I usually reach for 'value' or 'esteem' when polishing academic prose, because they carry that neutral, formal weight without sounding gushy. In my experience, 'admire' tends to read as personal and emotive, which is fine for a reflective piece or an opinion column but clunky in tough-minded journal articles. 'Value' is versatile — it works in literature reviews ('Researchers have long valued X for its...'), policy writing ('We value the role of...'), and methods sections when framing priorities or trade-offs.
If you want something a touch more formal, I like 'esteem' or the phrase 'hold in high regard.' 'Esteem' is tidy and slightly elevated; it fits well in acknowledgments or historical overviews: 'Early scholars esteemed the work of X for its contribution to Y.' For evaluative claims where you need a bit more punch, '
praise' or 'laud' are acceptable, but use them sparingly because they imply endorsement rather than neutral description. 'Recognize' and 'acknowledge' are excellent when you want to highlight contributions without strong affect: 'Several studies recognize the contribution of…' feels objective and measured.
A practical tip I rely on: pick the verb based on stance. If you're describing consensus, use 'recognize' or 'value.' If you're positioning something as widely respected historically, 'be held in high regard' or 'esteemed' works. Avoid 'revere' unless you genuinely mean near-religious admiration. In the end I usually settle on 'value' for its flexibility, and it lets the evidence do the praising rather than the prose — which suits academic tone better, in my view.