An Analysis of Writer’s Block: Causes and Solutions

ABSTRACT

Previous research findings suggest that multiple factors contribute to writer’s block and that blocking may occur at any part of the writing process. The aim of this study was to investigate different causes of blocking and discover the most effective solutions for writers. 146 writers completed an online, mixed-method survey about their experiences with writer’s block. Four causes of writer’s block were described by the respondents and supported by existing literature: physiological, motivational, cognitive, and behavioral. The most common causes of blocking were physiological and motivational, and interfered with the composition process of writing more often than idea generation. Writers described twelve effective solutions. The four most useful strategies were taking a break from writing, working on a different writing project, forcing themselves to keep writing, and discussing ideas with others. The findings also revealed an association between different causes of blocking and the cognitive processes involved with different parts of the writing process. Professional and semiprofessional writers did not significantly differ in the types of blocks they experienced, solutions they considered effective, and the length of writer’s block they experienced. The findings presented may provide readers with helpful strategies for overcoming writer’s block.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Juliana Leding for her thoughtful comments on an earlier version of this article. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to both Sarah J. Ahmed and C. Dominik Güss, Department of Psychology, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA. Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement and data deposition

We choose to share or make the data underlying the study open. Feel free to contact the authors for a copy of the data spreadsheet.

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported in part by a grant from the University of North Florida’s Delaney Presidential Professorship to the second author.