Evidence record 16647 · automatically gathered

War in the Abstract: The Rise and Consequences of Militarized Language in Scientific Communication

arXiv:2606.23462v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Scientists do not, by profession, wage war. Yet warfare's vocabulary consistently appears in their abstracts. To quantify the extent to which warfare's vocabulary pervades scientific abstracts, we analyze 21.4 million papers (2010-2025; OpenAlex, PubMed). We additionally run a within-subject war-framing experiment ($N = 801$; 32{,}040 trials) designed to provide causal insight into the effects of militaristic language on persuasion. Betwe

Record details

Published: 6 August 2026
Source: arXiv cs.CY
Category: Research
Topics: Military & security
Retrieved: 6 August 2026

source-onlyevidence status

These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.

How to cite this record

ethics.ai (6 August 2026), “War in the Abstract: The Rise and Consequences of Militarized Language in Scientific Communication,” evidence record 16647, https://ethics.ai/record/16647 (originally published by arXiv cs.CY).

JSON

Use and limitations

This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.