A comparative genre analysis of journal articles and theses in discussion section

Abstract

There has been growing interest in academic text; however, little empirical research has been conducted on the discussion section. This study presents a comparative genre analysis of the Discussion sections in journal articles and theses. While both formats aim to interpret and contextualize research findings, they differ significantly in their structural organization. This paper analyzes these differences by focusing on key rhetorical features, including the distribution of moves and steps, and the embedding of moves. Through a corpus-based approach, a range of journal articles and theses were examined. The findings indicate that journal articles tend to be more diversified in the organization of moves and steps, while theses are characterized by few moves that conssist of discussions. Additionally, this study explores the role of academic conventions and the expectations of different academic communities in shaping the discourse in the Discussion section. The results provide insights into how genre conventions influence academic writing and offer practical implications for both novice and experienced researchers in adapting their writing to meet specific requirements.