In 2023, the American Psychological Association [APA] published the second edition of its Inclusive Language Guide to continue its mission of eradicating “the destructive hierarchies that have marginalized people from equitable representation and participation in society” (Foreword). Its efforts were to recognize the harmful connotations of terms to marginalized people and offer suggestions for more inclusive language. Writers commonly have difficulty recognizing when their writing is biased, unfair, or exclusively catered to a specific reader. Inclusive writing ensures communication is accessible and welcoming to all readers. To promote inclusivity, consider using gender-neutral language, person-first terms, and specificity throughout your writing.

Use Gender-Neutral Terms

Gender-neutral language can eliminate the need to make any assumptions about the source’s gender identity. When using a narrative citation, it is best to use the source’s last name (e.g., “Smith (2026) stated…”) instead of using a pronoun. A writer can also eliminate any reference to gender within their writing by avoiding gender-paired words like policeman or policewoman and opting instead for the gender-neutral police officer.

When you do decide to use pronouns, APA (n.d.b) approved the use of the inclusive singular ‘they’ instead of ‘he’ or ‘she’ since it eliminates any gender assumptions. As the association explained, strict grammarians who once denounced the use of singular ‘they’ now advocate its use. Merriam-Webster (n.d.), for example, lists ‘they’ as a pronoun used for many reasons, including for a non-revealed or non-binary gender identity.

Although Purdue Global advocates the use of gender-neutral language, students should avoid the use of desexed language (i.e., terms used to obscure sex even when it is relevant to its meaning) because it can confuse the reader by replacing a word with overly complex language. It can also misrepresent the writer’s intentions. As Bartick et al. (2025) explained, “[S]cientific research may be misrepresented if research is quoted using ‘people’ when only women or only men were studied” (p. 3). The authors also suggested that if hospitals use desexed language when explaining their services (e.g., chestfeeding or bodyfeeding instead of breastfeeding), transgender patients may inaccurately assume that a particular facility can provide those patients with specialized care. An example of beneficial desexed language is using the term ‘family’ instead of ‘mother’.

Use Person-First Language (if Preferred) 

The use of person-first language (e.g., “student with a disability”) is used to “uphold the dignity, autonomy, and agency of people with disabilities” (Janiszewski, 2025, Abstract). However, many Disability advocacy groups use identity-first language (e.g., disabled student) to reclaim their independence and put value on their Disability. For example, many autism advocacy groups use the identity-first term instead of people with autism or on the spectrum because a person’s autism diagnosis is important to their identity, not as a condition they are inflicted with (National Autistic Society, 2025). Similarly, the Deaf (capitalized D) community uses identity-first language to identify with their culture. For more examples of person-first language, check out the PG blog post “Bias-free Language.”  

If students are unsure of which terms to use, they can consult a writer’s guide or an advocacy group to determine the preferred language. For example, APA’s (2025) “Brief Guide to Bias-free and Inclusive Language” provides a list of preferred and problematic terms to ensure writers use the preferred terms. The association explained, “Honoring the preference of the group is not only a sign of professional awareness and respect for any disability group but also a way to offer solidarity” (APA, n.d.a, Disability, para. 2). Once you determine which identity terms are relevant to use, you should adhere to specific terminology since generalities can cause the reader to make overgeneralizations. For example, Widman (2024) recommended using “below the U.S. federal poverty level,” which would provide clarity for the reader, instead of simply “low income” (para. 3).

Use Specificity

By adding specificity to their writing, researchers will ensure they have a proper representation of participants. Worldwide, “[u]nder-served groups are not reflected in the volume or focus of health research” (Routen et al., 2022, p. 444). This is especially concerning when many patients and physicians base treatment plans on the results of research studies. Unless the demographics of participants affect the outcome of results, researchers should ask whether including those demographics is essential to their research.

For health assessments, healthcare providers should avoid words that focus on a person’s limitations, which “can stigmatize the individual and does not recognize systemic and structural issues which limited their opportunity in the beginning” (Carter et al., 2024, p. 314). For example, avoid derogatory terms such as homeless, disadvantaged, or at-risk and instead use terms that focus on what the patient has. 

Using the editorial we is often used to create a partnership between reader and writer. However, when used in research writing, we can create an illusion of shared experience between the writer and reader, which ignores the history of systemic racism and its effect on educational access. Suhr-Sytsma and Brown (2011) explained that when writers use ‘we’, they have a “tendency to assume that theirs is an audience from the same demographic and/or ideology as themselves or to assume that their audience will hold perspectives viewed by the writers as dominant” (p. 26). Additionally, if a source with multiple authors uses ‘we’, it implies a balanced contribution of all authors, which may not have been the case. For more information on the editorial “we,” check out the PG blog post “A ‘We’ Problem.”   

Review and Revise

Microsoft Word has a helpful Editor tool that checks spelling, grammar, and inclusiveness. For example, if a writer uses the word master, which may unintentionally trigger the reader, Microsoft Editor would flag it for inclusiveness and recommend using more appropriate words, like expert. After using the Editor tool, re-read your work and ask yourself if any words or phrases could be misconstrued for bias or discrimination. Words have power. To treat all readers with respect and dignity, students should review their work for biased language and revise accordingly. Using gender-neutral language, person-first terms, and specificity in your written communication is the first step to acknowledging and respecting marginalized groups.

References

American Psychological Association. (n.d.a). Bias-free language. https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/bias-free-language 

American Psychological Association. (n.d.b). Singular “they.” https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/grammar/singular-they  

American Psychological Association. (2023). Inclusive language guide (2nd ed.). https://www.apa.org/about/apa/equity-diversity-inclusion/language-guide.pdf   

American Psychological Association. (2025). Brief guide to bias-free and inclusive language. https://apastyle.apa.org/instructional-aids/inclusive-language.pdf  

Bartick, M., Dahlen, H., Gamble, J., Walker, S., Mathisen, R., & Gribble, K. (2025). Reconsidering ‘inclusive language:’ Consequences for healthcare and equitableness of a growing linguistic movement to address gender identity with a path forward. Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare: Official journal of the Swedish Association of Midwives, 44, 101088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srhc.2025.101088 

Carter, B.M., Johnson, R., McDaniel, V.P., Rodgers, S.G., Downing, C., & Barrier, K.M. (2024). The progression of inclusive language that enhances belonging. Creative Nursing, 30(4):308-319. https://doi.org/10.1177/10784535241296824  

Clements, K. (2020, December 18). A “we” problem. Purdue University Global. https://purdueglobalwriting.center/2020/12/18/a-we-problem/  

Clements, K. (2020, September 25). Bias-free language. Purdue University Global. https://purdueglobalwriting.center/2020/09/25/bias-free-language/  

Janiszewski, C. M. S., Friedel, E., Skvarc, D., Koller, D., & Grech, L. B. (2025). The relationship between disability identity and use of person-first and identity-first language. Rehabilitation Psychology. Advance online publication. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/rep0000631 

Merriam-Webster. (n.d.) They. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/they  

National Autistic Society. (2025, June). How to talk and write about autism. https://nas.chorus.thirdlight.com/file/24/w2nAKE4w2MLxnl9w2LQ-w1l_8C/How%20to%20talk%20and%20write%20about%20autism%20guide%20-%20June%202025.pdf  

Routen, A., Bodicoat, D., Willis, A., Treweek, S., Paget, S., & Khunti, K. (2022). Tackling the lack of diversity in health research. British Journal of General Practice, 72(722), 444-447. https://bjgp.org/content/72/722/444  

Suhr-Sytsma, M., & Brown, S. E. (2011). Theory in/to practice: Addressing the everyday language of oppression in the writing center. Writing Center Journal, 31(2), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.7771/2832-9414.1732  
Widman, L. (2024). Inclusive writing practices. Nesbitt-Johnson Writing Center, Hamilton College.https://www.hamilton.edu/documents/2024%20Inclusive%20Writing.docx.pdf