Negotiating Theoretical Implication in Management Research Article Discussions

Abstract

Demonstrating the theoretical contribution of new research is essential if the work is considered worthy of publication. This study draws upon genre-based research to explore the means by which theoretical implications are textually realized, negotiated, and promoted to readers in terms of their constituent components and argumentation patterns. By conducting a rhetorical analysis on the discussion section of 60 management research articles, the present study reveals theoretical implications are achieved through a combination of three constituent steps: Stating theoretical implication, Showcasing the theoretical background, and Justifying the theoretical value, and their related substeps. Three salient argumentation patterns are typically employed by research article (RA) authors to negotiate the theoretical value of the novel research. The findings indicate that to transform a new finding into disciplinary knowledge requires contextualizing that finding in a relevant theoretical domain, ascribing value to the finding and interpreting and explaining its meaning in terms of its theoretical insights. It also highlights pedagogical focus should illuminate the pathways for effectively defending and justifying the demonstrated theoretical value.

To Be, or Not to Be, Self-Critical? Writing Discussion and/or Closing Sections in English and Spanish Social Science Research Articles

“…Over the last four decades, there has been a growing body of research that has had as its focus the generic structure of DC sections in English (e.g. Basturkmen, 2012;Berkenkotter & Huckin, 1995;Cheng, 2020;Cotos et al, 2016;Holmes, 1997 Dudley-Evans, 1988;Kanoksilapatham, 2005;Joseph & Miin-Hwa Lim, 2019;Lindeberg, 2004;Nwogu, 1997;Parkinson, 2017;Peacock, 2002;Yang & Allison, 2003). The studies in italics are those that include social science RA DC sections in their corpora.…”