Analysis of Interdisciplinary Differences in the Structure of the Scientific Genre in the Introduction Section of Humanities Research Articles

Purpose: The purpose of this research was to analyze the genre of the introduction section of research papers in the humanities, based on John Swales CARS model, and to show the potential inter-disciplinary differences regarding this model. To this end, the introductions of research papers in three disciplines of humanities, namely (1) Psychology; (2) Persian Literature; (3) Management, were analyzed based on the CARS model in terms of compliance with discursive moves and also the meaning and content expected in these moves and the steps related to them. The research aimed to explore discursive strategies employed in the introduction sections of research papers across various fields. Additionally, the study examined whether there was a statistically significant variation in the frequency of adherence to genre-based discursive moves within the fields under investigation.
Methodology: This research was designed as a mixed method to analyze the genre of research in the introduction section of research papers written in Persian Language, based on the CARS model and to investigate potential inter-disciplinary differences. The textual data of the research included the introduction section of papers in three different fields of humanities, listed above. In total, 45 papers were randomly selected from the indexed journals approved by the Ministry of Science in the last decade as a sample. The papers were analyzed in the qualitative section of this mixed method study using content analysis based on coding to identify the discursive moves and steps of the CARS model. Then, using the Likert scale, a score was given to each move as a variable, and the mean score of the moves in the quantitative section was calculated for each paper and compared with the Kruskal-Wallis statistical test in a cross-disciplinary manner.
Findings: The results of this study showed that compliance with the main discursive moves and obligatory and optional steps of the CARS model in the selected disciplines is significantly different. In relation to the first research question, papers in the management field had the highest compliance with this model. The first move (determining the scope of research) and the third move (filling the research gap) had the highest compliance in all three disciplines, and the second move (explaining the research gap) had the lowest compliance observed in all three fields. No evidence of compliance with the second step of the third move (introduction of the present research) was observed in any of the fields. In response to the second research question, a quantitative review of the research data showed that the average scores obtained in compliance with discursive moves in the introduction section in the management field in all three main moves are higher than the other two fields; in the second place is the field of psychology and then the field of Persian literature.
Conclusion: . Since scientific articles serve as a communication platform for researchers in various scientific fields, the scientific style and genre in writing papers, enhances the comprehensibility of scientific texts by other researchers as expert readers. This, in turn, increases the likelihood of citing the article and consequently improves its visibility and the number of citations.The present study showed that one of the well-known models of scientific writing in international level is not well observed in our country. This heterogeneity was particularly evident in explaining the rationale and necessity of research in the introduction section of papers in humanities. the most application of obligatory and optional steps in all three disciplines is the first discursive move, which is identifying the research scope. This means that researchers, as the writers of the paper, have been more willing in expressing the centrality and importance of the topic under study. Although explaining the reason for the research is an important discursive move for understanding the research topic and a factor in maintaining the coherence of the text and effective communication between the author and the reader, a general weakness was clear in all three fields regarding the second move. It seems that researchers in all three disciplines pay less attention to explaining the reasons for and necessity of the research. The findings of this research are both applicable and feasible in evaluating the existing problem of scientific writing. In this regard, two key recommendations have been proposed to enhance academic writing in Persian language. First, there is a need for further research specifically focused on different sections of academic papers, such as abstracts, introductions, methodologies, findings, and conclusions. Second, experts should organize training courses at the academic level, incorporating academic writing in the scientific genre as part of graduate education.