R Markdown and my divorce from Microsoft Word

rants

A short description of the post.

Maxwell B. Joseph true
2013-10-30

I do a lot of scholarly writing that requires associated or embedded R analyses, figures, and tables, plus bibliographies.

Microsoft Word makes this unnecessarily difficult.

Many tools are now available to break free from the tyranny of Word. The ones I like involve writing an article in markdown format, integrating all data preparation, analysis, and outputs with the document (e.g. with the excellent and accessible knitr package or with a custom make set up like this one). Add in version control with Git, and you’ve got a nice stew going.

If you’re involved in the open source/reproducible research blogo-twittersphere, this is probably old hat. To many others, it’s not.

Most scientists I see in the wild still manually insert figures and results from statistical analyses in Word documents, perhaps the manufacturing equivalent of hand-crafting each document. R markdown provides a level of automation that is amenable to creating many documents or recreating/updating one document many times, the manufacturing equivalent of automated robots that increase efficiency (but do require some programming to function properly).

I can’t give an authoritative overview, but here are some resources that helped me get through my divorce with Microsoft Word:

Ram, Karthik. 2013. “Git Can Facilitate Greater Reproducibility and Increased Transparency in Science.” Source Code for Biology and Medicine 8 (1): 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1751-0473-8-7.

References

Corrections

If you see mistakes or want to suggest changes, please create an issue on the source repository.

Reuse

Text and figures are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0. Source code is available at https://github.com/mbjoseph/mbjoseph.github.io, unless otherwise noted. The figures that have been reused from other sources don't fall under this license and can be recognized by a note in their caption: "Figure from ...".