How do I choose between a verbatim transcript and a readable transcript?
Quick answer
Choose a more verbatim transcript when exact wording, repetitions, or false starts matter to your purpose. Choose a readable transcript when your main goal is to communicate what was said in easier-to-read prose. These labels can mean different things in different projects: define what you will keep, remove, or change before transcription, and tell readers how the text differs from the recording.
The question, the details, the next step.
How do I decide which kind I need? I have an interview recording and want to share the transcript with people who did not attend.
Start with what readers need the transcript to do. If they need to examine exactly how someone spoke—for example, because a repeated phrase or false start is relevant—choose a more verbatim approach. If they mainly need to follow the ideas, a readable version may be a better fit.
“Verbatim” is not always used with identical rules. The Library of Congress describes a transcript as a word-for-word copy, while its Veterans History Project guidance also gives a project-specific approach that omits fillers such as “um” and “ah.” It emphasizes accuracy, understandability, consistency, and telling readers when and how a transcript differs from the recording. [S1] So do not rely on the label alone: state your editing choices.
What should I decide before I start? I’m unsure about fillers, repeated words, and sentences that trail off.
Write a short editing rule for each feature that could change how the text reads. For instance, decide whether you will keep fillers, repeated words, false starts, incomplete sentences, and noticeable pauses. Also decide how you will handle unclear words or brief nonverbal sounds. You do not need to describe every tiny punctuation choice, but do settle choices that affect meaning or the impression of the speaker.
A practical distinction is: preserve speech features that matter to your purpose; edit only features you have explicitly decided are outside the scope. Avoid silently repairing a speaker’s grammar or turning uncertain wording into a confident sentence. If you make a change for readability, make sure the transcript still represents what was said rather than adding meaning.
Can you show me how the same spoken line might look under different choices?
Assume the speaker says: “I, um, I sent it Tuesday—no, Wednesday. I think.” These are illustrative versions, not a claim about any actual recording.
- More verbatim: “I, um, I sent it Tuesday—no, Wednesday. I think.” This preserves the filler, repetition, correction, and uncertainty.
- Readable, lightly edited: “I sent it Tuesday—no, Wednesday, I think.” This removes one filler and repeated start but retains the correction and uncertainty.
- Too much interpretation for a simple cleanup: “I sent it Wednesday.” This removes the speaker’s uncertainty and could overstate what they meant.
The right version depends on your stated purpose. A readable transcript should not become a summary unless you label it as one. For this example, a note could say: “Lightly edited for readability; fillers and repeated starts may be omitted. Corrections and uncertainty are retained.”
How do I communicate the choice so someone reading only the transcript understands its limits?
Put a brief note near the title or opening, not only in instructions that readers may never see. Name the editing level in plain language and mention the most important choices. For example:
“Editing note: This is a readable transcript. Some fillers and repeated starts have been removed for ease of reading. Corrections and expressions of uncertainty have been retained. Consult the recording where exact wording or delivery matters.”
Adjust that note to match the work actually done. Do not say that wording is exact if it has been edited. A transcript note helps explain the text, but it cannot establish details that the recording or transcription process does not make clear. The Library of Congress guidance supports explaining how a transcript differs from its recording, but it does not establish one universal rule for every project or prescribe the editing level that suits your particular purpose. [S1]
A practical checklist
Name the transcript’s purpose and intended readers.
Choose an editing level; do not assume the label explains itself.
Decide how to handle fillers, repetitions, false starts, corrections, uncertainty, and unclear wording.
Apply the choices consistently, especially when an edit could change meaning.
Add a short note describing what was edited and when readers should consult the recording.
A few more useful answers
Does a readable transcript mean rewriting the speaker’s words?
Not necessarily. It can involve limited cleanup, such as removing agreed-upon fillers, while retaining the speaker’s meaning and uncertainty. If you reorganize or summarize ideas, label the result accordingly.
Should I remove every “um” and repeated word?
There is no one rule for every project. Decide based on your purpose, record the choice, and apply it consistently; some fillers or repetitions may matter to how a passage is understood.
What if a word cannot be made out?
Do not guess and present the guess as certain. Mark the wording as unclear using a convention you define, and consult the recording if resolving it matters.
Sources
References used for this guide.
- [S1] Transcribing Interviews: Veterans History Project Guidance loc.gov · Checked