Comparative Analysis of Abstracts from the Education and Medicine Field

Research Papers Abstracts Analysis-Integrative Assignment   

                                                                        Godoy,B., Goyeneche,X. ,Furlano,P.

Comparative Analysis of Abstracts from the Education and Medicine Field

This paper compares and analyses two abstracts from the education field (King, 2002; Rammal, 2006) and two from the medicine field (Martinez, Assimes, Mines, Dell’ Aniello, & Suissa, 2008; Wijeysundera, Beattie, Elliot, Austin, Hux, & Laupacis, 2010).  Hubbuch (1996) defines Research Papers’ (RP) Abstracts “as brief summaries of the major points made by an author in a book or article” (p. 126). They are the first section that appears in an RA, however, they are written as the final stage of the research. Swales and Feak (1994) agree with Hubbuch (1996) in the fact that RP abstracts “consists of a single paragraph containing from about four to ten full sentences” (Swales & Feak, 1994, p.210).

The comparison will be based in terms of structures, types, linguistic characteristics and writing methods applied. The American Psychological Association (APA) manual offers useful guidelines as regards  abstracts’ composition, since “it allows readers to survey the contents of an article quickly” (APA, 2008, p.12). Depending on the kind of abstract there are some conventions writers have to meet, that is, the organization, the linguistic specifications including the use of full sentences, past tense, impersonal passive, the absence of negatives, abbreviation and jargon, and tense variation (Swales & Feak, 1994; Swales, 1990). Swales and Feak (1994) distinguish two approaches to write abstracts: the result-driven approach, related to the findings and the reached conclusion and the RP summary approach which follows Introduction- Methods-Results-And-Discussions (IMRAD) formula summarized in two sentences.

Concerning one of the articles from the medicine field written by Wijeysundera et al.(2010), it could be stated that it is a structured abstract as it contains bolded headings which identify the main sections in the RA (Swales & Feak, 1994); this is probably because it follows certain requirements of specialized journals. It seems to be a RP abstract as the article has been already written and the audience could be any reader in the arena.  Wijeysundera et al.’s (2010) abstract is informative since it is heavy on data; it looks to the past and describes what the researchers did. Moreover, it follows the IMRAD formula (Swales &  Feak, 1994; Swales, 1990).

As regards linguistics specifications, it includes some use of full sentences and the use of impersonal passive (Graetz, 1985), for instance: “…testing was associated with improved one year survival…” (Wijeysundera et al., 2010,  Abstract, p.1). Some sentences are not fully complete, probably because subheadings provide the information about the content of each section. There is an absence of abbreviations, jargon and negatives and the Conclusion is written in the present tense (Swales &  Feak, 1994; Swales, 1990). As regards APA conventions it does not follow some rules as it does not begin on a new page, the word “Abstract” is not centered and it should not be bolded.

The second abstract from the medicine field was written by Martínez et al. (2010); it presents similarities with Wijeysundera et al's (2010) abstract. This abstract is also structured as it is divided into sections, and it contains bolding headings with the aim of identifying each main section in the RA. It is informative providing the readers with the main findings (Swales & Feak, 1994; Swales, 1990).  It seems to be an RP abstract and it follows the IMRAD formula, allowing the reader to preview the content of the Research Article. The conciseness and the amount of specific information presented may attract readers to go on reading the rest of the paper.

Regarding its linguistic features it is mostly written in full sentences and there is use of past tense as well as passive structures. Martinez et al.'s (2010) abstract does not present abbreviations and negatives. The choice of verb tenses in the Conclusions section differs from Wijeysundera et al.'s (2010) article as it is written in the past passive. Concerning APA conventions, the abstract does not comply with certain requirements as the word “Abstract” is not centered, it is bolded and capitalized. Martinez et al. (2010) seem to be acquainted with current changes in APA style as they use personal passive: “We did a nested case-control analysis (…)” (Martinez et al., 2010, Abstract, p.1). APA (2008) states that in co-authored papers it can be used the second person plural pronoun. Both medicine abstracts have been written following the result-driven approach as the findings are deeply described and the conclusion would serve as a stride for future works.

As regards the educational area, King’s (2002) abstract is an indicative abstract as it summarizes the information presented in the article and it has been written following the RP summary approach. It does not include specific results but describes the use of the DVD as an educational resource, as the author points out that “DVD has vastly replaced traditional VHS (…)" (King, 2002, p.1). As for its structure, it is an unstructured type of abstract, which consists of a single, unbroken paragraph of 10 lines (Swales & Feak, 1994). Full sentences are used to show the content to the audience and it is positioned at the beginning of the RA. Conversely, the author does not follow the IMRAD formula and the word "Abstract" is not written in a single page and it is bolded and italized.

Considering abstracts' linguistics specifications proposed by Graetz (1985) the whole abstract is written in the present tense as for instance, “this paper starts off by discussing film-viewing approaches, and then assessing (…)" (King, 2002, Abstract, p.1). Moreover, it is characterized by the absence of negatives and the avoidance of jargon, and symbols, and the last sentences of the abstract is written in the passive voice, since it focuses on the receiver rather on the writer. APA manual (2008) calls of for “continuity in words, concepts, and thematic development” (p.32),  and this issue in not respected by the author  as he fails to clarify the terms DVD and VHS that might distract the reader.

The fourth abstract analyzed is also from the education field and it belongs to Rammal (2006). As King’s abstract (2002), the author introduces his project by means of an indicative and unstructured abstract, as it describes what the researcher intends to do (Swales and Feak, 1994). Similar to the previous educational abstract, Rammal (2006) does not follow APA (2008) format layout as the word Abstract is wrongly placed; it is not centered, it is bold-typed, and it is followed by a semi colon. Moreover, neither Rammal (2008) nor King (2002) follows IMRAD formula for writing abstracts, use a new page for their abstracts and no keywords are listed. Rammal’s (2006) educational paper does not pursue any of the stated approaches for writing abstracts. It is just a two-sentence paragraph that refers only to the Introduction section.

With reference to the linguistic aspects, Rammal’s (2006) abstract is the shortest of the four as it encloses five lines with less than a hundred words. As opposed to King (2002) the word limited is not respected and the analysis show that the abstract is not written as a description of the RA.  Two long sentences constitute this paragraph; the first sentence is written in the present tense whilst future tense is used for the second one. As King’s (2002) abstract, there is also use of full sentences and an absence abbreviations and negatives. But, unlike King’s abstract (2002), there is no use of impersonal passive and the acronym English as a Foreign Language (EFL)  is clarified next to the contraction.

Abstracts should be brief, self contained and accurate (APA, 2008). They should contain specific data and be coherent and readable as it is the reader’s first contact with the RA. After analyzing the four abstracts, it might be concluded that depending on the field of research, abstracts may present different formats and ways of structuring information, and also vary in their linguistic aspects and methods of writing. Whilst the medicine  RAs mostly comply with standard requirements and rules when publishing papers, the educational RAs fail to follow these conventions. None of the four follow APA (2008) manual for writing abstracts, as this section of the RA is not separated from the rest of the article. This might be due to publishers’ requirements concerning space and cost reduction.

References

            Hubbuch, S. M. (1996). Writing research paper across the curriculum. (4th ed.). Harcourt Brace: Fort Worth, TX. 

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

King, J. (2002). Using DVD feature films in the EFL classroom. [Abstract]. The weekly column, 88, 1-10.

Martínez, C., Assimes, T.L., Mines, D., Dell’Aniello, S., & Suissa, S. (2010). Use of venlafaxine compared with other antidepressants and the risk of sudden cardiac death or near death: A nested case-control study. [Abstract]. British Medical Journal, 340: c249, 1-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c249.

Rammal, S. M. (2006). Video in EFL Classrooms. [Abstract]. Retrieved from: http://www.usingenglish.com/articles/video-in-efl-classrooms.html

Swales,  J. M.  (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings.(Cambridge Applied Linguistics Series). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

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

Wijeysundera, D.N., Beattie, W. S., Elliot, R.F., Austin, P. C., Hux, J.E., & Laupacis, A. (2010). Non-invasive cardiac stress testing before elective major non-cardiac surgery: Population based cohort study. [Abstract]. British Medical Journal, 340: b5526, 1-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b5526