Hype in reports of clinical research: The authors' perspectives
Hype in reports of clinical research: The authors' perspectives
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.esp.2020.07.001
复制
发表时间：
2020-10-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Salager-Meyer, Francoise
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Millar, Neil;Budgell, Brian;Salager-Meyer, Francoise
医学研究文章越来越多地使用语言来强调或促进研究的积极方面（例如稳健、新颖、创新、前所未有）。这种现象被称为“炒作”，可能会影响读者的判断，妨碍他们发现真实效果的能力或疏远读者。本研究探讨了作者选择炒作的原因，并在此过程中扩展了先前记录炒作的语言形式和功能的工作。对最近发表包含炒作的临床研究报告的七位作者进行了知情人士采访。知情人士，所有使用英语作为附加语言的用户，都认为大多数炒作的功能本质上是促销 - 例如强调方法论的严谨性、主张优先性、强调影响。影响炒作使用的因素包括作者对客观性的努力、外部编辑干预、语言能力和传统话语的复制。这些因素与期刊指南、出版压力和正式写作指导有关。考虑了对医学文献的生产者和消费者的伦理和实际影响。 (c) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. 保留所有权利。
Medical research articles increasingly employ language to emphasise or promote positive aspects of the research (e.g. robust, novel, innovative, unprecedented). This phenomenon, referred to as 'hype', may bias readers' judgements, impede their ability to find true effects or alienate readers. The present study explores why authors choose to hype, and, in doing so, extends prior work documenting the linguistic form and function of hype. Informant interviews were conducted with seven authors who have recently published reports of clinical research containing hype. The informants, all users of English as an additional language, identified the function of most hypes as promotional in nature - e.g. emphasising methodological rigour, claiming priority, highlighting the implications. Factors influencing the use of hype included authors' struggle for objectivity, external editorial intervention, linguistic ability and replication of conventionalised discourse. These factors are discussed in relation to journal guidelines, pressure to publish and formal writing instruction. Ethical and practical implications for the producers and consumers of the medical literature are considered. (c) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.