Robust, novel, innovative, and unprecedented

  • Thread starter S.G. Janssens
  • Start date
  • Tags
    novel
In summary, a recent study published in the British Medical Journal found that there has been an increase in the use of positive language in scientific abstracts between 1974 and 2014. This trend may be due to the pressure for scientists to publish and the emergence of a positive outcome bias in the scientific community. This phenomenon may also be present in other fields, such as physics and mathematics. Additionally, the study's lead author's institution released a related news item in Dutch, which was mentioned in popular press.
  • #1
S.G. Janssens
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
1,222
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
  • #2
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.
 

Related to Robust, novel, innovative, and unprecedented

What does it mean for something to be "robust"?

"Robust" refers to the ability of something to withstand difficult conditions or challenges without breaking or failing. In science, this can refer to the reliability and stability of experimental results or the resilience of a system or process.

What is the difference between something being "novel" and "innovative"?

"Novel" means something new or original, while "innovative" refers to something that introduces new ideas or methods. In science, a novel idea may be one that has never been explored before, while an innovative approach may involve using new technologies or techniques to solve a problem.

How is something determined to be "unprecedented"?

"Unprecedented" means that something has never been done or seen before. In science, this can refer to groundbreaking discoveries or breakthroughs that have never been achieved in the past. It can also describe unique phenomena or events that have never occurred before.

Why are "robust", "novel", "innovative", and "unprecedented" important in science?

These terms are important because they represent qualities that are highly valued in the scientific community. Robustness ensures the reliability and validity of research and experiments, while novelty and innovation drive progress and advancements in the field. Unprecedented discoveries push the boundaries of our understanding and open up new avenues for exploration.

Can something be all four of these things at the same time?

Yes, something can be robust, novel, innovative, and unprecedented all at once. For example, a groundbreaking discovery that introduces a new method or technology and produces reliable results that have never been seen before would be considered all four of these things.

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top