boring. There’s no pressure or expectation to be an interesting, thoughtful, engaging writer. If an article is highly readable, that’s like a bonus.
Whereas when it comes to a book chapter, you want to take a different approach.
This means, first and foremost, expanding your readership to include curious non-experts. And then you must write in such a way that meets the needs of that broader group.
Now, when I say “curious non-experts,” I am including people with PhDs like myself. We just don’t happen to know a ton about your field!
But I also mean undergrads and even members of the general public who are deeply interested in learning more about your topic.
That is a HUGE shift in perspective for scholarly authors who are accustomed to writing narrowly for a small group of insiders.
This really comes down to reconceptualizing your envisioned readers and writing in a way that is legible to them.
If you haven’t listened to my episode on how to find your ideal audience—and you might not have if you’re a more recent listener—please do so.
It will really help you. It is all the way at the beginning in Episode #4: Develop Your Voice as an Author.
Journal articles are often motivated by the question: “What gap am I filling in the scholarly literature?”
Whereas when it comes to book chapters, I encourage you to ask instead: “What do my ideal readers need to make sense of the narrative I’m presenting and the argument I’m making?”
This means changing a number of things.
I recommend that everyone starts their chapter with a story—either an anecdote from your research or a historical event that highlights the main take-home of the piece.
You need to “hook” your audience!
You also need to eliminate jargon—or at least briefly define terms as you go. And not just once, but multiple times, because readers will probably not remember.
You should consistently give background or historical context. Think about it like whatever you might include if you were giving a lecture to an undergrad survey course on this topic.
For example, one of my authors was writing about the concept of tenure in higher ed without defining it first. This person’s ideal audience member is not an academic.
So to meet this reader’s needs, the author must devote at least a few sentences to describing what the tenure system is and why it’s so pivotal to the experience of a professor.
Also, you should always keep an eye on the bigger picture instead of getting stuck in the details.
This means giving much more of your own analysis. Tell readers what you think and why it matters to THEM.
It also means sign-posting to readers where you’re going because you are the tour guide and you don’t want your visitors to get lost.
By doing all of this, you can avoid the deadly trap of writing narrowly and assuming too much reader knowledge.
I often tell my authors that they need to find a balance between what THEY think is important and what READERS actually need.
Step 3: Streamline & Expand the Chapter
Okay, so that was a lot! It was way more than one strategy but a lot of these areas bleed into each other.
Lastly, I want to talk more about the nitty-gritty details of revision.
Here are a few pointers when it comes to streamlining and then expanding your article into a chapter:
First, take out the parts of the article that no longer fit to reduce redundancy.
Usually this is stuff like background context on your case or topic that will go into the Intro chapter.
Keep what readers need to make sense of the chapter, of course, but take out the more general stuff.
You’ll probably also want to pull out your lit review and methods sections. That is, unless you’re taking a completely different methodological approach in this chapter than the rest of the book, which is very rare.
I’d recommend keeping a separate document where you cut and paste these sections so you can refer to them and use them later.
I’d also measure the word count for what you’re taking out so you know how much space you have left to write in the chapter.
I’ve noticed a lot of confusion about how long a book chapter should be. Ideally, it’s about 8,000-10,000 words, including footnotes. That’s about 30-35 pages double-spaced.
Any longer than that and your chapter will likely meander or you will be including way too many details for a reader to keep straight.
And while we’re on the topic of length, I also get a lot of questions about how many chapters are typical for a scholarly book.
I would say that six is the magic number, including an intro chapter, four empirical chapters, and a conclusion.
Some folks have a lot to say, so they want to add more body chapters. That’s fine but I really wouldn’t go past eight chapters total.
So getting back to the chapter, you will likely also need to reframe it to align better with the whole book.
This means coming up with different questions and a chapter-level argument, as I mentioned earlier.
You’ll also want to write an entirely new opening. Ideally, it’s story-driven one and highlights the primary questions and/or the argument of the chapter.
The area you can expand the most is the findings.
This is your chance to bring in new data or other data that didn’t fit into the article (or your dissertation, for that matter) as long as it helps prove the chapter-level argument.
But again, this is your opportunity to flesh things out more for your readers.
You have space to explain more and develop ideas thoroughly. You can also provide more vivid examples that capture your reader’s attention.
Because remember, people have a million things distracting them from reading your book. It is your job to continually draw them back in.
At the same time, it’s important to be intentional here, because expanding a chapter doesn’t simply mean adding more words or more citations for the sake of length.
What you’re aiming for is depth, which means giving ideas space to breathe.
So maybe ask yourself, “What did I really want to include in my article, but had to leave out?”
That can give you some good ideas for how to expand the piece.
You may also find that your sections need to be reorganized to improve the flow of the chapter.
You have flexibility here because a chapter doesn’t follow the same formulaic structure as an article.
Finally, when it comes to your conclusion, shift the emphasis.
Instead of simply summarizing what you’ve already said, clearly state how this chapter connects back to the overarching argument of the book.
You might also want to segway into what’s coming next in the book, although I think that’s really a matter of choice.
Summing Everything Up
Today I’ve tried giving my best advice on how to take a published article and reverse engineer it into a chapter of your book.
I’m not going to repeat all of the strategies I just gave.
But ultimately, it’s about transitioning from a stand-alone piece of scholarship into a puzzle piece that connects to a cohesive whole.
You need to carefully consider how you integrate this chapter so that it both has something real to contribute and also connects to the other pieces of the book.
You can have a beautifully written, well-developed chapter. However, if it could be taken out without affecting the rest of the book, then it hasn’t fully made this transition.
You’re also ideally moving from a narrow, exclusive form of writing to one that allows for more depth and nuance by broadening your readership and putting their needs first.
This requires giving yourself permission to move beyond the rigidity of journal article writing and creating something that feels more engaging for your reader.
And I’ll tell you from experience, when you write this way, you’ll sound more authentic and like yourself. When you do this, people want to keep reading.
So, if you’re looking for a place to start with all this, go back to one of your published articles that relates to your book idea.
Spend some time reflecting on what you had to leave out, what areas could be expanded, and what role it might play within a larger book project.
Do all of this while centering the needs of a curious, non-expert audience.
Then, you might be able to see a more straightforward path to revision and be well on your way to completing the first chapter of your manuscript.
I hope that this has been helpful, and I’ll talk to you all again soon.
If you enjoyed this episode, make sure to also check out: