Hedging, Weasel Words, and Truthiness in Scientific Writing

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Words in scientific discourse must be truthful. Introducing ambiguity or creating a false narrative by insinuating close counts or almost statements as facts that appeal to a truth the writer wants to exist doesn't make it true. A reader's personal interpretation...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Ott, Douglas E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2018
Materias:
Scientific Paper
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6311890/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30607107
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2018.00063
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Words in scientific discourse must be truthful. Introducing ambiguity or creating a false narrative by insinuating close counts or almost statements as facts that appeal to a truth the writer wants to exist doesn't make it true. A reader's personal interpretation because of hedging or weasel words creates an opportunity for truthiness as a belief to become a fact when it isn't. CONCLUSION: Awareness by scientists of this situation will make article reading more critical and related to reality rather than what you want an author wants it to be.

Ejemplares similares