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
_version_ 1783383694019395584
author Ott, Douglas E.
author_facet Ott, Douglas E.
author_sort Ott, Douglas E.
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6311890
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63118902019-01-03 Hedging, Weasel Words, and Truthiness in Scientific Writing Ott, Douglas E. JSLS Scientific Paper 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. Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6311890/ /pubmed/30607107 http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2018.00063 Text en © 2018 by JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/), which permits for noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not altered in any way.
spellingShingle Scientific Paper
Ott, Douglas E.
Hedging, Weasel Words, and Truthiness in Scientific Writing
title Hedging, Weasel Words, and Truthiness in Scientific Writing
title_full Hedging, Weasel Words, and Truthiness in Scientific Writing
title_fullStr Hedging, Weasel Words, and Truthiness in Scientific Writing
title_full_unstemmed Hedging, Weasel Words, and Truthiness in Scientific Writing
title_short Hedging, Weasel Words, and Truthiness in Scientific Writing
title_sort hedging, weasel words, and truthiness in scientific writing
topic Scientific Paper
url 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
work_keys_str_mv AT ottdouglase hedgingweaselwordsandtruthinessinscientificwriting

Ejemplares similares