Writing with authority – boosting and hedging
Two very important rhetorical devices that research writers use to establish authority (and to sound like an expert) are called ‘boosting’ and ‘hedging’.
Boosting
According to Pat Thomson, boosters are a linguistic means of presenting the newsworthiness of research. They are statements that are intended to persuade. Boosters say – you can trust this, this is good stuff, this matters!!
Boosters are a kind of rhetorical assertiveness. They signal ‘Look at what I’ve done and how important it is’. For this very reason, it is sometimes difficult for students new to research to use boosters, perhaps because they feel anything like an expert.
Hedging
It is important that as research writers, we make claims that are reasonable and measured (that is, well thought out). One of the ways in which researchers signal ‘caution’ is through the use of language called hedging. Hedging is considered the opposite of boosting.
As Pat Thomson points out, in academic texts, hedges guard against criticism. They show that the writer is not claiming to have the final word and that there is still room for discussion and new work. Hedges are a way to demonstrate rigour and precision – the researcher shows that they know the kind of claim that follows from the actual research that has been done. Using hedges also creates trust between the reader and the text; readers know that the writer/researcher has carefully considered their work, and is not simply advocating, preaching or ranting.
In practice, boosting and hedging occur together – often in the same sentence!
In practice, research writers become skilful at using both techniques to establish authority and credibility. See how these strategies are used together to create a sense of authority in the text below:
While the debate about generic skills and attributes is ongoing and while the case is yet to be made [a] for the transferability of skills, it seems increasingly likely [b] that only participation in work-based learning can develop the competencies that are required for effective practice. This study has shown [c] that students understand the value of employability skills and enjoy participating in work-based learning experiences such as that afforded by professional placements. However, this study has also shown [d] that in order for [e] those experiences to optimise skill development, placements need to be well-supported and supportive in order to [f] foster the confidence which seems to play a key role in skill development.
In the passage given above, [b] is a boosting statement that shows the writer’s position in the debate relating to developing generic skills at university (i.e. generic skills for employment are developed in work experience). It is followed by [c] which makes a strong statement for what the study shows. This is followed by some hedging [d] that provides further conditions for the statement made in [c] to be true and applicable to other similar cases (i.e. that work experience needs to be well-supported in order to effectively help students develop work skills). This is an example of how boosting and hedging work together to create a ‘research voice’.
