Validation markers in introduction and results and discussion sections of research articles from four disciplines

In the last three decades, genre of research article, among other genres of academic writings, hasreceived the greatest attention. This attention is due to the vital role that research article plays inthe legitimating of claims and disciplines. Johns and Swales (2002) relate this attention to theintensive review process that research article goes through before getting “valorized and ratifiedby the very fact of being published” (p.13). Research article also plays a significant role in thecirculation of academic knowledge that requires meeting the often-stringent requirements of adisciplinary community. The mentioned importance has provoked this study to investigate howwriters validate the ideas, claims, arguments and findings reported in introduction and results anddiscussion sections of research articles across four disciplines namely; Applied Linguistics,Psychology, Chemistry, and Environmental Engineering. To this end, 40 introduction and resultsand discussion sections were extracted from 40 research articles published in high-impactjournals from four disciplines (10 from each discipline). The data were analyzed and the findingsreported some disciplinary differences concerning the frequency and discourse functions ofvalidation markers. The differences could be attributed to the disciplinary conventions of writingor rhetorical functions of introduction and results and discussion section of research article. Theresults of this study might act as a guide for novice writers from four disciplines to plot howsuccessful writers validate their ideas, arguments, findings and claims in introduction and resultsand discussion sections of research articles.