A probabilistic model of hype reveals a rhetorical shift in biomedicine

Abstract Promotional language, or ‘hype,’ characterized by words like novel, outstanding, and promising, has been increasingly observed in scientific writing. To systematically analyze how hype is employed and evolves in structured biomedical abstracts, we introduce a probabilistic model to estimate the propensity of hype in selected candidate words in biomedical abstracts. Our analysis examines the positional distribution of 43 candidate hype words across approximately 14.5 million PubMed abstracts within the IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) framework of structured writing. The model accounts for context, filtering out technical concepts (e.g., major histocompatibility complex or ‘vital capacity‘) and non-hyping uses (e.g., outstanding questions). We find that the degree of hype varies depending on the word and its context: words such as promising and noteworthy frequently convey hype, whereas others like major and central typically remain neutral. Temporal trends suggest that the increased hype is not due to a shift in the words’ propensity to hype but rather authors’ strategic rhetorical choices, particularly in the ‘Introduction’ and ‘Discussion’ sections. This analytical approach enhances the identification and understanding of hype’s role, and we provide a labeled dataset annotated with abstract-level hype probabilities to facilitate further research into its impact on scientific communication. Peer Review https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1162/QSS.a.482

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Quantitative Science Studies
Published
2026-05-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1162/qss.a.482
Primary Topic
Academic Writing and Publishing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A probabilistic model of hype reveals a rhetorical shift in biomedicine

Jana Diesner, Vetle I. Torvik, Apratim Mishra
Quantitative Science Studies
Academic Writing and Publishing
article

A probabilistic model of hype reveals a rhetorical shift in biomedicine

Jana Diesner, Vetle I. Torvik, Apratim Mishra
article en

Abstract

Abstract Promotional language, or ‘hype,’ characterized by words like novel, outstanding, and promising, has been increasingly observed in scientific writing. To systematically analyze how hype is employed and evolves in structured biomedical abstracts, we introduce a probabilistic model to estimate the propensity of hype in selected candidate words in biomedical abstracts. Our analysis examines the positional distribution of 43 candidate hype words across approximately 14.5 million PubMed abstracts within the IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) framework of structured writing. The model accounts for context, filtering out technical concepts (e.g., major histocompatibility complex or ‘vital capacity‘) and non-hyping uses (e.g., outstanding questions). We find that the degree of hype varies depending on the word and its context: words such as promising and noteworthy frequently convey hype, whereas others like major and central typically remain neutral. Temporal trends suggest that the increased hype is not due to a shift in the words’ propensity to hype but rather authors’ strategic rhetorical choices, particularly in the ‘Introduction’ and ‘Discussion’ sections. This analytical approach enhances the identification and understanding of hype’s role, and we provide a labeled dataset annotated with abstract-level hype probabilities to facilitate further research into its impact on scientific communication. Peer Review https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1162/QSS.a.482

Quantitative Science Studies
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US), Technical University of Munich (DE)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Academic Writing and Publishing
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.