Revisiting the use of hedges and boosters in scientific research articles in Morocco: Caution that does not exclude conviction

Abstract

The ways in which researchers present the results of their research and make claims about them are determined by the conventions of academic writing held by the scientific community. This article examines the use of hedges and boosters in the published articles of PhD students in a Moroccan university, and to what extent these students are conscious of their semantic and pragmatic meanings and use them adequately following established conventions. Textual analysis was implemented to study the use of these discourse markers in the published articles. We additionally carried out qualitative and quantitative research in the form of questionnaires and semi-structured interviews to gain a better understanding of hedge and booster use. While the students may use hedges in contexts in which the results are deemed uncertain and unsatisfactory, expressing conviction through boosters is a common practice. These results indicate a lack of appropriate adherence to academic conventions and that cultural influences and other contextual variables are in play. Thus, revising textbooks and methodologies in Moroccan universities based on scientific data and conventions is required.