The role of discussion sections in research articles: the case of health information-seeking studies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47989/ir30341812Keywords:
Discussion section, Health information seeking, Research article, Scientific communicationAbstract
Introduction. Drawing on the ideas of genre analysis, this article elaborates the role of discussion sections as sites where researchers reflect their contributions to a particular field of study.
Method. A sample of 100 discussions sections of research articles examining health information seeking was scrutinized by means of descriptive quantitative analysis. To obtain a quantitative overview, the percentage distribution of the codes assigned to the 14 constituents of discussion sections was calculated. The main emphasis was laid on qualitative content analysis.
Analysis. The qualitative analysis focused on the content of diverse constituents of discussion sections, for example, interpreting individual research results and reflecting the theoretical contributions of the study. More specifically, the analysis focused on the variation in the constituents´ content. To achieve this, similarities and differences were identified in the ways in which the authors depicted such content per constituent, for example, while summarizing the key findings and reflecting the empirical contribution.
Results. The findings indicate that in discussion sections of research articles on health information-seeking studies, researchers direct their main attention to the interpretation of individual (key) findings. While reflecting their contributions to health-information studies, they also compare their findings in order to identify similarities and differences with prior studies. Moreover, they are active to propose topics for future research. In contrast, researchers in the above domain quite seldom employ analytically demanding strategies by explaining the similarities and differences or reflect the theoretical and methodological implications of their study.
Conclusion. Researchers prefer a conservative approach by seeking confirmatory support for their findings, rather than challenging them by presenting contrasting evidence.
References
Al-Shujairi, Y.B.J (2021). Review of the discussion section of research articles: rhetorical structure and move. LSP International Journal, 8(2), 9-25. https://doi.org/10.11113/lspi.v8.17099
Al-Shujairi, Y.B.J., Tan, H., Abdullah, A.N, Nimehchisalem, V., & Imm, L.G. (2019). Moving in the right direction in the discussion section of research articles. Journal of Language and Communication, 6(2), 23-38. (Archived by the Internet Archive at https://archive.org/details/al-shujairi-et-al.-2019)
Angelini, D.J. (2023). Delving into the critical constituents of the discussion section. Nurse Author & Editor, 33(3-4), 26-29. https://doi.org/10.1111/nae2.12056
Annesley, T.M. (2010). The discussion section: your closing argument. Clinical Chemistry, 56(11), 1671-1674. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.155358
Arsyad, S, Purwo, B.K., & Adnan, Z. (2020). The argument style in research article discussions to support research findings in Language Studies. Studies in English Language and Education, 7(2), 290-307. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v7i2.16626
Avidan, M.S., Ioannidis, J.P.A, & Mashour G.A. (2019). Independent discussion sections for improving inferential reproducibility in published research. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 122(4), 413-420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2018.12.010
Bachl, M., Link, E., Mangold, F., Stier, S. (2024). Search engine use for health-related purposes: behavioral data on online health information-seeking in Germany. Health Communication, 39(8), 1651-1664. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2024.2309810
Basturkmen, H. (2012). A genre-based investigation of discussion sections of research articles in Dentistry and disciplinary variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2), 134-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.10.004
Bavdekar, S.B. (2015). Writing the discussion section: describing the significance of the study findings. Journal of the Association of Physicians of India, 63, 40-42. (Archived by the Internet Archive at https://archive.org/details/bavdekar-2015)
Brett, P. (1994). A genre analysis of the results section of sociology articles. English for Specific Purposes, 13(1), 47-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(94)90024-8
Capkin, C. (2024). Trends in genre analysis articles on scientific abstract structures: a quantitative content analysis. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 56(1), 71-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006221132274
Conn, V.S. (2017). How to craft a strong discussion section. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 39(5), 607-608. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945916650196
Dobakhti, L. (2016). A genre analysis of discussion sections of qualitative research articles in applied linguistics. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(7), 1383-1389. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0607.08
Dudley-Evans, T. (1994). Genre analysis: an approach to text analysis for ESP. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. 219-228). Routledge.
Ghasemi, A., Bahadoran, Z., Mirmiran, P., Hosseinpanah, F., Shiva, N., & Zadeh-Vakili, A. (2019). The principles of biomedical scientific writing: discussion. International Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 17(3) (unpaginated). https://doi.org/10.5812/ijem.95415
Given, L.M., Case, D.O., & Willson, R. (2023) Looking for information: examining research on how people engage with information. 5th ed. Emerald.
Goulston, A. (2023). How to write the discussion section of a research paper. AJE Scholar Author Resource Center. https://www.aje.com/arc/how-to-write-the-discussion-section/ (Archived by the Internet Archive at https://archive.org/details/Goulston)
Gray, J.A. (2019). Discussion and conclusion. AME Medical Journal, 4 (unpaginated). https://doi.org/10.21037/amj.2019.04.05
Hashemi, M.R., & Moghaddam, I.G. (2019). A mixed methods genre analysis of the discussion section of MMR articles in applied linguistics. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(2), 242-260. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689816674626
Holmes, R. (1997). Genre analysis, and the social sciences: an investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 321-337. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(96)00038-5
Hyland, K. (2008). Persuasion, interaction and the construction of knowledge; representing self and others in research writing. International Journal of English Studies, 8(2), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes.8.2.49151
Kearney, M.H. (2017). The discussion section tells us where we are. Research in Nursing Health, 40(4), 289-291. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.2180
Lamanauskas, V (2021) Writing a scientific article: focused discussion and rational conclusions. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 79(1), 4-11. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/21.79.04
Lambert, S.D., & Loiselle, C.G. (2007). Health information-seeking behavior. Qualitative Health Research, 17(8), 1006-1019. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973230730519
Lim, J.M.H (2010). Commenting on research results in applied linguistics and education: a comparative genre-based investigation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(4), 280-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.10.001
Liu, Y., & Buckingham, L. (2018). The schematic structure of discussion sections in applied linguistics and the distribution of metadiscourse markers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 34, 97-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.04.002
Masic, I. (2018). How to write an efficient discussion? Medical Archives, 72(3), 306-307. https://doi.org/0.5455/medarh.2018.72.306-307
Mirzaei. A., Aslani, P., Luca, E.J., & Schneider, C.R. (2021). Predictors of health information–seeking behavior: systematic literature review and network analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(7) (unpaginated). https://doi.org/10.2196/21680
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook, 2nd ed., Sage.
Peacock, M. (2002). Communicative moves in the discussion section of research articles. System, 30(4), 479-497. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00050-7
Qin, C., & Zhang, C. (2023). Which structure of academic articles do referees pay more attention to? Perspective of peer review and full-text of academic articles. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 75(5), 884-916. https://doi-org.libproxy.tuni.fi/10.1108/AJIM-05-2022-0244
Skelton, J.R., & Edwards, S.J.L. (2000). The function of the discussion section in academic medical writing. British Medical Journal, 320, 1269-1270. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7244.1269
Smith, D.E.A. (1984). Medical discourse: aspects of author's comment. The ESP Journal, 3(1), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-2380(84)90004-0
Swales, J. (1981). Aspects of article introductions. University of Aston Language Studies Unit.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. (2004). Research genres: explorations and applications. Cambridge University Press.
Teufel, S. (1999). Argumentative zoning information extraction from scientific text. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh. https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sht25/thesis/t1.pdf (Archived by the Internet Archive at https://archive.org/details/teufel-1999)
Teufel, S., Siddharthan, A., & Batchelor, C. (2009). Towards domain-independent argumentative zoning: evidence from Chemistry and Computational Linguistics. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 1493-1502. https://aclanthology.org/D09-1155 (Archived by the Internet Archive at https://archive.org/details/teufel-siddhartan-batchelor)
Yang, R. & Allison, D. (2003). Research articles in applied linguistics: moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes, 22(4), 365-385. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00026-1
Zhang, Y., & Wildemuth, B.M. (2016). Qualitative analysis of content. In B. Wildemuth (Ed.), Applications of social research methods to questions in Information and Library Science (pp. 318-329). 2nd ed. Libraries Unlimited.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Reijo Savolainen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
