How Authors Use Beta Readers: Who, When, Why—and Does It Help?
By Barbara Linn Probst | December 16, 2022 |
If you’ve ever struggled with a manuscript, unsure if you’re on the right track, you’ve probably heard the term beta reader.
Although some people do offer beta reading for a fee (a word about that below), the term beta reader usually refers to an unpaid non-professional who gives feedback prior to a book’s publication.
Unlike critique partners, there’s no requirement to exchange manuscripts with a beta reader; and unlike editors, there’s no expectation that beta readers will have advice about how to fix whatever weaknesses they find. They’re civilians, proxies for our future readers. Typically, they’re people we know, if not personally, then through a friend or writing community. We trust them enough to test our books on them and (presumably) listen to what they have to say.
Use of beta readers is widespread, but surprisingly little has been written about how writers actually use them and how they help—or if they do. I got curious, so I set out to fill the gap. Although I first reported these “research findings” a few years ago, they remain just as relevant today. And if they don’t, I hope you’ll say so in your comments and let us know what I missed or what may have changed!
A word of background: I posted my question on five different Facebook groups for writers, asking whether, who, when, why, and how people used beta readers. After parsing close to 100 responses into topics and themes, I ended up with nearly 200 distinct “bits” of information.
Here’s what I learned from my fellow authors. Not what advice-giving blogs tell them they ought to do, but what they actually do.
WHO: Most people use a variety of beta readers, both writers and non-writers.
Responses fell into three distinct camps.
Readers only, please! Some people only used readers, never fellow writers, because they felt that readers were more authentic, representative, and jargon-free. They liked readers with “a sharp mind and attention to detail,” preferably from their target audience, who were familiar with and liked their genre. Some preferred non-friends who had no expectations, vested interest, or reason to soften their response for the sake of the friendship. “I’ve had plenty of betas who ‘yes’ me to death and while nice for the ego, it’s not what you need.”
At times, specialty readers were sought, either because they were experts in an area relevant to the book’s setting or plot (e.g., legal or mental health issues, a particular time or place) or because they could serve as “sensitivity readers” for content outside the author’s experience.
Readers can also be found, for a small fee, through enterprises such as The Spun Yarn that vet and train their beta readers, match an author with three appropriate readers, and monitor the process. This can be a good “middle option,” since there is structure, accountability, and confidentiality, since identities are masked. Be aware, however, that these readers are not trained professionals. Even if they agree about a weakness in the manuscript, they aren’t in a position to tell you what to do about it.
Writers only, please! Other people were equally adamant that they preferred to use fellow writers, whom they considered better equipped to spot and articulate specific plot, pacing, and character issues. “Civilian readers don’t catch snafus like we do.”
On the other hand, they were well aware of the pitfalls of using other writers—in particular, the challenge for a writer of being able to switch gears and simply “read as a reader.” “We writers have a tendency to want to change it to how we would write it ourselves.” Interestingly, this is very much what I found, back when I was an academic and doing research on therapists who returned to “the client chair.” Most had a difficult time surrendering to the patient role, even for an hour.
Both, please! More often, people preferred a variety of beta readers, both writers and non-writers. That could include family members, trusted critique partners, representatives of the target audience, and “intelligent friends.”
“You need a good variety to get a full understanding of the good and bad in your writing.” One person used one-third supporters/cheerleaders, one-third tough critics, and one-third “wild cards” whose opinion she couldn’t predict. “I like to ask different sets of people: some that are my target audience and some who can help edit and deal with higher level critiques.”
WHEN: What matters isn’t just who, but when. Different kinds of beta readers are useful at different points in the process.
Rather than thinking of beta readers as a single group, or of beta reading as a single event taking place at a single point in the process, many people use different kinds of readers at different stages, and for different reasons. They liked to have one kind of reader to review an early draft, but wanted a different kind of reader for a revision and a third kind for a polished manuscript.
These three “points in time”—early draft, revision stage, and final version—weren’t rigidly defined, of course. Nevertheless, people were consistent in stating that different types of beta readers were useful at different stages.
Fellow writers were seen as most helpful for early drafts, ongoing critique, and feedback when one was stuck, at a crossroad, or “when I have done everything I can with a draft but don’t know how to go further and need assistance with recognizing craft issues.” Drawing on a common lexicon, fellow writers could explain, more specifically, what was lacking or wrong—as long as they didn’t cross the line into “this is how I would have done it.”
Non-writers, on the other hand, were considered more helpful, later, when the book was done, “as a test audience, almost as quality assurance,” but not for material that still required considerable work. Respondents emphasized that it was up to the writer to make the manuscript as polished as possible before showing it to non-writers, who “don’t want to read something that’s not been edited or is hard to follow.”
ADVANTAGES. Using beta readers is worthwhile, if not essential.
Those who responded to my inquiry felt that beta readers were a necessary part of the writing process. “They are a huge part of my process since the longer I work on a manuscript, the more susceptible I am to blind spots.” Obviously, there may be other writers who didn’t share that view —the ones who did not respond to my post, because they had no interest in beta readers. That’s how it is with any survey.
In some cases, people used beta readers because they couldn’t afford a paid professional. Betas were seen as an alternative way to get an independent, impartial view of their work. For other people, beta readers complemented the feedback they received from paid editors, preceding or following their input; that is, they used—and valued—both. “Betas can tell you how the average reader will respond to your book, and editors can make your book marketable.”
Getting the most benefit from a beta reader was a key concern. To avoid both generic praise and generic criticism, some people felt it was important to give readers a list of specific questions about structure, clarity, continuity, and character development. “The questions are the key to focusing the comments—otherwise you run the danger of vague praise or people thinking they’re line editors.”
On the other hand, some preferred to leave things open-ended, letting readers report what they actually, felt without being limited or primed—the way people will focus only on the color of a flower, ignoring its shape and scent, if you tell them that’s what you’re interested in.
DISADVANTAGES. Using beta readers has its pitfalls and limitations.
People noted that problems can stem from an over-abundance of feedback—a trap that’s easy to fall into when feedback is free. “It’s way too easy to ask ten people for comments, and then implement all their comments and lose what I intended for the story.” Confusion and loss of focus will make the manuscript worse, rather than better. “If you get too many chefs in the kitchen, it can change the recipe, which is almost never the best solution.”
Because feedback from beta readers doesn’t reflect knowledge of writing craft, it may lack the specificity necessary for it to be “actionable.” As one person put it, “reverse engineering” is needed to translate a beta reader’s reaction into what, exactly, went wrong and what to do about it, requiring so many extra steps that it left him wishing he’d hired a professional—or never asked. In his view, willingness to provide useful feedback and the ability to do so aren’t the same thing.
As with all forms of feedback, quality will vary. “My experience is that you can find beta readers that are spectacular and some that are useless. And it is the same for professional editors. It depends on who you can find, not on whether you pay them or not, or whether they’re writers or not.”
Ultimately, of course, writers must decide what to do with the feedback they receive. People tended to feel free to accept or reject what beta readers told them. If a number of people pointed out the same weakness—especially if they included both writers and non-writers—or if the comments resonated strongly, the feedback was more likely to be taken seriously.
TAKEAWAYS. What can we learn from these responses?
- Know—and communicate— what you want from a beta reader. That may be different at different points in the writing process, or with different books.
- Seek diversity of background and viewpoint, depending on your aim. Sometimes you’ll want a heterogeneous group of readers, and sometimes you’ll want someone specific. Sometimes you want a generic “target audience,” and sometimes you want help with a specific problem. Figure it out anew each time—before you look for beta readers.
- Be open and non-defensive, but don’t try to please everyone. After all, there is no “perfect book” that every single reader will love!
Over to you now! Have you ever used or been a beta reader? What struck you about that experience? Is there something you would like to add to the points in this essay?
Barbara (she/her) is an author of contemporary women’s fiction living on an historic dirt road in New York’s Hudson Valley. Each of her acclaimed novels (Queen of the Owls, 2020; The Sound Between the Notes, 2021; and The Color of Ice, 2022) was a medalist for prestigious national awards, including the Sarton Award for Contemporary Fiction, the Independent Book Publishers Award, the Hawthorne Prize, and the Nautilus Award for Fiction. Her fourth novel, Roll the Sun Across the Sky, launches in May 2025 and has received stellar advance praise. Barbara has also published more than 80 articles on the craft of writing and the writing life. She has a PhD in Clinical Social Work and has been a therapist, teacher, researcher, and advocate for out-of-the-box kids and their families. When not writing, she’s a serious amateur pianist and a traveler to spots from Iceland to the Himalayas. Learn more on her website .
[coffee]
Great post! I’m hoping you’ll go back and ask why those who don’t use beta readers don’t. Did they ever? What percentage? It’d be interesting to see those trends, as this could be the group that most shows us what not to do as authors or beta readers. Thank you for the work you’ve done on this. Curious as well if it changed your own position or clarity on beta readers.
Great comment, Susan! When I taught qualitative research to PhD students, one of the first articles I had them read was entitled “What We Didn’t Learn From the People Who Wouldn’t Talk to Us.” We can only report and analyze the data we collected, and we’ll never know if the people who didn’t respond would have said something very, very different that might have completed changed our conclusions. That’s always the nature of research—you hope that your sample is representative, but you can’t truly know if it is.
Personally, I use only two beta readers, at this point = two people I absolutely trust because they are tough and smart. I do think that “who” and “how many” can change at different points in one’s career, or with different books—as one’s needs change. Like everything, it’s very personal!
Hi Barbara – your post has great timing! I just received a beta reader report (from Spun Yarn) in my inbox last night for a reading of my nearly polished manuscript. I have a few smart-reader friends who are doing beta reads as well. My hope is that the feedback from all will reveal blind spots and weaker points I glossed over, and especially give me answers to a few specific questions. They are the first readers of the manuscript by someone other than a dev editor. Any advice on the emotional mindset (deep breaths) I should take before going in?
As a veteran of The Spun Yarn (which is, overall, very good as a “middle step” and well worth the reasonable cost), I will offer this: I submitted my last two books to them, twice each. That is, I took their feedback into account and resubmitted the revision (specifying three fresh readers, of course). With my recent book, it was bizarre because the second set of readers had issues with elements that the first set had raved about as strengths! So it taught me to remember that all feedback is subjective. I think a useful principle is to take something seriously if multiple people have pointed it out, independently. Of course, there can be something that only one person notices—and yet is so, so important.
To respond to your question, I think we have to keep shifting between a thick and thin skin, between non-defensive openness and the integrity/courage of our own instincts. Let me know!!
According to The Spun Yarn’s website, its beta readers are paid $1 per 1,000 words of the manuscript, or $80 for 80,000 words. The sample report, also available through the company’s website, contains responses to four questions, sampled at four places throughout the manuscript. A typical answer is about 50-100 words long. Doing the math, the typical report is then 800-1,600 words with a midpoint of 1,200 words. Let’s say it takes the reader 5-6 hours to read the manuscript and 2-3 hours to draft the report. Total: 8 hours, or $10 an hour. A faster reader would earn more per hour. A slower reader, less. Meanwhile, the author pays the company “a small fee” of $500. At $80 per reader for three readers, the company pays out $240 and keeps $260, or about half the author’s fee.
Thank you for such a comprehensive discussion of this often confusing subject. I have used Beta readers, and I found that asking specific questions was vital. One in particular (Did you want to stop reading? If so, when and why?) feels key. I recently read for someone who was likewise specific. As a writer, this helped me keep my feedback focused. The paid-reader thing kind of bugs me that’s a personal quibble and I’m sure it can be useful. But my takeaway here is for anyone seeking Beta Readers to be intentional about it.
Well said, Susan! I absolutely agree—the more clear and specific one is, the more useful the feedback tends to be. That said, it’s also important to end with that final, open-ended question: “Was there anything else that struck you that I didn’t ask about?” In my experience as a researcher, that’s often where the most interesting material would surface ….
An excellent post on a worthy topic, Barbara. Thank you for your research. I myself am an advocate for professional, paid editors, but whether it’s beta readers or gun-for-hire freelance editors, ego must be kept in mind. In fact, ego was an unavoidable aspect in your research. Of the hundred responses you worked with, to what degree were the respondents anxious to look good, or had some distinctly personal point they wanted to make? That said, I would add this: the writer must know her story so well that she is able to judge what’s said about her work from the point of strength. Only then can she be confident when something positive or negative rings true to her. Otherwise, the writer is likely to be susceptible to influence that can mislead or damage. And this holds true for working with professional editors. They have egos, too.
So true! This is a topic that I ponder quite a lot. The best we can do, I think—since ego is everywhere, as you say, and anyone who claims that they’ve banished theirs is (probably) expressing a wish rather than a fact—is to be mindful, to stop and question, and to trust our instincts (as you say when you write “whether something rings true”).
It’s a dance, of course, because that can be a pleasant way of justifying defensiveness. And yet, I stand by it. I have had Big Important Experts tell me that the opening chapter of my recent book was no good. Luckily, I didn’t listen, because readers have loved it and were hooked by it… and they are the people I’m writing for.
Thanks Barbara! This is a very informative post. I’ve followed this community for about a year and it is invaluable. As a newly published author (this past October) I actually used ‘beta readers’ without realizing this was a thing. I called them my First Read Team. I invited each of them separately with a special note and a set of instructions, then I hosted a luncheon with them and handed out my manuscript. We set follow up dates to meet individually to capture feedback. It was a clarifying and inspiring experience. I gained remarkable insight from my five ‘first time readers. Your post is spot on.
Thanks, Daisy! It would be interesting to know if their individual feedback was similar or different, and how you handled the differences … It could also be interesting be to share the entire body of feedback with everyone—that is, to see what people thought about the feedback that each, personally, did NOT give! Of course, as Barry reminds us, ultimately you are the one to decide what to do with the feedback!
Yes, lucky indeed that you didn’t listen. And the reason you didn’t was that you knew your story in depth. For that reason, you were able to dismiss editorial misreading about your opening. But as you say, if the writer doesn’t objectively understand what she’s written and why, then rejecting a negative take is probably just defensiveness, i.e., more ego.
Most recently a beta reader, my high school girlfriend who remains a dear friend, pointed out two errors in a short story I’d sent her: 1) The constellation Orion is *not* visible in the summer night sky, ) A girl in 1966 would not sit for hours on a cold boulder in a miniskirt, it wouldn’t (ahem) cover enough. I missed those points. (She otherwise liked the story and told me in detail what worked.)
So yeah, beta readers. Good idea. But the best beta reader has to be me.
You remind us that feedback exists on all levels: from fact-checking to personal/emotional response! And to be one’s own beta reader means stepping away from the manuscript for long enough to be able to view it with fresh eyes—which are often more critical than anyone else’s!
Barbara, I had 11 beta readers for the memoir of my teenage shoplifting business that I recently published. But only two are writers; however, all are friends or relatives from that checkered time—50 years!— who gave me essential info regarding my cracked memory, through their cracked memories. (More than once I heard, “You’re nuts, that never happened!” Lucky I’ve heard that many times.)
I did have pro editors look at the work afterward. They likely wanted to tell me I was nuts, but instead they simply did good work.
You make an important point about “specialty readers” who can read, not as an editor or even as a random reader, but for authenticity—whether that has to do with place, era, culture, etc. I did that for my recent novel, which I had a very accomplished and experienced glass artist read, to make sure I got the glass part right. So yup, that’s another variety of “beta reader!” Sounds like you had several kinds of early readers, which is the best way to do it!
My single beta reader has been with me since before the first novel was published, and we’ve operated the same way every time: I only send her the next chapter when it’s as good as I can make it.
She responds to anything she sees fit, from things she likes to questions to pointing out an occasional typo to asking me what I mean. We chat back and forth via email once or twice more, I explain the times I write ‘stet’ and look exceedingly carefully at anything she mentions.
And then that chapter is done, basically for all time. Rachel’s indispensable – and has a huge reading background similar to mine; she’s a writer at a beginning stage in her career, now is married with a darling baby boy, and insists she wants to keep going. A lot of time has passed in our relationship – and I have so much material I can see writing a book with it some day!
Essentially, the chapters are finished only when she’s finished asking questions. We chat a lot about the why of my choices. I just hope she lasts through the final book of the trilogy! She keeps saying it’s a learning experience (!) for her, and won’t let me pay her.
Some writers have that kind of a relationship with an editor – or a spouse ‘first reader’ – this one has been my very great fortune to find.
It’s always so fascinating to read about people’s writing processes, which are very different! Your way clearly works beautifully for you, but it would never work for me since I write in spirals—that is, as I move through and into my story, I get to know my characters better and see more deeply, so I go back to rework earlier chapters, often by thickening, leaving “bread crumbs,” etc. Viva la difference! Happy for you that you have a way and a partner that worksso well for you!
Most of my oddities are the result of only having a brain part of a day – and having a limited capacity to hold anything in it, not really a choice. There is no way I could edit an 187K word mainstream novel as a whole, with editing passes for various attention-needing parts. But I’ve found this works for me, and follow a printed guideline for it for every single scenes, which then gets read by the robot voice many time in part and in whole, and put through Autocrit’s counting functions over and over and over – and then, miraculously, it gels.
So far, so good. I call it ‘atomizing’ – reducing things to pieces I can handle in-brain. And my beta reader humors me.
Thanks, Barbara, for all your research and synthesis on this. For the first two volumes of a trilogy I’m writing (historical fiction set in the 2nd-century Middle East), I used the beta reader service available through the History Quill website. For each of the two books (at separate times), they set me up with eight readers of historical fiction from across the UK (I’m in the US), all of them answering the same twenty or so core questions for each story after reading it through. Their feedback was often detailed and extensive. The responses varied, but patterns were definitely observable, and this process gave confirmation both of the manuscript’s strengths (which I most firmly believed in) and the weaknesses I’d reluctantly suspected all along.
Wow, that sounds like an ideal process for you, and a great example of that “middle ground” between (unpaid) friends and fellow writers, on the one hand, and professional (often expensive) developmental editors, on the other. I’m not implying that value is based on how much one spends, of course—simply that budgets are not the same for all of us. Your conclusion sums it up perfectly: observable patterns, and confirmation of the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses which you “reluctantly suspected all along.” Sometimes it’s worth paying an impartial outsider to verify our hunches :-)
Great analysis, Barbara!
I’m a staunch believer in beta readers, and I prefer a mix of readers and writers, for the reasons you mentioned. I also have an “ideal reader,” a concept from Stephen King’s excellent “On Writing.” That’s the one person who gets me the most, and is thus the best judge of whether I pulled off what I was aiming for.
I usually don’t share a manuscript until it’s pretty close to final, and well-polished. I don’t think it’s fair or reasonable to expect a reader to mentally fill in the blanks on how great your story could *eventually* be. But I will try a very short excerpt of an early draft on a few readers who know me well, to get a vibe-check on whether they find the concept I’m working on to be at all engaging.
What a great point, Keith—that it’s not the job of beta readers to tell us how to write our book or make it better. They are readers, not teachers, and are responding as such. Another good reason to be clear about one’s expectations, so that the readers can be clear too! Of course, the risk of that approach (which is also mine) is hearing from trusted beta readers that the story isn’t very good, after all that work and revision. So there’s something to be said for trying out the concept and sample pages on one or two trusted “early readers” for what you’re calling a “vibe-check.” I do that too. More than once, it’s saved me from going down a long and arduous path to nowhere.