Harms of hedging in scientific discourse: Andrew Wakefield and the origins of the autism vaccine controversy
LR Kolodziejski - Technical Communication Quarterly, 2014 - Taylor & Francis
Technical Communication Quarterly, 2014•Taylor & Francis
This study reveals the discursive origins of the Autism MMR vaccine controversy through a
rhetorical examination of the 1998 Wakefield et al. article. I argue the very practices of
scientific publishing, specifically the tradition of hedging, help to create a scientifically
acceptable text but also leave discursive gaps. These gaps allow for alternate interpretations
as scientific texts pass from technical to public contexts, enabling insufficiently supported
claims the standing of scientific knowledge among citizens.
rhetorical examination of the 1998 Wakefield et al. article. I argue the very practices of
scientific publishing, specifically the tradition of hedging, help to create a scientifically
acceptable text but also leave discursive gaps. These gaps allow for alternate interpretations
as scientific texts pass from technical to public contexts, enabling insufficiently supported
claims the standing of scientific knowledge among citizens.
This study reveals the discursive origins of the Autism MMR vaccine controversy through a rhetorical examination of the 1998 Wakefield et al. article. I argue the very practices of scientific publishing, specifically the tradition of hedging, help to create a scientifically acceptable text but also leave discursive gaps. These gaps allow for alternate interpretations as scientific texts pass from technical to public contexts, enabling insufficiently supported claims the standing of scientific knowledge among citizens.
Taylor & Francis Online