The introduction section of research articles in English and Turkish: The case of educational sciences – a preliminary study

Abstract

Readers’ decisions about the relevance and significance of research presented in a journal article are often influenced by the introduction section. Several factors contribute to authors’ writing of effective introductions. This descriptive study aimed to explore strategies used by English and Turkish authors in the introduction section of educational sciences research articles published between 2012 and 2018. Towards this end, the creation of a research space (CARS) model and authorial voice were investigated in a 358,068-word collection of 62 journal articles (31 Turkish & 31 English). Results showed that the English collection revealed more frequent use of the submoves in CARS. Additionally, it included other moves (i.e., announcing principal findings and description of the methodology used) which were absent in the Turkish collection of text. The authors of the English introductions and those of the Turkish introductions also differed from each other significantly in their use of authorial voice. The former used the active voice more often than the passive voice. There was also some use of personal pronouns in the English texts while they were never used in the Turkish texts. These results point to a general pattern in education research article introductions in English and Turkish. The results imply that authors' lack of attention to these trends when writing in a foreign language may result in limited visibility in their fields. It is, therefore, recommended that scholars and training students should be informed about the ways they could navigate these issues within their discourse communities.

Keywords

• Authorial voice; CARS model; education research articles; introduction

References

1. Acar, D. (2016). Çocuk ve mimarlık: Küçük çocuklar için mimari tasarım öğretimi programı. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(1), 66-81.
2. Adika, G. S. K. (2014). Swales’ CARS model and the metaphor of research space: An illustration with an African journal. Legon Journal of the Humanities, 25, 58-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ljh.v25i1.4
3. Afshar, H. S., Doosti, M., & Movassagh, H. (2018). A genre analysis of the introduction section of applied linguistics and chemistry research articles. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21(1), 163-214.
4. Alley, M. (2013). The craft of scientific writing. New York, NY: Springer. American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
5. Anthony, L. (1999). Writing research article introductions in software engineering: How accurate is a standard model? IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 42(1), 38-46.
6. Arvay, A., & Tanko, G. (2004). A contrastive analysis of English and Hungarian theoretical research article introductions, IRAL, 42(1), 71-100.
7. Ayvacı, H. Ş., Atik, A., & Ürey, M. (2016). Okul öncesi çocuklarının bilim insanı kavramına yönelik algıları. Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(3), 669-689.
8. Beyaztaş, D. İ., & Şahin, S. G. (2017). Öğrenme yaklaşımları ile öğrenme stratejilerini kullanma kalitesi arasındaki ilişkilerin modellenmesi. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 50(2), 59-78.

9. Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
10. Candan, E. (2007). Türklerin kültür kökenleri. İstanbul: Sınır Ötesi Yayınları.
11. Carciu, O. M. (2009). An intercultural study of first-person plural references in biomedical writing. Ibérica, 18, 71-92.
12. Cargill, M., & O’Connor, P. (2013). Writing scientific research articles: Strategy and steps (2nd ed.). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
13. Causapin, M., & Groombridge, T. (2017). The effects of language simplification and pictures on the ability of Emirati university students to comprehend and solve mathematics word problems. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 14(2). http//doi.org/10.18538/lthe.v14.n2.288
14. Chandrasegara, A. (2012). Empowering second-language writers through rhetorical move analysis. In C.
15. Gitsaki, & R. B. Baldauf Jr. (Eds.), Future directions in applied linguistics: Local and global perspectives (pp. 10-25). Newcastle, England: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Crookes, G. (1986). Towards a validated analysis of scientific text structure. Applied Linguistics, 7, 57-70.
16. Deveci, T. (2019). Sentence openers in academic writing: A comparison between seminar texts and students’ reflective writing papers. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(1), 247-261.
17. Deveci, T., & Nunn, R. (2018). Use of relative clauses in humanities and social sciences research articles: A case study. Linguistics and Literature Studies, 6(1), 17-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.13189/lls.2018.060103
18. Deveci, T., & Nunn, R. (2020). First person pronouns in method section of education research articles: The case of Turkish scholars. In O. Mentz & K. Papaja (Eds.), Focus on Language: Challenging Language Learning and Language Teaching in Peace and Global Education (pp. 286-311). Münster: LIT Verlag volume 10 of the book series: Europa lernen. Pespektiven für eine Didaktik europäischer Kulturstudien.
19. Dontcheva-Navratilova, O. (2013). Authorial presence in academic discourse: Functions of author-reference pronouns. Linguistica Pragensia, 23(1), 9-30.
20. Dudley-Evans, T. (2000). Genre analysis: A key to a theory of ESP? Ibérica, 2, 3-11.
21. Englander, K. (2014). Writing publishing science research papers in English: A global perspective. Toronto, Canada: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7714-9
22. Fudhla, N., Rozimela, Y., & Ningsih, K. (2014). An analysis of students' research proposal introduction based on CARS model at STAIN Sjech M. Djamil Djambek Bukittinggi. Journal English Language Teaching, 2, 66-77.
23. Gastel, B., & Day, R. A. (2016). How to publish a scientific paper (8th ed.). Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood.
24. Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25. Gupta, R. (1995). Managing general and specific information in introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 14(1), 59-75.
26. Habibie, P. (2008). Genre analysis of research article introductions across ESP, Psycholinguistics, and Sociolinguistics. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 87-111.
27. Harwood, N. (2005). ‘Nowhere has anyone attempted … In this article I aim to do just that’: A corpus-based study of self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(8), 1207-1231.
28. Hirano, E. (2009). Research article introductions in English for specific purposes: A comparison between Brazilian Portuguese and English. English for Specific Purposes, 28(4), 240-250.
29. Howe, L. (2016). Resistance, transformation, and identity: Replacing at-risk patterns with agency through the creative writing workshop. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 25, 51-67.
30. Hüttner, J. (2015). Communicative purpose in student genres: Evidence from authors and texts. Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen, 44(1), 29-43.
31. Hyland, K. (1999). Disciplinary discourses: Writer stance in research articles. In C. Candlin & K. Hyland (Eds.), Writing: Texts, processes and practices (pp. 99–121). London, England and New York, NY: Longman.
32. Hyland, K. (2002). Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1091-1112.
33. Ioannis, A., & Eleftheria, I. (2018). Comparison of students with non-verbal learning disabilities and students with Asperger syndrome in solving word arithmetic problems. European Journal of Special Education Research, 3(3), 27-48.
34. Işık-Taş, E. (2008). A corpus-based analysis of genre-specific discourse of research: The research article and the PhD thesis in ELT (Unpublished PhD Dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
35. Işık-Taş, E. (2010). “In this paper I will discuss...”: Current trends in academic writing. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 3, 121-126.
36. İşler, C. (2018). The use of first person pronouns in master's theses written in English by Turkish authors. Journal of English and Education, 4(1), 12-20.
37. Jalilifar, A., Hayati, A. M., & Namdari, N. (2012). A comparative study of research article discussion sections of local and international applied linguistics journals. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 9(1), 1-29.
38. Kafes, H. (2012). Cultural traces on the rhetorical organization of research article abstracts. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 3(3), 207-220.
39. Krashen, S. (1984). Writing: Research, theory and application. Oxford, England: Pergamon Institute of English. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100006197
40. Kuhi, D., Tofigh, M., & Babaie, R. (2013). Writers’ self-representation in academic writing: The case of computer engineering research articles by English versus Iranian writers, International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 2(3), 35-48.
41. LaForge, C., Perro, M., Roy-Charland, A., Roy, E. M., & Carignan, I. (2018). Contributing to children's early comprehension of emotions: A picture book approach. Canadian Journal of Education, 4(1), 301-328.
42. Loi, C. K., & Evans, M. S. (2010). Cultural differences in the organization of research article introductions from the field of educational psychology: English and Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(10), 2814-2825.
43. Louie, D. (2018). Sexual exploitation prevention education for indigenous girls. Canadian Journal of Education, 41(2), 633-663.
44. Maajeeny, H. (2018). Children with emotional and behavioral disorders in Saudi Arabia: A preliminary prevalence screening. European Journal of Special Education Research, 3(3), 49-77.
45. Martin-Martin, P. (2013). The teaching of academic writing to English as a second language students: A functional genre-based approach. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 19, 329-351.
46. Maznun, M. D. B., Monsefi, R., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2017). Undergraduate ESL students’ difficulties in writing the introduction for research reports. Advances in Language and Literacy Studies, 8(1), 9-16.
47. McCallum, L. (2016). Exploring authorial presence through the use of first person pronouns: Evidence from a Saudi university. Arab World English Journal, 7(2), 118-135. Merriam-Webster.com. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/introduce
48. Michael, N., & Gorpe, T. S. (2017). Public relations for the next generation: Middle East Public Relations Association (MEPRA)’s engagement with students. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 14(2). http//dx.doi.org/10.18538/lthe.v14.n2.268
49. Mishra, N., Ahmed, I. A., & Al Hadabi, S. J. (2017). A major choice: Exploring the factors influencing undergraduate choices of communication major. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 14(2). http//doi.org/10.18538/lthe.v14.n2.292.
50. Nunn, R. (2008). Do academic reviewers readily accept a first-person voice? Asian EFL Journal, 10(2), 210-229.
51. Nunn, R. (2012). In search of a personal voice: A tale of two papers. In J. Adamson & R. Nunn (Eds.). Editorial and authorial voices in EFL academic journal publishing (pp. 31-43). Australia: Asian EFL Journal Press.
52. Nunn, R. (2014). Holistic learning, first-person voice and developing academic competence. Asian EFL Journal, 74, 19-32.
53. Nunn, R., Brandt, C., & Deveci, T. (2018). Transparency, subjectivity and objectivity in academic texts. ESBB English Scholarship Beyond Borders, 4(1), 71-102.
54. Nunn, R., Deveci, T., Khan, I., & Ayish, N. (2018). A transitivity investigation of Nature journal articles. The Linguistics Journal, 12(1), 192-220.
55. Özel, M., & Akyol, C. (2016). Bu benim eserim projeleri hazırlamada karşılaşılan sorunlar, nedenleri ve çözüm önerileri. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 36(1), 141-173.
56. Öztürk, I. (2007). The textual organization of research article introductions in applied linguistics: Variability within a single discipline. English for Specific Purposes, 26(1), 25-38.
57. Paraskevas, C. (2006). Grammar apprenticeship. The English Journal, 95(5), 65-70. https://doi.org/10.2307/30046591
58. Patrick, M., Gulayets, V., & Peck, C. L. (2017). A call for teacher professional learning and the study of religion in social studies. Canadian Journal of Education, 40(4), 603-637.
59. Rahman, M., Darus, S., & Amir, Z. (2017). Rhetorical structure of introduction in applied linguistics research articles. EDUCARE: International Journal for Educational Studies, 9(2), 69-84.
60. Samraj, B. (2002). Introductions in research articles: Variations across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 1-17.
61. Shank, G., & Brown, L. (2007). Exploring educational research literacy. New York, NY: Routledge.
62. Shehzad, W. (2006). Computer scientist’s approach to “establishing a research territory.” Selected Papers from the Fifteenth International Symposium on English Teaching. Taipei, Taiwan: Crane Publishing and ETA-ROC.
63. Sheldon, E. (2011). Rhetorical differences in RA introductions written by English L1 and L2 and Castilian Spanish L1 writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(4), 238-251.
64. Stoller, F. L., & Robinson, M. S. (2013). Chemistry journal articles: An interdisciplinary approach to move analysis with pedagogical aims. English for Specific Purposes, 32, 45-57.
65. Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
66. Swales, J., & Najjar, H. (1987). Research on introductions to research articles. Written Communication, 4(2), 175-191.
67. Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential skills and tasks (3rd Ed.). Ann Arbor, Michigan: Michigan ELT.
68. Sword, H. (2012). Stylish academic writing. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
69. van Weijen, D. (2014, September 29). How to overcome common obstacles to publishing in English. Retrieved from https://www.elsevier.com/authors-update/story/publishing-tips/how-to-overcome-common-obstacles-to-publishing-in-english
70. Yaylı, D., & Canagarajah, A. S. (2018). The processes behind RA introduction writing among Turkish arts and science scholars. In Y. Kırkgöz & K. Dikilitaş (Eds.). Key issues in English for specific purposes in higher education (pp. 111-128). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.