IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0221933.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Writers’ uncertainty in scientific and popular biomedical articles. A comparative analysis of the British Medical Journal and Discover Magazine

Author

Listed:
  • Ramona Bongelli
  • Ilaria Riccioni
  • Roberto Burro
  • Andrzej Zuczkowski

Abstract

Distinguishing certain and uncertain information is of crucial importance both in the scientific field in the strict sense and in the popular scientific domain. In this paper, by adopting an epistemic stance perspective on certainty and uncertainty, and a mixed procedure of analysis, which combines a bottom-up and a top-down approach, we perform a comparative study (both qualitative and quantitative) of the uncertainty linguistic markers (verbs, non-verbs, modal verbs, conditional clauses, uncertain questions, epistemic future) and their scope in three different corpora: a historical corpus of 80 biomedical articles from the British Medical Journal (BMJ) 1840–2007; a corpus of 12 biomedical articles from BMJ 2013, and a contemporary corpus of 12 scientific popular articles from Discover 2013. The variables under observation are time, structure (IMRaD vs no-IMRaD) and genre (scientific vs popular articles). We apply the Generalized Linear Models analysis in order to test whether there are statistically significant differences (1) in the amount of uncertainty among the different corpora, and (2) in the categories of uncertainty markers used by writers. The results of our analysis reveal that (1) in all corpora, the percentages of uncertainty are always much lower than that of certainty; (2) uncertainty progressively diminishes over time in biomedical articles (in conjunction with their structural changes–IMRaD–and to the increase of the BMJ Impact Factor); and (3) uncertainty is slightly higher in scientific popular articles (Discover 2013) as compared to the contemporary corpus of scientific articles (BMJ 2013). Nevertheless, in all corpora, modal verbs are the most used uncertainty markers. These results suggest that not only do scientific writers prefer to communicate their uncertainty with markers of possibility rather than those of subjectivity but also that science journalists prefer using a third-person subject followed by modal verbs rather than a first-person subject followed by mental verbs such as think or believe.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramona Bongelli & Ilaria Riccioni & Roberto Burro & Andrzej Zuczkowski, 2019. "Writers’ uncertainty in scientific and popular biomedical articles. A comparative analysis of the British Medical Journal and Discover Magazine," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-26, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221933
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221933
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221933
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221933&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0221933?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Victora, C.G. & Habicht, J.-P. & Bryce, J., 2004. "Evidence-Based Public Health: Moving Beyond Randomized Trials," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 94(3), pages 400-405.
    2. Huiwei Zhou & Huijie Deng & Degen Huang & Minling Zhu, 2015. "Hedge Scope Detection in Biomedical Texts: An Effective Dependency-Based Method," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eugenio Zucchelli & Andrew M Jones & Nigel Rice, 2012. "The evaluation of health policies through dynamic microsimulation methods," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 5(1), pages 2-20.
    2. Sonja Jungreitmayr & Susanne Ring-Dimitriou & Birgit Trukeschitz & Siegfried Eisenberg & Cornelia Schneider, 2021. "Effects of an Information and Communication Technology-Based Fitness Program on Strength and Balance in Female Home Care Service Users," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-14, July.
    3. Timothy O Abuya & Greg Fegan & Abdinasir A Amin & Willis S Akhwale & Abdisalan M Noor & Robert W Snow & Vicki Marsh, 2010. "Evaluating Different Dimensions of Programme Effectiveness for Private Medicine Retailer Malaria Control Interventions in Kenya," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(1), pages 1-9, January.
    4. Biljana Macura & Laura Del Duca & Adriana Soto & Naomi Carrard & Louisa Gosling & Karin Hannes & James Thomas & Lewnida Sara & Marni Sommer & Hugh S. Waddington & Sarah Dickin, 2021. "PROTOCOL: What is the impact of complex WASH interventions on gender and social equality outcomes in low‐ and middle‐income countries? A mixed‐method systematic review protocol," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), June.
    5. Kelly, Michael & Morgan, Antony & Ellis, Simon & Younger, Tricia & Huntley, Jane & Swann, Catherine, 2010. "Evidence based public health: A review of the experience of the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) of developing public health guidance in England," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(6), pages 1056-1062, September.
    6. Archontoula Drouka & Dora Brikou & Céline Causeret & Nur Al Ali Al Malla & Stéphane Sibalo & Concha Ávila & Gabriela Alcat & Anastasia E. Kapetanakou & Patricia Gurviez & Nawel Fellah-Dehiri & Marine , 2023. "Effectiveness of school-based interventions in Europe for promoting healthy lifestyle behaviors in children [Efficacité des interventions en milieu scolaire en Europe pour promouvoir un mode de vie," Post-Print hal-04241325, HAL.
    7. repec:mof:journl:ppr03ab is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Jana Sisnowski & Jackie M Street & Tracy Merlin, 2017. "Improving food environments and tackling obesity: A realist systematic review of the policy success of regulatory interventions targeting population nutrition," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-16, August.
    9. Hatcher, Abigail M & McBride, Ruari-Santiago & Rebombo, Dumisani & Munshi, Shehnaz & Khumalo, Mzwakhe & Christofides, Nicola, 2020. "Process evaluation of a community mobilization intervention for preventing men’s partner violence use in peri-urban South Africa," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    10. Kathryn Oliver & Warren Pearce, 2017. "Three lessons from evidence-based medicine and policy: increase transparency, balance inputs and understand power," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(1), pages 1-7, December.
    11. Sarah Rondeaux & Tessa Braeckman & Mieke Beckwé & Natacha Biset & Joris Maesschalck & Nathalie Duquet & Isabelle De Wulf & Dirk Devroey & Carine De Vriese, 2022. "Diabetes and Cardiovascular Diseases Risk Assessment in Community Pharmacies: An Implementation Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-23, July.
    12. Rhodes, Tim & Lancaster, Kari, 2019. "Evidence-making interventions in health: A conceptual framing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1-1.
    13. K. Thoonen & L. van Osch & H. de Vries & S. Jongen & F. Schneider, 2020. "Are Environmental Interventions Targeting Skin Cancer Prevention among Children and Adolescents Effective? A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-29, January.
    14. Senier, Laura & Smollin, Leandra & Lee, Rachael & Nicoll, Lauren & Shields, Michael & Tan, Catherine, 2018. "Navigating the evidentiary turn in public health: Sensemaking strategies to integrate genomics into state-level chronic disease prevention programs," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 207-215.
    15. Zucchelli, E & Jones, A.M & Rice, N, 2010. "The evaluation of health policies through microsimulation methods," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 10/03, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    16. Maja Larsen & Gabriel Gulis & Kjeld Pedersen, 2012. "Use of evidence in local public health work in Denmark," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 57(3), pages 477-483, June.
    17. Florian Fischer, 2016. "Challenges in Creating Evidence in Environmental Health Risk Assessments: The Example of Second-Hand Smoke," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, January.
    18. Cláudia Fançony & Ânia Soares & João Lavinha & Henrique Barros & Miguel Brito, 2019. "Efficacy of Nutrition and WASH/Malaria Educational Community-Based Interventions in Reducing Anemia in Preschool Children from Bengo, Angola: Study Protocol of a Randomized Controlled Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-17, February.
    19. Margaret Dalziel, 2018. "Why are there (almost) no randomised controlled trial-based evaluations of business support programmes?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, December.
    20. Sonia Hernández-Cordero & Mireya Vilar-Compte & Kathrin Litwan & Vania Lara-Mejía & Natalia Rovelo-Velázquez & Mónica Ancira-Moreno & Matthias Sachse-Aguilera & Fernanda Cobo-Armijo, 2022. "Implementation of Breastfeeding Policies at Workplace in Mexico: Analysis of Context Using a Realist Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-20, February.
    21. Marian Meller & Stephan Litschig, 2014. "Saving Lives: Evidence from a Conditional Food Supplementation Program," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(4), pages 1014-1052.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221933. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.