establishing a research territory example

Creating a Research Space: CaRS Model 

The CaRS Model can help you build an introduction, especially in STEM fields. The model consists of three rhetorical moves that help identify the background, motivation, and focus of the research. This framework can help give your reader a basic overview of your larger project.

Move 1: Establish a Research Territory

The research territory, or broad topic, is the context required to both understand and conduct the research being explored. Your goal is to explain the current state of scholarship in the field and answer the question, “Why is this general research area important?” 

Language for Establishing a Research Territory:

__________ has been extensively studied... 

Interest in _________ has been growing. 

Recent studies have focused on... 

__________ has become a major issue...

Move 2: Establish a Niche

The niche is the reason or motivation for the research. You are preparing your audience to understand how your research relates to the background you have given, highlighting gaps/problems in current knowledge that justify or explain the need for further investigation.  

Methods for Establishing a Niche

Make a counter-claim (something is wrong) 

Indicate a gap (something is missing) 

Raise a question or make an inference (something is unclear) 

Continue a tradition (adding something) 

Language for Establishing a Niche

Previous studies of _______ have not examined...

Such studies are unsatisfactory because...

One question that needs to be asked, however is...

Research on _______ has mostly been restricted to _______ so...

Move 3: Occupying a Niche

This step is an explanation of how you are responding to the need for further investigation. Explain how your research addresses the need you identified in the previous step and list your specific research objectives, questions, or methods.  

Strategies for Occupying the Niche  

Outline purpose(s) of your research 

List research questions or hypotheses 

Announce principal research findings 

Indicate structure of your research process

Example: Three Moves in Action

Move 1:   Stress is a seemingly ever-present factor in the lives of university students, and many have difficulty regulating stress and functioning to their fullest potential. Many individuals choose to relieve their stress by listening to music, and stress relief as a result of music listening has been researched through both physiological and self-perception studies. Music listening decreases physiological stress by indirectly decreasing cortisol levels (a hormone linked to high stress levels) through a down-regulation of the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) Axis (Linnemann, Ditzen, Strahler, Doerr, & Nater, 2015). Studies focused on self-perceived stress levels found that listening to music with the goal of relaxation is significantly more effective than listening to music for the purpose of distraction according to self-report measures (Linnemann et al., 2015).   Move 2:   While the positive relationship between music listening and stress relief has been supported within the general population, little research has been done to examine music’s effect on the mental health and stress levels of university students in particular. University students exhibit a higher rate of both stress-induced depression and anxiety than the general population due to the pressures of completing complex programs while often living away from home for the first time (Hanser, 1985, p. 419; Regehr, Glancy, & Pitts, 2013). As a result, student stress relief is a critical part of ensuring student wellbeing, especially with student mental health at the forefront of many recent discussions among university faculty, staff, and students.   Move 3:   This investigatory survey is the first step in a multi-stage study on how undergraduate residents at Conrad Grebel University College use music in relation to stressful situations, and how stress relief through music listening is perceived. We hypothesize that students will report stress-relief as one of the primary reasons they choose to listen to music, and that they will report choosing music they enjoy when they need to relieve stress. Patterns observed in student responses will be used to determine specific research questions for further investigation, and research on student stress relief could help to inform university policy makers on ways to create healthier campuses.

Adapted from: Swales, John and Christine Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2013. Print. 

• Departments
• For Students
• For Faculty
• Book Appointment

• Flow and Cohesion
• Reverse Outline
• Paper Skeleton

Creating a Research Space

• Personal Statements
• Literature Reviews

Typical Research Genre Structure

Swales’ Model of Rhetorical moves in Research Articles: Create A Research Space (CARS)

Move 1 Establishing a territory Step 1 Claiming centrality and/or Step 2 Making topic generalization(s) and/or Step 3 Reviewing items of previous research  Move 2 Establishing a niche  Step 1A Counter-claiming or Step 1B Indicating a gap or Step 1C Question-raising or Step 1D Continuing a tradition  Move 3 Occupying the niche  Step 1A Outlining purposes or Step 1B Announcing present research Step 2 Announcing principal findings Step 3 Indicating research article structure

The CARS Model (Create a Research Space), by John Swales

According to Swales, research writers frequently use  three rhetorical moves  to create a context for their work. These moves can happen both in the introduction of a piece, as well as on a larger scale, throughout the research paper/proposal/document:

MOVE 1: Establishing a Territory (Annotated Bibliography/Literature Review)

• Ask yourself:  “Why is my research important in this current moment of 2016 – politically, socially, historically?” Then
• Example phrase:  “In recent years, researchers have become increasingly interested in...” “A central issue in  ______  is...” “Many recent studies have focused on..."
• Imagine that all past research on your topic is an ongoing academic conversation that you need to understand fully before joining in; then, to structure your synthesis,  ask yourself:  "What would X author say to Y author? Does X author extend Y author's research, or does she critique it, etc.?"
• Example phrase:  “Much research has examined ______, though different conclusions have been made.”

MOVE 2: Establishing a Niche (Rhetorical Prospectus)

• Imagine that you now understand the conversation, and you see some limitation or place where extension is needed; join the conversation to make the limitation or need for more research clear.
• Example phrases:  (limitation) “However, these studies have failed to recognize the...” or (extension) “X...has been extensively studied. However, less attention has been paid to..."

MOVE 3: Occupying the Niche (Research Proposal)

• Imagine that you now have everyone’s attention, and that you must explain to fellow scholars how your ideas will add or move the conversation forward.
• Example phrases – for proposal:  “The purpose of this investigation is to...” or “To focus my research, I will ask the following questions..."
• Example phrases – for research article or dissertation introduction:  “The remainder of this paper is divided into five sections. Section 1 describes..."

Works Consulted:

• Swales, John M.  Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings  (1990)
• Swales, John M. and Christine B. Feak.  Academic Writing for Graduate Students  (2008)

[Adapted by Lisha Storey, May 2015]

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

Introduction

The Creating a Research Space [C.A.R.S.] Model was developed by John Swales based upon his analysis of journal articles representing a variety of discipline-based writing practices. His model attempts to explain and describe the organizational pattern of writing the introduction to scholarly research studies. Following the C.A.R.S. Model can be useful approach because it can help you to: 1) begin the writing process [getting started is often the most difficult task]; 2) understand the way in which an introduction sets the stage for the rest of your paper; and, 3) assess how the introduction fits within the larger scope of your study. The model assumes that writers follow a general organizational pattern in response to two types of challenges [“competitions”] relating to establishing a presence within a particular domain of research: 1) the competition to create a rhetorical space and, 2) the competition to attract readers into that space. The model proposes three actions [Swales calls them “moves”], accompanied by specific steps, that reflect the development of an effective introduction for a research paper. These “moves” and steps can be used as a template for writing the introduction to your own social sciences research papers.

"Introductions." The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Coffin, Caroline and Rupert Wegerif. “How to Write a Standard Research Article.” Inspiring Academic Practice at the University of Exeter; Kayfetz, Janet. "Academic Writing Workshop." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. "The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John and Christine B. Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Skills and Tasks. 2nd edition. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004.

Creating a Research Space Move 1: Establishing a Territory [the situation] This is generally accomplished in two ways: by demonstrating that a general area of research is important, critical, interesting, problematic, relevant, or otherwise worthy of investigation and by introducing and reviewing key sources of prior research in that area to show where gaps exist or where prior research has been inadequate in addressing the research problem. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1 -- Claiming importance of, and/or  [writing action = describing the research problem and providing evidence to support why the topic is important to study]
• Step 2 -- Making topic generalizations, and/or  [writing action = providing statements about the current state of knowledge, consensus, practice or description of phenomena]
• Step 3 -- Reviewing items of previous research  [writing action = synthesize prior research that further supports the need to study the research problem; this is not a literature review but more a reflection of key studies that have touched upon but perhaps not fully addressed the topic]

Move 2: Establishing a Niche [the problem] This action refers to making a clear and cogent argument that your particular piece of research is important and possesses value. This can be done by indicating a specific gap in previous research, by challenging a broadly accepted assumption, by raising a question, a hypothesis, or need, or by extending previous knowledge in some way. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1a -- Counter-claiming, or  [writing action = introduce an opposing viewpoint or perspective or identify a gap in prior research that you believe has weakened or undermined the prevailing argument]
• Step 1b -- Indicating a gap, or  [writing action = develop the research problem around a gap or understudied area of the literature]
• Step 1c -- Question-raising, or  [writing action = similar to gap identification, this involves presenting key questions about the consequences of gaps in prior research that will be addressed by your study. For example, one could state, “Despite prior observations of voter behavior in local elections in urban Detroit, it remains unclear why do some single mothers choose to avoid....”]
• Step 1d -- Continuing a tradition  [writing action = extend prior research to expand upon or clarify a research problem. This is often signaled with logical connecting terminology, such as, “hence,” “therefore,” “consequently,” “thus” or language that indicates a need. For example, one could state, “Consequently, these factors need to examined in more detail....” or “Evidence suggests an interesting correlation, therefore, it is desirable to survey different respondents....”]

Move 3: Occupying the Niche [the solution] The final "move" is to announce the means by which your study will contribute new knowledge or new understanding in contrast to prior research on the topic. This is also where you describe the remaining organizational structure of the paper. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1a -- Outlining purposes, or  [writing action = answering the “So What?” question. Explain in clear language the objectives of your study]
• Step 1b -- Announcing present research [writing action = describe the purpose of your study in terms of what the research is going to do or accomplish. In the social sciences, the “So What?” question still needs to addressed]
• Step 2 -- Announcing principle findings  [writing action = present a brief, general summary of key findings written, such as, “The findings indicate a need for...,” or “The research suggests four approaches to....”]
• Step 3 -- Indicating article structure  [writing action = state how the remainder of your paper is organized]

"Introductions." The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Atai, Mahmood Reza. “Exploring Subdisciplinary Variations and Generic Structure of Applied Linguistics Research Article Introductions Using CARS Model.” The Journal of Applied Linguistics 2 (Fall 2009): 26-51; Chanel, Dana. "Research Article Introductions in Cultural Studies: A Genre Analysis Explorationn of Rhetorical Structure." The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes 2 (2014): 1-20; Coffin, Caroline and Rupert Wegerif. “How to Write a Standard Research Article.” Inspiring Academic Practice at the University of Exeter; Kayfetz, Janet. "Academic Writing Workshop." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. "The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John and Christine B. Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Skills and Tasks . 2nd edition. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004; Swales, John M. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings . New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990; Chapter 5: Beginning Work. In Writing for Peer Reviewed Journals: Strategies for Getting Published . Pat Thomson and Barbara Kamler. (New York: Routledge, 2013), pp. 93-96.

Writing Tip

Swales showed that establishing a research niche [move 2] is often signaled by specific terminology that expresses a contrasting viewpoint, a critical evaluation of gaps in the literature, or a perceived weakness in prior research. The purpose of using these words is to draw a clear distinction between perceived deficiencies in previous studies and the research you are presenting that is intended to help resolve these deficiencies. Below is a table of common words used by authors.

NOTE : You may prefer not to adopt a negative stance in your writing when placing it within the context of prior research. In such cases, an alternative approach is to utilize a neutral, contrastive statement that expresses a new perspective without giving the appearance of trying to diminish the validity of other people's research. Examples of how to take a more neutral contrasting stance can be achieved in the following ways, with A representing the findings of prior research, B representing your research problem, and X representing one or more variables that have been investigated.

• Prior research has focused primarily on A , rather than on B ...
• Prior research into A can be beneficial but to rectify X , it is important to examine B ...
• These studies have placed an emphasis in the areas of A as opposed to describing B ...
• While prior studies have examined A , it may be preferable to contemplate the impact of B ...
• After consideration of A , it is important to also distinguish B ...
• The study of A has been thorough, but changing circumstances related to X support a need for examining [or revisiting] B ...
• Although research has been devoted to A , less attention has been paid to B ...
• Earlier research offers insights into the need for A , though consideration of B would be particularly helpful to...

In each of these example statements, what follows the ellipsis is the justification for designing a study that approaches the problem in the way that contrasts with prior research but which does not devalue its ongoing contributions to current knowledge and understanding.

Dretske, Fred I. “Contrastive Statements.” The Philosophical Review 81 (October 1972): 411-437; Kayfetz, Janet. "Academic Writing Workshop." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. "The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John M. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings . New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990

• << Previous: 4. The Introduction
• Next: Background Information >>
• Last Updated: Apr 5, 2024 1:38 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

3 Writing an Introduction

An introduction gives the reader the “why” the document was written. It provides readers important context for understanding your writing. For example, what was the research question or experiment that led to the creation of the written document? In general it will contain a statement of purpose, a hypothesis or thesis, and define the scope of the document—what it is or is not about. Of course there will be background information, but how much or how little will depend on the audience. A specialist in your field will need less background information than a general audience.

In science documents, the introduction often follows what is known as the Creating a Research Space (CARS) rhetorical pattern (Swales 2012). There are three sections or moves in a CARS: 1) Establishing a Territory, 2) Establishing a Niche, and finally 3) Occupying the Niche.

3.1 Establishing a territory

Establishing your territory is like announcing your topic to your readers. You also want to explain to the readers that your paper is important. To do this first you need to do more than just announce the topic, you need to give some context to your topic. Put your research or experiment into a wider context either by giving a general overview of the of the topic or by reviewing previous research. Reviewing previous research is called a literature review and is very important in writing in the sciences. See section 9 for more information on the literature review. See Fig. 2.3 for an example of establishing your territory.

3.2 Establishing a Niche

A niche is the specific research question or topic that your document addresses. In the example paper by Crowley et. al. (2019), the general topic is the extinction of vertebrate animals living on islands (Fig. 2.4).   The niche, or specific topic, is the extinction history of a particular giant rat and a giant lizard in the Canary Islands.

When establishing your niche ask what is missing from previous research. Is there a gap or something that needs more research or verification? Also include briefly what methods of analysis are used for testing, validation, etc.

Writing tip: make a clear argument for the value of your particular research; e.g., what are the gaps in research that your study addresses?

3.3 Occupying the Niche

Here you announce how your study will contribute new knowledge or verify previous knowledge. You also state your hypothesis or thesis in this part of the introduction. Make clear the links between problem and solution, question asked and research design, prior research and your experiment.

Finally describe the organizational structure of the paper. (See Fig. 2.4.)

Writing tip: here are some ways to occupy your niche (notice all of these prompts are in present tense):

• The aim of this paper is
• My main purpose is
• My primary objective is
• This paper reports on the results of
• This paper primarily focuses on

When occupying your niche you can state either your thesis or hypothesis. A thesis is a statement or claim that you make about a subject and tells the reader your viewpoint. A hypothesis, on the other hand, is a tentative answer to a question, one that must be tested through experimentation.

Technical Writing @ SLCC Copyright © 2020 by Department of English, Linguistics, and Writing Studies at SLCC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Organization & the CARS Model

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

Although each discipline has its own conventions for what articles, research reports, dissertations, and other types of scholarly writing should look like, academic writing shares some general characteristics across each field. One area of similarity is the introduction section. This handout provides strategies for revising introductions.

CARS (Creating a Research Space)

John Swales’ CARS model for introductions is based on his study of articles across a range of disciplines. He identified the following moves as common among most articles:

Move 1: Establishing a territory

Step 1 Claiming importance and/or

Step 2 Making topic generalizations and/or

Step 3 Reviewing items of previous research

Move 2: Establishing a niche

Step 1a Counter-claiming or

Step 1b Indicating a gap or

Step 1c Question-raising or

Step 1d Continuing a tradition

Move 3: Occupying the niche

Step 1a Outlining purposes or

Step 1b Announcing present research

Step 2 Announcing principle findings

Step 3 Indicating article structure

Writers can use these moves as a guide for revising their own writing, or for helping others.

Questions for Revision

Does the introduction to the piece of writing you are working with…

Topic Outline

A topic outline is a fast and easy way to analyze whether an introduction is effectively organized. According to Pyrczak and Bruce, a topic outline can help show the flow of an introduction to ensure it moves from a general introduction of the problem or gap to a specific discussion of the current research (33). The topic outline can be combined with the CARS model to improve your introduction or to offer advice to a peer.

Topic Outline Exercise

Works cited.

Pyrczak, Fred and Randall R. Bruce. Writing Empirical Research Reports : A Basic Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Los Angeles: Pyrczak Publishing, 2000. Print.

Swales, John. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings . 1990. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Chapter 6: Discussion/Conclusion Section(s)

Discussion/Conclusion Goal 1: Re-establishing the Territory

The first goal in the Discussion and Conclusion section is called Re-establishing the Territory. The name of this goal should sound familiar to you if you think back to Chapter 3 and our discussion of the goals for the Introduction section, where the first aim is to Establish the Knowledge Territory. Now that you have come to the final section of your manuscript, you will revisit this idea of “territory,” as the functions of these two sections’ goals are similar. The Discussion/Conclusion Goal 1 (Re-establish the Territory) functions to remind the reader how your research fits into the bigger picture, or territory, of the field. Effective writers use this goal to provide a foundation for the Discussion and better contextualize the argument that follows.

Strategies for Discussion/Conclusion Communicative Goal 1: Re-establishing the Territory

• Drawing on general background
• Drawing on study-­specific background
• Announcing principal findings
• Previewing content

Discussion/Conclusion Goal 1 Strategy: Drawing on General Background

Drawing on general background means that a writer prepares the reader for the upcoming discussion of the research results in broader/more general terms. To do this, you must incorporate your understanding of the theories and frameworks that underlie your study. You can do this with information from your own background knowledge, with citations, or with a combination of both tactics to provide needed informational background and a conceptual frame of reference for the reader, to remind the reader of the problem, issue, gap, etc. that motivated the study, and to show how the current study fits in the targeted knowledge/research space.

Here are two examples of how you can accomplish this strategy:

• It is not inconceivable, then, that whilst the sector perhaps rightly distinguishes a wide variety of professional tasks, the homogeneous nature of its personnel places too heavy a burden on all their shoulders – and hence on the sole training program for the job. The fact is that in countries like the theUnited Kingdom (see Peeters, 2008) and the United States (Hyson &Biggar, 2006), which have long had a variety of training schemes leading to a variety of qualifications – associate, foundation, Bachelor’s, and Master’s degrees, at both initial licensure and advanced level – there is clearly greater differentiation in the nature and level of content standards (see also Busch-Rossnagel & Worman, 1985) [1]
• A relationship between carbohydrates and rooting of cuttings has been reported (Bartolini et al. 1996, 2000; Murai et al. 1999), but high carbohydrate content has not always been associated with high rooting and sprouting potential, as this study showed. Hansen et al. (1978) and Veierskov et al. (1982) observed a negative correlation between carbohydrates and rooting (when light was given to alter stock plant carbohydrate content). [2]

If you are referring back to literature (whether it is in the literature review in your Introduction, or not), you can use specific wording (sentence starters) to indicate to your reader that you are re-establishing the territory. Here are some suggestions from the Academic Phrasebank website :

Another way to accomplish this strategy is to contribute background information by making reference back to the research question or aim/objective, as exemplified in these sentence starters from the Academic Phrasebank website :

Discussion/Conclusion Goal 1 Strategy: Drawing on Study-Specific Background

Drawing on study- ­specific background is similar to the previous strategy in that it attempts to justify and further reflect on the results. This strategy reiterates relevant study specifics (e.g., methods, approaches, experimentation, procedures, analysis, hypotheses/research questions, etc.) to help the reader understand how the results were obtained, remind the reader of study specifics relevant to the results, and/or claims discussed further, clarify the connection between certain study specifics and respective results, and/or re-emphasize the reliability of discussed findings.

Consider the following examples:

• This analysis considered the efficacy of a suite of even- and uneven-aged treatments to address fire hazard in Colorado based on their ability to reduce crown fire initiation and spread. The treatment simulations were performed over a broad area using available forest inventory data and consistent assumptions about surface fuels and weather conditions. [3]
• Since we consider sinusoidal bottom contours we describe the hydraulic jumps in terms of the Froude number at the inclination angle of the channel. This results in hydraulic jumps at Froude numbers smaller than 1 in the fit of Fig. 10. [4]

The Academic Phrasebank website offers a few suggestions for sentence starters useful to employing this strategy:

Discussion/Conclusion Goal 1 Strategy: Announcing Principal Findings

Announcing principal findings is a way to highlight results by explaining, synthesizing, and/or reviewing what you discovered. The purpose is to emphasize takeaways, show how you’ve accomplished the objectives of the research, and/or demonstrate which specific discoveries occupy the identified niche in the sub-area of your discipline or field.

•  The processes involved in aerial pathogen movement can be divided into five stages of (i) preconditioning in a source area, (ii) release, (iii) horizontal transport, (iv) deposition, and (v) impact at the receptor area (Isard and Gage, 2001). Ecological and environmental factors that influence organisms during each stage of the dispersal process are important for understanding the movement of plant pathogens and the development of plant disease epidemics (Aylor, 1986; Madden, 1992). However, there is limited information about some of these processes, especially for the deposition of plant pathogen propagules from the atmosphere onto susceptible host plant tissues. [5]
• A major finding of this study is that short and long-term androstenedione supplementation did not increase the serum testosterone concentration in young men with normal serum testosterone levels. [6]

The Academic Phrasebank website provides these suggestions for starting out sentences in which you plan to discuss or draw conclusions about your findings:

Discussion/Conclusion Goal 1 Strategy: Previewing Content

Previewing content designates the organization of your writing. This helps to guide the reader through your ideas, clarify how you envision the content fulfilling your communicative goals, and point out noteworthy features of the research.

The following are examples of how you can realize this strategy:

• Next, we provide evidence that AAP2 functions in xylem-phloem transfer of amino acids. [7]
• Results underscore the promise of the WG vocabulary intervention for LM learners. There are multiple implications and discussion points – practical and theoretical – to address when interpreting the results of this pilot study. WG was implemented for only 15-20 min a day, and yet the treatment group students, more of whom were formerly identified as limited English proficient, gained knowledge of a substantially larger number of words than the contrast group. [8]

Key Takeaways

The first communicative goal in the Discussion and Conclusion section is called Re-establishing the Territory, and there are four strategies that can be used to successfully accomplish this goal:

• Drawing on general background, and/or
• Drawing on study-­specific background, and/or
• Announcing principal findings, and/or
• Previewing content.

Note the use of  and/or at the end of each strategy, an indication — as in other chapters — that it is not always necessary to utilize each individual strategy as these are variable by writer, discipline, and journal.

• Fukkink, R. G. (2010). Missing pages? A study of textbooks for Dutch early childhood teacher education.  Teaching and Teacher Education ,  26 (3), 371-376. ↵
• Tsipouridis, G., Thomidis, T., & Bladenopoulou, S. (2006). Seasonal variation in sprouting of GF677 peach× almond (Prunus persica× Prunus aygdalus) hybrid root cuttings.  New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science ,  34 (1), 45-50. ↵
• Huggett Jr, R. J., Abt, K. L., & Shepperd, W. (2008). Efficacy of mechanical fuel treatments for reducing wildfire hazard.  Forest Policy and Economics ,  10 (6), 408-414. ↵
• Wierschem, A., & Aksel, N. (2004). Hydraulic jumps and standing waves in gravity-driven flows of viscous liquids in wavy open channels.  Physics of Fluids ,  16 (11), 3868-3877. ↵
• Dufault, N., Isard, S., “A portable rainfall simulator for evaluating the wet deposition of plant pathogens”,  Applied Engineering in Agriculture  26(1):71-78, 2010 ↵
• King, D. S., Sharp, R. L., Vukovich, M. D., Brown, G. A., Reifenrath, T. A., Uhl, N. L., & Parsons, K. A. (1999). Effect of oral androstenedione on serum testosterone and adaptations to resistance training in young men: a randomized controlled trial.  Jama ,  281 (21), 2020-2028. ↵
• Zhang, L., Tan, Q., Lee, R., Trethewy, A., Lee, Y. H., & Tegeder, M. (2010). Altered xylem-phloem transfer of amino acids affects metabolism and leads to increased seed yield and oil content in Arabidopsis. The Plant Cell, 22 (11), 3603-3620. ↵
• Mancilla-Martinez, Jeannette. (2010). Word meanings matter: Cultivating English vocabulary knowledge in fifth-grade Spanish-speaking language minority learners. TESOL Quarterly, 44 (4), 669-699. ↵

Preparing to Publish Copyright © 2023 by Sarah Huffman; Elena Cotos; and Kimberly Becker is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Genres in academic writing: Writing introductions

The purpose of the introduction is to show your reader what you are doing in your writing. It is also helpful to explain why you are doing it and how you are doing it.

For that reason, there are usually three main parts in the introduction. The most useful description is given by Swales (1990, pp. 137-165):

Research Report Introductions

Identify the moves in the following introduction:

Identify the information elements you find in each sentence of the text.

Move 1: Establishing a research territory

Note particularly the language used in the first two sentences to express Move la.

• The increasing interest in ... has heightened the need for ....
• Of particular interest and complexity are ....
• Recently, there has been growing interest in ....
• The development of ... has led to the hope that....
• The ... has become a favourite topic for analysis ....
• The study of ... has become an important aspect of ....
• A central issue in ... is ....
• The ... has been extensively studied in recent years.
• Many recent studies have focused on ....

Move 2: Establishing a niche

In many ways, Move 2 is the key move in Introductions. It connects Move 1 (what has been done) to Move 3 (what the present research will do). Move 2 thus establishes the reason for the study. By the end of Move 2, the reader should have a good idea of what is going to come in Move 3.

Move 2s establish a niche by indicating a gap. Probably the most common way to indicate a gap is to use a "negative" subject. Presumably, negative subjects are chosen because they signal immediately to the reader that Move 1 has come to an end. Note the following uses of little and few:

• However, little information/attention/work/data/research ....
• However, few studies/investigations/researchers/attempts ....

Of course, not all RP Introductions express Move 2 by indicating an obvious gap. You may prefer, for various reasons, to avoid negative comment altogether. In such cases, a useful alternative is to use a contrastive statement.

• The research has tended to focus on ...,rather than on ....
• These studies have emphasised ...,as opposed to ....
• Although considerable research has been devoted to ... , rather less attention has been paid to ....
• The previous research ... has concentrated on ....
• Most studies have been content to ....
• So far, investigations have been confined to ...

Move 3: Occupying the Niche

The third and final step is to show you want to fill the gap (or answer the question) that has been created in Move 2.

• The purpose of this paper is to ...
• The purpose of this investigation is to ...
• The aim of this paper is to ...
• This paper reports on the results obtained ....
• This study was designed to ...
• In this paper, we give results of ...
• In this paper, we argue that ....
• This paper argues that ....
• We have organise the rest of this paper in the following way ....
• This paper is structured as follows ....
• The remainder of this paper is divided into five sections ....

Identify the moves in the following introductions:

Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Back to Introduction

Establishing a Territory in the Introductions of Engineering Research Articles Using a Problem-Solution Patterns Approach

Ieee account.

• Change Username/Password
• Update Address

Purchase Details

• Payment Options
• Order History
• View Purchased Documents

Profile Information

• Communications Preferences
• Profession and Education
• Technical Interests
• US & Canada: +1 800 678 4333
• Worldwide: +1 732 981 0060
• Contact & Support
• About IEEE Xplore
• Accessibility
• Terms of Use
• Nondiscrimination Policy
• Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. © Copyright 2024 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.

  Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies Journal / Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies / Vol. 41 No. 4 (2023) / Articles (function() { function async_load(){ var s = document.createElement('script'); s.type = 'text/javascript'; s.async = true; var theUrl = 'https://www.journalquality.info/journalquality/ratings/2404-www-ajol-info-salas'; s.src = theUrl + ( theUrl.indexOf("?") >= 0 ? "&" : "?") + 'ref=' + encodeURIComponent(window.location.href); var embedder = document.getElementById('jpps-embedder-ajol-salas'); embedder.parentNode.insertBefore(s, embedder); } if (window.attachEvent) window.attachEvent('onload', async_load); else window.addEventListener('load', async_load, false); })();

Article sidebar, article details, main article content, establishing a research territory in economics: implications for academic writing instruction, may siaw-mei liu, jason miin-hwa lim.

Doing a literature review to establish a research territory constitutes an important task that both experienced and novice writers have to grapple with in research writing. While previous studies have focused on how research gaps are indicated, few studies have exclusively investigated the language resources needed to establish a territory, especially in economics. Using a genre-based textual analysis and inputs from specialist informants, we identified the key rhetorical strategies and language resources used by expert writers to review previous research in high impact publications. The results revealed that this overarching move focuses not only on centrality claims aimed at explicitly captivating the interest of the academic fraternity and real-world stakeholders, but also on previously published information signalling the breadth of knowledge acquired by writers. While specific ‘noun-prepositional phrase’ structures are used to indicate circumstantial exigencies, attributive adjectives depicting enormity are employed to signal growing scholarly engagement in a selected research domain. To furnish background information on previous research methods and findings, writers employ present-tense reporting verbs and gravity-enhancing expressions to delineate present alarming situations, thus demonstrating their readiness to stay current in economic situations. Our findings have pedagogical implications for designing instructional materials in economics and social sciences at large.

AJOL is a Non Profit Organisation that cannot function without donations. AJOL and the millions of African and international researchers who rely on our free services are deeply grateful for your contribution. AJOL is annually audited and was also independently assessed in 2019 by E&Y.

Your donation is guaranteed to directly contribute to Africans sharing their research output with a global readership.

• For annual AJOL Supporter contributions, please view our Supporters page.

Journal Identifiers

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Computer Scientist's Approach to " Establishing a Research Territory "

Related Papers

Journal of Human Development and Communication Volume 7, 2018 [1-8]

Ina Suryani , Norkhairi Ahmad

The competition and pursuit for better ranking within the academia drive a more prevailing and urgent need to increase the number of research publications. This paper examines twenty research article introduction sections written in English to identify the rhetorical patterns and structures for better understanding on how the writers write. The research articles are written by the Computer Science researchers in Malaysian private universities. This paper presents the results of the move analysis on the rhetorical structure of the selected text and the descriptions on how the moves were accomplished by the writers. In general, the results show that the writers utilised the Create a Research Space (CARS) model by Swales (2004). The three moves suggested in CARS model are establishing the research territory, establishing the research niche and presenting the present work. While all the three moves suggested in the model are fulfilled by the writers, some of the rhetorical steps which are proposed as obligatory steps in CARS model are being underutilised. Such underutilisation calls for more emphasis and employment on the respective rhetorical steps. The respective rhetorical steps are presenting positive justification, summarising methods, announcing principle outcomes and stating the value of the present research.

Scientometrics

Vivian Paganuzzi

Professional Communication, IEEE Transactions on

Laurence Anthony

Ina Suryani

Research article introduction is crucial in determining the chances for publication. Non–native English writers have been reported to face difficulties in structuring rhetorical strategies in the introduction section. Although rhetorical models in writing are available, research articles of different disciplines vary in rhetorical structure and style. Therefore, there is a need to explore the rhetorical strategies in the Introduction sections for non-native writers in Computer Science discipline. This qualitative study explored the moves and steps in 150 Scopus indexed Computer Science research articles written by Malaysian academicians. It also examined the extent to which the writers conformed to Create a Research Space (CARS) model when writing the introduction sections. Move analysis using CARS model was employed to identify the rhetorical structures of the corpus while face-to-face semi- structured interviews were conducted to understand the use of rhetorical strategies through...

Sandra Maria Aluísio

Wasima Shehzad

Where corpus linguistics has offered new perspectives on linguistic analyses, it has provided a myriad of opportunities to academic discourse analysts also. Much work has been done on the academic (MICASE) and scientific discourse (the advent of the computer revolution, information technology continues to steamroll into our lives. In this information society a few linguists have paid scholarly attention to the discourse of computer science (CS) (Anthony 1999, 2000, 2001 and Pestiguillo 1999). This paper discusses the patterns of the ending of the introductions to research articles in CS based on the structures of introductions presented by Swales (forthcoming) and Lewin et.al. (2001) with a special focus on outlining the structure of the text of a CS research article A corpus of authentic academic texts of 56 research articles published during 2003 in five different journals of IEEE was analyzed using Wordsmith tools .The study reveals that the need for this metadiscourse of outlining the structure of the paper in the CS introductions arises because of the variable number of the sections, ranging from 4-11, and follows a variable order according to the technical needs of the paper. The use of the word SECTION, found throughout the corpus, is discussed with reference to the lack of structural variation in Computer Science research papers.

This paper presents a rhetorical analysis of the Introductions of Computer Science (CS) research articles from a specialized corpus with reference to " Announcement of Principal Findings " and " Statement of Value " steps within the framework of the " Create A Research Space " (CARS) model (Swales, 2004), conducted through corpus-based techniques. The results show that discoursal practices in CS are result-oriented and in various ways highlight the writers' contribution. The results are explicitly described with embedded " value " statements in the elaborate explanations of the nature of the present research. The common linguistic indicators used for this purpose are " contribution " , " efficient " and " novel ". The discussion concludes with the suggestion to amend the CARS model for CS writers. Resumen En el presente trabajo se realiza un análisis retórico de los apartados de introducción que figuran en los artículos de investigación del área de informática, partiendo de un corpus especializado, y haciendo hincapié en los pasos " anuncio de los hallazgos principales " y " declaración del valor de una aportación " contenidos en el ya conocido modelo CARS (Create a Research Space) de Swales (2004). Los resultados demuestran que las prácticas discursivas en el área de informática están orientadas a los resultados, resaltándose de diversos modos la contribución que realizan los autores de los correspondientes artículos. Se describen de forma explícita los resultados entre los que destacan las

Proceedings of the 1st UMGESHIC International Seminar on Health, Social Science and Humanities (UMGESHIC-ISHSSH 2020)

Risa Simanjuntak

Maryam Farnia

The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics

Lynne Flowerdew

RELATED PAPERS

Ruth Gordillo Rodríguez

PLoS Genetics

Nordisk Tidsskrift for Kriminalvidenskab

Flemming Balvig

Ralf Elbert

Khaled Mellouli

Rev. Inst. investig. Fac. …

enrique guadalupe

Wasit Journal of Engineering Sciences

Muhammad al-badri

Elvis Vilca Macedo

Iktisadi Ve Idari Bilimler Fakultesi Dergisi

Azzem Özkan

Hydrobiologia

Pedro Duarte

Daniel Felix

Journal of Chemical Crystallography

Victor Hruby

Tạp chí Khoa học Công nghệ Xây dựng (KHCNXD) - ĐHXDHN

Sleep Health

Thomas Anders

Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery

Alper Toker

Revista De Investigacion Clinica

Carlota García

Frontiers in Genetics

Wilfred Otambo

Molecular Immunology

Sebnem Unlu

Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Consuelo Borrás

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)

V. 11, n. 03

Revista Quaestio Iuris

Analyzing Sustainability in Peripheral, Ultra-Peripheral, and Low-Density Regions

ayfer gedikli

Rev Enferm UFPI

Mariangela Gobatto

See More Documents Like This

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024