Search

The ability to publish research papers is a must for scientists nowadays. Ideally, at the very beginning of their career, young researchers, PhD students, should be instructed in writing research papers and should get feedback on their texts. In this study, the first manuscripts from 22 doctoral students, non-native English speakers, 223 pages were analysed for errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and style. For each type of error and each student, the average per page was calculated. The most frequent errors were identified in using articles, formal features, missing information, and the use of inappropriate words. Individual students showed significantly different levels, which reflected their previous language training and the approach (responsibility) to completing the task. The results will be used to modify the course in Academic Writing (more attention paid to the most frequent errors) and individual work with students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Academic paper writing holds significant importance in the education of medical students, and poses a clear challenge for those whose first language is not English. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of employing large language models, particularly ChatGPT, in improving the English academic writing skills of these students. Methods A cohort of 25 third-year medical students from China was recruited. The study consisted of two stages. Firstly, the students were asked to write a mini paper. Secondly, the students were asked to revise the mini paper using ChatGPT within two weeks. The evaluation of the mini papers focused on three key dimensions, including structure, logic, and language. The evaluation method incorporated both manual scoring and AI scoring utilizing the ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 models. Additionally, we employed a questionnaire to gather feedback on students’ experience in using ChatGPT. Results After implementing ChatGPT for writing assistance, there was a notable increase in manual scoring by 4.23 points. Similarly, AI scoring based on the ChatGPT-3.5 model showed an increase of 4.82 points, while the ChatGPT-4 model showed an increase of 3.84 points. These results highlight the potential of large language models in supporting academic writing. Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference between manual scoring and ChatGPT-4 scoring, indicating the potential of ChatGPT-4 to assist teachers in the grading process. Feedback from the questionnaire indicated a generally positive response from students, with 92% acknowledging an improvement in the quality of their writing, 84% noting advancements in their language skills, and 76% recognizing the contribution of ChatGPT in supporting academic research. Conclusion The study highlighted the efficacy of large language models like ChatGPT in augmenting the English academic writing proficiency of non-native speakers in medical education. Furthermore, it illustrated the potential of these models to make a contribution to the educational evaluation process, particularly in environments where English is not the primary language.

Metadiscourse markers and their importance to academic writing are essential research subjects nowadays. The current corpus-based study aims at identifying interactional and interactive metadiscourse markers in terms of frequency and function in the abstract section of published research articles in applied linguistics developed by Algerian, Saudi, and Native researchers. 20 research articles for each group, with a total of 60 articles have been randomly selected and compiled as the research corpus for this study, then analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively using AntConc.3.2.4 relying on Hyland’s classification of metadiscourse markers. As a comparative study, the research considered the abstracts written by natives as a benchmark and attempted to find an answer to the main inquiry related to the frequency of use of metadiscourse devices by Algerian and Saudi researchers in comparison to their Native counterparts. The main research results showed how close were Algerian abstracts to native ones in terms of using endophorics, frame markers, code glosses, hedges, attitude markers, and self-mentions. While Saudi abstracts were close to the benchmark only in two markers that are transitions and engagement markers. The rest of the devices were shown to be far from the native norm in both cases. The findings also revealed that the use of metadiscourse markers is not the only indicator of papers’ publication rate in indexed journals by comparing the corpus analysis results to the source of the articles (journals), to find that even if Algerian researchers publish less in high indexed journals in comparison to Saudis, they are still closer in using markers to the natives as a benchmark.

Background: Many physicians in Turkey are both clinicians and researchers, and publishing their research contributes to better patient care as well as to career advancement.Objective: To identify the barriers faced by Turkish physicians to writing research papers and getting them published.Methods: Respondents were asked, through eight multiple-choice questions, about the difficulties they faced in writing research papers and in getting them published in journals. We also searched published literature for accounts of similar difficulties and answers to the question ‘What is your purpose in writing scientific publications?’Results: A total of 18% (155 of 871) of physicians completed the questionnaire. About the difficulties faced in writing, 82 out of the 155 participants, or 57%, reported problems in finding financial support; 58 (40%), in obtaining required permissions and clearances; 65 (45%), in acquiring relevant skills, especially those related to data analysis or statistics; and 42 (29%), in language-related skills. About the difficulties in getting their papers published in journals, 85 (60%) said that they tried to overcome the difficulties by searching for appropriate solutions on the internet; 66 (47%) sought help from experienced colleagues; and 47 (33%) needed professional help in English translation and editing. Need for financial support was reported by a significantly (p = 0.04) larger proportion of associate professors or full professors (69%) than that of residents (47%) and fellows (45%).Conclusion: The main problems that Turkish physicians face in preparing scientific manuscripts were lack of financial support, inadequate knowledge of data analysis and statistics, and the paperwork involved in obtaining required approvals and permissions—problems that were common to the departments of internal medicine and of surgery. The primary motivation for writing and publishing was career advancement, especially through promotion to a higher academic rank.

This study analysed the information-argument structure of the Introduction sections of sociology research papers, to identify differences across three types of sociology research: Investigative research, Development and Evaluation research, and Descriptive research. The information-argument analysis framework bears some resemblance to rhetorical structure frameworks following Swales’ CARS model, but focuses on the argumentative aspect of text and how information is used to support argument claims. The coding scheme specifies information types, subdivided into those that imply an argument claim and those that play the role of argument support. Seventy papers were sampled from ten sociology journals for analysis. Sequential association rule mining was used to identify sequential information-argument patterns. The study identified significant differences in information-argument profile across the three types of research papers, as well as differences in sequential patterns. Methodology contributions of the paper include the coding scheme for information-argument types in research papers, and the method of analysing sequential patterns.

Copyright of Calidoscópio is the property of Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

There are strong shreds of evidence that the choice of instructional materials has large effects on students’ achievement. This study was to assess the efficacy of using ELT research papers as authentic materials in teaching research-based article writing. This study was aimed at revealing whether or not there is a significant difference in students’ writing skill in terms of ELT research paper writing between the students who were taught by using ELT research papers as authentic materials and those who were taught by using textbook materials provided by the faculty. This study belongs to a quasi-experimental study with an experimental and control group pretest-posttest design. The population of this study was 75 students from the fourth semester of English Education Study Program of IKIP PGRI Bojonegoro, East Java, Indonesia. The sample was selected through cluster random sampling and consisted of 50 students that were divided into two groups. The instrument used to collect the data was a writing test. Consequently, normality and homogeneity of the data were tested. A t-test was used to compare the mean of the two groups. The hypothesis was designed and tested at 0.05 level of significance. The results revealed that there is a significant difference in students’ academic writing skill between the students who were taught by using the ELT research papers as authentic materials and those who were taught by using textbook materials. The t-test revealed that t-value is higher than t-table (6.07>2.01). Therefore it is concluded that the authentic instructional materials could significantly improve students’ academic writing skill.

Stance-taking is one aspect of academic-writing conventions that college students need to attend to in order to improve their scholarly writing. Stance includes the ways writers express their value judgments and attitudes to forward a proposition and be aligned with other authors in the field (Biber, Johansson, Leech, Conrad, & Finegan, 1999; Du Bois, 2007). This study aims to describe the ways students establish their stance in their literary-analysis papers. While most researchers on stance-taking followed Hyland’s (2005, 2010) framework, it cannot be denied that nuances appear in the ever-evolving dynamics of writing as a social act from authors. While Hyland’s framework is heavily informed by a bulk of data involving advanced and published researchers only, the present study followed Aull and Lancaster’s (2014) framework as this is informed by rather inclusive research data from amateur to advanced writers. The researcher examined the stance-taking linguistic markers used in the literary-analysis papers through the following: expressing commitment (use of hedges and boosters), reformulating and exemplifying (use of code glosses), and expressing concession and contrast (use of adversative or contrast connectors). Nine recorded interviews and 58 literary-analysis papers written by college students from a Philippine state university served as research data. Findings revealed that students used more boosters to express commitment to their claims, which would increase their authorial presence in the essays. Most of the time, the students used code glosses, boosters, and adversative or contrast markers to evidentialize their claims and refer to other authors in order to align themselves and eventually reveal their position on the topic(s) they discuss. The students, however, have limited understanding of the functions of stance-taking as they reasoned that these are only used to sound more convincing and persuasive. The study recommends the explicit instruction of linguistic markers of stance and their functions so that students can expand their rhetorical options for academic writing.

Academic writing, particularly writing research articles, is an indispensable part of every major in higher education. Hyland (2004) argued that a valuable means of exploring academic writing, and comparing the rhetorical features and preferences of different discourse communities, is through the metadiscourse analysis of the text. The present study examines the differences in the use, type, and frequency of interactional metadiscourse markers in the introduction and conclusion sections of research papers across the two disciplines of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering. To this end, 42 research articles (21 Mechanical and 21 Electrical Engineering) written by English native speakers were randomly selected from two major international journals. The current study made use of Hyland’s (2005) model for analyzing the interactional metadiscourse markers used in the selected corpus, consisting of 41484 words. To analyze the data, the frequency, patterns of use, and type of interactional metadiscourse markers were elicited both through a manual corpus analysis and concordance package. Furthermore, to examine whether there is any significant difference in the use of metadiscourse markers in the introduction and conclusion sections of these papers, a Chi-square analysis was run. The results of the quantitative analysis revealed that although there were some minor differences in the frequency and type of these metadiscourse markers, there was no statistically significant difference across the disciplines, which can be attributed to the close nature of these fields. The findings of this study may render some pedagogical implications for ESP courses and especially writing research papers.

The author considers the significance of teaching post-graduate students the module of written scientific communication to avoid problems facing them in future publishing career. The notion ‘academic writing’ is interpreted as the key to realizing national differences in intercultural written interaction. The author highlights the inevitable interference of the English scientific language and the native language of a researcher, the international part of a modern academic paper being English as lingua franca. Typology of cultures helps to explain possible misunderstanding in reading academic papers. Linguistico-culturological analysis of several scientific articles written in English by investigators from various countries allows the author to conclude that any researcher writes in English under unconscious domination of his national features.

How Should I Write a Research Paper? This article analyses the necessary techniques, skills, and procedures of writing an academic or a research paper. Further, the article examines the criteria, and essential components of a good research paper. By focusing on the contemporary debates and discussion on academic writing and publishing, this article acts as a platform to realise the challenges associated with this crucial endeavor in the academic arena. The article also reveals the need to teach academic writing to graduates, and postgraduate students. The author uses written sources to analyse and synthesize important skills and procedures required to write a good academic paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic writing is a critical skill distinct from creative writing. While brevity is vital, clarity in writing reflects clarity of thought. This paper is a primer for novice academic writers. [WestJEM. 2009;10:120-123.]

INTRODUCTION A research paper is a part of academic writing where there is a gathering of information from different sources. It is multistep process. Selection of title is the most important part of research writing. The title which is interesting should be chosen for the research purpose. All the related information is gathered and the title for research is synthesized. After thorough understanding and developing the title, the preliminary outline is made which maintains the logical path for its exploration. After preliminary research, proper research work is started with collection of previous resources which is then organized and important points are noted. Then research paper is written by referring to outlines, notes, articles, journals and books. The research paper should be well structured containing core parts like introduction, material and methods, results and disscussion and important additional parts like title, abstract, references. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The round table discussion of the journal Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii (Higher Education in Russia) took place on March 14, 2017 within the framework of Humanities Readings at Russian State University for the Humanities. The key theme - the model of the modern research journal in various aspects: philological (academic writing, IMRaD), philosophical (criteria of scholarly publication), historical and cultural, economical. The participants have touched upon such issues as interrelations between an author and an editor, types of peer review, the epistemological model of editor's activities, assessment of research activities, scientific communication. Special attention was paid to academic writing and suitability of IMRaD format for Humanities papers, scientometrics.

The round table discussion of the journal Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii (Higher Education in Russia) took place on March 14, 2017 within the framework of Humanities Readings at Russian State University for the Humanities. The key theme - the model of the modern research journal in various aspects: philological (academic writing, IMRaD), philosophical (criteria of scholarly publication), historical and cultural, economical. The participants have touched upon such issues as interrelations between an author and an editor, types of peer review, the epistemological model of editor's activities, assessment of research activities, scientific communication. Special attention was paid to academic writing and suitability of IMRaD format for Humanities papers, scientometrics.

Copyright of Journal of Language & Literary Studies / Folia Linguistica & Litteraria is the property of Journal of Language & Literary Studies / Folia Linguistica & Litteraria and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

To be a successful academic writer, we need a strong awareness of the circumstances that support our writing productivity. First and foremost, writing requires time-on-task. To obtain focused, effective writing time, we may need to increase our accountability related to writing. In addition, each writer needs a writing system - a set of processes that helps them to reliably complete their writing work. To build an effective writing system, we advocate for observation, reflection, and experimentation related to our writing processes. In particular, examination of the what, where, when, and how of writing is critical. Strategies for optimizing productivity during writing sessions are also needed. Strengthening writing productivity requires mechanisms for accountability, awareness of our writing process, and strategies to enhance the effectiveness of each writing session. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author considers the ways to prevent errors and mistakes in English language abstracts of papers written in Russian by university faculty, post+graduate students and students earning their Master’s degree in engineering. Common errors have been identified and systematized. The articleprovides examples of common lexical and grammar errors and errors of style and their presumable roots. The process of training includes ‘writing for training’ and ‘writing for communication’ stages. During the second one the studentsread and analyze some samples of abstracts, write their own drafts and discuss them inclass (peer+to+peer review). As a result the quality of abstracts has improved and the number of errors and mistakes has decreased significantly.

Background: Many physicians in Turkey are both clinicians and researchers, and publishing their research contributes to better patient care as well as to career advancement. Objective: To identify the barriers faced by Turkish physicians to writing research papers and getting them published. Methods: Respondents were asked, through eight multiple-choice questions, about the difficulties they faced in writing research papers and in getting them published in journals. We also searched published literature for accounts of similar difficulties and answers to the question 'What is your purpose in writing scientific publications?' Results: A total of 18% (155 of 871) of physicians completed the questionnaire. About the difficulties faced in writing, 82 out of the 155 participants, or 57%, reported problems in finding financial support; 58 (40%), in obtaining required permissions and clearances; 65 (45%), in acquiring relevant skills, especially those related to data analysis or statistics; and 42 (29%), in languagerelated skills. About the difficulties in getting their papers published in journals, 85 (60%) said that they tried to overcome the difficulties by searching for appropriate solutions on the internet; 66 (47%) sought help from experienced colleagues; and 47 (33%) needed professional help in English translation and editing. Need for financial support was reported by a significantly (p = 0.04) larger proportion of associate professors or full professors (69%) than that of residents (47%) and fellows (45%). Conclusion: The main problems that Turkish physicians face in preparing scientific manuscripts were lack of financial support, inadequate knowledge of data analysis and statistics, and the paperwork involved in obtaining required approvals and permissions--problems that were common to the departments of internal medicine and of surgery. The primary motivation for writing and publishing was career advancement, especially through promotion to a higher academic rank. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to investigate the rhetorical structure of the results and discussion section of scientific papers of the colleges of Life Sciences and Exact, Technological and Multidisciplinary Sciences. In addition to investigating rhetorical relationships, clues (linguistic signals) that signal the relationships are also investigated. The theoretical-methodological model adopted is the Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST), a descriptive theory that studies the organization of texts, characterizing the relations held between its parts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Writing a research paper as a graduation requisite by university students is an important part of university education. It is not a simple task for most university students who face several problems during writing the graduation project. Several kinds of research have been conducted on recognising the challenges and problems that face students in academic writing, but to the researcher's best knowledge, no study has been conducted on the problems faced in writing a graduate research paper by Jordanian undergraduate students of the English Language and Literature major. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the academic writing challenges and difficulties encountered in writing graduation papers by EFL undergraduate students in the Department of English at Alzaytoonah University of Jordan (ZUJ). The data for the study was collected through distributing a questionnaire of three parameters: attitude about writing a research paper, methodology challenges, and background knowledge about research. The questionnaire is based on identifying the causes of the students' challenges in writing their graduation papers. The respondents were 45 undergraduate students of the English Language and Literature. The findings revealed that the most important problems were lack of an academic prerequisite of teaching the techniques of how to write a research paper, lack of knowledge of research paper writing process, lack of resources, lack of the methodology, etc. Thus, for these reasons, the present study attempts to present suggestions and recommendations to overcome such hurdles faced by graduate students in writing their graduation research papers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Domínios de Lingu@gem is the property of Dominios de Lingu@gem and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Publishing in premier journals is a multifaceted challenge that requires not only conducting impactful research but also mastering the art of scholarly writing. This article offers a comprehensive guide, specifically tailored for quantitative research, a dominant methodology in premier journals. The guide systematically navigates through each section of a quantitative research paper—title, abstract, keywords, introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, conclusion, and references—providing clear, actionable advice. Drawing from a research publication in a Q1‐ranked journal as an illustration, this guide elucidates the nuances of constructing an engaging and rigorous quantitative research paper. The guide also delves into the expectations of editors and reviewers, offering innovative strategies and insights to enhance the clarity, coherence, and persuasiveness of submissions. Designed to resonate deeply with quantitative scholars, this guide empowers researchers to craft research papers that not only align but surpass the expectations of premier journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of GeSec: Revista de Gestao e Secretariado is the property of Sindicato das Secretarias e Secretarios do Estado de Sao Paulo (SINSESP) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)