Author(s): Nurettin Köroğlu

Abstract: This study investigates the use of hedges in the emerging genre of academic writing known as Transparent Peer Review (TPR). Unlike traditional blind review processes, TPR Writing Process, characterized by its open and inclusive nature, reveals the entire peer review process publicly , and thus allows academic readers to access reviewer reports and authorial responses along with the published article. Drawing on a corpus of twenty TPR reports from various Publications, this study aims to explore the role of hedges in transparent peer review. Using qualitative methods to explore several dimensions of hedging in this genre, it seeks to understand whether researchers and scholars participating in TPR employ hedges, what types of hedging strategies are used by reviewers and authors, how prevalence differs between these participant groups, and what functions hedges fulfil in the transparent review process. Drawing on a corpus of twenty TPR reports from Publications—an international quarterly peer-reviewed open-access journal—this investigation employs qualitative methods to explore several dimensions of hedging in this specific genre. The findings revealed that even though both authors and reviewers employ hedging techniques in their correspondence during the TPR process, the former use fewer hedges than the latter. It was also found that lexical hedges are predominate over strategic hedges. On the other hand, the functions of hedging in the TPR reports we have analyzed remain the same as their functions in other academic genres as to softening the truth value of the claim, showing the writer’s commitment to be a responsible and informed member of the scholarly community, and demonstrating awareness of one's audience etc.

Keywords: English for Academic Purposes, Transparent Peer Review, Hedges

Article Info: Received: 11 Apr 2026; Received in revised form: 09 May 2026; Accepted: 13 May 2026; Available online: 17 May 2026

DOI: 10.22161/ijels.113.14