Volume 3, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2542-3851
  • E-ISSN: 2542-386X
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Based on questionnaire data in response to six excerpts of Australian online health information, this study investigates university students’ attitudes towards elastic language (EL). The findings show that averaging all six cases a neutral attitude is found, with no strong preference for EL or non-EL. This indicates that it is unnecessary to deliberately use more or less EL – the key is to use EL appropriately when and where it is needed. Examining the reasons for participants’ choices, we identify ten frames. Often the same EL generated positive and negative comments: a phenomenon that can be explained in terms of two sides of a frame. The findings may help healthcare professionals to deliver medical information in ways most accessible to the public and to find effective ways of communicating uncertainty. A ‘one fits all’ rule for language use does not exist, and instead multiple standards guide our use of it.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Adolphs, Svenja, Sarah Atkins, and Kevin Harvey
    2007 “Caught between professional requirements and interpersonal needs: Vague language in healthcare contexts.” InVague Language Explored, ed. byJoan Cutting, 62–78. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230627420_4
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230627420_4 [Google Scholar]
  2. Babrow, Austin S., Chris R. Kasch, and Leigh A. Ford
    1998 “The many meanings of uncertainty in Illness: Toward a systematic accounting.” Health Communication10(1): 1–23. 10.1207/s15327027hc1001_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327027hc1001_1 [Google Scholar]
  3. Barry, Colleen L., Victoria L. Brescoll, and Sarah E. Gollust
    2013 “Framing childhood obesity: How individualizing the problem affects public support for prevention.” Political Psychology34(3): 327–349. 10.1111/pops.12018
    https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12018 [Google Scholar]
  4. Borah, Porismita, and Xizhu Xiao
    2018 “The importance of ‘likes’: The interplay of message framing, source, and social endorsement on credibility perceptions of health information on Facebook.” Journal of Health Communication23(4): 399–411. 10.1080/10810730.2018.1455770
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2018.1455770 [Google Scholar]
  5. Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke
    2008 “Using thematic analysis in psychology.” Qualitative Research in Psychology3: 77–101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
    https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar]
  6. Bryman, Alan
    2012Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bylund, Carma L., Carla L. Fisher, Dale Brashers, Shawna Edgerson, Emily A. Glogowski, Sherry R. Boyar, Yelena Kemel, Sara Spencer, and David Kissane
    2012 “Sources of uncertainty about daughters’ breast cancer risk that emerge during genetic counseling consultations.” Journal of Genetic Counseling21: 292–304. 10.1007/s10897‑011‑9400‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-011-9400-y [Google Scholar]
  8. Bylund, Carma L., Miryam Sperka, and Thomas A. D’Agostino
    2015 “Formative assessment of oncology trainees’ communication with cancer patients about internet information.” Palliative and Supportive Care13(2): 197–200. 10.1017/S1478951513000928
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478951513000928 [Google Scholar]
  9. Channell, Joanna
    1994Vague Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cho, Hyunyi, and Laura Sands
    2011 “Gain- and loss-frame sun safety messages and psychological reactance of adolescents.” Communication Research Reports28(4): 308–317. 10.1080/08824096.2011.616242
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2011.616242 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cocco, Anthony M., Rachel Zordan, David McD Taylor, Tracey J. Weiland, Stuart J. Dilley, Joyce Kant, Mahesha Dombagolla, Andreas Hendarto, Fiona Lai, and Jennie Hutton
    2018 “Dr Google in the ED: searching for online health information by adult emergency department patients.” The Medical Journal of Australia209(8): 342–347. 10.5694/mja17.00889
    https://doi.org/10.5694/mja17.00889 [Google Scholar]
  12. Corrales, Dalia M., Ali E. Wells, Carmen Radecki Breitkopf, Gabriela Pena, Alan L. Kaplan, Lorrie S. King, Sonia C. Robazetti, and Tri A. Dinh
    2018 “Internet use by gynecologic oncology patients and its relationship with anxiety.” Journal of Health Communication23(3): 299–305. 10.1080/10810730.2018.1442529
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2018.1442529 [Google Scholar]
  13. Creswell, John W.
    2009Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Cutting, Joan
    (ed.) 2007Vague Language Explored. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230627420
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230627420 [Google Scholar]
  15. 2012 “Vague language in conference abstracts.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes11: 283–293. 10.1016/j.jeap.2012.05.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.05.004 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2015 “Dingsbums und so: Beliefs about German vague language.” Journal of Pragmatics85: 108–121. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.011 [Google Scholar]
  17. Edwards, Adrian Gwyn, Glyn Elwyn, Judith Covey, Elaine Matthews, Rolsin Pill
    2001 “Presenting risk information: A review of the effects of framing and other manipulations on patient outcomes.” Journal of Health Communication6(1): 61–82. 10.1080/10810730150501413
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730150501413 [Google Scholar]
  18. Fairclough, Norman
    1989Language and Power. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Felde, Lina Klara Hoel
    2011 “The everyday elasticity of compliance in a symptomless disease.” Communication & Medicine8(2): 123–134.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Fillmore, Charles J.
    1976 “Frame semantics and the nature of language.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences280(1): 20–32. 10.1111/j.1749‑6632.1976.tb25467.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1976.tb25467.x [Google Scholar]
  21. Fiske, Susan T.
    1980 “Attention and weight in person perception: The impact of negative and extreme behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology38(6): 889–906. 10.1037/0022‑3514.38.6.889
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.6.889 [Google Scholar]
  22. Folkman, Susan, Catherine Schaefer, and Richard S. Lazarus
    1979 “Cognitive processes as mediators of stress and coping.” InHuman Stress and Cognition: An Information Processing Approach, ed. byVernon Hmilton, and David M. Warburton, 265–298. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Grice, Paul H.
    1975 “Logic and conversation.” InSyntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, ed. byPeter Cole, and Jerry L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Goffman, Erving
    1974Frame Analysis. New York: Harper & Row.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Haugh, Michael, and Johnathan Culpeper
    2018 “Integrative pragmatics and (im)politeness theory.” InPragmatics and Its Interfaces, ed. byCornelia Ilie, and Neal R. Norrick, 213–239. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.294.10hau
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.294.10hau [Google Scholar]
  26. Heritage, John, and Steven E. Clayman
    2010 “Diagnosis and treatment: Medical authority and its limits.” InTalk in Action: Interactions, Identities, and Institutions, ed. byJohn Heritage, and Steven E. Clayman, 154–169. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444318135.ch11
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444318135.ch11 [Google Scholar]
  27. Holmes, Janet
    1984 “Modifying illocutionary force.” Journal of Pragmatics8(3): 345–365. 10.1016/0378‑2166(84)90028‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(84)90028-6 [Google Scholar]
  28. Hwang, Yoori, Hyunyi Cho, Layra Sands, and Se-Hoon Jeong
    2011 “Effects of gain- and loss-framed messages on the sun safety behavior of adolescents: The moderating role of risk perceptions.” Journal of Health Psychology17(6): 929–940. 10.1177/1359105311428536
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105311428536 [Google Scholar]
  29. Hyland, Ken
    1998Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.54
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.54 [Google Scholar]
  30. Jucker, Andreas H., Sara W. Smith, and Tanja Lüdge
    2003 “Interactive aspects of vagueness in conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics35(12): 1737–1769. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00188‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00188-1 [Google Scholar]
  31. Katz, Jay
    1984The Silent World of Doctor and Patient. New York: Free Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kecskes, Istvan
    2010 “Situation-bound utterances as pragmatic acts.” Journal of Pragmatics42(11): 2889–2897. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.06.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.06.008 [Google Scholar]
  33. Koehly, Laura M., June A. Peters, Regina Kenen, Lindsey M. Hoskins, Anne L. Ersig, Natalia R. Kuhn, Jennifer T. Loud, and Mark H. Greene
    2009 “Characteristics of health information gatherers, disseminators, and blockers within families at risk of hereditary cancer: Implications for family health communication interventions.” American Journal of Public Health99(12): 2203–2209. 10.2105/AJPH.2008.154096
    https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2008.154096 [Google Scholar]
  34. Krosnick, Jon A., and Stanley Presser
    2010 “Question and questionnaire design.” InHandbook of Survey Research, ed. byPeter V. Marsden, and James D. Wright, 263–313. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Lavrakas, Paul J.
    2008Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 10.4135/9781412963947
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963947 [Google Scholar]
  36. Layder, Derek
    2013Doing Excellent Small-Scale Research. London: Sage. 10.4135/9781473913936
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473913936 [Google Scholar]
  37. Lazarus, Richard S., and Folkman, Susan
    1984Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Lindström, Anna, and Ann Weatherall
    2015 “Orientations to epistemics and deontics in treatment discussions.” Journal of Pragmatics78: 39–53. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.005 [Google Scholar]
  39. Major, Lesa H.
    2009 “Break it to me harshly: The effects of intersecting news frames on lung cancer and obesity coverage.” Journal of Health Communication14(2): 174–188. 10.1080/10810730802659939
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730802659939 [Google Scholar]
  40. 2018 “Mental health news: How frames influence support for policy and civic engagement intentions.” Journal of Health Communication23(1): 52–60. 10.1080/10810730.2017.1411994
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2017.1411994 [Google Scholar]
  41. Mashiach, Roy, Guy I. Seidman, and Daniel S. Seidman
    2002 “Use of mifepristone as an example of conflicting and misleading medical information on the Internet.” BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology109(4): 437–442. 10.1111/j.1471‑0528.2002.t01‑1‑01124.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.t01-1-01124.x [Google Scholar]
  42. Mey, Jacob L.
    2016 “Why we need the pragmeme, or: Speech acting and its peripeties.” InPragmemes and Theories of Language Use, ed. byKeith Allan, Alessandro Capone, and Istvan Kecskes, 133–140. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑43491‑9_7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43491-9_7 [Google Scholar]
  43. Miller, Suzanne M.
    1987 “Monitoring and blunting: Validation of a questionnaire to assess styles of information seeking under threat.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology52(2): 345–353. 10.1037/0022‑3514.52.2.345
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.2.345 [Google Scholar]
  44. Miller, Suzanne M., and Charles E. Mangan
    1983 “Interacting effects of information and coping style in adapting to gynecologic stress: Should the doctor tell all?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology45(1): 223–236. 10.1037/0022‑3514.45.1.223
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.1.223 [Google Scholar]
  45. Morse, Janice M.
    2003 “Principles of mixed methods and multi-method research design.” InHandbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, ed. byAbbas Tashakkori, and Charles Teddlie, 189–208. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Moxey, Linda, and Anthony Sanford
    1993Communicating Quantities: A Psychological Perspective. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Muijs, Daniel
    2011Doing Quantitative Research in Education with SPSS. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. 10.4135/9781849203241
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849203241 [Google Scholar]
  48. Neelapala, Padmaja, Shyam S. Duvvi, G. Kumar, and Nirmal B. Kumar
    2008 “Do gynaecology outpatients use the Internet to seek health information? A questionnaire survey.” Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice14(2): 300–304. 10.1111/j.1365‑2753.2007.00854.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00854.x [Google Scholar]
  49. Neeley, Liz
    2014 “Risk communication social media”. InEffective Risk Communication, ed. byJoseph Árvai, and Louie RiversIII, 143–164. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Nicholson-Perry, Kathryn, and May Burgess
    2003Communication in Cancer Care. Malden: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Overstreet, Maryann
    1999Whales, Candlelight, and Stuff Like That: General Extenders in English Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Paige, Samantha R., Janice L. Krieger, and Michael L. Stellefson
    2018 “The influence of eHealth literacy on perceived trust in online health communication channels and sources.” Journal of Health Communication22(1): 53–65. 10.1080/10810730.2016.1250846
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2016.1250846 [Google Scholar]
  53. Parvaresh, Vahid
    2018 “‘We are going to do a lot of things for college tuition’: Vague language in the 2016 U.S. presidential debates.” Corpus Pragmatics2(2): 167–192. 10.1007/s41701‑017‑0029‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-017-0029-4 [Google Scholar]
  54. Patton, Michael Q.
    1990Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Peeters, Guido, and Janusz Czapiński
    1990 “Positive-negative asymmetry in evaluations: The distinction between affective and informational negativity effects.” European Review of Social Psychology1(1): 33–60. 10.1080/14792779108401856
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779108401856 [Google Scholar]
  56. Pratto, Felicia, and Oliver P. John
    1991 “Automatic vigilance: The attention-grabbing power of negative social information.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology61(3): 380–391. 10.1037/0022‑3514.61.3.380
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.3.380 [Google Scholar]
  57. Preacher, Kristopher J.
    2001 “Calculation for the chi-square test: An interactive calculation tool for chi-square tests of goodness of fit and independence [Computer software].” Available fromquantpsy.org
  58. Prince, Ellen F., Joel Frader, and Charles Bosk
    1982 “On hedging in physician–physician discourse.” InLinguistics and the Professions, ed. byRobert J. Di Pietro, 83–97. New Jersey: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Rauscher, Emily A.
    2017 “Investigating uncertainty in genetic counseling encounters: Managing information about genetic cancer risk.” Journal of Health Communication22(11): 896–904. 10.1080/10810730.2017.1373875
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2017.1373875 [Google Scholar]
  60. Rothman, Alexander J., Roger D. Bartels, Jhon Wlaschin, and Peter Salovey
    2006 “The strategic use of gain- and loss-framed messages to promote healthy behavior: How theory can inform practice.” Journal of Communication56: 202–220. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2006.00290.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00290.x [Google Scholar]
  61. Rothman, Alexander J., and Peter Salovey
    1997 “Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behaviour: The role of message framing.” Psychological Bulletin121(1): 3–19. 10.1037/0033‑2909.121.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  62. Russell, Bethany J., and Alicia M. Ward
    2011 “Deciding what information is necessary: Do patients with advanced cancer want to know all the details?” Cancer Management and Research3: 191–199.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Ruzaitė, Jūratė
    2007Vague Language in Educational Settings: Quantifiers and Approximators in British and American English. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Scullard, Paul, Clare Peacock, and Patrick Davies
    2010 “Googling children’s health: Reliability of medical advice on the internet.” Archives of Disease in Childhood95(8): 580–582. 10.1136/adc.2009.168856
    https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.2009.168856 [Google Scholar]
  65. Smith, Lisa F., Gratz, Zandra S., and Suzanne G. Bousquet
    2009The Art and Practice of Statistics. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
    1995Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Terkourafi, Marina
    2001 “Politeness in Cypriot Greek: A frame-based approach.” PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.
  68. Thon, Franziska M., and Regina Jucks
    2017 “Believing in expertise: How authors’ credentials and language use influence the credibility of online health information.” Health Communication32(7): 828–836. 10.1080/10410236.2016.1172296
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2016.1172296 [Google Scholar]
  69. Tseng, Ming-Yu, and Grace Zhang
    2020 “Perceptions of and attitudes toward elastic language in online health communication in Chinese.” Lingua233: 1–24. 10.1016/j.lingua.2019.102750
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2019.102750 [Google Scholar]
  70. Van der Henst, Jean-Baptiste, Laure Carles, and Dan Sperber
    2002 “Truthfulness and relevance in telling the time.” Mind & Language17(5): 457–466. 10.1111/1468‑0017.00207
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0017.00207 [Google Scholar]
  71. Varttala, Teppo
    1999 “Remarks on the communicative functions of hedging in popular scientific and specialist research articles on medicine.” English for Specific Purposes18(2): 177–200. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(98)00007‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00007-6 [Google Scholar]
  72. Vasilescu, Andra
    2016 “Towards a ‘theory of everything’ in human communication.” InPragmemes and Theories of Language Use, ed. byKeith Allan, Alessandro Capone, and Istvan Kecskes, 305–333. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑43491‑9_17
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43491-9_17 [Google Scholar]
  73. Walther, Joseph B., Jeong-woo Jang, and Ashley H. Edwards
    2018 “Evaluating health advice in a Web 2.0 environment: The impact of multiple user-generated factors on HIV advice perceptions.” Health Communication33(1): 57–67. 10.1080/10410236.2016.1242036
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2016.1242036 [Google Scholar]
  74. Whitmarsh, Ian, Arlene M. Davis, Debra B. Skinner, and Donald B. Bailey
    2007 “A place for genetic uncertainty: Parents valuing an unknown in the meaning of disease.” Social Science & Medicine65(6): 1082–1093. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.04.034
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.04.034 [Google Scholar]
  75. Zhang, Grace
    2011 “Elasticity of vague language.” Intercultural Pragmatics8(4): 571–599. 10.1515/iprg.2011.026
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2011.026 [Google Scholar]
  76. 2015Elastic Language: How and Why We Stretch Our Words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139236218
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139236218 [Google Scholar]
  77. 2020 “Vague language challenged: Australian customs encounters.” International Review of Pragmatics12(1): 107–134. 10.1163/18773109‑01201104
    https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-01201104 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error