Robust, novel, innovative, and unprecedented

  • Thread starter Thread starter S.G. Janssens
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    novel
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the article by Vinkers et al. published in the British Medical Journal, which analyzes the use of positive and negative language in scientific abstracts from PubMed between 1974 and 2014. The authors conclude that there is an increasing trend of exaggerated language in scientific literature, driven by the pressure on researchers to publish significant results. This phenomenon may reflect a broader positive outcome bias in academia, where the emphasis on publishing can lead to overstated claims in order to meet journal expectations. The implications of this trend warrant further examination in fields beyond medicine, such as physics and mathematics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of scientific publishing standards and practices
  • Familiarity with PubMed and its role in medical literature
  • Knowledge of statistical significance and its implications in research
  • Awareness of publication bias and its effects on scientific integrity
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the concept of publication bias in scientific literature
  • Explore the impact of language in scientific communication
  • Investigate trends in publication practices across different scientific disciplines
  • Examine case studies of exaggerated claims in academic publications
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, academic publishers, and anyone involved in scientific communication who seeks to understand the dynamics of language use in research publications and its impact on scientific integrity.

S.G. Janssens
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Messages
1,222
Reaction score
820
The following article just appeared in the British Medical Journal:

Vinkers CH, Tijdink JK, Otte WM. Use of positive and negative words in scientific PubMed abstracts between 1974 and 2014: retrospective analysis. BMJ 2015;351:h6467

http://www.umcutrecht.nl/nl/Over-Ons/Nieuws/2015/Overdrijving-in-de-wetenschap-lijkt-toe-te-nemen is a related news item from the first author's institution, unfortunately in Dutch only. The publication was also mentioned in the Dutch popular press today.

In any case, I wonder to what extent a similar phenomenon would also be visible in the contemporary physics and mathematics literature. (The authors only looked at publications in PubMed.) Perhaps the trend signalled in the article is due to the tendency of most scientists to be "excellent" these days.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Although it is possible that researchers have adopted an increasingly optimistic writing approach and are ever more enthusiastic about their results, another explanation is more likely: scientists may assume that results and their implications have to be exaggerated and overstated in order to get published. Our finding that scientific abstracts use more overt positive language is also probably related to the emergence of a positive outcome bias that currently dominates scientific literature. There is much pressure on scientists in academia to publish as many papers as possible to further their careers. As a result, we may be afraid to break the bad news that many studies do not result in statistically significant or clinically meaningful effects.
(emphasis added)

It is not that scientists assume that, but that it is the case for many top journals. I've seen cover letters longer than articles themselves in order to justify why this is important enough research for journal X.