Summaries are common in all kinds of writing. They highlight the major points in a piece and outline the significant details. In academic writing, papers also begin with a summary which receives the name of abstract. On average, abstracts have a fairly standard form, but, according to their type, they may also show some differences. According to Swales and Feak (1994, cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010), there are RP abstracts and conference abstracts. “ For the first type of abstract, there is a text to work from, the one you have already written, whereas for the second type, there may or may not be a text to refer back” (Pintos and Crimi, 2010, p.12). In this paper, abstracts from four different articles in the medicine field, three from The British Medical Journal (BMJ) and one from The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), will be analyzed on a comparison-contrast basis.
The BMJ articles share the same appearance layout as the three of them are written in two text columns . The Abstract (A) section is on the left , its heading written in colour block letters.This section is all written in Arial font , whereas the rest of the sections in the paper are written in Times New Roman. This may be the pattern for BMJ´s requirements regarding abstracts submission. They are informative structured abstracts with bolded subheadings that , on average, identify the main sections in the RA. However, there are some differences regarding the addition of a ‘Main outcome measure’ subheading in two of the articles. This insertion may be due to the relevance of the outcome in the research carried out. This subsection does not contain a sentence but a phrase instead. This characteristic does not seem to be in keeping with one of the linguistic specifications of abstracts provided by Graetz (1985, cited in Swales & Feak,1998, p.212, cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010) which states that full sentence should be used. All the other subheadings – Objective(O), Design(D), Setting(S), Participants(P), Results(R), Conclusions(C) - are full sentences. However , the O sentence is grammatically different from the rest because it starts with a full infinitive , typical of sentence in these sections.
The three articles follow the results-driven approach (Swales & Feak, 1994, cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010) with an outstanding longer ‘Results’ subsection. Conversely, some differences among the three articles can be observed. In the article by Jorgensen, Zahl, & Gotzsche (2010) and Wijeysundera, et al. (2010) the description of results takes up five sentences . The information in them is full of numerals and abbreviations. Conversely, the article by Martinez, Assimes, Mines, Dell´Aniello & Suissa (2010) contains a shorter ‘Results’ subsection but the numerals refer to the number of participants in the study. This might be the reason why the ‘Participants’ (P) subsection is longer. The researchers might have felt the need to include P´s infortmation to support the results obtained. A feature that all the other subsections share in the three articles share is that they remain relatively short, made up of one or two sentences.
Regarding voice, it may be stated that passive voice constitutes the pattern with the highest frequency of usage throughout . But, it can also be noted that, in the article by Martinez, Assimes, Mines, Dell´Aniello & Suissa (2010) and in the article by Jorgensen, Zahl, & Gotzsche (2010) there exist some sentences with the pronoun ‘we’ functioning as subject . Passive voice usage has been controversial in the medicine field for long. As Pintos & Crimi (2010) point out “ In medicine, when the agent is not stated, there is no one to take responsibility for the actions that are carried out. This lack of responsibility is one of the reasons [ why ] medical writers are told to avoid the passive. Another reason is that in medicine , physicians tend to overuse the passive , thus making the text seem artificially formal and uninteresting” ( p.39 ).
“(…) Traditionally, the American Psychological Association ( APA) dictated that academic writing had to be carried out in an impersonal form, not using the pronouns “I” or “We”. Nevertheless, one of the major changes in APA format is that, in a co-authored paper you can use ‘I’ or ‘We’ ” (p. 40 ). It might be that researchers alternate in the use of active ‘we’ and passive voice to make their work accessible to a wider audience without losing the formality achieved by passive voice usage.
The BMJ articles meet the requirements proposed by Graetz (1985, cited in Swales, 1990, cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010) concerning past tense usage. Swales (1990, cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010) argues that RP abstracts are characterized by the use of past tense. Almost all the sentences, whether active or passive, are written in the past tense because they refer to the research previously carried out. It is the usual tense in these type of abstracts. Conversely, proposal abstracts “should be written in the future form because the reasearch has not been implemented yet”. (Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p. 37 )
The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) article , in contrast to the BMJ articles, has a different appearance layout. The word ‘abstract’ is centered and written in black block letters.The subheadings in the section are also written in block letters, but in colour and left aligned. The arrangement text is also a double columned one , but the text is written on the left , in Times New Roman font and the footnotes, written in Arial smaller font, occupy the right column. It also differs from the BMJ articles in the subheadings´ tittles. The NEJM article is subdivided into : Background, Methods, Results and Conclusions. The Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussions (IMRAD) formula may be more clearly distinguished in this article than in the BMJs´.
Full sentences have been used in all the subsections . The Background and Methods sections are made up of two sentences each. The Results section comprises the longest section running along sentences. The shortest one is the Conclusions section which has only one sentence. The Results section outstands as the longest portion, full of numerals which might make it difficult for someone not related to the field to understand the core information. It might not be the case for someone acquainted to the medical field.
The BMJ and NEJM articles alternate in the use of passive and active voices. In the NEJM article, the verb “to be” has a high frequency of usage , especially in the past tense and in the Results section.There is also tense mobility with a sequence of Present (Present Perfect tense) Past and Present (Simple Present tense) times. The present perfect tense has been used in the Background section, the simple past tense in the Methods and Results section and, the simple present tense in the Conclusions section.
All in all, it may be claimed that although the format of abstracts in the medicine field presents variations depending on the journals´ requirements because they may prefer to publish their research according to different patterns, there are similar linguistic features that all of them share regarding the use of full sentences, past tenses, active and passive voices, numbers and abbreviations. Writing an efficient abstract may represent hard work but the effort will find its reward when members of the discourse community are enticed to read one´s publications.
References
Becket, N., Peters, R., Fletcher, A., Staessen,J., Liu,L., Dumitrascu, D., et al. (2008). Treatment of Hypertension in Patients 80 of age or older. The New England Journal of Medicine. 358(18), 1887-1898. Retrieved June 22nd , 2010 from www.caececampus universidad.com
Jorgensen, K., Zahl, P-H., & Gotzsche, P. (2010) Breast Cancer mortality in organised mammography screening in Denmark: comparative study. BMJ 2010 340(1241), 1- 6 . doi:10-1136/bmj.c1241
Martinez, C., Assimes, T., Mines, D., Dell´aniello, S., & Suissa, S. (2010) Use of venlafaxine compared with other antidepressants and the risk of sudden cardiac death or near death: a nested case-control study. BMJ 2010 340(249), 1- 9. doi:10.1136/bmj.c249
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). LENGUA INGLESA ESPECIALIZADA II. Unit 4. Research Articles: Abstracts. UNIVERSIDAD CAECE.
Swales, J. (1990) Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge Applied Linguistics Series. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
Wijeysundera,D.N., Beattie, W.S., Elliot, R.F., Austin, P.C., Hux, J.E., & Laupacis, A. (2010). Non – invasive cardiac stress testing before elective major non –cardiac surgery: Population based cohort study. BMJ 2010, 340(b5526) 1 - 9. doi:10.1136/bmj.b5526
Jul 8, 2010
The Research Article: Contrastive Analysis of Results, Discussions & Conclusions sections. Part II
In the research arena information is supposed to follow an organization aligned to the conventions of the scientific protocol. Research in the field of education, if compared to other sciences, is a relatively recent activity. As I have previously discussed, it has flourished since the last decade with the launch of university courses for teachers. There was no research history in the field of education in our country due to the absence of scientific treatment of the profession. Medical Science, on the contrary, has a solid history of research writing and may be considered the most loyal adherent to scientific protocols due to its long history of evolution from the experimental reports. As is often the case, medicine research papers serve for models of research writing in other fields. “As is well known, certain groups in the social or behavior sciences have tried, with varying degrees of success, to adopt and adapt the hard science paradigm” (Swales, 1990, p.175).
Nwogu (1997) notes that “as with most experimental research reports, the medical research paper is a highly technical form with a standard format for the presentation of information. This format is the division of the paper into "Introduction [(I)], Methods [(M)], Results [(R)] and Discussion[(D)]" - the traditional IMRD sections of the research paper” (p.119). However, Swales (1990) believes that the RD patterns are in an exploratory phase. On the arrangement of section labels he comments that “ [e]ven if a majority of RAs have closing Results and Discussion sections, others coalesce the two, while even others have additional or substituted sections labeled Conclusions, Implications or Applications and so on” (Swales,1990, p.170).
Regarding Discussions sections Belanger (1982, cited in Swales, 1990) proposes certain cycling movements within the subsection that confirm Peng´s (1987 , cited in Swales, 1990) and Hopkins & Dudley- Evans´ (1988, cited in Swales, 1990) 11- Move schemes. Swales (1990), however, glosses the scheme in eight moves: (1) Background information, (2) Statement of results, (3) (Un)expected outcome, (4) Reference to previous research, (5) Explanation, (6) Exemplification, (7) Deduction and Hypothesis , (8) Recommendation (pp. 172-173). This paper aims at analyzing the Results, Discussions and Conclusions sections on a corpus of two Research Articles (RA), one in the medicine field ( Gardiner, Owen, Sugiyama & Vandelanotte , 2009) and the other in the field of education (Loucky , 2007) in order to illustrate the similarities and differences of RAs in both fields.
An analysis of the layout of both papers shows that they are divided into subsections following the IMRD model with some variations. The article by Gardiner, Owen, Sugiyama & Vandelanotte ( 2009) has a R section subdivided into four subsections and a D section which includes some recommendations and a conclusion. On the other hand, the RA on education (Loucky, 2007) has two additional subsections – (1)Results, (2)Discussion & Pedagogical Implications, (3) Conclusions and (4)Research Recommendations. In the education RA the Recommendations section appear after the Conclusion, but, in the medical paper, the recommendations form part of one of the moves in the ‘Discussions’ section.
For Pintos & Crimi (2010) “[d]epending on the kind of research, the results section may be isolated from the discussed section or it may be integrated together. Thus, RA writers may opt to write first the results, (…) or describe the results and discuss them in the same section. You may find different structures with many different purposes.” (p.18). Nwogu (1997) also points out the notion of structure, but he relates it more to the internal organization within each subsection. He observes that “[m]ost research article writers are familiar with the IMRD format, but not all are conscious of the fact that there exists an internal ordering of the information presented in the various sections of the research article” (p.119). It may be stated that Nwogu´s notion of internal structure should be taken into consideration in order to produce clear, coherent and logically organized research reports.
For the Results section writers not only appeal to description of outcomes but they also make use of visual devices that can compact a wide range of information within a limited space. According to Crimi & Pintos (2010) tables and figures are used in papers “(…) to describe the results of statistical analysis or pertinent quantitative data” (p.22) In both papers these devices are introduced in the R sections.
In the article on education (Loucky, 2007) there is one one table which does not totally fulfill the American Psychological Association (APA) conventions. The APA (2007, cited in Crimi & Pintos, 2010, p.23) “ (…) establishes certain basic rules, [some of them are] :(1) all tables should be numbered, (2) each table should have an individual title, (3) all elements of the table should be double spaced, (4) all tables should be referenced at the end of the paper, (4) no vertical lines can be used to separate information and (5) each table should begin on a separate page”. Although the table mentioned above is numbered, the elements on the table are not double spaced or referenced at the end of the paper. The table does not begin on a separate page. Although there are no vertical lines separating information, and this is in keeping with APA conventions, the absence of lines may make the table rather confusing.
In the medical RA there are two tables and one figure. The size of them all is very small, making them unreadable in the present screen format. Below each tables and figure there´s a hyperlink between square brackets – [view the table] - that allows the reader to view the table/figure after clicking on it. A tentative explanation could be that the article might not be originally intended for paper format, as is often the case with articles having hyperlinks. The figure is a 3D column bar with general notes on its right that explains the symbols, abbreviations and references, but, there is no word Note preceding the information.
Regarding internal unity in the Discussions section, the medical article (Gardiner, Owen, Sugiyama & Vandelanotte, 2009) validates the 11-Move model (Peng, 1987, cited in Swales 1990 ) (Hopkins and Dudley- Evans, 1988, cited in Swales, 1990) or 8-Move model (Swales, 1990) (Nwogu, 1987). The section contains eight paragraphs. The first two paragraphs redescribe the main findings. Paragraph 3 reveals the unexpected outcome. Paragraphs 4 and 5 make refer to fig. 1 deals with previous research and provide explanation. Paragraph 6 deals with some recommendations. Paragraph 7 handles the limitations of the study and the last paragraph discusses the conclusion.
The article on education (Loucky, 1987) does not seem to follow Swales´ (1990) or Nwogu´s (1987) model for the Discussions section. It is labeled “Discussion and Pedagogical implications” and it only contains one short paragraph. The conclusion and recommendations are isolated in different subsection headings. These subsections appear to be larger than the conclusion and far more content-comprehensive. As Pintos and Crimi (2010) have stated “The first part of a discussion section serves the function of restating the key findings with reference to the initial question(s) or hypothesis, as well as reminding the reader of the overall aim of the study” (p.20). None of these features can be traced in the section being analyzed. The information provided is vague and all the features proposed by Crimi & Pintos (2010) take place in the Conclusions and Research Recommendations sections.
By and large, it may be assumed that the corpus of the present analysis bears some similarities and differences. Both of them are divided into subsections, although with minor differences in the subdivisions. Both of them contain figures and/or tables in the Results section to display statistical outcomes. However, they differ in the content organization and internal unity. The article by Loucky (1987) does not follow the highly technical standard format for the presentation of information that the medical RA does. As it has been previously pointed out in the introduction, medicine research papers still seem to serve for models of research writing in other fields, but, as Swales (1990) wisely commented “[f]inally, there is an element of irony in a situation wherein social scientists are engaged in a cognitive and rhetorical of method at a time when their mentors in the hard sciences are beginning, rhetorically at least, to downgrade its importance” (p.176).
References
Gardiner, P., Owen, N., Sugiyama, T., & Vandelanotte, C. (2009). Associations of Leisure-Time Internet and Computer Use with Overweight and Obesity, Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviors: Cross-Sectional Study. J Med Internet Res, 2009. 11(3): e 28. http://www.jmir.org/2009/3e28/. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1084
Loucky, J. (2007). Improving Online Reading and Vocabulary Development. KASELE Bulletin, 35, 181-188. Retrieved April, 2010 from www.caececampusuniversidad.com.ar
Nwogu, K. (1997). The Medical Research Paper: Structure and Functions. English for Specific Purposes, 16(2), 119-138. Retrieved June, 2010 from www.sciencedirect.com
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). LENGUA INGLESA ESPECIALIZADA II. Unit 3. The Research Article: Results, Discussions, and Conclusions. UNIVERSIDAD CAECE.
Swales, J. (1990) Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge Applied Linguistics Series. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Pre
Nwogu (1997) notes that “as with most experimental research reports, the medical research paper is a highly technical form with a standard format for the presentation of information. This format is the division of the paper into "Introduction [(I)], Methods [(M)], Results [(R)] and Discussion[(D)]" - the traditional IMRD sections of the research paper” (p.119). However, Swales (1990) believes that the RD patterns are in an exploratory phase. On the arrangement of section labels he comments that “ [e]ven if a majority of RAs have closing Results and Discussion sections, others coalesce the two, while even others have additional or substituted sections labeled Conclusions, Implications or Applications and so on” (Swales,1990, p.170).
Regarding Discussions sections Belanger (1982, cited in Swales, 1990) proposes certain cycling movements within the subsection that confirm Peng´s (1987 , cited in Swales, 1990) and Hopkins & Dudley- Evans´ (1988, cited in Swales, 1990) 11- Move schemes. Swales (1990), however, glosses the scheme in eight moves: (1) Background information, (2) Statement of results, (3) (Un)expected outcome, (4) Reference to previous research, (5) Explanation, (6) Exemplification, (7) Deduction and Hypothesis , (8) Recommendation (pp. 172-173). This paper aims at analyzing the Results, Discussions and Conclusions sections on a corpus of two Research Articles (RA), one in the medicine field ( Gardiner, Owen, Sugiyama & Vandelanotte , 2009) and the other in the field of education (Loucky , 2007) in order to illustrate the similarities and differences of RAs in both fields.
An analysis of the layout of both papers shows that they are divided into subsections following the IMRD model with some variations. The article by Gardiner, Owen, Sugiyama & Vandelanotte ( 2009) has a R section subdivided into four subsections and a D section which includes some recommendations and a conclusion. On the other hand, the RA on education (Loucky, 2007) has two additional subsections – (1)Results, (2)Discussion & Pedagogical Implications, (3) Conclusions and (4)Research Recommendations. In the education RA the Recommendations section appear after the Conclusion, but, in the medical paper, the recommendations form part of one of the moves in the ‘Discussions’ section.
For Pintos & Crimi (2010) “[d]epending on the kind of research, the results section may be isolated from the discussed section or it may be integrated together. Thus, RA writers may opt to write first the results, (…) or describe the results and discuss them in the same section. You may find different structures with many different purposes.” (p.18). Nwogu (1997) also points out the notion of structure, but he relates it more to the internal organization within each subsection. He observes that “[m]ost research article writers are familiar with the IMRD format, but not all are conscious of the fact that there exists an internal ordering of the information presented in the various sections of the research article” (p.119). It may be stated that Nwogu´s notion of internal structure should be taken into consideration in order to produce clear, coherent and logically organized research reports.
For the Results section writers not only appeal to description of outcomes but they also make use of visual devices that can compact a wide range of information within a limited space. According to Crimi & Pintos (2010) tables and figures are used in papers “(…) to describe the results of statistical analysis or pertinent quantitative data” (p.22) In both papers these devices are introduced in the R sections.
In the article on education (Loucky, 2007) there is one one table which does not totally fulfill the American Psychological Association (APA) conventions. The APA (2007, cited in Crimi & Pintos, 2010, p.23) “ (…) establishes certain basic rules, [some of them are] :(1) all tables should be numbered, (2) each table should have an individual title, (3) all elements of the table should be double spaced, (4) all tables should be referenced at the end of the paper, (4) no vertical lines can be used to separate information and (5) each table should begin on a separate page”. Although the table mentioned above is numbered, the elements on the table are not double spaced or referenced at the end of the paper. The table does not begin on a separate page. Although there are no vertical lines separating information, and this is in keeping with APA conventions, the absence of lines may make the table rather confusing.
In the medical RA there are two tables and one figure. The size of them all is very small, making them unreadable in the present screen format. Below each tables and figure there´s a hyperlink between square brackets – [view the table] - that allows the reader to view the table/figure after clicking on it. A tentative explanation could be that the article might not be originally intended for paper format, as is often the case with articles having hyperlinks. The figure is a 3D column bar with general notes on its right that explains the symbols, abbreviations and references, but, there is no word Note preceding the information.
Regarding internal unity in the Discussions section, the medical article (Gardiner, Owen, Sugiyama & Vandelanotte, 2009) validates the 11-Move model (Peng, 1987, cited in Swales 1990 ) (Hopkins and Dudley- Evans, 1988, cited in Swales, 1990) or 8-Move model (Swales, 1990) (Nwogu, 1987). The section contains eight paragraphs. The first two paragraphs redescribe the main findings. Paragraph 3 reveals the unexpected outcome. Paragraphs 4 and 5 make refer to fig. 1 deals with previous research and provide explanation. Paragraph 6 deals with some recommendations. Paragraph 7 handles the limitations of the study and the last paragraph discusses the conclusion.
The article on education (Loucky, 1987) does not seem to follow Swales´ (1990) or Nwogu´s (1987) model for the Discussions section. It is labeled “Discussion and Pedagogical implications” and it only contains one short paragraph. The conclusion and recommendations are isolated in different subsection headings. These subsections appear to be larger than the conclusion and far more content-comprehensive. As Pintos and Crimi (2010) have stated “The first part of a discussion section serves the function of restating the key findings with reference to the initial question(s) or hypothesis, as well as reminding the reader of the overall aim of the study” (p.20). None of these features can be traced in the section being analyzed. The information provided is vague and all the features proposed by Crimi & Pintos (2010) take place in the Conclusions and Research Recommendations sections.
By and large, it may be assumed that the corpus of the present analysis bears some similarities and differences. Both of them are divided into subsections, although with minor differences in the subdivisions. Both of them contain figures and/or tables in the Results section to display statistical outcomes. However, they differ in the content organization and internal unity. The article by Loucky (1987) does not follow the highly technical standard format for the presentation of information that the medical RA does. As it has been previously pointed out in the introduction, medicine research papers still seem to serve for models of research writing in other fields, but, as Swales (1990) wisely commented “[f]inally, there is an element of irony in a situation wherein social scientists are engaged in a cognitive and rhetorical of method at a time when their mentors in the hard sciences are beginning, rhetorically at least, to downgrade its importance” (p.176).
References
Gardiner, P., Owen, N., Sugiyama, T., & Vandelanotte, C. (2009). Associations of Leisure-Time Internet and Computer Use with Overweight and Obesity, Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviors: Cross-Sectional Study. J Med Internet Res, 2009. 11(3): e 28. http://www.jmir.org/2009/3e28/. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1084
Loucky, J. (2007). Improving Online Reading and Vocabulary Development. KASELE Bulletin, 35, 181-188. Retrieved April, 2010 from www.caececampusuniversidad.com.ar
Nwogu, K. (1997). The Medical Research Paper: Structure and Functions. English for Specific Purposes, 16(2), 119-138. Retrieved June, 2010 from www.sciencedirect.com
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). LENGUA INGLESA ESPECIALIZADA II. Unit 3. The Research Article: Results, Discussions, and Conclusions. UNIVERSIDAD CAECE.
Swales, J. (1990) Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge Applied Linguistics Series. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Pre
The Research Article : Contrastive Analysis of Introduction and Methods sections . Part I
Research in the field of Education has flourished since the last decade with the launch of university courses for teachers. There was no research history in the field of education in our country due to absence of scientific treatment of the profession and the prevailing local academic culture which used to be mainly oral (Kandel, cited in Banfi, 2009 , discussion section). In the past few years, when universities launched complementary courses for teachers, access to systematic, controlled , empiric and critical (Sampieri, Collado and Lucio, 1998, cited in Pintos and Crimi, 2010) ways of presenting written information was gained , providing alignment with the Social Sciences, thus giving English Language Teaching (ELT) a professional status, “(…) not just in terms of the definition of profession, but as regards the academic discipline” (Banfi, 2009).
This paper aims at analysing the introduction and methods´ section of two Research Articles (RA) in the fields of medicine and education, in order to illustrate the similarities in the written presentation of research that both disciplines share and to highlight some differences inherent to each of them. For the following analysis the two articles were selected : one in the field of medicine (Gardiner, Owen, Sugiyama & Vandelanotte, 2009) and the other in the field of education( Loucky, 2007). Both papers will be analysed following the guidelines offered by the tutors of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) in The Research Article: Introduction, Literature Review and Method sections ( Pintos & Crimi, 2010).
Analysis of the Introduction Sections (IS)
Regarding the IS, it can be stated that the two articles evidence different layouts. The medicine article follows neatly and orderly the three moves proposed by Pintos & Crimi (2010). The first two paragraphs take up Move 1 (M1). The negative opening “However” marks the beginning of Move 2 (M2) which runs along three paragraphs. Move 3 (M3), starting in paragraph 6, states the aim of the study which starts with the purposive statement “The aim of this study is (…)”
The Literature Review (LR) is not structured separately from the (IS), but it is included in the first and third paragraphs of M2.
“However, most of the evidence on associations between sedentary behavior and health outcomes, such as weight status and levels of physical activity, is specific to time spent on watching television [5,6,8,10,12], which is the most commonly (…)” (para 1, Introd. Section). “(…) A study by Sugiyama et al. [22] demonstrated that, in women, time spent watching TV (…)” (para 3 , Introd. Section)
In the first paragraph, the past studies are referenced parenthetically, the numbers corresponding to the order of mention of sources in the References List (RL). In the second case the mention of the past study is done by means of an in-text citation. As the article is not written in APA style, the number after the author´s name is not the year of publication ,but , the order of mention in the RL.
Regarding the main grammatical features, it can be mentioned that the tenses used in the different moves run along the lines of those proposed by Crimi and Pintos (2010) in the grammar and Mechanics Section (p. 29).
The Present Perfect Tense is used in paragraph 1, followed by the use of the Present Passive in paragraph 2. M2 (para. 3, 4 & 5) alternate the use of The Present Simple Tense, in active and passive voices and The Present Perfect Tense in active voice. The purposive statement in M3 is written in the Present.
In the education article, the three moves are not clearly distinguished and the article is not structured following the characteristics proposed by Crimi & Pintos (2010) (pp. 28-31). The IS takes up only one paragraph and the LR stands in isolation as a separate section. The IS is all a descriptive statement , giving , first, the participants standpoint , moving afterwards to the explanation of what the study consisted of , and finishing by describing the aim using the strange pattern “ We show the students how to use WordChamp.com for improving their vocabulary learning and comprehension of any online reading (…)” (lines 6-8 , Introd. Section). The reading of the Abstract was necessary to fully comprehend the meaning of the study. There is no negative opening indicating the beginning of M2 and the purposive statement is included in the Abstract, not in the ‘Introduction’.
As for the grammatical features in the introduction section of this article, it is noticed that there is alternation in the use of Present and Past Tenses. The tenses used in the LR include The Present Perfect and The Simple Past. There is a shift to the Present tense at the end of the paragraph when the students´ and teachers´ needs –gaps- are expressed.
Examples of the issue previously explained are: “Grabe (1991) developed some useful guidelines for reading programs” (line 1, LR section). “ As Rosszell (2006) has written, ER+ is proposed as a more effective alternative to ER, and one which enabled learners” (line 5, LR section). “But both teachers and students need clear guidance in how to analyze any scanned or online text into programs (…)” (line 9, LR section)
Analysis of the Methods Sections (MS)
In both articles, the MS is brief and they also share the fact that they include the heading “Participants and Procedures”. In the case of the article on medicine, the information of the participants and the procedures is all together in one paragraph under the subheading “Participants and Procedures”. However, in the article on education there exists some information about the procedures, as a form of introduction , and then , the subheading “Participants and Procedures” is followed by information on the participants and an enlargement of the procedures previously introduced .
As regards the grammatical features of the two articles, a difference in the use of tenses along the MS can be pointed out. The medicine article starts the section in the Present Tense but shifts to the Past Tense, in active and passive voices, to explain the procedures. On the contrary, the article on education, the IORVD article, follows a strange pattern. The introduction starts in the Present Passive and shifts to Past Passive in the last sentences. But, the section under the sub-heading “Participants and Procedures” is not structured in sentences, but in phrases instead for the participants´ information. The rest of the paragraph is a piece of advice to help in the achievement of the aim.
Conclusion
All things considered, it can be assumed that the article on education attempts to meet the requirements of a RA , but when compared and contrasted to an article in the medicine field , it deviates from the scientific protocol , so usual in medicine RAs. However, the introduction of “Metodología de la Investigación” in university courses will help teachers and researchers in education achieve excellence in research writing.
References
Banfi ,C. (2009). Cristina Banfi´s page. Retrieved from http://www.cristinabanfi .com.ar/formacion.html
Gardiner, P., Owen, N., Sugiyama, T. & Vandelanotte, C., (2009) Associations of Leisure-Time Internet and Computer Use With Overweight and Obesity, Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviors: Cross-Sectional Study. J Med Internet Res, 2009. 11(3): e 28. http://www.jmir.org/2009/3e28/. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1084
Kandel, A. Cristina banfi´s page (2009) Retrieved from http://guilders.ning.com /forum/topics/publish-or-perish-in-the-elt?id=3318232%3A Topic%3A101&page=2#comments
Loucky, J., (2007). Improving Online Reading and Vocabulary Development . KASELE Bulletin, (35) (pp 181-188) Retrieved from www.caececampusuniversidad. com.ar
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). LENGUA ESPECIALIZADA II. Unit 2 . The Research Article: Introductions, Literature Review and Method Sections. UNIVERSIDAD CAECE .
This paper aims at analysing the introduction and methods´ section of two Research Articles (RA) in the fields of medicine and education, in order to illustrate the similarities in the written presentation of research that both disciplines share and to highlight some differences inherent to each of them. For the following analysis the two articles were selected : one in the field of medicine (Gardiner, Owen, Sugiyama & Vandelanotte, 2009) and the other in the field of education( Loucky, 2007). Both papers will be analysed following the guidelines offered by the tutors of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) in The Research Article: Introduction, Literature Review and Method sections ( Pintos & Crimi, 2010).
Analysis of the Introduction Sections (IS)
Regarding the IS, it can be stated that the two articles evidence different layouts. The medicine article follows neatly and orderly the three moves proposed by Pintos & Crimi (2010). The first two paragraphs take up Move 1 (M1). The negative opening “However” marks the beginning of Move 2 (M2) which runs along three paragraphs. Move 3 (M3), starting in paragraph 6, states the aim of the study which starts with the purposive statement “The aim of this study is (…)”
The Literature Review (LR) is not structured separately from the (IS), but it is included in the first and third paragraphs of M2.
“However, most of the evidence on associations between sedentary behavior and health outcomes, such as weight status and levels of physical activity, is specific to time spent on watching television [5,6,8,10,12], which is the most commonly (…)” (para 1, Introd. Section). “(…) A study by Sugiyama et al. [22] demonstrated that, in women, time spent watching TV (…)” (para 3 , Introd. Section)
In the first paragraph, the past studies are referenced parenthetically, the numbers corresponding to the order of mention of sources in the References List (RL). In the second case the mention of the past study is done by means of an in-text citation. As the article is not written in APA style, the number after the author´s name is not the year of publication ,but , the order of mention in the RL.
Regarding the main grammatical features, it can be mentioned that the tenses used in the different moves run along the lines of those proposed by Crimi and Pintos (2010) in the grammar and Mechanics Section (p. 29).
The Present Perfect Tense is used in paragraph 1, followed by the use of the Present Passive in paragraph 2. M2 (para. 3, 4 & 5) alternate the use of The Present Simple Tense, in active and passive voices and The Present Perfect Tense in active voice. The purposive statement in M3 is written in the Present.
In the education article, the three moves are not clearly distinguished and the article is not structured following the characteristics proposed by Crimi & Pintos (2010) (pp. 28-31). The IS takes up only one paragraph and the LR stands in isolation as a separate section. The IS is all a descriptive statement , giving , first, the participants standpoint , moving afterwards to the explanation of what the study consisted of , and finishing by describing the aim using the strange pattern “ We show the students how to use WordChamp.com for improving their vocabulary learning and comprehension of any online reading (…)” (lines 6-8 , Introd. Section). The reading of the Abstract was necessary to fully comprehend the meaning of the study. There is no negative opening indicating the beginning of M2 and the purposive statement is included in the Abstract, not in the ‘Introduction’.
As for the grammatical features in the introduction section of this article, it is noticed that there is alternation in the use of Present and Past Tenses. The tenses used in the LR include The Present Perfect and The Simple Past. There is a shift to the Present tense at the end of the paragraph when the students´ and teachers´ needs –gaps- are expressed.
Examples of the issue previously explained are: “Grabe (1991) developed some useful guidelines for reading programs” (line 1, LR section). “ As Rosszell (2006) has written, ER+ is proposed as a more effective alternative to ER, and one which enabled learners” (line 5, LR section). “But both teachers and students need clear guidance in how to analyze any scanned or online text into programs (…)” (line 9, LR section)
Analysis of the Methods Sections (MS)
In both articles, the MS is brief and they also share the fact that they include the heading “Participants and Procedures”. In the case of the article on medicine, the information of the participants and the procedures is all together in one paragraph under the subheading “Participants and Procedures”. However, in the article on education there exists some information about the procedures, as a form of introduction , and then , the subheading “Participants and Procedures” is followed by information on the participants and an enlargement of the procedures previously introduced .
As regards the grammatical features of the two articles, a difference in the use of tenses along the MS can be pointed out. The medicine article starts the section in the Present Tense but shifts to the Past Tense, in active and passive voices, to explain the procedures. On the contrary, the article on education, the IORVD article, follows a strange pattern. The introduction starts in the Present Passive and shifts to Past Passive in the last sentences. But, the section under the sub-heading “Participants and Procedures” is not structured in sentences, but in phrases instead for the participants´ information. The rest of the paragraph is a piece of advice to help in the achievement of the aim.
Conclusion
All things considered, it can be assumed that the article on education attempts to meet the requirements of a RA , but when compared and contrasted to an article in the medicine field , it deviates from the scientific protocol , so usual in medicine RAs. However, the introduction of “Metodología de la Investigación” in university courses will help teachers and researchers in education achieve excellence in research writing.
References
Banfi ,C. (2009). Cristina Banfi´s page. Retrieved from http://www.cristinabanfi .com.ar/formacion.html
Gardiner, P., Owen, N., Sugiyama, T. & Vandelanotte, C., (2009) Associations of Leisure-Time Internet and Computer Use With Overweight and Obesity, Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviors: Cross-Sectional Study. J Med Internet Res, 2009. 11(3): e 28. http://www.jmir.org/2009/3e28/. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1084
Kandel, A. Cristina banfi´s page (2009) Retrieved from http://guilders.ning.com /forum/topics/publish-or-perish-in-the-elt?id=3318232%3A Topic%3A101&page=2#comments
Loucky, J., (2007). Improving Online Reading and Vocabulary Development . KASELE Bulletin, (35) (pp 181-188) Retrieved from www.caececampusuniversidad. com.ar
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). LENGUA ESPECIALIZADA II. Unit 2 . The Research Article: Introductions, Literature Review and Method Sections. UNIVERSIDAD CAECE .
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)