Introduction
Academic writing is held to a high standard of objectivity, clarity, and evidence-based reasoning. Yet, in recent years, a trend has emerged among early-career researchers and students: the increased use of subjective, hedging phrases such as “to the best of our knowledge,” “we tried our best,” or “we believe that.” While these expressions may appear benign or even modest, they often add little value and may, in fact, undermine the scientific credibility of the work.
This article explores the implications of such phrases in scholarly writing, particularly focusing on “to the best of our knowledge.” We argue that this phrase is largely redundant, scientifically weak, and can be replaced with stronger, more objective alternatives. Our discussion draws from both stylistic analysis and practical observations from peer review processes.
The Rise of Subjective Framing in Scientific Writing
With the democratization of publishing through preprints, open access journals, and online tutorials, there is growing evidence that informal, conversational writing is making its way into scientific literature. This is not inherently bad—clarity and accessibility are laudable goals—but when it results in subjective framing, it begins to erode the logical foundation of the discourse.
Phrases like “to the best of our knowledge” are symptomatic of a mindset that prioritizes perceived humility over substantiated claims. Young scientists often deploy these phrases as a protective mechanism against criticism or as a stylistic habit learned from tutorials and blog-style publications.
Why “To the Best of Our Knowledge” Is Problematic
1. It Offers No Real Epistemic Value
The phrase does not enhance the truth value of the statement. It does not demonstrate a literature review, nor does it provide citations. In essence, it says: “This is what we think is true, but we haven’t fully verified it.” In the realm of scientific communication, where knowledge is cumulative and verifiable, such statements fall flat.
2. It Shifts Responsibility to the Reader
By framing a claim as “to the best of our knowledge,” the author subtly avoids accountability. It leaves the door open for error without consequence. This may be acceptable in casual speech, but it is substandard in academic writing.
3. It Encourages Intellectual Laziness
Instead of investing time to thoroughly survey the literature and provide concrete references, authors may default to this phrase. The implication is that if reviewers or readers don’t immediately know of a contradiction, the statement passes unchallenged. This is intellectually dishonest, or at best, negligent.
4. It Dilutes Precision and Weakens Argumentation
Academic arguments rely on clarity and precision. When subjective phrases are used, they muddy the waters, making it difficult for readers to evaluate the strength of the evidence or the novelty of the claim.
A Practical Illustration: How Reviewers Perceive It
Consider a manuscript under peer review. An author writes: “To the best of our knowledge, no study has previously addressed the correlation between X and Y.”
A competent reviewer may ask:
- How was this determined?
- Was a systematic review conducted?
- What are the major review papers on the topic?
- Why not simply cite them?
If the reviewer does not have additional knowledge, the phrase passes. If they do, the phrase becomes evidence of weak preparation or misrepresentation. Either way, it serves no real value.
The Psychology Behind Using the Phrase
The use of “to the best of our knowledge” may reflect genuine humility or anxiety, particularly among graduate students and young researchers. They are trained to be cautious, not to overstate their results, and to anticipate reviewer pushback. But humility in science is best demonstrated through rigorous methods, not rhetorical disclaimers.
Better Alternatives
Instead of defaulting to weak hedging phrases, authors should opt for concrete, verifiable statements. Below are some practical replacements:
| Weak Phrase | Stronger Alternative |
|---|---|
| To the best of our knowledge | A search of recent literature (2015–2024) reveals no studies… |
| We believe that | This result suggests… / Evidence indicates… |
| It seems that | Analysis shows that… / The data demonstrate… |
| We tried our best to | Data was processed using X method, ensuring Y accuracy |
| We think this might be because | A possible explanation, supported by prior work [ref], is… |
When (If Ever) Is It Acceptable?
There are rare cases where the phrase might be appropriate, for example:
- When addressing truly emergent topics (e.g., COVID-19 in early 2020)
- When conventional literature search tools are insufficient (e.g., grey literature)
- In certain legal or ethical disclaimers where absolute certainty is impossible
Even in those cases, a proper justification should follow.
Conclusion
Scientific writing should not mimic blog posts or casual conversations. It should be precise, reproducible, and focused on verifiable evidence. Phrases like “to the best of our knowledge” are not inherently wrong, but they often betray a lack of rigor and can weaken the scholarly tone of a manuscript.
Writers—especially young scientists—should strive to communicate their findings with confidence grounded in evidence, not apologies. Science does not demand omniscience, only that you prove what you claim.
Postscript: A Final Note
As one academic aptly put it:
“Knowledge is infinite. The human brain is finite. So just prove what you say, not how hard you tried to know everything.”
A statement more valuable than any empty disclaimer.