Examining Engagement in the Discussion Section of Marketing Research Articles

Abstract

Studies have shown that the use of Engagement resources is a subtle task for research article writers, making the appropriate use of such resources a complex topic for less experienced writers. For this reason, the present study examined expert writers' ways of positioning their work in marketing research articles on Discussion sections to highlight how Engagement resources can be managed successfully. Drawing on the Engagement subsystem of the Appraisal Framework nine Discussion sections were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively using the UAM corpus tool. The analysis revealed that the Discussion sections were highly heteroglossic, and had contractive resources twice as much as expansive ones, suggesting that marketing academics are more concerned with establishing their credibility as knowers in the field than construing a reader-friendly text. It is also observed that academics in the marketing field tend to focus more on proclaiming their findings in the Discussion section while at the same time mitigating the communicative force of their argument by using tentative language, creating a subtle balance between claim-making and acceptance of potentially differing views. The findings of the present study can offer insights for academic writing materials' developers, novice researchers, and academic writing instructors.

Untitled

“…No todos los investigadores tienen las mismas competencias para escribir artículos científicos dentro de sus propias disciplinas (Perković Paloš et al, 2022), a pesar de conocer los criterios de escritura (Gil Calderón, 2024;Giraldo-Giraldo, 2020), mientras algunos lo hacen bastante bien (Alzahrani, 2020;Bajwa et al, 2020;Perković Paloš et al, 2022;Ramírez-Castañeda, 2020;Zein et al, 2023), otros redactan con amplias oportunidades de mejora (Echanique y Portillo, 2020;Duvoba et al, 2020;Ganga-Contreras et al, 2022;Trinh et al, 2020).…”