This session focuses on calibrating how certain your claims sound. You will learn to deploy modal verbs, tentative verbs, probability adverbs, and author-distancing frames, and to avoid the twin pitfalls of under-hedging and over-hedging.
By the end of this session, you will be able to:
●Explain the concept of epistemic modesty and why scholarly writers avoid expressing absolute certainty.
●Differentiate between unhedged categorical assertions and proportionate, evidence-grounded claims.
●Identify and deploy four key hedging devices: modal verbs, tentative verbs, probability adverbs and quantifiers, and author-distancing frames.
●Apply discipline-appropriate hedging, recognising when to hedge and when to state facts directly.
Phase 115 minutes
Understanding Epistemic Modesty and Hedging
🎤 Listen: introducing epistemic modesty and hedging♫
Defining epistemic modesty
In academic discourse, writers take care not to appear certain where doubt exists, and they systematically avoid broad over-generalisations where exceptions might occur. This caution is not a weakness — it is a discipline.
What is hedging?
Hedging devices are linguistic mechanisms that mitigate or lessen the epistemological strength — the strength of knowledge — of a statement or claim. They allow a writer to signal exactly how confident the evidence justifies being, rather than defaulting to either full certainty or vague uncertainty.
Why hedge at all?
Softening the tone of assertions enables writers to make claims that are strictly proportionate to the scope and quality of the available evidence. Far from signalling weakness, epistemic hedging demonstrates academic rigour, respects the limits of the data, and leaves room for future inquiry or counter-evidence. A claim that is hedged appropriately is more defensible, not less persuasive.
Overconfident claim
Epistemically modest claim
“This proves the theory is correct.”
“This finding supports the theory.”
“All participants improved after training.”
“Most participants showed improvement after training.”
“The policy failed because of poor design.”
“The policy’s limited success may be attributable to design factors.”
Check 1: which claim demonstrates epistemic modesty?
Check 2: which claim demonstrates epistemic modesty?
Check 3: which claim is proportionate to the evidence?
Check 4: which claim demonstrates epistemic modesty?
Check 5: which claim best matches the limits of a single small study?
Check 6: which claim leaves appropriate room for counter-evidence?
Check 7: which claim states a cause with appropriate caution?
Check 8: which claim is epistemically modest without being over-hedged?
Phase 230 minutes
Linguistic Mechanics of Hedging
There are four primary categories of hedging device. Strong academic writers move between all four rather than relying on just one.
1. Tentative Verbs
Replace absolute verbs with verbs that denote possibility or probability: suggests, appears to, seems, tends to, indicates.
Unhedged: “Drinking alcohol causes breast cancer in women.” Hedged: “Some studies suggest that drinking alcohol increases the risk of breast cancer.”
2. Modal verbs
Use may, might, or could to bound possibilities rather than state them as fact.
“This inconsistency may be due to sample limitations.”
“Extreme weather could be a result of climate change.”
3. Probability adverbs and quantifiers
Soften generalisations using adverbs (generally, likely, possibly, conceivably) and bounded quantifiers (most, several, a number of).
“It is likely that these conditions are less common in urban populations.”
4. Author-distancing frames
Use passive or impersonal constructions that distance the author from an unverified proposition: It is widely believed that…, Recent research has suggested that…, There is some evidence to indicate that….
Hedging device
Examples
Tentative verbs
suggests, appears to, seems, tends to, indicates
Modal verbs
may, might, could
Probability adverbs / quantifiers
generally, likely, possibly, conceivably, most, several
Author-distancing frames
it is widely believed that, recent research has suggested that
Check 1: identify the hedging device type used in “It is widely believed that early intervention improves outcomes.”
Practice 1: hedge this unhedged claim using a modal verb.
“Sample size limitations explain the inconsistent results.”
Practice 2: rewrite this categorical claim using a tentative verb.
“The intervention improves long-term patient outcomes.”
Model: “The intervention appears to improve long-term patient outcomes.”
Practice 3: rewrite this broad generalisation using a probability adverb or bounded quantifier.
“Students prefer digital feedback to written comments.”
Model: “Most students are likely to prefer digital feedback to written comments.”
Practice 4: use an author-distancing frame to rewrite this personal assertion.
“I think that early intervention improves language outcomes.”
Model: “Recent research has suggested that early intervention may improve language outcomes.”
Check 2: which revision is appropriately hedged without becoming over-hedged?
More device-spotting checks
Check 3: identify the main hedging device in “Previous studies have tended to focus on urban populations.”
Check 4: identify the main hedging device in “The delay could be caused by funding issues.”
Check 5: identify the main hedging device in “Several participants reported mild side effects.”
Check 6: identify the main hedging device in “There is some evidence to indicate that sleep affects memory.”
Check 7: which sentence is appropriately hedged?
Check 8: which sentence uses a bounded quantifier?
Check 9: which sentence is hedged without being over-hedged?
Extra hedging practice
Practice 5: hedge the claim using a modal verb to express probability (may, might, could).
“The decline in attendance is due to the new timetable.”
Model: “The decline in attendance may be due to the new timetable.”
Practice 6: hedge the claim using a modal verb to express probability.
“Climate change is the reason for the longer droughts.”
Model: “Climate change could be one reason for the longer droughts.”
Practice 7: rewrite the claim using a tentative verb.
“The data prove that the training works.”
Model: “The data suggest that the training is effective.”
Practice 8: rewrite the claim using a tentative verb. Avoid the word “causes”.
“Social media causes anxiety in teenagers.”
Model: “Social media use appears to be associated with anxiety in teenagers.”
Practice 9: rewrite the generalisation using a bounded quantifier.
“Employees prefer flexible working hours.”
Model: “Most employees prefer flexible working hours.”
Practice 10: rewrite the generalisation using a probability adverb.
“Online courses are cheaper than classroom courses.”
Model: “Online courses are generally cheaper than classroom courses.”
Practice 11: use an author-distancing frame.
“Bilingual children are better at multitasking.”
Model: “There is some evidence to indicate that bilingual children may perform better at multitasking.”
Practice 12: combine two different hedging devices, but avoid stacking more than two.
“The new curriculum raises exam scores in every school.”
Model: “The new curriculum appears to raise exam scores in many schools.”
Practice 13: this sentence is over-hedged. Simplify it to one well-chosen hedge.
“It could perhaps possibly be suggested that the drug might potentially reduce pain.”
Model: “The drug may reduce pain.”
Practice 14: hedge the short paragraph appropriately, with one hedge per sentence.
“Remote work makes people more productive. It also improves their health. Companies must offer it to every employee.”
Model: “Remote work appears to be associated with higher productivity. It may also benefit employees’ health. Companies could consider offering it to a wider range of employees.”
Phase 315 minutes
Discipline-Specific Contexts and Placement
Where hedging concentrates
Discussion and conclusion sections of research articles are particularly rich in hedging devices, especially when authors offer explanations for findings or suggest broader implications. Methods and results sections, by contrast, tend to state what was measured directly.
Disciplinary variations
Field
Typical hedging pattern
Social sciences and humanities
Hedging used frequently, reflecting complex, multi-causal phenomena and open-ended interpretation.
Natural sciences
Hedging used more sparingly, reserved mainly for interpreting unexpected findings or unproven hypotheses; verified empirical data are stated directly.
Check 1: in which section of a research article would you expect to find the most hedging?
Hedging across the sections of a research article
Hedging is not spread evenly across an article. Writers use more of it where they interpret, explain or speculate, and less where they report what was done or measured.
Section
Amount of hedging
Typical purpose
Introduction
Low to moderate
Reviewing earlier research; noting gaps without overstating them
Results (direct): “Mean test scores rose from 52 to 61 after the intervention.” Discussion (hedged): “This increase may reflect the additional practice time that students received.”
The measured change is stated as fact. The explanation for the change is hedged, because the study cannot fully rule out other causes.
What to hedge and what to state directly
Usually hedged
Usually stated directly
Explanations and causes
Measured results and verified data
Generalisations beyond the sample
Methods and procedures
Predictions and implications
Established facts and definitions
Interpretations of unexpected findings
Descriptions of the study’s own design
Claims about the limits of the study
Numbers, dates and quotations
The same finding in two disciplines
Field
Example
Natural sciences
“The yield was lower than predicted. Impurities in the reagents may account for this difference.”
Humanities
“The poem can be read as an expression of the poet’s grief, although other readings are possible.”
In both examples the observation is stated plainly. Only the explanation or interpretation is hedged.
More placement checks
Check 2: which sentence is typical of a Results section?
Check 3: which sentence is typical of a Discussion section?
Check 4: which sentence describes the study design appropriately for a Methods section?
Check 5: which sentence states an established fact appropriately?
Check 6: which sentence handles an unexpected finding appropriately?
Check 7: which sentence states a limitation of the study appropriately?
Check 8: which part of this sentence should be hedged? “Blood pressure fell by 5 mmHg, so the drug is the cause.”
Placement practice
Practice 1: write a hedged Discussion sentence that interprets this Results sentence.
Results: “Test scores increased by 8% after the intervention.”
Model: “This increase may reflect the additional practice time that students received.”
Practice 2: the explanation below is stated as fact. Rewrite it with an appropriate hedge.
“Participants in the control group reported lower stress because the control task was more relaxing.”
Model: “Participants in the control group reported lower stress, which might be related to the less demanding control task.”
Practice 3: rewrite this conclusion so that the implication is suitably cautious.
“Schools must adopt this programme.”
Model: “Schools could consider adopting this programme, although further research is needed to confirm these effects.”
Practice 4: rewrite this humanities claim with an interpretive hedge.
“The poem expresses the poet’s grief.”
Model: “The poem can be read as an expression of the poet’s grief.”
Practice 5: rewrite the explanation for this unexpected result in a natural-science style.
“The reaction produced less product than predicted. Impurities caused this.”
Model: “The yield was lower than predicted. Impurities in the reagents may account for this difference.”
Practice 6: decide which sentences to leave direct and which to hedge, then rewrite the paragraph.
“The study measured blood pressure in 60 adults. Blood pressure fell by 5 mmHg. The drug is responsible for this fall and will help all patients.”
Model: “The study measured blood pressure in 60 adults. Blood pressure fell by 5 mmHg. This fall may be attributable to the drug, and it could benefit some patients, although further research is needed.”
Phase 415 minutes
Common Pitfalls: Under-Hedging vs Over-Hedging
Under-hedging
Making sweeping, categorical statements — for example, “The new policy definitely fixes urban housing issues” — leaves the author vulnerable to immediate refutation. A single counterexample can undermine the entire claim.
Over-hedging
Compounding too many hedging devices in a single sentence — for example, “It might possibly seem that the data could perhaps suggest…” — dilutes the argument until it loses all communicative value. One well-chosen hedge is stronger than four stacked together.
Problem
Example
Better version
Under-hedged
“The new policy definitely fixes urban housing issues.”
“The new policy appears to improve some urban housing outcomes.”
Over-hedged
“It might possibly seem that the data could perhaps suggest a link.”
“The data suggest a possible link.”
Check 1: which sentence is over-hedged?
More under-hedging and over-hedging checks
Check 2: which sentence is over-hedged?
Check 3: which sentence is under-hedged?
Check 4: which sentence is best calibrated?
Check 5: classify this sentence. “The results seem to possibly suggest that the treatment might potentially help.”
Check 6: classify this sentence. “All studies confirm that bilingualism improves intelligence.”
Check 7: which revision best fixes this over-hedged sentence? “It could perhaps possibly be that the intervention might help.”
Check 8: which revision fixes the under-hedged sentence “This proves that the app improves learning.” without over-correcting?
Check 9: which sentence is best calibrated for a small pilot study of 12 participants?
Check 10: which sentence unnecessarily hedges a measured fact?
Practice15 minutes
Claim Calibration Workshop
Calibrate each overconfident or absolute claim using appropriate hedging devices. Aim for one well-chosen hedge per sentence rather than stacking several.
1. “The survey proves that students hate online lectures.”
Model: “Survey findings suggest that a significant number of students may find online lectures less engaging than in-person sessions.”
2. “This mistake was caused by poor training of the research team.”
Model: “This discrepancy could conceivably be attributed to insufficient training of the research team.”
3. “New technology will replace traditional classroom teachers in the future.”
Model: “It is likely that emerging technology will significantly transform the role of traditional classroom teachers in the future.”
AssignmentHomework
The Hedging Audit and Calibration Exercise
Rewrite the discussion-section draft below by introducing modal verbs, tentative verbs, and probability adverbs to align every claim with proper epistemic modesty. Aim for balance — avoid leaving claims unhedged, but also avoid stacking multiple hedges in a single sentence.
“The results prove that flexible working arrangements improve employee wellbeing across all industries. Companies that resist remote work will definitely lose talent to more progressive competitors. This trend explains why traditional office culture is now obsolete. Employees who work from home always report higher job satisfaction than those who commute daily. The data confirm that productivity increases whenever autonomy increases. Every organisation that adopted flexible policies during the study period saw immediate improvements in retention. Managers who oppose these changes are simply behind the times and will struggle to attract skilled staff. Ultimately, this research settles the debate: flexible work is the only viable model for the modern workplace, and any company that ignores this fact will fail to compete in the coming decade.”
Model answer: “The results suggest that flexible working arrangements may improve employee wellbeing in some industries. Organizations that do not offer remote or hybrid options could experience challenges in retaining skilled employees. These trends may indicate that traditional office culture is becoming less suitable for certain knowledge-sector roles. Most employees who work from home report higher job satisfaction than those who commute daily, although this pattern may vary according to organizational context. The data also suggest that increased autonomy may be associated with improved productivity. Several organizations that adopted flexible policies during the study period reported improvements in retention. However, further research is required to determine the long-term effects of flexible work arrangements across different sectors and employee groups.”
TakeawayReference sheet
Session 3 Summary Sheet
Download a PDF summarising the hedging device categories, article-section placement, what to hedge and what to state directly, and the under-hedging versus over-hedging pitfalls from this session.
📄
Session 3: Epistemic Modesty and the Art of Hedging
Hedging device categories · discipline variation · under vs over-hedging · calibration examples
✓
Session 3 complete
You have covered epistemic modesty, the four hedging device categories, discipline-specific placement, and the pitfalls of under-hedging and over-hedging. Download your takeaway summary any time from the previous step.
