2025, Vol. 16, No. 4. - go to content...

Permanent address of this page - https://sfk-mn.ru/en/10flsk425.html

Метаданные этой статьи так же доступны на русском языке

DOI: 10.15862/10FLSK425 (https://doi.org/10.15862/10FLSK425)

Full article in PDF format (file size: 447.5 KB)

For citation:

Kostyushkina G.M., Ol’shevskaja N.N. [Refutation in scientific communication: a strategic aspect] World of Science. Series: Sociology, Philology, Cultural Studies, 2025, Vol. 16, No. 4. Available at: https://sfk-mn.ru/PDF/10FLSK425.pdf (in Russian). DOI: 10.15862/10FLSK425

Refutation in scientific communication: a strategic aspect

Kostyushkina Galina Maksimovna
A.E. Favorsky Irkutsk Institute of Chemistry of the Siberian Branch of the
Russian Academy of Sciences, Irkutsk, Russia
E-mail: kostushkina@mail.ru
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7673-2441
RSCI: https://elibrary.ru/author_profile.asp?id=170489
WoS: https://www.webofscience.com/wos/author/rid/MXL-3724-2025

Ol’shevskaja Natalia Nikolaevna
A.E. Favorsky Irkutsk Institute of Chemistry of the Siberian Branch of the
Russian Academy of Sciences, Irkutsk, Russia
E-mail: everspring@mail.ru

Abstract. The article is devoted to the analysis of a key rhetorical tool used in scientific communication for critical reflection and rejection of controversial or erroneous statements. The research focuses on the strategy of counterargument, considered as a systematic way of organizing scientific communication aimed at achieving a specific communicative goal — convincing refutation.

The paper provides a detailed linguistic and rhetorical analysis of the structure of the counterargument, revealing its main components: the identification and precise formulation of the contested thesis, providing strong evidence of its inconsistency and putting forward an alternative position. Special attention is paid to the typology of counterarguments used in scientific texts, such as criticism of methodology, pointing out logical contradictions, appealing to contradictory data, or demonstrating the irrelevance of an opponent’s arguments.

The authors conclude that effective counterargument in the scientific community is not limited to simple denial, but is a constructive process aimed at strengthening scientific credibility and promoting knowledge. The study demonstrates how mastery of this strategy contributes not only to winning intellectual discussion, but also to maintaining ethical standards of scientific communication. The article will be useful to linguists, experts in argumentation theory, scientists, as well as all researchers seeking to improve the effectiveness of their communication in the academic environment.

Keywords: scientific communication; counterargumentation; refutation; argumentation; communicative strategy; communicative tactics; and communicative move/step

Download article in PDF format