Is There a Common Pattern for Research Papers?
In academic writing, Research Papers (RP) and Research Articles (RA) are structured in several sections. This paper will analyze the introduction and the method sections of two research reports, one belonging to the field of education and the other to the field of medicine. Comparisons between the two papers will be discussed and analysed.
According to Swales and Feak (1994), effective introductions should be written to grab the reader’s attention (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010b). In order to accomplish this purpose, the writer should follow some structural patterns when composing. For example, an introduction opens with a general discussion of a topic and gradually moves to the specific details in question. The Create a Research Space model (CARS) developed by Swales and Feak (1994) involves three main moves that depict this progress from the general to the specific issues when writing introductions.
The first move identified as creating a research space “introduce[s] previous research in the area” (Pintos & Crimi, 2010b, p. 28) and expresses the state of the arts of the fields of studies under analysis. In the RPs analyzed in the present work, this move is placed in the very first paragraphs of the introductions. Key phrases such as “[m]uch has been written about” (Gorard, 2006, p. 3) or “[t]here have been some previous studies to identify the USL’s anatomical relationships” (Vu D., Haylen B. T., Tse K. & Farnsworth, 2010, p. 1123) are used by the authors to make it clear that the topic addressed has been studied before, though some gaps in the theory call for further studies, and make their work worth considering, as suggested by the second move.
After the state of the arts is acknowledged in the first move, the gaps in the available theory are highlighted and the necessity for further investigation is posed. Swales and Feak (1994) coin the phrase “establish the niche” (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010b, p. 28) to refer to this move in which authors “turn to present their motivations for the study” (Pintos & Crimi, 2010b, p. 28). One more time, there seems to be a parallel between the two papers analyzed herein, since both authors make overt reference to this need for further study. Gorard (2006) argues that “researchers should be more concerned with developing and using indicators of the scientific importance of their results” (p. 3) and he adds that “they could ask whether what they have found fits observations elsewhere” (p. 3). Similarly, Vu D. et al. (2010) go on to say that:
The published descriptions of the anatomy of the USL have differed widely. The proximal attachment has been the subject of controversy with some believing it connects to the sacrum while others postulating an attachment o the sacrospinous ligament and coccygeus. While some authors, distinguish between the USL and the
so-called (as there is controversy over terminology) cardinal ligament (CL), others refer to a less defined “uterosacral-cardinal ligament complex. (p. 1123)
Finally, it is in the third move that the purpose of the paper is clearly announced. Once the gap is revealed, researchers introduce their own investigation work to fill the gap in theory or, Swales and Feak (1994) would put it, to occupy the niche (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010a, p. 28). Once again, there exist some key phrases such as “our aim is” (Vu D. et al., 2010, p. 1124) or “this paper illustrates these points” (Gorard, 2006, p. 3) to introduce the aim of the researchers, and both papers seem to coincide in this aspect too.
Regarding the methods section of RPs, Pintos and Crimi (2010b) state they are mainly characterized by “following the principles of process paragraphs [and by] mak[ing] use of passive voice” (p.p. 33-34). These linguistic and textual features are illustrated in both papers; in the case of medicine, for example, the observations and procedures carried out during the medical research are registered using the past passive while in the paper of education the past passive is used to compare the findings of the two correlational studies.
Another textual feature found in the method section is the use of headings to open the new section of the paper. Swales and Feak (1994) divide this section in three: “a) participants, b) materials, c) procedures” (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010b, p. 34). Even though the methods sections in both papers are included under the heading methods, the medicine RP includes materials and methods under the same headings and uses subheadings to refer to the specific terminology used and the procedures conducted during research. On the other hand, the three subheadings are not included in the paper of education - the participants, the materials and the procedure are integrated as part of the main section.
One last characteristic of methods sections seems to be that they take account of the types of research studies being conducted. In the education paper, for example, the researchers analyze the relationship between two variables and how they correlate, features commonly covered in correlational researches and especially found in the Social Science (Water, n.d., cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010a). In contrast, the medicine paper seems to have many of the distinguishing characteristics of a descriptive research study since it describes the specific features of the phenomenon under analysis and the “interrelationships of phenomena and changes that take place as a function of time” (Key, 2002, cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010a, p.11).
All in all, after both research papers have been analyzed and contrasted, it can be concluded that whereas their introductions are alike – in terms of general to specific organization of information and moves distribution – and their methods sections share a style in the use of passive voice and some formal linguistic patterns, there are still some differences as regards the use of headings, maybe due to field-specific prescriptions. What is more remarkable, the kind of research carried out. The medicine paper is purely descriptive but the education paper undertakes correlative research. What remains to be analyzed now is whether the characteristics outlined above can transcend this work and be regarded as field specific, i.e. from medicine or education, or they simply apply to the two particular cases considered here.
Reference
Gorard, S., (2006). Re-analysing the Value-added of Primary Schools. Retrieved April 2010 from http://www.york.ac.uk/media/educationalstudies/documents/research/Paper15Value-addedinprimaryschools.pdf
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010a). Unit 1: Defining concepts in research. Universidad CAECE. Buenos Aires Argentina
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010b). Unit 2: The research article: Introduction, literature review and method sections. Universidad CAECE. Buenos Aires Argentina
Vu D., Haylen B. T., Tse K. & Farnsworth, A. (2010). Surgical Anatomy of the Uterosacral Ligament. Department of Educational Studies. International Urogynecology Journal, 21, 1123-1128. Doi:10.1007/s00192-010-1147-8. Retrieved April 2010 from http://www.med.unsw.edu.au/SOMSWeb.nsf/resources/POM1002/$file/Sept2010.pdf
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario