Analysis of Abstracts from Research Papers Belonging to the Fields of Medicine and Education

             

Introduction

Abstracts in Research Papers (RP) can be regarded as reduced summaries of the main text. Swales and Feak (1994) state that abstracts are more important for readers than for writers, as their primary purpose is to permit a quick review of the applicability, importance and validity of a RP, and to attract readers’ attention to the rest of a RP.

The American Psychological Association (APA) (2008) states that abstracts should achieve accuracy and clarity of expression, and be purely informative avoiding all sorts of judgments. Besides these inherent characteristics, the structure and type of abstract is directly linked to the field of investigation a RP belongs to.

The purpose of this analysis is to compare four abstracts from RP belonging to two different fields and to illustrate how the characteristics inherent to each field affect the content of the information presented. Rammal (2006) and Zhen-ye’s (2008) articles are concerned with educational issues, while Beckett et al. (2008) and Jorgensen, Zahl and Gotzsche’s (2009) articles belong to the field of medicine.

Analysis

Abstracts can be classified according to their organizational format: They can be unstructured or structured. The former consists of one long unbroken paragraph, while the latter contains headings identifying the main sections in the RP (Swales & Feak, 1994). According to this classification, Rammal (2006) and Zhen-ye’s (2008) abstracts can be regarded as unstructured, whereas Beckett et al. (2008) and Jorgensen et al.’s (2009) abstracts are structured, as both include bolded headings which parallel the structure of the whole paper, each of them referring to one section in the RP.

Beckett et al. (2008) and Jorgensen et al.’s (2009) abstracts follow the Introduction-Method-Results-And-Discussions (IMRAD) formula and are informative: They are heavy on data, look to the past, and describe what the researchers did. These abstracts from the medical field appear to be rather long, and the approach to writing used by the authors of both papers seems to be the RP summary approach (Swales and Feak, 1994), as a synthesis per each of the sections of the RP is provided.

Zhen-ye’s (2008) abstract seems to be written following the results-driven approach (Swales & Feak, 1994) as it focuses on the research findings and what might be concluded from them. The writer does not seem to apply the IMRAD formula in his abstract but concentrates on depicting the results and the possible implications of the research for English language teaching and learning. This abstract is written in a clear and organized manner and includes keywords.

On the other hand, Rammal’s (2006) abstract appears to be Indicative (Swales and Feak, 1994) since it provides a generalized summary of the information in the article, does not include specific results, looks to the future, and describes what the researcher intends to do. Moreover, the abstract is rather short in length, as it consists of two sentences, focuses on the implications of the research on foreign language learning, and does not follow the IMRAD formula.

Regarding the linguistic features of the abstracts, it appears that Zhen-ye’s (2008) abstract includes full sentences with a tense variation. The author first uses the past tense to describe the results of the research, and later he employs the present tense to introduce the discussion and implications of the study. As in every academic writing, it is noticeable the avoidance of abbreviations and jargon, and the use of the impersonal passive. In addition, ideas are presented in order, objectively, concisely and smoothly. By comparison, the abstract by Rammal (2006) presents the first sentence in the present tense, and the last sentence in future tense. This abstract includes full sentences, and active voice.

Alternatively, the abstracts from the medical field differ in length and linguistic features. Jorgensen et al.’s (2009) abstract contains full sentences, the use of the past tense through the whole abstract, active voice with the first person plural “We”, and the avoidance of unexplained abbreviations. This abstract, in contrast to the previous two, includes very specific details and information in a concise and formal style. As regards the abstract by Beckett et al. (2008), it is noticeable the use of full sentences, the inclusion of both active voice by the pronoun “We” and impersonal passive; the use of the past tense to describe the Background, Methods and Results, and the present tense to introduce the Conclusions. This abstract seems to be very detailed and formal.

Conclusion

After a deep analysis of four abstracts from two different fields, it can be stated that all abstracts follow academic conventions and are able to stand alone as they are unified, coherent and concise summaries of the main RP excepting Rammal’s (2006) abstract, which is more similar to an outline. However, they differ in organization patterns and linguistic features as the field and purpose of researches appear to have an important role when compiling information in an abstract.

Beckett et al. (2008) and Jorgensen et al.’s (2009) abstracts, which belong to the medical field, appear strictly structured and seem to follow an IMRAD formula which contains the scope, purpose, results, and contents of the work. This may be due to the fact that readers of medical RP usually need a concise but complete and detailed account of every part of the overall investigation. On the other hand, Rammal (2006) and Zhen-ye’s (2008) abstracts, which are concerned about education, comprise a long paragraph with the thesis, background, and conclusion of the larger work. The effectiveness of abstracts within this field relies heavily on the use of linguistic features to develop interpretative arguments.

References

American Psychological Association (2008). Publication Manual (5^th ed.). Washington, DC: British Library Cataloguing-in-publication Data.

Beckett, N. S., Peters, R., Fletcher, A. E., Staessen, J. A., Liu, L., Dumitrascu, D., Stoyanovsky, V., Antikainen, R. L., Nikitin, Y., Anderson, C., Belhani, A., Forette, F., Rajkumar, C., Thijs, L., Banya, W., & Bulpitt, C. J. (2008, May 1). Treatment of Hypertension in Patients 80 Years of Age or Older. The New England Journal of Medicine, 358 (18) 1887-1897. Retrieved 2010 from www.neim.org

Jorgensen, K. J., Zahl, P., & Gotzsche, P. C. (2009). Breast cancer mortality in organised mammography screening in Denmark: comparative study. Research. BMJ, Online first, 1-6. DOI: 10.1136/bjm.c1241

Rammal, S. (2006). Video in EFL Classrooms. Retrieved from www.usingenglish.com

Swales, J.M., & Feak, C.B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Harbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Zhen-ye, N. (2008, July). A genre-based analysis of English research article abstracts and the linguistic feature of personal pronouns for financial economics, 5 (7)62-64. US-China Education Review, ISSN1548-6613, USA