Journal articles, Discussion section results, interpreting

The Introduction section of a journal article Identlhes the research area, explains the Importance of the research, provides background Information, cites and summarizes key literature in the held, points out what still needs to be studied, and Introduces the reader to the work presented In the article. The Methods section—formally known as Materials and Methods or Experimental (Section)— describes how the study was conducted. The Results section summarizes quantitative (and possibly qualitative) data collected during the study. In the Discussion section, authors interpret their data and suggest the larger implications and/or applications of their results. Each of these major sections can be further divided into moves, as we will see in subsequent chapters. 

In this part of the chapter, we revisit the journal articles that were introduced in chapter 4, where we focused on Results. Here we focus on the Discussion sections of these articles. We examine how well the authors follow the move structure in figure 5.1, how they interpret their results, and how they conclude their work. 

The phrases in table 6.3 are often followed by the personal pronoun we (e.g., In the present study, we...). In such instances, we is used to signal the beginning of the authors presented work in the journal article. (Recall that we is also used in Results sections to signal human choice and in Discussion sections to signal interpretative remarks.) Table 6.4 lists some verbs that typically follow we in the fill-the-gap statement. Note that the verbs are in present tense when they refer to what is presented in the paper (e.g., we present ) they are in past tense when they refer to work done in the past (e.g., we measured ). (See table 6.5 for a summary of common functions of verb tense—voice combinations in Introductions.)... 

As you read through these Discussion sections, you will notice that they are quite short. Moreover, the discussion points within these sections are often used to highlight, explain, or reiterate key findings rather than to truly interpret data. In addition, unlike a journal article, few references are made to the literature. These common practices illustrate that the main emphasis in posters is to present, rather than interpret, results. This emphasis reflects both the newness of the data presented (late-breaking results may not yet be fully understood) and the interactive role of the poster (to promote an exchange of ideas and dialog). 

---