Four studies that analyzed reading and writing technical texts behavior were carried out. The first study analyzed the level in which eleven master degree students read and wrote scientific texts, specifically about identification and elaboration of some elements of empirical articles, and formulated and justificated from them a research question. The results showed correspondence between the two types of behavior (reading and writing). It means, if they read poorly their research questions were just a repetition of the text previously read. On the other side, if the reading was good their research questions were original and well justified. The second study, using the same design of the previous one, analyzed the effects of corrective training in twenty undergraduates. The results showed a dramatic improvement just in the case of the performance of the experimental group. The third study analyzed the effect of varying the experimental articles' textual features (making them unstructured). Participated twenty undergraduate students and the results obtained were low. The fourth study, analyzed the effect of exposing six experienced researchers to experimental articles unstructured. The results showed the participants' performances, of both experimental and control groups, were excellent. The importance of identifying strategies that improve the way in which researchers are trained in reading and writing experimental articles is discussed.