The use of tentative language in scientific publications

Abstract

I am concerned about the frequent use of qualifying terms such as “presumptive,” “presumed,” “suspected,” and similar qualifiers (such as “probable,” “possible,” “potential,” “putative,” “apparent,” “hypothetical,” “tentative,” “likely,” “indicative,” and “suggestive”) in scientific publications, especially in titles.

Although these terms are important for communicating the preliminary nature of research findings, their presence may have unforeseen effects on scientific integrity, clinical decision-making, and public perception.

Words like “presumptive,” “probable,” “possible,” “putative,” and “suggestive” belong to a broader category known as tentative or qualifying language. These terms are vital for accurately conveying uncertainty and ensuring that findings are interpreted within the appropriate context of evidence and limitations. By using such language, researchers can signal the need for further validation and protect against the overstatement of results.

However, the use of tentative language in scientific titles and key sections may also pose challenges. These terms create a perception of weakness or inconclusiveness, potentially leading to the undervaluation of the research. Moreover, when tentative findings are cited or referenced, they may be misinterpreted as more definitive than intended, influencing clinical guidelines, policy decisions, and further research directions.

The impact of this is particularly concerning in fields such as oncology, where terms like “presumptive” in brain tumor treatment studies can lead to the premature adoption of unverified therapies or, conversely, discourage investment in promising avenues that require further validation. This misalignment between the preliminary nature of the findings and their perceived robustness can have real-world consequences for patient care and scientific advancement.

The use of tentative or qualifying language is a critical aspect of scientific communication, providing a necessary balance between the need to share new findings and the responsibility to communicate those findings accurately.

By adopting clear guidelines and best practices, the scientific community can improve how these terms are used, minimizing the risk of misinterpretation and ensuring that research continues to inform, rather than mislead, both scientific and public audiences.

Thank you for considering these perspectives. I hope this letter encourages a broader discussion on the use of tentative language in scientific publications and the steps we can take to enhance its effectiveness.