The different ways to write publishable research articles: Using cluster analysis to uncover patterns of APPRAISAL in discussions across disciplines

Abstract

Most existing English for Academic Purposes (EAP) studies from a discourse analysis perspective adopt a discipline-based framework that foregrounds the influence of discipline on linguistic features. However, this practice may become unproductive and impractical, given the increasing interdisciplinarity of research. Informed by APPRAISAL theory, this study used Cluster Analysis and identified five different linguistic profiles in research article (RA) discussions (n = 240) from four disciplines: Chemistry, Geoscience, Education, and Management. The distinctions of the profiles cannot be fully explained by disciplinary characteristics. Instead, they may be shaped by the interplay of various factors, including 1) positively appraising the practical significance of the research, 2) mitigating claims and addressing alternative voices, 3) drawing upon existing knowledge, 4) reiterating experimental procedures and real-world observations, 5) idiosyncratic styles, and 6) journal specificities. The findings contribute to a new understanding of linguistic features and variations of research writing and offer empirical support to the recent call for re-examining the foregrounding of disciplinary influence in writing research. The identified linguistic profiles and shaping factors can guide the teaching and learning of the different ways to write publishable RAs across disciplines.