Trends in the Use of Promotional Language (Hype) in Abstracts of Successful National Institutes of Health Grant Applications, 1985-2020.
Trends in the Use of Promotional Language (Hype) in Abstracts of Successful National Institutes of Health Grant Applications, 1985-2020.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.28676
复制
发表时间：
2022-08-01
影响因子：
13.8
通讯作者：
Budgell, Brian
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Millar, Neil;Batalo, Bojan;Budgell, Brian
自1985年以来，在美国国立卫生研究院成功申请的摘要中使用“炒作”(宣传语言)的情况是否有所增加？这项横断面研究对1985年至2020年期间 717国立卫生研究院的901篇摘要进行了研究，结果表明，申请者描述他们的工作越来越主观，并依赖于宣传语言和情感诉求(即，130种形容词形式被识别为炒作的频率增加)。这项研究表明，申请者、审查者和资助机构应该意识到，在资助申请中，推广语言的使用越来越普遍。拨款申请过程的完整性对整个研究企业的成功至关重要。然而，几乎没有关于主观或宣传语言(“炒作”)的流行和演变的信息，这种语言可能会破坏赠款申请的撰写和评估的客观性。评估美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)拨款申请摘要中炒作的使用随时间的变化。这项横断面研究评估了1985年至2020年NIH档案摘要中提升形容词的使用情况。从NIH记者(研究组合在线报告工具：支出和结果)档案中的所有摘要中，形容词被自动提取，并相对于开始年(1985)评估了它们在最近一年(2020年)的频率。频率显著变化和带有促进意义(即炒作)的形容词被保留，并通过绘制年度频率(1985-2020年)来评估变化模式。通过根据共享的语义属性对形容词进行分组，识别出通常通过炒作表达的广泛含义。绝对变化以1985年和2020年之间归一化频率的差异来衡量。相对变化以2020年归一化频率相对于1985年或发生的第一年的百分比变化来衡量。总共分析了90 1篇 717摘要，其中139个形容词形式被识别为炒作。在这139个形容词形式中，130个夸张形容词的使用频率增加了7690词/百万(Wpm)(平均[SD]相对增加，1378%[3132%])，而9个hype形容词的使用频率减少了686wpm(平均[SD]相对减少，44%[18%])。最大的绝对增长是新奇(1054wpm)、关键(555wpm)和关键(461wpm)，而最大的相对增长是可持续(25 157%)、可操作(16 114%)和可扩展(13 029%)。炒作通常用于宣传项目的重要性、新颖性、规模和严谨性；预期结果的实用性；研究人员的素质和研究环境；问题的严重性；以及传达申请者的个人态度。从1985年到2020年，成功申请NIH拨款的炒作程度随着时间的推移而增加。这项研究的发现应该有助于使申请者、审查者和资助机构敏感地认识到，在资助申请中，主观的、宣传的语言越来越普遍。这项横断面研究评估了从1985年到2020年在国家卫生研究院(NIH)拨款申请摘要中主观、宣传语言的使用变化。
Has the use of “hype” (promotional language) in the abstracts of successful National Institutes of Health applications increased since 1985? This cross-sectional study of 901 717 National Institutes of Health abstracts from 1985 to 2020 shows that applicants described their work in increasingly subjective terms and relied on promotional language and appeals to emotion (ie, 130 adjective forms identified as hype increased in frequency). This study suggests that applicants, reviewers, and funding agencies should be aware of the increasing prevalence of promotional language in funding applications. The integrity of the grant application process is important to the success of the entire research enterprise. However, little information is available concerning the prevalence and evolution of subjective or promotional language (“hype”) that has the potential to undermine objectivity in the writing and evaluation of grant applications. To assess changes over time in the use of hype in abstracts of National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant applications. This cross-sectional study assessed the prevalence of promotional adjectives in abstracts in the NIH archive from 1985 to 2020. From all abstracts in the NIH RePORTER (Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools: Expenditures and Results) archive, adjectives were automatically extracted, and their frequencies in the most recent year (2020) were assessed relative to the start year (1985). Adjectives that shifted significantly in frequency and that carried a promotional sense (ie, hype) were retained, and patterns of change were assessed by plotting yearly frequencies (1985-2020). By grouping the adjectives based on shared semantic properties, broad meanings commonly expressed by hype were identified. Absolute change was measured as the difference in normalized frequency between 1985 and 2020. Relative change was measured as the percentage change in normalized frequency in 2020 relative to 1985, or the first year of occurrence. In total, 901 717 abstracts were analyzed and 139 adjective forms were identified as hype. Among these 139 adjective forms, 130 hype adjectives increased in frequency by 7690 words per million (wpm) (mean [SD] relative increase, 1378% [3132%]), while 9 hype adjectives decreased in frequency by 686 wpm (mean [SD] relative decrease, 44% [18%]). The largest absolute increases were for the terms novel (1054 wpm), critical (555 wpm), and key (461 wpm), while the largest relative increases were for the terms sustainable (25 157%), actionable (16 114%), and scalable (13 029%). Hype most often serves to promote the significance, novelty, scale, and rigor of a project; the utility of the expected outcomes; the qualities of the investigators and research environment; and the gravity of the problem; as well as conveying the personal attitudes of the applicants. Levels of hype in successful NIH grant applications have increased over time from 1985 to 2020. The findings in this study should serve to sensitize applicants, reviewers, and funding agencies to the increasing prevalence of subjective, promotional language in funding applications. This cross-sectional study assesses changes from 1985 to 2020 in the use of subjective, promotional language in abstracts of National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant applications.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Velde HM;van Heteren JAA;Smit AL;Stegeman I
通讯作者：
Stegeman I
影响因子：
9.8
作者：
Chiu, Kellia;Grundy, Quinn;Bero, Lisa
通讯作者：
Bero, Lisa
影响因子：
7.2
作者：
Lazarus, Clement;Haneef, Romana;Boutron, Isabelle
通讯作者：
Boutron, Isabelle
影响因子：
1
作者：
Hardie, Andrew
通讯作者：
Hardie, Andrew
影响因子：
1.6
作者：
Hyland, Ken;Jiang, Feng (Kevin)
通讯作者：
Jiang, Feng (Kevin)