Investigating Methodological Trends of Hedging Strategies in Academic Discourse: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

This systematic literature review investigated the methodological trends regarding hedging strategies in academic discourse from 2014 to 2023. A total of 40 peer-reviewed empirical studies were analyzed, focusing on aspects such as publication year, regional participation, sample size, genre type, research design, category, discipline, section, and analytical framework. The review revealed a fluctuating interest in hedging strategies, peaking in 2023, with significant contributions from Asia and Europe. Research articles dominated the genre types, reflecting a preference for standardized and accessible formats. Mixed methods were the most common research design, followed by quantitative and qualitative approaches. Mono-disciplinary studies were prevalent, highlighting detailed analyses within specific fields, whereas cross-disciplinary, cross-cultural, cross-linguistic and cross-generic studies emphasized comparative approaches. The research spanned both hard and soft sciences, with applied linguistics and chemistry being notably represented. Comprehensive examinations of all sections of academic texts, particularly the discussion section, were frequent. Established frameworks, primarily those by Hyland (1998) and Salager-Meyer (1994), were commonly utilized, underscoring their influence. This review highlighted the need for more cross-disciplinary and cross-generic analyses and the development of comprehensive frameworks to enrich the understanding of hedging strategies in academic writing. Future research should expand cross-disciplinary, cross-cultural, and regional analyses, develop new frameworks, explore emerging genres, integrate technology, diversify methodologies, and address geographical disparities to broaden the global understanding of hedging in academic discourse.