Comparative Analysis of Four Abstracts in Specialized Journals

Comparative Analysis of Four Abstracts in Specialized Journals

Burgos Madia

Garcete Marisol

UCAECE

     Writing academic summaries has become a task in itself in which writers briefly display their understanding of the sources analyzed. Research Paper abstracts are considered one type of summary in the sense that they attempt to succinctly condense the content of a Paper that has already been produced (Swales & Feak, 1994). Authors (APA, 2011; Swales & Feak, 1994; Wallwork, 2011) agree that the audience should be in mind because it is the readers who will determine whether to continue reading the entire research based on how appealing the abstract is.

Producing this kind of summary has been claimed to be a particularly complex process to such an extent that a number of handbooks and books have been published to provide detailed guidance on how to construct them. Although exploration of abstracts across disciplines has been carried out, the comparison and contrast of several Abstract sections is still limited. It is the purpose of the present paper to analyze the Abstract sections of four Research Articles (RA) in specialized journals: two in the field of education by Aydin and Yildiz (2014) and by Collentine (2009) and two in the field of medicine by Gregg et al. (2014) and by Reynolds et al. (2006). 

Both RAs in the educational field by Aydin and Yildiz (2014) and by Collentine (2009) present an Abstract section embedded in the first page at the beginning of the RA between the title and the Introduction of the paper. Neither of the Abstracts conforms to all standard APA conventions since they were not written on a new page and the label Abstract does not appear. They were both typed in single-spaced format on the very next line below the authors as a single paragraph in block format. No titles or subtitles have been included indicating that the organizational format is unstructured. As for word length, they both respect the limit range: 190 in the RA by Aydin and Yildiz (2014) and 203 in the RA by Collentine (2009).

The article by Aydin and Yildiz (2014) directly starts with the scope of the study, whereas the one by Collentine (2009) takes two long sentences to introduce the topic. The MRAD structure (Methods-Results-Analysis-Discussion) is followed orderly in a results-driven approach “because [they] concentrate on the research findings and what might be concluded from them” (Swales and Feak, 1994, pp.210-211). They are both informative abstracts since they look back to the past depicting what researchers have done and the results the study has yielded.

Regarding linguistic features the article by Aydin and Yildiz (2014) makes use of past simple and past passive voice whereas the article by Collentine (2009) mainly makes use of present simple tense for established knowledge and past simple. While impersonal passive has been used in the article about wikis, the article about computer-mediated communication has chosen a human agent: the subject pronoun we.  Key words have only been included in the article by Aydin and Yildiz (2014); according to Wallwork (2011) “it makes sense to have key words in your abstract (and title too) because it forces you, the author, to decide what words in your paper really are important. The key words are also the words that readers are looking for in their initial search and then when they actually scan your abstract” (p.190).

Abstract sections in the medicine field RAs by Gregg et. al. (2014) and by Reynolds et al. (2006) bear an obvious resemblance. The sections have been placed below the title and authors on the first page. The headline Abstract has been typed in capital letters and centered. Both abstracts follow the IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion) formula and are structured with bolded red sub-headings identifying the main sections of the RP: Background, Methods, Results and Conclusion. Both RAs are informative relying heavily on data. For example, “rates of all five complications declined between 1990 and 2010, with the largest relative declines in acute myocardial infarction (−67.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], −76.2 to −59.3) and death from hyperglycemic crisis (−64.4%; 95% CI, −68.0 to −60.9), followed by stroke and amputations, which each declined by approximately half (−52.7% and −51.4%, respectively)” (Gregg et al, 2014, p. 1514). There is a clear-cut look into the past and a thorough description of what researchers have done.

Some of the linguistic specifications outlined by Graetz (1985) (as cited in Swales and Feak, 1994) are followed in these sections: there is a use of full sentences in simple past tense throughout most of the section; present perfect is also used under the headings Background and Conclusion in the article by Gregg et. al. (2014). Regarding the writing approach, it might be said that both authors have adopted a RP Summary approach that provides “one – or two – sentences synopses of each of the four sections” (Swales and Feak, 1994, p. 211). Regarding word length, these RAs surpass the typical range: there are 322 words in the article by Gregg et al. (2014) and 311 in the one by Reynolds et al. (2006). Even though it is longer, it contributes to readability. Key words have not been included in any of the RAs.

As Wallwork (2011) claims, “abstracts are like advertisements for your paper” (p. 184). Therefore, they should be written in such a way that readers will feel compelled to read the entire article. In doing this, researchers should not neglect to comply with standard lineaments. The abstracts in the education field and the ones in the medicine filed reveal some similarities. Even though they do not share format characteristics, they are self-contained summaries that seem to be accurate, concise, coherent and readable.

References

 American Psychological Association. (2011). Publication Manual (6th ed.). British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data: Washington, DC. 

Aydin, Z. &Yildiz, S. (2014). Using wikis to promote collaborative EFL writing. Language Learning & Technology, 18 (1), 160-180. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/february2014/aydinyildiz.pdf

Collentine, K. (2009). Learner use of holistic language units in multimodal, task-based synchronous computer-mediated communication. Language Learning & Technology, 13(2), 68-87. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol13num2/collentine.pdf

Gregg, E. W., Li, Y., Wang, J., Rios Burrows, N., Ali, M. K., Rolka, D., ... Geiss, L. (2014). Changes in diabetes-related complications in the United States, 1990-2010 [Electronic version]. The New England Journal of Medicine, 370 (16), 1514-1523.

doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1310799

Reynolds, C., Dew, M.A., Pollock, B. G., Mulsant, B. H., Frank, E., Miller, M. D., … Kupfer, D. J .(2006). Maintenance treatment of major depression in old age [Electronic version]. The New England Journal of Medicine, 354, 1130-8.

doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa052619

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

Wallwork, A. (2011). English for writing Research Papers. Italy: Springer.

doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-7922-3

Crediting Sources in Research Articles

Crediting Sources in Research Articles

When writing a Research Article (RA), it is of utmost importance to credit the sources cited or consulted.  Constructing a Reference List (RL) has a twofold objective: Avoiding plagiarism because as Swales and Feak (1994) state “it is a sign of disrespect—rather than respect—to copy without acknowledgment from the works of published authorities” (p.125)  and “enabling readers to retrieve and use the sources” (APA, 2011, p.180). Depending on the field the writers belongs to, they will select the most appropriate academic Documentation System available. Numerous manuals and online resources have been created to aid writers in the construction of correct RLs; however, few attempts have been made to critically analyze a RL. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the accuracy and completeness of the RL provided by the tutor.

     The works consulted in the RL indicates that the RA is related to the Environmental Sciences. The Documentation System generally followed by writers on this knowledge area is the Council of Science Editors (CSE); however, the one used as a guideline for this RL is the Modern Language Association (MLA) which bears some considerable differences with the American Psychological Association style (APA). For example, the heading to list sources at the end of a document is Works cited centered in upper and lower cases, whereas the one used in APA style is References.     

     Even though all the components —author, title, publication date — seem to be present and organized in alphabetical order, the way of acknowledging sources throughout the list seems to be inconsistent. The author of the first entry is missing or misplaced, it is not clear whether the Environmental Defense Fund is a corporate author or it is the name of the publisher.  Different types of quotation marks have been used: "Blueprint Lays Out Clear Path for Climate Action" and “Clinton on Climate Change” which makes it difficult for the reader to know what type of document they might be. Pages or paragraph numbers within the documents cited have not been included, neither have retrieval links. Sources are repeated twice in each entry with different formats, as in “Environmental Defense Fund. Environmental Defense Fund.”. The list has not been indented and does not seem to have been double-spaced.

     Regarding authors, full names have been included instead of initials for first names: Clinton, Bill and Dean, Cornelia. The use of italics is not clear and might lead to lack of clarity. For example, the names of the newspapers are repeated twice and italicized once. According to APA (2011), names of newspapers should be italicized and detailed publication date together with page numbers need to be provided.

     RLs should be as accurate and complete as possible in order to facilitate the reader to find the sources cited. In the case of the list provided, if readers are used to working with APA style, they would find many inconsistencies which will not only obscure the understanding of the type of works cited but also complicate their retrieval. If writers fail to carefully follow requirements for documenting papers in the corresponding style, their papers might not be accepted or published by well-known journals. Complying with academic standards will pave the way for being part of a broader Discourse Community.

References

     American Psychological Association. (2011). Publication Manual (6th ed.). British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data: Washington, DC. 

     Swales, J. M. & Feak C. B.(1994). Academic Writing for Graduate Students. Essential Tasks and Skills. (3rd ed.). The USA: University of Michigan Press. 

Research Articles: Results, Discussion and Conclusion Sections analyzed

Research Articles: Results, Discussion and Conclusion Sections analyzed

Burgos Madia 

Garcete Marisol
UCAECE

  Writing Research Articles (RAs) is no easy task; not only do writers have to clearly display the results of their investigations but also they have to position themselves in their competitive fields of study “ showing that [they] are relevant and significant and have some new contribution to make” (Swales, 1994, p.156) . Fortunately, writers such as Swales and Feak (1994), among others, have extensively analyzed this genre developing reliable and clear guidelines as to how to construct them. However, few studies have attempted to compare and contrast sections of RAs in different areas of knowledge to reveal similarities and differences. It is the purpose of the present paper to analyze the Results, Discussion and Conclusion sections of two RAs: one in the field of Education by Hermes and King (2013) and the other in the field of Medicine by Gregg et al. (2014).
     The article by Hermes and King (2013) has been written as a problem-solution (PS) text devoting four pages to describe in detail – organized in subtitles – the situation, the problem and a possible solution. After the Methods section, the word Findings is used as a subtitle instead of the word Results. It is typed in bold capital letters on the left margin. Wallwork (2011) states that “the standard procedure is to present [the results] with little or no interpretation or discussion. This means that the Results is generally the shortest section in a paper” (p. 233). However, not only does this section take up seven pages but it also contains a few interpretations of key findings. For example, “our analysis (. . .) points to how the software has the potential to promote face-to-face, interpersonal interactions within the family” (p.131). Other interpretations have been weakened by the verb appear:“while the software fit into already established dynamics; it did not (. . .) appear to directly impact language use patterns with their children” (p.136).
     Regarding tables and figures, this section does not make use of them; the only element that has been included is the transcripts of parts of video-taped interviews. The transcriptions have been organized into subtitles with the word Excerpt in bold with corresponding numbers followed by the week number in which the videos have been recorded. Readers are referred to excerpts by phrases such as “This is apparent in Excerpt 1”, “This is illustrated in Excerpt 2 below”, “As Excerpt 4 suggests”, etc. Past simple tense has been used throughout this section to report about past events.
     The Discussion Section has been written separately; the word Discussion is typed in bold and capital letters on the left margin. At the beginning the authors summarize briefly their findings and refer back to the question that originated the study: “Is there potential for this technological tool to help learners make the leap from learning language as an isolated, academic task to actually using the language for everyday communication?” (p. 138). Hermes and King (2013) analyze what the finding imply and state the reasons for this outcome.
     Expression of distance and probability such as copular verbs, adverbs and the modal verb might can be found when interpreting the findings: “While this might well be indicative of Eileen’s interpretation of the researchers’ expectations surrounding the task, it also is suggestive of her conceptions of the ways in which Ojibwe can and should be used”; “she herself and her boys, reportedly started to use more Ojibwe with the grandparents”; “the technology did seem to create a bridge, that is, a means for Eileen to learn reportedly enough language to respond to her parents occasionally in Ojibwe”; “Eileen’s case suggested ways in which Ojibwemodaa might jumpstart authentic language use, and might help shift language learning from a chore to something she considers part of her personal time”(pp.138-139).
     In the Conclusions section Hermes and King (2013) seem to meet the criteria suggested by Wallwok (2011) in the sense that they briefly revisited the most important findings pointing out how these create knowledge: “Findings here suggest that these tools have the potential to jumpstart offline language use or even provide an occasion for latent speakers to rally around”; highlighted the importance and significance of those findings: “We should note that in some ways the research study itself provided a measure of structure and support for learning at home”; acknowledged the limitations of the study: “However, more work needs to be done to understand specifically what kinds of tools or activities could motivate youth to embrace learning their heritage language”; provided suggestions for improvements: “These findings suggest ways in which the software might be redesigned to help support such a shift”; and made recommendations for policy changes: “This case study also suggests it might be useful for language revitalization efforts to invest in validation and development of informal learning networks”, “the present research suggests that informal learning networks and the language learning technology needed to get them started, merit greater attention and investment” (p.141).
     In the article by Gregg et al. (2014) the Results section is presented in isolation and its headline is typed in capital letters and centered. This section is subdivided into two subtitles signaled in bold capital letters on the left margin: ‘Rates of Diabetes’ and ‘Rates of Diabetes-related Complications’ which clearly present the main findings of the research. Simple past tense is used throughout the section to refer to the outcomes produced.
The analysis of data is displayed within the text, discussing only the highlights. Readers are referred to tables and figures for more detailed information: “(Table S1 in the Supplementary Appendix shows the distribution of diagnosed diabetes in the civilian population according to age, sex, and race)”, “(Tables S4, S5, and S6 in the SupplementaryAppendix)”, “(Table 1 and Fig. 1A)” (pp. 1516-1519).
     Considering the rules established by the American Psychological Association (2007), the tables and figures presented in the article comply with most of the characteristics. It is important to mention that there are three tables numbered consecutively with individual titles with each word capitalized, though not italicized, which adequately explain the content of the table. Only two tables begin on a separate page. All the data is presented and separated in horizontal lines where every column and row has a heading. However, not all the elements of the table are doubled spaced probably because of specific journal printing requirements.
     As regards the figures used in this RA, there are two line graphs presented in one column. They include a caption underneath the figure with the word Figure and its corresponding number. However, the figure and figure number are not in italics or doubled-spaced.
     The Discussion section in the article has been written under the heading Discussion in capital letters and centered. The descriptive nature of the section is clearly seen as the author explained the findings and analyzed several trends on diabetes-related complications between 1990 and 2010 in the U.S. population of adults with diabetes. Moreover, the section also explains the causes and effects of many other variables found while researching.
     Findings in the section are presented using the present perfect tense, some modal verbs and several expressions of distance and probability. For instance, “These findings probably reflect a combination of advances in acute clinical care”; “These changes (. . .) were likely to have influenced rates of myocardial infarction, stroke, end-stage renal disease, and amputation.”; “The screening for early complications may have contributed reductions in rates of end-stage renal disease” (p.1521).
     At this point, it might be relevant to mention that there is no visible distinction between the Discussion and Conclusions sections in the article as they seem to be blended at the end. However, there is a short and clear-cut conclusion, under that heading typed in red and capital letters, at the very beginning of the article in the Abstract section. Further concluding details are added almost at the end of the RA and a final idea concludes the article: “the total burden, or absolute number of cases of complications, will probably continue to increase in the coming decades” (p. 1522).
     All in all, even though the RAs analyzed partially follow the established conventions for the Discussion, Result and Conclusion sections, the information they convey is equally valuable and relevant. It can be stated that scholars in different areas of knowledge will adapt the requirements to their research needs. For instance, the article in the Medicine field have recourse to tables and figures due to the extensive numerical data, whereas the article in the Education field dealt with more qualitative data which did not demand the used of these strategies. Being aware of different text-types and being able to recognize the structure and main elements in RAs, help us to construct our own Research Papers to gradually take a more active part in the discourse community we belong to.

References

     American Psychological Association. (2011). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th Ed). Washington, DC: British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.
     Gegg, E. W., Li, Y., Wang, J., Rios Burrows, N., Ali, M. K., Rolka, D., ... Geiss, L. (2014). Changes in diabetes-related complications in the United States, 1990-2010 [Electronic version]. The New England Journal of Medicine.370 (16), 1514-1523.
    doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1310799
     Hermes M. & King K. A. (2013). Ojibwe language revitalization, multimedia technology, and family language learning [Electronic version]. Language Learning & Technology, 17, (1), 125–144.
     doi: 10.1.1.295.2845
     Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in Academic and Research settings. New York: Cambridge Univerity Press.
     Swales, J.M., & Feak, C.B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Harbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
     Wallwork, A. (2011). English for writing Research Papers. Italy: Springer.
     doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-7922-3

Research Articles: An Analysis of the Introduction and Method Sections

Research Articles: An Analysis of the Introduction and Method Sections

According to the American Psychological Association (APA), “Research is complete only when the results are shared with the scientific community” (2011, p.9). In doing so, not only do researchers have to display language skills in order to be clear and concise but they also need to have knowledge of the structure of a Research Article (RA) so as to be understood by the discourse community they belong to. 

Much research has been done to establish the underlying organization of RAs (Swales, 1990; Swales and Feak, 2012) with the aim of providing writers with explicit and practical guidelines. However, few attempts have been made to compare and contrast each section of RAs from two different fields of investigation with the aid of a peer editor and the utilization of a wiki. The purpose of this paper is to perform a thorough analysis of the structure of the Introduction and the Methods sections of two RAs, one in the field of education by Hermes and King (2013) and the other in the field of medicine by Reynolds et al. (2006). 

One of the most important sections in RAs is the Introduction in which you compel the interest of readers by creating a research gap.  Both articles will be analyzed in light of the Creating a Research Space Model (C.A.R.S.) and the general-specific (GS) criteria of organizing texts (Swales and Feak, 1994).

Both articles evidence a neatly and standardized introduction which follows the overall rhetorical shape of GS texts. Move 1 is signaled by the literature review in both fields which describes the current state of the phenomena studied: The article written by Hermes and King (2013) claims centrality by stating the critical importance of the research: “If the language is not transmitted to younger generations within the next decade, Ojibwe, (…) could cease to be a living language” (para. 1) and the article written by Reynolds et al. (2006) does that by stating that “Finding practical and affordable depression-management strategies that prevent recurrence is of great importance” (para. 1). As for grammatical features, tenses used in this move are Present Simple and Present Perfect. Only the article about Ojivwe uses Present passive voice.

After the territory has been established by making a centrality claim, making topic generalizations and reviewing what has been done by whom in previous research, both articles continue with Move 2. Authors signal this change by the subordinating conjunction however with the intent to establish a niche in the literature reviewed. The following negative openings have been chosen: “Little is known about how technology might be useful to Indigenous language learning among children and families in informal contexts” (Hermes and King, 2013, para. 1) and “there is little information about the long-term efficacy of SSRIs or psychotherapy in the elderly (…). There is also no consensus about whether long-term maintenance pharmacotherapy is appropriate after a first episode of depression” (Reynolds et al., 2006, para. 2).

Once the gap has been identified, both articles continue to Move 3. Neither of the authors begin this move with a purposive statement; they occupy the niche by means of descriptive statements of their present study: “Addressing this gap, this research project examined how a recently developed multimedia software program, Ojibwemodaa, was used by families at home” (Hermes and King, 2013, para. 1) and “We assessed whether long-term antidepressant treatment would affect the recurrence of depression specifically in people 70 years of age or older” (Reynolds et al., 2006, para. 3). Only the article on Ojivwe indicates the structure of the paper in the end of the introduction which is followed by further subheadings: Technology and Indigenous Language Revitalization, Context and theoretical framework and Ojibwemodaa software. 

Tenses used in this move are past simple and past passive voice. The article in the education field has chosen inanimate agent (passive voice), whereas the article in the medicine field has chosen a human agent: the subject pronoun “we”.

Regarding the acknowledgment of sources, the article in the field of education follows the American Psychological Association (APA) guidelines of in-text citations and reference list whereas the one in the field of medicine has recourse to numbered end notes organized in the References section in order of appearance and not in alphabetical order.   

Another equally important section is Methods, which describes how the research has been carried out allowing for future replication. Whereas the authors of the article “Maintenance Treatment of Major Depression in Old Age” have centered the word Methods at the start of the section and have included no sub-headings other than Statistical Analysis, the authors of the article “Ojibwe Language Revitalization, Multimedia Technology, and Family Language Learning” have chosen the heading Research Design typed in the left margin in upper case and bold letters and have included three sub-headings typed in the left margin in bold: Data Collection and Analysis, Participants and Study Motivation and Participant Retention.

The information disclosed in both Methods sections follows Sampieri, Collado and Baptista’s (2010) suggestions of what to include: Method, Context, Sample, Design and Procedure (pp. 351-352). As both articles describe how data was collected, how the participants were selected and how the research was carried out, tenses used in this section are mainly Past Simple in active and passive voice. As regards tables and figures, the article by Reynolds et al. includes them and directs readers to see them in parenthesis without the use of the imperative see and the abbreviation fig. On the other hand, the article by Hermes and King has only included figures in the first part of the paper and has signaled them by the use of the imperative see and the complete word figure.

All things considered, it can be stated that even though the articles in the fields of education and medicine do not possess the same layout or the same style of acknowledging sources, they have both followed the steps in the process of conducting scientific research. Both have structured the content by complying with the Creating a Research Space Model (C.A.R.S.) and with the general-specific (GS) criteria of organizing texts (Swales and Feak, 1994). Moreover, they contain relevant and valuable information which contributes to the production of knowledge within their discourse communities.

References

 American Psychological Association. (2011). Publication Manual (6th ed.). British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data: Washington, DC. 

Hermes M. & King K. A. (2013). Ojibwe language revitalization, multimedia technology, and family language learning [Electronic version]. Language Learning & Technology, 17, (1), 125–144.

doi: 10.1.1.295.2845

Reynolds, C., Dew, M.A., Pollock, B. G., Mulsant, B. H., Frank, E., Miller, M. D., … Kupfer, D. J .(2006). Maintenance treatment of major depression in old age [Electronic version]. The New England Journal of Medicine, 354, 1130-8.

doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa052619

Hernández Sampieri, R., Fernández Collado, C., & Baptista Lucio, P. (2010). Metodología de la investigación [Methodology of investigation]. (5th ed.). McGraw Hill: México.

Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English for Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: CUP. 

Swales, J. M. & Feak C. B.(1994). Academic Writing for Graduate Students. Essential Tasks and Skills. (3rd ed.). The USA: University of Michigan Press.