Academic writing is an area which offers a wide variety of genres and
discourses. As members immersed in this community of writing, it is
essential to analyze research studies developed by proficient members of
various academic discourse communities. This paper is based on a
comparative analysis which combines the examination and the scrutiny of
research findings that belong to different scientific fields. In order to illustrate introduction and method sections in
Research Articles (RA), this paper will examine two research papers in the
field of medicine and education, carrying out a deep analysis of their
introductions, literature reviews and methods. The first article
belongs to the field of medicine and is based on the effects of
revaccination with BCG in early childhood on mortality in Guinea-Bissau (Roth et
al., 2010), the second article describes a study on the use of blogs in a
specific academic setting in China (Sun & Chang, 2012). Although both
articles follow academic standards as regards structure of academic research
papers, they present different formats and styles when presenting the
information. The parameters they exhibit are discussed, compared and
contrasted in the present paper.
The C.A.R.S. Model: Moves in Introductions
The first element that characterizes a research
article is its introduction. In order to write an introduction,
the writer has a fundamental purpose in mind: to call readers’ attention.
A common organizational pattern that facilitates reading as well as
comprehension is the model proposed by Swales and Feak (1994) called the Create
a Research Space Model (C.A.R.S.) (Swales & Feak, 1994, as cited in Hengl
and Gould, 2002). It is comprised of three moves, which contains semantic
and syntactic patterns: establishing a territory, establishing a niche, and
occupying the niche.
Move 1a: establishing the territory
As it has been mentioned, the first move in
introductions establishes the territory of the research and may be divided into
two parts: the first one, which is optional, accounts for the relevance of the
research and the second part reviews outstanding previous studies. Roth
et al. (2010) state the importance of their investigation demonstrating that no
other studies have dealt with the problem of the effects of revaccination with BCG in early childhood on
mortality in Guinea-Bissau: “Routine infant vaccines currently used in low
income countries were not tested in randomized trials for their impact on
overall child survival before their introduction” (p.1).
Whereas Roth et al. (2010) develop Move 1a, Sun and Chang (2012)
establish the research territory defining blogs through a contrastive
definition: “ Blogs differ from discussion boards, or Wikis in that blogs are
controlled and owned by the bloggers (…)” (p.43). Moreover, they expand the
definition by stating general characteristics and benefits of using blogs:
"Characterized by their strong personal editorship, hyper linking
potential, archival features, access to content, blogs invite users to share,
create and interact in a virtual space to generate knowledge." (p.43).
Move 1b: literature reviews
According to C.A.R.S. Model (Swales & Feak, 1994), Move 1b is the
section which presents current knowledge on the subject matter of the research.
Roth et al. (2010) explore the literature relevant to their study chronologically,
departing from pioneering studies on vaccination in low income countries to
recent ones carried out in the same context.
From the linguistic point of view, Roth et al. (2010) follow standard
procedures applying the present perfect tense to describe areas of inquiries:
“Numerous studies of measles vaccine have reported significant reductions
(…)” (p.1, Roth et al., 2010), and present tenses to refer to current and
accepted knowledge in the field of medicine: “This is best documented for standard
measles vaccine.”(p1). Past simple tense is also used to describe the methods and findings from
relevant studies related to the area of interest: “In Sun’s study examining
speaking practice on blogs, EFL students went through a series of stages (…)” (p.44).
Unlike Roth et al. (2010), Sun and Chang (2012) develop Move 1b making
reference to consulted literature on blogs in a general – specific manner.
Sun and Chang (2012) proceed smoothly from a general definition of blogs,
stating their distinct characteristics and benefits, to a more specific
definition in pedagogical settings. The authors provide a detailed
revision of studies made in the field of English Language Teaching (ELT),
providing advantages of including blogs in the foreign language classroom.
Similarly to Roth et al. (2010), Sun and Chang (2012) use the present
perfect tense to refer to areas of inquiries: “Several studies have highlighted
the advantages of integrating blogs in foreign language classrooms to develop
writing skills, and present tenses to describe current knowledge.” (p.43).
Move 2: establishing the niche
Establishing the gap is the main objective of Move 2, it is the link
between Move 1 and 3. As Swales and Feak (1994) point out, readers should
have an overall idea of what is coming in Move 3. The researcher raises
questions as regards previous studies, stating the significance of his
research, trying to fill the gap found in the literature review. To accomplish
this aim of demonstrating that there is some kind of left-aside issue, Move 2
is introduced with a negative opening. Accordingly, Roth et al. (2010)
present Move 2 explaining that “randomized studies of BCG in low income
countries have not been carried out” (p.1), and connect Move 2 and Move 3
establishing the gap. Similarly, Sun and Chang (2012) start Move 2 with a
negative opening, describing that there is no major research done on the field
of blogging in academic writing, especially in EFL: “little, if any, empirical
research has been done to examine how interactions in blogs help EFL graduate
students develop academic writing knowledge and writer identities.”(p.44). As it has been seen, clear evidence is
presented as regards smooth transitions between move 1 and 2 made by
researchers when writing papers to communicate their
findings.
Move 3: occupying the niche
The last move in introductions states the purposes of the RA, describing
the general nature and structure of the paper and / or presenting main
findings. Move 3 may comprise two types of phrases: purposive or descriptive
statements. While the former establishes the purposes of the study, the
latter attempts to describe the general structure of the paper. Roth et
al. (2010) make use of descriptive statements in order to present the steps
followed in their research study; evidence of this can be traced by the use of
sequence connectors as firstly and secondly. Furthermore, a clear and concise description
of the study is given, stating its design and characteristics, as well as its
main objective. Likewise, Sun and Chang (2012) make use of a descriptive
statement, referring to the phases they followed to carry out their research,
as well as establish their view towards the topic of study: “the current study
expands the conceptual scope of blogs and views blogs as a social medium for
knowledge and identity construction (…).” (p.44)
Methods Section
Methods
comprise techniques that describe the processes, the individuals involved and
the tools for collecting information. On the one hand, Sun and Chang (2012)
follow a case study research method in order to analyze inductively seven
graduate students. The authors develop
the method section by describing the participants, the procedures followed and
the techniques used to collect data. On
the other hand, Roth et al. (2010) develop an experimental design and provide more
detailed explanations on the setting, the study design and the data collection
procedures and the participants. Although each work has a different outcome,
the main characteristics of the methods and procedures that have been followed
to arrive to results are clearly depicted and explained, providing a solid
framework that improves understanding of the articles.
Conclusion
To bring the
paper to a close, main aspects considered in this analysis are summarized. The relevant components and features of two
distinct research papers have been identified and discussed: introduction,
literary review and method section. Main
concepts and papers’ structure have been compared and contrasted in detail. Although
these articles pertain to differing scientific fields, they follow RAs’
structure and include linguistic features used in academic research papers, and
have successfully reached the aim of communicating new perspectives in the
Medicine and ELT contexts. Lastly, the
interpretation of the articles has provided with major insights into the
requirements and procedures for writing academic papers effectively.
References
Hengl, T. and Gould, M. (2002). Rules
of thumb for writing research articles. Retrieved in April 2012 from:
http://www.itc.nl/library/Papers/hengl_rules.pdf
Sun, C. and Chang, J. (2012).
Blogging to Learn: Becoming EFL Academic Writers through Collaborative
Dialogues. Language Learning and Technology, volume 16 (Number 1), pp.
43-61. Retrieved in April 2012, from:
http:/llt.msu.edu/issues/february2012/sunchang.pdf
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario