IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v128y2023i8d10.1007_s11192-023-04759-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Promoting research by reducing uncertainty in academic writing: a large-scale diachronic case study on hedging in Science research articles across 25 years

Author

Listed:
  • Mingxin Yao

    (Nanjing University)

  • Ying Wei

    (Nanjing University)

  • Huiyu Wang

    (Harbin Institute of Petroleum)

Abstract

Hedges are important in academic writing since they indicate uncertainty and tentativeness about academic knowledge. However, few studies explore how hedges have changed in academic writing overtime. Among the existing studies, there is also divergent understandings. The current case study traced the diachronic development of hedges that express doubt and uncertainty in the full texts of Science research articles from 1997 to 2021. Our findings show that the use of such hedges has significantly decreased in the past 25 years in the research articles of the Journal Science. In addition, we propose that the drop of such hedges in Science research articles may be an implicit writing strategy for research promotion, and therefore may correlate with the rising linguistic positivity in academic writing. Our hypothesis was initially confirmed by the significant correlation between the evolution of hedges and Yuan and Yao’s (Scientometrics 127:1–17, 2022) sentiment scores in academic writing. Our findings may reveal a bigger picture of promoting research by adopting not only explicit strategies such as more positive language (Yuan and Yao in Scientometrics 127:1–17, 2022) but also subtle and implicit writing strategies such as reducing uncertainty. Finally, we discussed the implications of this study for peer reviewers, editors, and researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Mingxin Yao & Ying Wei & Huiyu Wang, 2023. "Promoting research by reducing uncertainty in academic writing: a large-scale diachronic case study on hedging in Science research articles across 25 years," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4541-4558, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:128:y:2023:i:8:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04759-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-023-04759-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-023-04759-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-023-04759-6?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ju Wen & Lei Lei, 2022. "Adjectives and adverbs in life sciences across 50 years: implications for emotions and readability in academic texts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4731-4749, August.
    2. Xueying Liu & Haoran Zhu, 2023. "Linguistic positivity in soft and hard disciplines: temporal dynamics, disciplinary variation, and the relationship with research impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 3107-3127, May.
    3. Zhou-min Yuan & Mingxin Yao, 2022. "Is academic writing becoming more positive? A large-scale diachronic case study of Science research articles across 25 years," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6191-6207, November.
    4. Melissa A. Wheeler & Ekaterina Vylomova & Melanie J. McGrath & Nick Haslam, 2021. "More confident, less formal: stylistic changes in academic psychology writing from 1970 to 2016," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9603-9612, December.
    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. Yongchao Ma & Ying Teng & Zhongzhun Deng & Li Liu & Yi Zhang, 2023. "Does writing style affect gender differences in the research performance of articles?: An empirical study of BERT-based textual sentiment analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(4), pages 2105-2143, April.
    2. Zhijun Li, 2022. "Is academic writing less passivized? Corpus-based evidence from research article abstracts in applied linguistics over the past three decades (1990–2019)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 5773-5792, October.
    3. Xi Zhao & Li Li & Wei Xiao, 2023. "The diachronic change of research article abstract difficulty across disciplines: a cognitive information-theoretic approach," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Sun, Zhuanlan, 2024. "Textual features of peer review predict top-cited papers: An interpretable machine learning perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2).
    5. Xueying Liu & Haoran Zhu, 2023. "Linguistic positivity in soft and hard disciplines: temporal dynamics, disciplinary variation, and the relationship with research impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 3107-3127, May.
    6. Sun, Zhuanlan & Clark Cao, C. & Ma, Chao & Li, Yiwei, 2023. "The academic status of reviewers predicts their language use," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    7. Ju Wen & Lan Yi, 2023. "Comparing lay summaries to scientific abstracts for readability and jargon use: a case report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5791-5800, October.

    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:spr:scient:v:128:y:2023:i:8:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04759-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.