jetd Journal of Education and Teacher Development JETD 3123-7169 CV. Simpati Cloud As Evidence Evolves: Epistemic Recalibration in Sequential WHO Risk Assessments of Filovirus Outbreaks, 2022–2024 Mahardika Nur Universitas Muria Kudus Maulida Zihori Institut Pendidikan Nusantara global Dinata Benny Martha Universitas BPD Semarang 2026 06 30 1 2 62 76 Copyright (c) 2026 CV. Simpati Cloud 2026 CV. Simpati Cloud

Outbreak communication occurs when institutional authorities must convey information before all evidence is available and then update the assessment as knowledge evolves. This study examines how epistemic status and evidential grounding are maintained or recalibrated in sequential World Health Organization (WHO) Risk Assessments regarding three completed filovirus outbreaks: Sudan ebolavirus in Uganda (2022–2023), Marburg virus disease in Equatorial Guinea, and Marburg virus disease in Rwanda. The study used comparative longitudinal corpus-assisted discourse analysis of 17 WHO Risk Assessment sections from 17 DONs, totaling 4,247 cleaned tokens. Corpus-assisted identification of epistemic and evidential resources was combined with manual claim-level longitudinal tracking. The analysis yielded 85 event-specific claim units, including 53 inter-report relationships that could be traced longitudinally. The results show that epistemic positioning is realized through a combination of modal possibility, knowledge-status expressions, inferential predicates, evidential framing, institutional assessment expressions, classification, and temporal updating markers. Seventy-three percent of linked relations are carry-forward, indicating that epistemic persistence is more common than substantive change. When recalibration occurs, it is selective and claim-specific: Uganda primarily exhibits institutional risk reclassification, Equatorial Guinea maintains provisional inferences regarding undetected transmission and incomplete epidemiological knowledge, while Rwanda exhibits evidential strengthening in zoonotic source attribution. The three outbreaks also demonstrate that formal outbreak closure does not produce uniform epistemic closure; current outbreak status can be declared resolved while uncertainty persists regarding source, transmission history, or future re-emergence. The study uses epistemic recalibration as a study-specific analytical construct to capture longitudinal adjustment in epistemic status, evidential grounding, or institutional commitment. The findings demonstrate the analytical value of shifting attention from the distribution of isolated uncertainty markers to the longitudinal organization of event-specific institutional knowledge.

 epistemic recalibration evidentiality uncertainty communication WHO Risk Assessment filovirus outbreaks longitudinal discourse analysis Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2004). Evidentiality. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199263882.001.000110.1093/oso/9780199263882.001.0001 Ancarno, C. (2020). Corpus-Assisted Discourse Studies. In A. De Fina & A. Georgakopoulou (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Discourse Studies (pp. 165–185). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108348195.00910.1017/9781108348195.009 Ayine, B. (2025). The role of plausibility and attribution shields in disease outbreak and risk communication: Navigating credibility and uncertainty. SSM - Qualitative Research in Health, 8, 100633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmqr.2025.10063310.1016/j.ssmqr.2025.100633 Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., KhosraviNik, M., Krzyżanowski, M., McEnery, T., & Wodak, R. (2008). A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK press. Discourse \& Society, 19(3), 273–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/095792650808896210.1177/0957926508088962 Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1989). Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 9(1), 93–124. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1989.9.1.9310.1515/text.1.1989.9.1.93 Boye, K. (2012). Epistemic Meaning: A Crosslinguistic and Functional-Cognitive Study. De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/978311021903610.1515/9783110219036 Carlson, C. J., Boyce, M. R., Dunne, M., Graeden, E., Lin, J., Abdellatif, Y. O., Palys, M. A., Pavez, M., Phelan, A. L., & Katz, R. (2023). The World Health Organization’s Disease Outbreak News: A retrospective database. PLOS Global Public Health, 3(1), e0001083. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.000108310.1371/journal.pgph.0001083 Carretero, M. (2023). Knowledge and belief in the times of {COVID-19}: A comparative analysis of epistemicity in English newspaper discourse of two stages of the pandemic. Applied Corpus Linguistics, 3(2), 100054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acorp.2023.10005410.1016/j.acorp.2023.100054 Chor, W. (2018). Sentence final particles as epistemic modulators in Cantonese conversations: A discourse-pragmatic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 129, 34–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.03.00810.1016/j.pragma.2018.03.008 Cornillie, B. (2009). Evidentiality and epistemic modality: On the close relationship between two different categories. Functions of Language, 16(1), 44–62. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.16.1.04cor10.1075/fol.16.1.04cor Dries, C., McDowell, M., Rebitschek, F. G., & Leuker, C. (2024). When evidence changes: Communicating uncertainty protects against a loss of trust. Public Understanding of Science, 33(6), 777–794. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662524122844910.1177/09636625241228449 Gustafson, A., & Rice, R. E. (2020). A review of the effects of uncertainty in public science communication. Public Understanding of Science, 29(6), 614–633. https://doi.org/10.1177/096366252094212210.1177/0963662520942122 Han, P. K. J., Scharnetzki, E., Scherer, A. M., Thorpe, A., Lary, C., Waterston, L. B., Fagerlin, A., & Dieckmann, N. F. (2021). Communicating scientific uncertainty about the {COVID-19} pandemic: Online experimental study of an uncertainty-normalizing strategy. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(4), e27832. https://doi.org/10.2196/2783210.2196/27832 Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/146144560505036510.1177/1461445605050365 Jensen, J. D. (2008). Scientific uncertainty in news coverage of cancer research: Effects of hedging on scientists’ and journalists’ credibility. Human Communication Research, 34(3), 347–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00324.x10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00324.x Kalke, K., Studd, H., & Scherr, C. L. (2021). The communication of uncertainty in health: A scoping review. Patient Education and Counseling, 104(8), 1945–1961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2021.01.03410.1016/j.pec.2021.01.034 Koskinen, E., & Stevanovic, M. (2022). Epistemic calibration: Achieving affiliation through access claims and generalizations. Pragmatics, 32(3), 354–380. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20036.kos10.1075/prag.20036.kos Lata, H., Saad Duque, N. J., Togami, E., Miglietta, A., Perkins, D., Corpuz, A., Kato, M., Babu, A., Dorji, T., Matsui, T., Almiron, M., Cheng, K. Y., MacDonald, L. E., Pukkila, J. T., Williams, G. S., Andraghetti, R., Dolea, C., Mahamud, A., Morgan, O., … Hamblion, E. (2024). Disseminating information on acute public health events globally: Experiences from the {WHO}’s Disease Outbreak News. BMJ Global Health, 9(2), e012876. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-01287610.1136/bmjgh-2023-012876 Marín Arrese, J. I. (2015). Epistemicity and stance: A cross-linguistic study of epistemic stance strategies in journalistic discourse in English and Spanish. Discourse Studies, 17(2), 210–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/146144561456452310.1177/1461445614564523 McKnight, C. J., Aboushady, A. T., & Lane, C. R. (2024). Beyond early warning: Towards greater granularity in the use of event-based surveillance for public health emergencies. BMC Public Health, 24, 3488. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-20963-210.1186/s12889-024-20963-2 Nuyts, J. (2001). Epistemic Modality, Language, and Conceptualization: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Perspective (Vol. 5). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.510.1075/hcp.5 Partington, A., Duguid, A., & Taylor, C. (2013). Patterns and Meanings in Discourse: Theory and Practice in Corpus-Assisted Discourse Studies (CADS). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.5510.1075/scl.55 Poole, R., Gnann, A., & Hahn-Powell, G. (2019). Epistemic stance and the construction of knowledge in science writing: A diachronic corpus study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 42, 100784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.10078410.1016/j.jeap.2019.100784 Quah, K., Jin, J., & Hammer, C. C. (2026). Reporting trends and seasonality in the World Health Organization’s Disease Outbreak News ({DONs}) across 1996--2023. PLOS Global Public Health, 6(4), e0004876. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.000487610.1371/journal.pgph.0004876 Reynolds, B., & Seeger, M. W. (2005). Crisis and emergency risk communication as an integrative model. Journal of Health Communication, 10(1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/1081073059090457110.1080/10810730590904571 Schuster, C., & Scheu, A. M. (2026). How communication of scientific uncertainty affects trust in science---A systematic review. Risk Analysis, 46(5), e70233. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.7023310.1111/risa.70233 Sopory, P., Day, A. M., Novak, J. M., Eckert, K., Wilkins, L., Padgett, D. R., Noyes, J. P., Barakji, F. A., Liu, J., Fowler, B. N., Guzman-Barcenas, J. B., Nagayko, A., Nickell, J. J., Donahue, D., Daniels, K., Allen, T., Alexander, N., Vanderford, M. L., & Gamhewage, G. M. (2019). Communicating uncertainty during public health emergency events: A systematic review. Review of Communication Research, 7, 67–108. https://doi.org/10.12840/ISSN.2255-4165.01910.12840/ISSN.2255-4165.019 Taylor, C., & Marchi, A. (Eds.). (2018). Corpus Approaches to Discourse: A Critical Review. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/978131517934610.4324/9781315179346 van der Bles, A. M., van der Linden, S., Freeman, A. L. J., Mitchell, J., Galvao, A. B., Zaval, L., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2019). Communicating uncertainty about facts, numbers and science. Royal Society Open Science, 6(5), 181870. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.18187010.1098/rsos.181870 van der Bles, A. M., van der Linden, S., Freeman, A. L. J., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2020). The effects of communicating uncertainty on public trust in facts and numbers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(14), 7672–7683. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.191367811710.1073/pnas.1913678117 Weets, C. M., Carlson, C. J., Robertson, H., Toole, K., McGivern, L., Graeden, E., & Katz, R. (2025). The {WHO} Disease Outbreak News during the {Covid-19} pandemic. PLOS Global Public Health, 5(1), e0004025. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.000402510.1371/journal.pgph.0004025 World Health Organization. (n.d.). Disease Outbreak News ({DONs}): All hazards public health events. https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news World Health Organization. (2022). Ebola disease caused by Sudan virus -- Uganda. https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2022-DON410 World Health Organization. (2023a). Ebola disease caused by Sudan ebolavirus -- Uganda. https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2023-DON433 World Health Organization. (2023b). Marburg virus disease -- Equatorial Guinea. https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2023-DON444 World Health Organization. (2024). Marburg virus disease -- Rwanda. https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2024-DON537