Abstracts

Abstracts in research papers

Research papers provide writers the possibility to become members of a discourse community. They also are essential for the sharing of ideas about a certain topic. A research paper is divided into several parts that compose the paper as a whole. Those parts are: Title, Abstract, Acknowledgement, Introduction, Literature Review, Methods, Results, Discussions, Recommendations, Reference, and Appendixes.  The present paper delves into the analysis of the Abstract of four different papers, one of them coming from the medicine field and the other three coming from the education field. 

Those papers are “Treatment of hypertension in patients 80 years of age or older” written by Hypertension in the Very Elderly Trial (HYVET) in 2008; “Using DVD feature films in the EFL classroom” published in 2002 and written by Jane King; “Video in EFL classroom” written by Rammal in 2006; and “The video in the classroom: Agatha Christie’s 'evil under the sun' and the teaching of Narratology through the film” written by Kokonis in 1993. The abstracts of these papers will be analyzed by exploring their structure, by classifying them and by analyzing their linguistic features.

            Abstracts are defined within the meta-textual nature of genres as they need another text to exist. They are “a brief summary of a major point made by an author in a book or article” (Hubbuch, 1996, p. 126). Therefore, they are expected to be written once the author has finished the article or book. Abstracts are also descriptive texts as they describe the main text, which is the article or book. Swales and Freak (1994) also state that abstracts “consist of a single paragraph containing from about four to ten full sentences”.

            Bearing this in mind, especially noteworthy is the fact that not all the papers follow this rule posited by Swales and Freak. The paper coming from the medicine field has four different paragraphs divided into different sections. Should one join all the sentences, one would have a paragraph of 10 sentences. Apart from that, the paper written by King has two sentences. Therefore, it seems that there is no exact length for an Abstract.

            Depending on the type, Abstracts may have different structures. The most accepted layout forms a paragraph that contains an Introduction/Background part, with one sentence long; Materials and Methods part, with two to three sentences; Results part, with three to four sentences; and the Conclusion part, with one or two sentences. Considering the four Abstracts that are being analyzed, there is only one of them that follows this pattern, which is the RP that comes from the medicine field. This paper has the first two sentences that form the Introduction, two sentences for the Materials and Methods part, 5 sentences for the Results and one sentence for the Conclusion.

            On the other hand, the paper written by Rammal (2006) has one paragraph that contains one sentence that forms the Introduction and one sentence for the Conclusion. The paper written by King has no Results, neither Conclusion. And the paper written by Kokonis has no sentence in the Conclusion part. Consequently, it can be said that even though there is one most accepted layout, writers use the structure that they think is convenient for them according to their own set of beliefs.

            As regards the linguistic features used by the authors, it can be acknowledged the fact that all the abstracts have full sentences and that there is absence of negatives in all of them. Passive voice is present in all these papers although some active voice sentences could be found. Regarding tenses, present is the most frequently used even though some past sentences have been detected when stating the methods and the results. In all the papers coming from the education field, there are no abbreviations. However, in the paper dealing with medical issues, there are some abbreviations which are likely to be part of their medical jargon.

         Swales and Feak (1994) classify abstracts according to what their main aim is. Therefore, Abstracts can be informative or indicative. The former will provide the reader with the main findings; and the latter will indicate what kind of research has been done. Besides, Abstracts can also be divided into unstructured or structured depending on their organizational format. It is very likely that informative Abstracts are unstructured. However, this is not what the analysis of the four papers has shown. On the contrary, the medicine paper, which is rather informative with specific data and results and which describes what the authors have done in detail, is also the only one which is structured. All the other Abstracts are indicative and unstructured, that is to say, all of them do not include specific information nor contain bolded or italicized headings.

Reference

Hubbuch, S. M. (Ed. 4th). (1996). Writing research papers across the curriculum. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.

Hypertension in the Very Elderly Trial (HYVET, 2008). Treatment of hypertension in patients 80 years of age or older. The New England Journal of Medicine, 358(18). Retrieved from http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=24127

King, J. (2002). Using DVD feature films in the EFL classroom. ELT Newsletter.  Retrieved from http://www.eltnewsletter.com/back/February2002/art882002.htm

Kokonis, M. (1993). The video in the classroom: Agatha Christie’s “evil under the sun” and the teaching of narratology through the film. Education Resources Information Center. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED393427&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED393427

Rammal, S. (2006). Video in EFL classroom. Karen’s Linguistic  Issues, November. Retrieved from http://www3.telus.net/linguisticsissues/using%20video

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

Mid-term

Analysing Papers

Research papers (RP) are defined as a scientific type of papers in which research must be systematic, controlled, empiric, and critical (Samperi, Collado, Lucio, 1998). As regards layout, research papers in general are composed of several parts: title, abstract, acknowledgements, introduction, literature review, methods, results, discussions, recommendations, conclusions, references, and appendixes.  The aim of this paper will be to deeply analyze a paper written in 2011 by Judith Bennett, Martin Braund, Fred Lubben and Yvonne Mason.  The source will be evaluated taking into account the American Psychological Association (APA) style. Besides, the different sections will be explored so as to shed light on the analysis of introductions.

Taking into account the APA style, one can acknowledge the fact that these authors do not follow this style. On the contrary, except for some small details, there are several instances that show that the APA style was not taken into consideration. An example that is immediately spotted is the fact that the complete paper is justified and that there is no indentation at the beginning of each paragraph. Regarding the analysis of the table included in this part of the paper, once again, these authors seem not to bear the APA style in mind, as each word of the title should be capitalized, each table should begin on a separate page and the authors should not use vertical lines. 

Besides, these authors state their ideas with myriads of acronyms, which may make the reader feel at a lost. This illustrates the fact that the authors would seem not to be considering the fact that they may have a wider audience. It is certain that they are taking some information for granted as if all their readers knew what they are referring to.  The fact that these acronyms are not always explained when they should shows the authors are not following APA since “a term to be abbreviated must, on its first appearance, be written out completely and followed immediately by its abbreviation in parentheses” (APA, 2009, p. 107).

Regarding the layout of the paper, the authors have chosen to include different sections so as to organize the information. These sections are not the ones expected in a RP. However, the section named Review of Relevant Literature can be analyzed as if it were the introduction of a RP. According to Swales and Freak (1994) introductions have an organizational pattern that contains moves which have certain semantic and syntactic characteristics. Following this idea, this section has the moves Swales and Freak (1994) refer to.

 The first move, establishing a research territory, can be found in the first three paragraphs of that section. On the fourth paragraph move 2, establishing a niche, starts. It contains only one sentence that starts with the word “however” in a bid to show that the authors have found an area that raises questions about the situation. After that sentence, move 3, occupying the niche, begins by announcing the most important findings and by presenting the purpose of the investigation.    

Taking all this information into consideration, it can be stated that based on the previous analysis these authors would appear not to follow the APA style. Neither would they be considering the different section a RP should have.  Nevertheless, there seems to be a section which is not named “Introduction” but it functions as such since it is likely to have the same organizational pattern an introduction has.

  

Reference

American Psychological Association. (2009). Publication manual of the American

Psychological Association. (6th ed.) Washington, DC: American Psychological

Association.

Bennett, J., Braund, M., Lubben, F., & Mason, Y. (2011). Modes of Professional Development: An evaluation of the impact of different course modes operated across the National Network of Science Learning Centres. University of York, Department of Education.

Samperi, R., Collado, C., Lucio, P. (1998) Metodologia de la investigación. Mexico, D.F.: McGraw-Hill Interamericana.

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

Introductions and Methods sections

Analyzing Introductions and Methods sections

Particularly invaluable are research papers (RP) in any fields of studies since they provide the possibility to share knowledge and carry out investigations in any field. At the same time, they allow researchers to become members of a discourse community. RPs have distinctive characteristics and are composed of several parts: Title, Abstract, Acknowledgement, Introduction, Literature Review, Methods, Results, Discussions, Recommendations, Reference, and Appendixes. The present paper will delve into the Introduction, Literature Review and Method sections of two RPs from the education field and medicine field in order to depict their peculiarities. The former is named "Newspaper Articles in University EFL Reading Classes" (Ito, 1993) and the latter is named "Placebo Use in the United Kingdom: Results from a National Survey of Primary Care Practitioners" (Howick et al., 2013).

According to Swales and Freak (1994), Introductions must catch the readers’ attention as the writers need to sell their product to the readers. They compared writers to plants by saying that “as plants compete for light and space, so writers of RPs compete for acceptance and recognition” (p. 174). Introductions can be analyzed by taking the Create Research Space Model (CARS) in consideration. Following this model, Introductions are written in a general-specific manner. This means that statements go from a general topic of discussion to a particular situation of the analysis. Apart from considering this model, writers are expected to use an organizational pattern to present their introductions.  These patterns are composed by three moves or cycles, which have specific semantic and syntactic characteristics.

In both papers the different moves are likely to be detected. The main aim of the first move is to review previous research. Although writers have chosen to introduce other investigations directly, the way that has been done was different. In "Newspaper Articles in University EFL Reading Classes", Ito (1993) starts the section by saying “It has been long acknowledged that…” (p.1). On the other hand, in the other paper writers start less subtly by saying “Surveys in other countries suggest…” (Howick et al., 2013, p.2).  As regards tenses, both Introductions have the same pattern as writers have chosen to use present tenses. In the paper that comes from the medicine field, writers have used Present Simple to refer to the state of current knowledge. In the other paper, the author has used not only Present Simple but also Present Perfect in a bid to refer to the previous studies so as to show they are of utmost importance.

Especially noteworthy is the fact that the second move is presented in different ways. Its aim is to present the gap that exists in the previous research, which will provide meaning to the current paper. In a bid to show that gap, writers normally use connectors that express contrast. This is what Ito (1993) had done in his paper when using “but” in the following sentence “Newspaper articles in those textbooks, no doubt, represent authentic use of English, but they usually report events that took place more than a year before at best” (p. 1). Contrary to this, in the other paper, writers used words that carry negative connotation to show there is a gap. Some examples of these words are: only, unknown, barrier and confusion. These words were included in different sentences within the second move. Howick et al. (2013) stated:

 The only survey of placebo use in the UK was a 1976 qualitative study restricted to Welsh practitioners. Hence current prevalence of placebo use in UK primary care is unknown. A barrier to investigating placebo use is that confusion surrounds the ‘placebo’ concept.  For example, placebos are often characterized as inactive and nonspecific when in fact they can be active, and have specific effects, especially for relieving pain. (p. 2)

The aim of the third move is to occupy the gap that the writers have found by outlining purposes of the present studies and announcing the principal findings.  There are two different statements to start this move. Statements can be purposive or descriptive. The former states the purpose and the latter describes the present study. The paper written by Ito (1993) has started  with a purposive statement as he claims “This paper reports a simple but effective use of current newspaper articles in the form of a weekly short quiz in advanced EFL reading classes at Nara University of Education, Japan” (p.2). Ito (1993) continues with a descriptive statement by expressing

This weekly newspaper quiz not only takes full advantage of newspaper articles as authentic reading materials but also focuses on their immediacy as an important motivating factor for Japanese university students, whose motivation to learn English has generally dwindled very much after they have passed the all-important entrance examinations which determine most of their future career. (p.2)

In the other paper, the third move starts with a descriptive statement and then a purposive statement is introduced when the authors claim “We aimed to discover if UK general practitioners (GPs) prescribe placebos as frequently as elsewhere and also to understand the conditions under which general practitioners find placebos ethical” (p.2).

            Literature Reviews might be embedded in the first move of the Introduction indicating that a gap in the previous research has been found; or sometimes Literature Reviews can stand in isolation as a separate section. Both papers have their Literature Review inside their Introduction. Ito (1993) presents it inside the first move. In the paper coming from the medicine field, the Literature Review can be seen in the first and second move, as the authors start without mentioning any previous work in particular but referring to “surveys in various countries” (Howick et al., 2013, p. 2); and then, they continue by presenting another survey which was carried out in 1976  which is the one that shows there is a gap that needs to be filled.

            When producing the Methods section, authors should take into account that some specific information must be included, such as, the tool that has been used to collect data, the people who have participated and what is exactly what has been done. A peculiar characteristic of this section is the fact that it is often written in passive voice in order to avoid being personal. In these two papers, this rule has been applied as the use of passive voice sentences in the present and in the past is very frequent.

Swales and Freak (1994) claimed that Methods sections are normally divided into three subcategories, which are: participants, materials and procedure. In the paper written by Ito (1993), there is no Methods section as such, but there is a subtitle after the Introduction under the name of Preparation and Administration of the Newspaper Quiz. This section is also divided in three subsections: Quiz Format, Sources and Administration. It can be said that the first two subsections are part of the materials subcategory Swales and Freak (1994) refer to. In these two parts the author gives details about the quiz that has been used. A very clear example of this is the beginning of the Quiz Format subsection.

The newspaper quiz takes the form of a modified cloze test. It is different from the ordinary type of cloze test in several ways: the blanks, 10 in all, are placed rather deliberately instead of being placed at regular intervals; only nouns and verbs, usually those which are closely related to the content of a selected article, are deleted; the deleted words are listed on the blackboard in alphabetical order as the alternatives for the blanks; the use of a dictionary is allowed and encouraged. (Ito, 1993, p. 2)

The Administration subsection can be identified as the procedure section mentioned by Swales & Freak (1994). In this section how the research has been carried out is explained in detail. Ito (1993) creates a list of the different steps that the students have gone through when using the quiz. The participants section is not included in this paper. I adhere to the view that this happens because there is nothing in particular that the readers needs to know about them as the author has already said they were Japanese university students after passing the all-important examinations that will determine most of their future career.

In the other paper, writers have chosen to use a similar strategy, that is to say, they also divided the Methods section in four different subsections, which are Participants, Defining Pure and Impure Placebos, Survey Instrument and Statistical Analysis. The second and third parts can be taken as if they were one since they both refer to the material that has been used. The last section is the procedure part of the research. It is interesting to mention that in this last part, writers have changed the way to present their work as they are constantly using active voice with the personal pronoun “we”.

We used descriptive statistics (means and 95% confidence intervals) to describe practitioner characteristics and frequencies of placebo use. We reported how often respondents used all pure and all impure placebos at least once in their career (mean and 95% CI). For each type of placebo we categorized prevalence of use into: frequent (daily or approximately once per week), occasional (approximately once per month or once per year) and rare/never (more than once per year or never). (Howick et al., 2013, p. 4)

It can be concluded that even though these two papers have some differences, authors have used similar strategies and linguistic features. As regards organization, both papers have a similar structure even though the titles and subtitles of the Methods section do not coincide. In both Introductions authors have chosen to present a gap by the use of the three moves which have been easily identified. In both cases, Literature Reviews have been included in the Introduction section within the first and/or second move.

Reference

Howick et al. (2013). Placebo use in the United Kingdom: Results from a national survey of primary care practitioners. Plos One, 8(3), doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058247

Ito, H. (1993). Newspaper articles in university EFL reading classes. Bulletin of Institute for Educational Research of Nara University of Education, 29, 49-61.

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