Move Structures and Cognitive Genres in the Methods Sections of Experimental Research Articles and Corpus-Based Studies in Applied Linguistics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports an investigation of the variation in the move structures and cognitive genres found in the methods sections of research articles (RAs) in a discipline with diversified research methods. Sixty-five RAs involving two research methods in applied linguistics, namely corpus-based studies and experimental research, were analyzed. The results showed that the methods sections of these RAs contained distinct move structures. These distinct move structures, along with the findings of previous studies on the move structures of various disciplines, suggested that the research method adopted in a study is a stronger factor than discipline is in determining the move structure of the methods section. The analysis of the cognitive genres used in the methods sections showed that authors typically require more than one cognitive genre to realize the major moves of the methods sections. However, this variation in the cognitive genres is low between the two patterns of study. These findings suggested that different research methods yield variations in the move structures of the methods sections. However, the cognitive genres that authors require to realize the move structures tend to be common.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.070 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".