From “Spicing Up My Writing” to “Convincing My Supervisors”: EFL Learners’ Motivations for Using Promotional Language (‘Hypes’) in Academic Texts

Abstract

Background: The trend of promotional language (hypes) in academic discourse, such as critical, robust, new, discover, and undoubtedly, has raised concerns about the changing nature of scholarly communication. While previous studies have documented this trend in published texts, the motivations driving hype usage among developing academic writers, especially in EFL context, remain underexplored. Purpose: This paper investigates Indonesian EFL learners’ use of hypes in theses and dissertations, examines their perceptions and the factors that motivate hype usage in unpublished academic texts. Method: Through purposive sampling, we conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 12 Indonesian EFL learners whose theses and dissertations contained hypes, focusing on the intentions and reasons for using hypes. Hypes were analyzed using Millar et al.’s (2020) functional framework, and reflexive thematic analysis was conducted to identify motivational patterns underlying their usage. Results: Through thematic analysis of in-depth interviews, this study reveals that participants generally viewed hypes positively and strategically used them across all functional categories, with a novel category targeting the research gaps. While viewing hypes positively as persuasive tools, they expressed concerns about appearing overconfident. Five external motivational factors were identified: supervisory expectations shaped by hierarchical power dynamics, audience awareness, AI tool influences, classroom instructions, and published writing conventions. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that Indonesian EFL learners use hypes mainly to meet supervisory expectations rather than publication pressures. The findings offer three key theoretical contributions: first, that hype usage represents identity construction where EFL learners negotiate academic and cultural expectations; second, that power asymmetries in hierarchical context manifest linguistically through rhetorical compliance; and third, that AI tools now function as rhetorical agents alongside traditional human influences in academic discourse socialization.