Analysing academic conventions in research articles

             Sampieri, Collado and Lucio (1998) defined scientific research as systematic, controlled, empiric and critical. It is based on observable issues which demand permanent objective reflection. When doing research, two purposes can be identified, to produce new knowledge and theories or to solve problems.  Depending on the researcher’s field of study, research papers may have different formats and styles. Namely, medicine field research papers differ in organisation and style from educational field papers. In spite of this, both papers’ intention is to contribute knowledge and findings to their fields.

            The purpose of the present paper is to analyse and compare two different research articles from the medicine and educational fields. Its main focus is on the results, discussion and conclusion sections. The articles chosen for the analysis have been drawn from different scientific electronic journals.  On the one hand, the educational research is devoted to investigate the process of collaborative writing through the use of technology, such as wikis and chats. On the other hand, the medicine paper’s main concern is to analyse cancer survivor stories on the web and the creation of a database with these stories. The former was written by Elola and Oskoz (2010), whereas the latter was written by Eddens et al. (2009).

            Swales and Feak (1994) explain that the result section of a research paper (RP) should report the data collected by means of text, tables and/or figures. This kind of resources allows the authors to present a large proportion of information in a small amount of space (American Psychological Association, 2008). The educational research article starts its results section by stating the purpose of the section by dividing the results into 5 different areas of analysis. As regards the medicine paper, the result section presents the main findings of the research. Moreover, it can be noticed that this section is divided into sub-sections which deal with specific data of the research, such as form of communication and type of cancer, among others. The authors provide quantitative data of the main results, one important and representative element of this section.

            Swales and Feak (1994) developed criteria for reporting data in the result section. One of the main components is the use of tables. The Online Writing Laboratory(2010) states that their purpose is to enhance the reader’s understanding of the information in the document.  Furthermore, ‘‘tables provide exact values and, if well prepared, can present complex data and analyses in a format that is familiar with the reader’’(APA,2008,p.21).   In the case of medicine, Eddens and et al (2009) use tables to present the main characteristics of two different variables. As regards the educational paper, Elola and Oskoz (2010) use tables to present certain variables as well as the results of a questionnaire into quantitative data. Within this section in the educational paper, the authors included a dialogue between participants. Both papers use the past simple tense to present data so as to clearly inform the audience about their findings.

            According to the American Psychological Association (APA) (2008) the use of tables must be done under certain rules. One of these rules states that tables should be numbered (APA, 2008). Both articles number and provide a title for each table. However, only the educational article does respect APA rules as regards table titles. The authors italicised, capitalised and position flush left all the titles and they clearly state what information can be found in the table. In only one table the authors clarified information by using a specific note. Apparently, the medicine article tables are represented according to another documentation system such as the Vancouver System. All in all, results section should provide the reader with relevant details and data in order to justify the conclusion.

            Both papers include a discussion section.  In the discussion section, Swales and Feak (1994) explain that the writers should deal with interpreting the results and go beyond them.  According to the APA (2008) this section is devoted to the evaluation and interpretation of the main results, for that reason evaluative language as well as present tenses are used. Additionally, the results section and the discussion section can be found together or separated. (Swales & Feak, 1994). Specifically, the medical article is further enhanced by a limitation, a further implications and a concluding subtitle. Eddens and et al (2009) seem to have chosen this clear-cut division so that the audience is able to trace the line of thought sought. Past tenses are used to introduce results and present tenses are used to expand and clarify those results.

            In the case of the educational article, its purpose is to give answers to questions previously stated in the literature review section. Furthermore, this section is divided into paragraphs devoted to explain each part of the analysis carried out by the researchers. That is to say, a clear statement of support for the original hypothesis is provided (APA,2008).  Moreover, the authors cite sources from the literature review to support their discussion. The authors are comparing their results with the work of others in order to clarify and confirm the conclusions (APA,2008). It is worth pointing out the inclusion of a table within this particular section which also follows the APA guidelines. To sum up, the discussion section should contribute to the writer’s position and also help the reader to understand the problem.

            A conclusion section can be identified in both papers. Regarding the educational articles, the authors summarise, evaluate and provide their opinion in this section. Additionally, at the very end a paragraph is devoted to explain the limitations of the research. The authors cite sources to support their opinion and arguments. However, the medicine paper concludes the research with a very short paragraph in which explanation of what the study has contributed to its field of study is presented. The conclusion section is the shortest paragraph in the whole paper. There is no opinion provided with respect to the topic.  In this section the writer should provide information about the importance of the study, how can this study be related to a complex level of analysis and the applicability of the study to his/her field (APA,2008).

            All in all, the papers selected have similarities and differences. Firstly, each of them belongs to a different field, for that reason, rules, format and documentation systems differ. Secondly, they have sections in common and they both contain tables to present information. However, these tables address to different documentation systems. In each section, the writers have the possibility to present the results, discuss them and provide a general conclusion of the research. When writing each of these sections, the writers should use and demonstrate their abilities of summarizing, commenting, evaluating and also the ability to demonstrate the reader that the research has contributed significant findings to the field.

   

References

American Psychological Association (2008). Publication Manual (5^th ed.). Washington, DC: British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication.

Eddens, K.,  Kreuter , M., Morgan, J., Beatty,  K., Jasim, S., Garibay, L.,  Tao D., Buskirk. T. &  Jupka K.(2009) Disparities by Race and Ethnicity in Cancer Survivor Stories Available on the Web.  Retrieved April 2011 from  http://www.jmir.org/2009/4/e50/. Doi: 10.2196/jmir.1163  PMID: 19945948.

Hernández Sampieri, R., Fernández-Collado, C., & Lucio, B.P. (2008). Metodología de la Investigación (4th ed.). México: McGraw-Hill.

Elola, I. & Oskoz, A. (2010) Collaborative Writing: Fostering Foreign Language and Writing Conventions Development. October 2010. Volume 14, number 3. Pp.51-71. Retrieved April 2011, from  http://llt.msu.edu/vol14num3/elolaoskoz.pdf

Online Writing Laboratory (OWL). (2010). APA Tables and Figures. Retrieved May 2011, from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/656/01/

Swales, J.M. &Feak, C.B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students:  Essential tasks      and skills. Ann Harbour, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

The Process of Writing a Research Paper: Format and Linguistics Features

The Process of Writing a Research Paper:  Format and Linguistics Features         

            Research papers (RPs) are the final outcome of a long process. In general, RPs possess a standard format which facilitates communication and organise information. The typical organisational pattern is called IMRD format (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion) (Swales & Feak, 1994). Each section is characterised by rhetorical and specific linguistics characteristics as well as a clear purpose. The American Psychological Association (APA) (2008) explains that research papers ‘‘consist of distinct sections that reflect the stages in the research process (…)’’ (p.7). However, it is worth mentioning that depending on the field of investigation and requirement of publications research articles may have some differences. The purpose of this paper is to compare and analyse sections from two research papers which belong to the educational and medicine fields.

            The first section of the IMRD model is the introduction. Writing an introduction demands the presentation of problem under study. ‘‘The main purpose of the introduction is to provide the rationale of your paper, moving from general discussion of the topic to a particular question or hypotheses being investigated’’ (Swales & Feak, 1994, p.156). In addition, the APA (2008) explains that a good introduction states the importance of the problem, the relation between the hypotheses and the problem under investigation, the theoretical implications and theoretical propositions under investigation. This will ‘‘give the reader a firm sense of what was done and why’’ (APA; 2008, p. 16). Generally, the presentation of these issues is done through special linguistics features which will create a sense of worth reading on the reader. That is to say, the writer of an introduction should try to establish that his or her particular area of research is significant. (Swales and Najjar, 1987).

             The paper chosen from the educational field was written by Elola and Oskoz  (2010) and it investigated the use of technologies in the classroom to foster collaborative writing among students. Whereas the medicine paper was written by Eddens(2009) and its main purpose was to communicate the results of a descriptive study of online cancer survivor stories. It is clearly evident that each paper is written for different audiences and they respect different citation styles. However, some similarities can be found as regards formats.

            The introduction section will be analysed under the rules of Swales and Feak’s (1994) model called Create-a-Research-Space (CARS). The author stated that, in general, introductions follow this pattern which is divided into MOVES. Each move has a purpose in itself as well as some particular linguistics features. Move 1 is characterized by ‘introducing and reviewing items of previous research in the area’ (Swales & Feak, 1994, p.175). Move 2 indicates a gap in the research stated at move 1 or the necessity of further investigation. In Swales’ words move 2 ‘establishes a niche’ (Swales, ibid). Generally, move 2 will be marked by the use of a contrastive connector like however, or it is also possible to find some negative elements. The main function of move 3 is to express the purpose of the paper or its nature. The writer should explain the approach chosen to solve the problem and provide a clear and formal statement of the hypotheses (APA, 2008).

            Regarding Elola et al (2010)’s paper, the introduction is a clear example of the model previously explained. The author presents the main issue of the paper, the research territory in addition to citations of previous research. Background information is provided in order to evidence and sustain the problem under investigation. Move 2 is signalled by the use of the phrase ‘a question that remains to be answered, however, (...)’ (Elola et. al., 2010, p.1). The use of this sentence implies that there is a niche, that the research topic is not completed yet. Moreover, ‘it also establishes the motivation for the study’ (Swales & Feak, 1994, p.185). After clearly establishing the niche, Elola et al (2004) express the paper’s purpose. The authors decide to refer to the type of text by using descriptive statements in present tense.

            In comparison, Eddens’ paper (2009) does not clearly exemplify the moves of CARS model as Elola’s paper does. Previous research is presented, however with little information and specifications. It is worth mentioning that the author indicates a niche by using a negative opening statement: ‘this issue has received much less attention…’   (Eddens, et. al., 2009, para 1) and it clearly finishes by stating the need of the paper. According to Swales and Feak (1994) negative subjects indicate that ‘Move 1 has come to an end’ (p.188). In addition, further specification of the paper’s purpose is stated as well as the specification of the research territory. It is possible to say that both papers present their introduction by the use of a general- specific text. Swales and Feak (1994) define general-specific (G-S) text as ‘texts [which] move from broad statements to narrower ones’ (p.33).

            The method sections is also present in both papers. ‘The method section describes, in various degree of detail, methodology, materials and procedures.’(Swales & Feak, p.156). It should describe in detail the conduction of the study in order to allow the reader to evaluate the method as well as the results. In other words, it should tell the reader what was done and how. (APA, 2008). Analysing the papers previously mentioned, the medicine paper presents a method section divided into sampling, eligibility, coding, and measures. Whereas the educational paper does not clearly state the word method but instead, the phrase background information is found. After that phrase, categories such as procedures and analysis are presented.

            It can be said that both papers differ in their method section as regards categories and titles assigned to each category. In addition, Elola’s method section contains explicit details and procedures. The author also makes explanations of each step in the method taken and in general terminology is repeated. Within this section, tables are used to expand and exemplify information. The process and procedures are presented through a problem-solution text. In general, this type of text ‘describes procedures and processes’ (Swales & Feak, 1994, p.61).  Problem- solution texts are characterised by the use of past tense as well as passive voice. Elola’s method section is a clear example of a problem-solution text. It is also possible to recognise the use of passive voice as well as past tenses. However, in Edden’s paper, no tables are presented in this section. Instead, explicit information about the sampling, dates, selection criteria, among others variables are presented.

 Regarding terminology, it is possible to say that Edden’s paper supposes a necessity of background information from part of the reader in order to understand certain terms. All in all, both method sections have similarities and differences. In general, in social sciences the main purpose of RP is to announce development in the method whereas in medical research, the method section relies on standard practices and established methods. (Swales & Feak 1994). This main difference postulated by Swales can be indentified in the papers under analysis.  

            On balance, the analysis of both papers gives as results differences and similarities among research articles from different fields. The educational paper clearly represents in its introduction the IMRD model whereas the medicine paper does not provide such distinction. Regarding method sections, both Elola and Edden’s papers present clear and precise information. But the latter requires some background information from part of the reader in order to understand some specific terms. To sum up, both papers try to convince the reader that their research paper is worth reading and that they contribute useful information to their corresponding fields.

References

American Psychological Association (2008) .Publication Manual (5^th Ed.).Washington DC: British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

Eddens, K.,  Kreuter , M., Morgan, J., Beatty,  K., Jasim, S., Garibay, L.,  Tao D., Buskirk. T. and  Jupka K.(2009) Disparities by Race and Ethnicity in Cancer Survivor Stories Available on the Web.  Retrieved April 2011 from  http://www.jmir.org/2009/4/e50/. Doi: 10.2196/jmir.1163  PMID: 19945948.

Elola, I and Oskoz, A. (2010) Collaborative Writing: Fostering Foreign Language and Writing Conventions Development. October 2010. Volume 14, number 3. Pp.51-71. Retrieved April 2011, from  http://llt.msu.edu/vol14num3/elolaoskoz.pdf

Swales, J. M., and Najjar, H. (1987). The writing of research articles introductions. Written Communication. 4: 175-92. Retrieved May 2011 from http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/68973/2/10.1177_0741088387004002004.pdf

Swales, J.M., & Feak, C. B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Harbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

A long process...

I open this blog mainly for two reasons. First, I was asked to do so by tutors at CAECE University. It is the final product of a long process. Second, I wanted to share with you all my thoughts. Writing is a long process, in fact I would say it is a challenge.It is a long journey which implies effort and dedication. As a professional, I realized that somenthing was missing, for that reason I decided to start a Licenciatura. During this course of study, I discovered a wonderful world. A world that opened my mind and feelings. A world full of challenges, knowledge and learning. And also I have the opportunity to meet wonderful tutors who share their knowlege with me. I would like to thank them for their effort, patience and dedication. In this blog, you will read my papers about the academic world. I would like to thank my tutors Yanina and Veronica for their guidance and patience, without them these papers would have never existed.