Rhetorical Structures in Research Methodologies – A Cross-Disciplinary and Cross-Linguistic Analysis of Linguistics, Literature, and Psychology Articles

1.1 Rhetoric meets research

1.2 The power of scientific articles

One of the most important types of texts in academic communities is represented by scientific articles. Scientific articles facilitate the presentation and dissemination of research results within academic communities [4]. However, writing publishable scientific articles requires not only an awareness of language use but also knowledge of the rhetorical structure and linguistic features of the text [5, 6, 7, 8]. This skill, known as discourse competence, is crucial for authors seeking to communicate their research findings within academic communities effectively [9]. Authors of scientific articles must also be aware of the differences in text structures and international writing conventions to publish their work in international scientific journals [10]. The number of scientific articles is increasing today. Scientific articles, as a genre, consist of eight main sections: abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, findings, discussion, conclusion, and references [11, 12].

A genre is a spoken or written communication that has its own specific structural arrangement [2]. In recent years, the dominant approach to describing the language of scientific texts has been genre analysis. Since the proposal by eminent American linguist John Swales in the 1980s, notably in the field of English for academic or specific purposes (EAP/ESP), genre-based approaches (GBAs) have become increasingly common and powerful [13, 14]. Researchers in the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) School identified the genre as a staged and goal-oriented socio-communicative activity within a certain culture, providing insights into form-function relationships that are useful for some applied linguistic purposes, such as language teaching [13, 15].

In Asia, genre-based approaches have gained significant popularity. Originating in the United States and Australia, these approaches have been applied in both academic and professional settings [13, 16, 17, 18]. Applied genre analysis has become a prominent approach in applied linguistics, particularly for specialized purposes. Genre analysis studies examine written texts for educational purposes, aiming to identify patterns in the form and rhetorical organization of scientific articles across various cultures and academic disciplines. It has been demonstrated that, through genre analysis, one can obtain the fundamental framework of different genres, which is highly beneficial in the proper composition of scientific articles. Swales notes a growing interest in the structure of scientific writing, especially research articles. As Berkenkotter and Huckin [19] describe it, research articles serve as “the principal means by which the legitimacy of knowledge claims is established.” The significant attention to scientific articles as a genre for analysis stems from “the importance that articles have for the dissemination of science” [19]. Researchers have proposed various models for different sections of articles. Swales [1] first introduced the CARS (Create a Research Space) model for the introduction section of scientific articles, which has been studied and applied across various disciplines and languages. Although the CARS model was originally designed for analyzing introductions, it has been adapted for use in other sections, including abstracts [8, 10, 20], methodology sections [3, 21], results sections [22] and discussion sections [23, 24]. This genre analysis approach offers valuable insights into the structure and organization of academic writing, facilitating both the comprehension and creation of scientific articles across various fields and cultural contexts. Hyland and Jiang [25] claim that globalization and internationalization have spurred the fast expansion of English for research and publication needs as well as the extensive use of genre-based writing education.

The widespread adoption of digital communication has ushered in a digital and multimodal era for human civilization. Genres are absorbing the digital and multimodal components and are evolving into new forms and functions as they are built to solve the issues confronting reality.” This shift has resulted in three major developments in genre analysis: digital genre analysis, multimodal genre analysis, and genre innovation” [26]. Digital technologies produce a new communication setting that reconfigures the conditions to which pragmatic features of language respond. As a result, genres are no longer limited to conventional text-based formats, but rather include several semiotic resources, which results in creative forms such as science-oriented crowdfunding bids and video methodology articles. These advances highlight the need to see genre as a dynamically communicative phenomenon with social orientation that fits the always-changing social reality [26].

Following Swales’ [1] article on text analysis as genre, numerous studies have been conducted on the structure of scientific articles [22, 26, 27, 28, 29]. Some of these investigations focused on the overall structure of articles [30, 31, 32], while others examined specific sections of articles [10, 20, 31, 33, 34, 35].

However, to date, few studies have specifically analyzed the methodology section [3] examined the methodology section of 20 business management articles and proposed a model for constructing this section. His model suggested three moves and nine steps for the methodology section in this discipline. Genre analysis is based on the premise that a text, as a genre, is composed of smaller units called “moves,” which are arranged in a specific order and sequence to form a pattern. Each move may consist of sub-units called “steps” [19]. Each move and step have a distinct communicative function that can be identified through linguistic features.

Moves are functional and semantic units of text that have specific communicative goals and linguistically defined boundaries within each genre. Each text, as a genre, consists of several moves. A move can be a single phrase or composed of several sentences. Its boundaries may range from a single preposition to several paragraphs [35, 36]. A move, as a social purpose dependent on the author’s community, may consist of several steps. Each move may include one to several steps. Steps are text-dependent elements that are optional and may be present in one text, but absent in another [37, 38].

As each specific genre has its own communicative goals and linguistic boundaries, its moves are identifiable. Therefore, move analysis can be a useful method for studying scientific articles to discover and understand their structure. The moves in Lim’s [3] model includes (1) describing data collection procedures, (2) delineating procedures for measuring variables, and (3) elucidating data analysis procedures.

In this research, rhetoric is limited to the structure of moves and steps in the methodology section of scientific articles. The aim is to determine the structure of moves and steps in the methodology section of research articles in three disciplines: linguistics, literature, and psychology. This study also attempts to determine whether there are clear differences in the move structure between Persian and English articles in the methodology sections of these disciplines. Lim’s [3] model is employed in this analysis to address the aforementioned questions and ambiguities.

1.3 Bridging disciplines and languages

With the advancement of science and technology, the demand for publishing scientific and research articles in scientific and international journals has increased. Therefore, the correct and appropriate writing of articles seems necessary. To facilitate reading and writing articles, native and non-native speakers need to be aware of the rhetorical structure of scientific articles [5, 39, 40]. However, one of the important issues among students and researchers is writing scientific texts, including theses, doctoral dissertations, and scientific and research articles, as they often receive less training or experience in this crucial task during their university studies.

Swales [1] defines genre as a specific form of discourse that shares structure, style, content, and audience, used in specific discourse communities to achieve specific communicative goals. Scientific articles and their various sections, including the abstract, introduction, and methodology, serve a specific communicative purpose within scientific and academic communities. The structure, style, content, and audience of these articles are defined within each discipline. Genre analysis plays an undeniable role in scientific writing with a particular focus on the methodology section and the challenges researchers face when writing academic articles [10, 11, 12, 41].

Scientific articles and their various sections, including abstract, introduction, and methodology, are recognized as genres due to their specific communicative purpose within scientific and academic communities, with their structure, style, content, and audience defined for each discipline. The effort to uncover the social and rhetorical aspects of genres intensified, especially after Miller’s influential article [42] that introduced genre as a social behavior. Many novice students and researchers lack precise knowledge of the move structure and proper writing techniques for academic texts, which can lead to confusion when they are confronted with these tasks. Evidently, only articles that adhere to international principles and rules regarding linguistic features and rhetorical structure qualify for publication in reputable domestic and foreign journals. Students must learn correct methods of knowing, selecting, evaluating, reporting, concluding, and discussing to comprehend human community discourses effectively. Thus, to conduct scientific and academic studies, one must be a member of that discourse community [43, 44].

Among the various sections of articles, Goulart [45] and Lim [3] consider the methodology section crucial as it convinces the reader of its validity and reliability, demonstrating the procedure, experiments, models, questionnaires, tools, etc. [4]. Despite its importance, few genre-focused studies have examined and analyzed the methodology section of scientific articles, investigating its move structure and rhetoric. To date, no model has been proposed for the methodology section of articles in linguistics, literature, and psychology. Before identifying differences, a model is needed to understand better and explain that genre. Given the points, this study aims to examine and analyze the moves in the methodology section across these three scientific disciplines to answer whether Lim’s [3] model moves are incorporated in them. Additionally, it seeks to determine if there are differences between Persian and English articles in these three fields based on Lim’s [3] model.

1.4 Relevance of the research

Scientific articles are one of the fundamental genres in academic writing, serving as a medium for exchanging and communicating new knowledge among members of academic communities [46, 47]. Scientific articles present research results and share them within academic communities. Researchers strive to publish their investigations in reputable scientific journals to expand knowledge, introduce new innovations, and exchange findings among scientific and professional communities. However, the skill of writing scientific articles is considered essential and indispensable among professors, students, and researchers. Even if they have a thorough understanding of their research topic, content, and results, without knowing the correct method of writing and presenting it to scientific communities, the exchange and transfer of that knowledge is not possible. Researchers, especially those aiming to publish in prestigious international journals, must be aware of the correct structure and moves in each section and write their articles based on that model.

Genuine understanding of genres may be a “heuristic” for academic authors “evaluating and enhancing their formative assessment practices.” Kozhemyakin and Dubrovskaya [46] demonstrate how genre analysis provides a useful framework for scholars to “map task expectations according to the framework” and to realize that academic achievement calls for more than just topic knowledge.” Different aspects of the assessment cycle can benefit from a broader knowledge of the domains of knowledge required to be successful in a specific genre,” as they point out. Thus, genre knowledge may become “the thread which runs through different assessment practices,” enabling researchers not only to enhance their writing but also to successfully match it with academic criteria [46].

Studies on movement analysis have long been utilized as a tool for training inexperienced writers in a broad knowledge of norms in scientific and academic works move [10, 32, 34, 41]. Diverse research has been carried out to examine the textual traits among diverse fields, languages, and civilizations. Renowned research article beginning parts from Swales [1] inspired further general studies on the generic examination of several portions of academic genres, either cross-culturally or cross-disciplinary.

Despite the abundance of texts dedicated to genre research, more studies are needed to demonstrate the educational importance of studying linguistic features in relation to communicative functions. Understanding the rhetorical structure and linguistic characteristics of articles is only possible through examining articles, analyzing different sections, and presenting a general model of them. The creation of a comprehensive model and description of academic texts and enhancing students’ ability to understand and create them has brought genre analysis into the educational environment. Genre analysis can help professors make students aware of the differences between various genres and “how to identify these differences” [38]. This type of analysis is also very helpful for non-native researchers [1, 38, 48] and it is necessary for them to know how and with what structure scientific articles in that language are written. Among the various sections of articles, the methodology section appears to be very important as it provides a picture of the entire research and its method of implementation, as well as proving the correctness and validity of that research.

The methodology section of scientific articles encompasses the methods and experiments used to obtain research results. This section constitutes a crucial part of articles as it convinces readers of the validity, reliability, and appropriateness of the employed research method [3]. Hyland [49] identifies two primary objectives for researchers in creating scientific articles: 1) transferring new knowledge to scientific communities and 2) persuading scientific communities to accept their claims [43, 44]. It is evident that the second objective is achievable only through an appropriate presentation of the article’s methodology section. Despite the significance of the methodology section, many researchers do not exercise sufficient care in writing this part.

1.5 What this study aims to discover

The methodology section of scientific articles, distinct from other sections such as abstract, introduction, discussion, and conclusion, is considered a genre in itself. Understanding the linguistic and rhetorical features of research articles as scientific writing, as well as the ability to compose them, appears essential for a researcher. The present study aims to take a step toward achieving this goal.

The primary objective of this research is to analyze the structure of the methodology section in articles from three different disciplines—linguistics, literature, and psychology—and compare their move structures.

The Objectives of the study are as follows:

1. To examine the move structure in the methodology section of scientific articles in linguistics, literature, and psychology based on Lim’s [3] model and to answer whether a similar structure exists across the methodology sections of these three branches of science.

2. To compare the conformity scores of the methodology sections in articles from linguistics, literature, and psychology disciplines with the moves proposed in Lim’s [3] model for this section.

3. To compare the conformity scores of the methodology sections in Persian and English articles across the three disciplines with the moves presented in Lim’s [3] model.

1.6 Questions driving the inquiry

The research questions can be articulated as follows:

1. What differences exist in the methodology sections of scientific articles in linguistics, literature, and psychology in terms of conformity to Lim’s model?

2. What differences exist in the methodology sections of scientific research articles in linguistics, literature, and psychology regarding the three moves in Lim’s model?

3. What differences exist in the methodology sections of Persian and English scientific research articles in the mentioned disciplines in terms of conformity to Lim’s model?

4. What differences exist in the methodology sections of Persian and English scientific research articles in the mentioned disciplines in terms of conformity to the three moves in Lim’s model?

5. What differences exist in the methodology sections of Persian and English scientific research articles within each discipline (linguistics, literature, and psychology) in terms of conformity to the three moves in Lim’s model?

1.7 Guiding assumptions

1. There is a significant difference in the methodology sections of scientific research articles in linguistics, literature, and psychology disciplines in terms of conformity to Lim’s [3] model. For instance, because of frequent use of corpus-based methods, linguistics articles may show more conformity to Move 1 (Describing Data Collection Procedures), while psychology articles may prioritize Move 3 (Elucidating Data Analysis Procedures) with detailed statistical analyses and literature articles may show less consistent move structures due to qualitative interpretive approaches.

2. There is a significant difference in the methodology sections of scientific research articles in linguistics, literature, and psychology disciplines regarding the three moves in Lim’s [3] model. For example, while psychology articles may concentrate more on Move 3 with thorough justification of statistical tools, linguistics articles may stress Move 2 (Delineating Measurement Procedures) with exact descriptions of annotation schemes and underutilize Move 2 due to reliance on textual analysis rather than measurement.

3. There is a significant difference between the methodology sections of Persian and English scientific research articles in the mentioned disciplines in terms of conformity to Lim’s [3] model. Persian papers, for instance, can exhibit less compliance to Move 3 because they utilize complex statistical techniques less commonly than English papers, which often follow international standards requiring thorough data analysis disclosures.

4. There is a significant difference between the methodology sections of Persian and English scientific research articles in the mentioned disciplines in terms of conformity to the three moves in Lim’s [3] model. Persian articles may incorporate more complex Move 1 explanations to contextualize data collecting due to cultural rhetorical preferences, while English articles may give Move 3 top priority with succinct, standardized statistical reporting, so mirroring global publishing standards.

5. There is a significant difference between the methodology sections of Persian and English scientific research articles within each discipline (linguistics, literature, and psychology) in terms of conformity to the three moves in Lim’s [3] model. In linguistics, Persian articles may have longer Move 1 descriptions for qualitative data collecting than English articles’ standardized corpus descriptions; in psychology, Persian articles may underreport Move 3 statistical details compared to English articles; and in literature, Persian articles may underline Move 1 narrative contexts over Move 2 measurement, unlike English articles’ balanced move distribution.

1.8 From genre theory to research practice

It appears that limited research has been conducted on the genre of scientific research articles and their analysis in the Persian language. Therefore, all the background for the present research has been translated from English sources. Consequently, the Persian equivalents of specific terms are the author’s translations.

As it is not possible to access all reputable scientific research journals, only articles published on accessible reputable websites and journals were used. Specifically, 180 articles were selected from peer-reviewed journals published between 2018 and 2024, ensuring each had a distinct methodology section.

Scientific articles are composed of various sections, including abstract, introduction, methodology, findings, discussion, and conclusion. This research focuses exclusively on the study and analysis of the methodology section in articles from the fields of linguistics, literature, and psychology. One of the limitations of the present study is that many articles in the selected disciplines, particularly in literature and to a lesser extent in linguistics, lack a discrete section for presenting the research methodology. The authors of these articles do not devote sufficient attention to writing this section. Consequently, a substantial number of articles in the aforementioned fields were searched for data collection, and subsequently, those with a separate methodology section were selected.

1.9 Defining the terrain: Conceptual foundations

Scientific articles constitute a genre in scientific and academic writing, serving as intermediaries for the exchange and communication of new knowledge among members of academic communities [38, 50, 51, 52, 53]. Research articles encompass the presentation of research findings and the expansion of that knowledge within academic communities [11]. Scientific articles provide an appropriate environment for legitimizing findings and research [54, 55]. They are genres through which discourse communities communicate, and the specific language distinguishes different disciplines from one another [15]. The methodology section of scientific articles comprises information based on which the validity of the research can be evaluated. Therefore, it is necessary to provide details about how the research was conducted and why certain methodological approaches were selected.

The methodology section of articles should provide a precise and clear explanation of why a particular research method was selected. This section should clarify the actions taken and their implementation to address the research question [50, 56, 57]. The term genre is applied to various types of discourse, both oral and written, with or without literary inclinations. A genre is a type of writing, art, or music that shares specific common characteristics [2]. Defining the term genre is not a simple task, as this word carries different meanings across various domains and from different perspectives. In literary studies, genre refers to types of literary writings. Swales [1] introduces genre as any distinct category of discourse.

1.10 Genre analysis

Bhatia [58] considers genre analysis as the analysis of language in its broader context, which is used not only for the method of text creation but also for the method of interpretation employed in specific contexts to achieve particular objectives [40]. “Move” is a term that denotes a portion of text demonstrating a specific rhetorical function; in other words, it is a section of text with distinct linguistic features and a particular communicative purpose or function. Each move encompasses new information, thereby fulfilling a novel communicative objective [59]. Each move is divided into smaller rhetorical functions that Swales [1] terms “steps,” considering them as means to achieve the goal of that move.

1.11 Rhetoric

Valero-Garces [60] defines rhetoric as the writer’s strategy to persuade the reader and enhance the credibility of their research. Kennedy [61] extends rhetoric beyond “the art of speaking” and applies it to any form of “effective expression.”

In this study, scientific research articles refer to papers published in domestic and international peer-reviewed journals between 2018 and 2024 that contain a distinct methodology section.

The methodology section of scientific articles typically follows the literature review and includes information about participants, research location, instruments, research type, and procedures.

Genre: The genre investigated in this study consists of specific forms of discourse, namely the methodology sections of scientific research articles in linguistics, literature, and psychology, which share a common purpose, style, and structure aimed at detailing research procedures and ensuring reproducibility.

Genre Analysis: Genre analysis in this research refers to the systematic examination of methodology sections in Persian and English scientific research articles from linguistics, literature, and psychology, assessing their rhetorical structure and conformity to the three-move model proposed by Lim [3].

Move and Move Analysis: A move in this study corresponds to one of the three rhetorical components outlined in Lim’s [3] model for methodology sections, specifically Describing Data Collection Procedures, Delineating Measurement Procedures, and Elucidating Data Analysis Procedures. Move analysis involves coding these three moves to evaluate their presence or absence in the methodology sections of the selected articles.

Rhetoric: Rhetoric in this study denotes the structural skills and techniques employed by writers to craft methodology sections in scientific research articles, ensuring more appropriate, coherent, and effective expression of research procedures and rationale.

2.1 Tracing the roots of genre analysis

This section introduces the main existing ideas and theories related to the realm of the present study. This realm includes an overview of genre and its emergence, genre analysis, introduction to the methodology section of scientific articles, move and move analysis, as well as models presented for the methodology section of articles.

Before the second half of the twentieth century, genre was a concept mostly used in literature-related fields. However, since then, genre studies have taken a new direction and entered non-literary domains. Additionally, extra-textual factors, such as social and cultural contexts related to education, have gained importance in genre formation [62]. Today, genre provides a specific framework for analyzing the form and function of non-literary discourses such as scientific articles and is a means for teaching various learning areas including rhetoric, writing, and linguistic features [63]. Many researchers have defined the term genre, but perhaps the most comprehensive definition was provided by Swales. Swales [1] defined genre as a concept of communicative purpose, which is considered the main criterion for connecting members of discourse communities with different individual tastes. Genre is a means to achieve communicative goals given in response to specific rhetorical needs, and this response changes with changing needs [64]. Their community users—that is, lectures by instructors and students, news stories by journalists and newspaper readers—help one to understand genres [2, 38, 59]. Learning professional genres like writing an academic paper calls for further knowledge about certain groups [11].

According to Dudley-Evans [48], in each move category of genres, the emphasis should be on the overall communicative purpose of the text to create that genre. Dudley-Evans relates the author’s purpose to the culture to which it belongs; accordingly, genre is not just a type of text but also the function of that text in the society in which it was created [65]. In fact, genre can be introduced in the field of Systemic Functional Linguistics, which relates to the relationship between language and its function in different social contexts [63]. Miller [66] defines genre as a social act that occurs in repetitive rhetorical situations in specific discourse communities.

2.2 The ESP approach, RGS, and the Sydney school

The term “genre analysis” was first used in the context of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) in Swales’ study [1] on the introduction section of scientific articles [34, 35]. Deciphering and defining the linguistic aspects of academic research papers has proved to be mostly dependent on genre analysis [67]. Since then, many researchers have focused on introducing genre and researching scientific writing. Scientific articles, considered as a genre of knowledge production, have received particular attention in this regard. For over two decades, the importance of genre knowledge has been recognized due to its assistance in helping language learners understand and master scientific, professional, and educational [67] topics [1, 2]. It has been demonstrated that genre analysis is an effective tool for identifying the structural patterns of texts across various disciplines. The increased interest in this field is due to the need to create models for students to write academic and scientific texts appropriately and correctly. This approach, which directly addresses text and discourse analysis, has been considered as a type of text analysis in the field of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) and English for Academic Purposes (EAP). This method can uncover the linguistic features and rhetorical structure of a particular genre, which is useful not only for non-native students but also for native speakers of that language. Due to the variety of texts examined in this framework, different research genres such as scientific articles, research opinion presentations, graduate proposal forms, theses, doctoral dissertations, and reprint request forms, or professional genres such as marketing letters or job application letters, and even other types of organizational texts such as legal claims can be examined in this approach [15, 67]. Swales [1] considers genre analysis as a means of breaking down text that justifies the existence of specific characteristics in that text [68]. Dudley-Evans [48] gives this analysis an educational purpose and sees the main goal of genre analysis as teaching through the production of a modifiable instruction that relates to the arrangement and ordering as well as the identification of linguistic features for spoken and written texts. Understanding and spotting the linguistic characteristics of a genre about their intended use depends on genre analysis. The above indicated approach provides a structural framework for organizing the language features and communicative techniques applied in many genres usually observed in academic communication [69]. Focusing mostly on the study of the structural components and rhetorical patterns demonstrated by various genres often encountered in academic discourse, the genre analysis technique has attracted great scholarly attention [70, 71].

Genre analysis serves as a methodological approach to understanding how texts are structured and function within specific contexts. Hyland [55] defines it as “the study of how language is used in particular social situations,” emphasizing the relationship between language and its communicative purposes. Genres differ in their objectives and organizational patterns, necessitating genre analysis to identify the discursive features of texts and to elucidate how these features align with authors’ intentions and disciplinary conventions. Recent studies have expanded upon this foundation. For instance, Afshar et al. [72] conducted a comparative analysis of introduction sections in applied linguistics and chemistry research articles, revealing cross-disciplinary variations in rhetorical structures. Similarly, Atai and Habibie [73] examined sub-disciplinary variations in applied linguistics research article introductions, highlighting differences across English for Specific Purposes, psycholinguistics, and sociolinguistics. Porras and Ingilan [74] analyzed the move structures in linguistic research introductions, highlighting adherence to and deviations from established models like Swales’ CARS framework. It is widely acknowledged that, in applied linguistics, the author’s purpose in creating a particular genre is of special importance; however, genre analysis does not only emphasize the effect of purpose on the choice of grammatical form but also examines rhetorical moves [65]. Genre analysis emphasizes the similarities of texts in a particular genre. In this regard, two similar genres but in different languages may be composed of different structural moves, which can be attributed to the cultural differences of languages because people in different cultures have different attitudes; contrary to this idea, Bhatia [58] does not see a significant difference in scientific genres of different languages because in his view, when they belong to the same genre, they have common communicative goals and will therefore have a similar structure. According to foundational scholars such as Miller [66, 75], Bhatia [58], and Swales [1], genre analysis has evolved into three distinct yet interrelated traditions, each offering unique perspectives on the study of genres.

2.3 North American tradition: Rhetorical genre studies (RGS)

Emerging prominently in the 1980s, the North American tradition, particularly Rhetorical Genre Studies, conceptualizes genres as typified rhetorical actions that arise in response to recurrent social situations. Carolyn Miller’s [75] seminal work, Genre as Social Action, posits that genres are not merely forms but are deeply rooted in social contexts and functions. This perspective emphasizes the dynamic and socially constructed nature of genres, highlighting their role in shaping and being shaped by human activities. Tardy [76] underlines how genres, as social acts, change to fit changing academic and digital environments, therefore reinforcing Miller’s [75] fundamental work.

2.4 Australian tradition: Sydney school

The Australian tradition, often referred to as the Sydney School, is grounded in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) developed by M.A.K. Halliday. This approach views language as a social semiotic system, focusing on the relationship between language and its social functions. Scholars such as J. R. Martin and David Rose have been instrumental in applying Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) to genre pedagogy, particularly in educational settings [77]. Emphasizing specific genre training for ESL/EFL students, Liu et al. [78] complement the SFL paradigm of the Sydney School. The Sydney School emphasizes the teaching of genres through explicit instruction, scaffolding students’ understanding of the purpose, structure, and language features of various text types.

2.5 English for specific purposes (ESP) approach

The ESP approach, associated with scholars like John Swales and Vijay Bhatia, focuses on the analysis of genres within specific professional or academic contexts. This tradition aims to identify the communicative purposes and structural patterns of texts to inform language instruction tailored to learners’ specific needs. Swales’ concept of move analysis and Bhatia’s work on genre-mixing and the socio-cognitive perspective have been influential in this field. Building on Swales’ [1] move analysis, Wang et al. [79] underline the ongoing significance of ESP genre analysis in spotting communication intents across academic writings.

These three traditions—RGS, the Sydney School, and ESP—offer complementary insights into genre analysis, each emphasizing different aspects: the social action and context (RGS), the pedagogical and functional aspects (Sydney School), and the specific communicative purposes within professional domains (ESP). Together, they provide a comprehensive framework for understanding and teaching genres across various contexts.

They conceptualize genre as a staged process, based on social objectives and structural forms that different cultures employ in specific contexts to achieve various goals. According to Hyon [63], most ESP researchers focus on describing the formal characteristics of genres and pay less attention to the specific functions of texts and social contexts. The third approach, utilized by some researchers such as Swales and Bhatia under the ESP approach, has employed genre as a means for analyzing and teaching spoken and written language to non-native speakers for effective performance in professional and academic environments. They categorize genres into various types of spoken and written texts, defined by conventional features as well as communicative purposes in social contexts [80]. In studying the rhetorical structure of research articles, most studies have focused on a single specific scientific discipline. However, sometimes two different domains are compared in one article, and a few have analyzed the rhetorical structure across multiple academic scientific disciplines. A significant number of these studies have examined the overall structure of articles [30, 50], while others have focused on specific sections, such as the introduction [34, 35], methodology [3, 21, 81], results [22, 82, 83], discussion [22, 23, 24, 84], and conclusion [85, 86]. Among these, the introduction section has received the most attention from researchers, while the methodology section has been the least studied.

One of the genre-based approaches for defining the structure of research articles is move analysis, which has recently gained attention from researchers. Swales [1] pioneered genre analysis based on rhetorical structure and moves, focusing on the structure of research article introductions. Subsequently, a considerable number of similar studies have been conducted. Swales proposed the Creating a Research Space (CARS) model for analyzing articles in various fields. Dudley-Evans [48] argues that text analysis focuses on analyzing the whole to parts, attempting to demonstrate the general and overall characteristics of all texts as they represent a particular genre. In contrast, Hyland [87] emphasizes the definitive importance of the rhetorical structure of the text and directly relates it to the classroom. His research results revealed common rhetorical patterns in academic writing [65]. The educational goal of analyzing scientific article genres is to provide a comprehensive and accurate descriptive model for scientific and academic texts, enhancing the ability of students, especially non-native students or novice researchers, to understand and produce scientific texts suitable for publication in reputable scientific journals. Bhatia [88] views genre analysis as an examination of a framework that not only aids in discovering form-function relationships, but also significantly assists in understanding the information structure in specific linguistic spaces. This is particularly useful for ESP users in forming potentially meaningful appropriate activities to achieve targeted communicative outcomes in work, scientific, and academic spaces. In this concept, genre analysis not only has educational efficacy but also elucidates the communication process in a given genre. Thus, genre analysis combines grammatical insights with cultural, social, and cognitive definitions. Its aim is to explain applied language rather than discovering linguistic templates at superficial levels.

2.6 Rhetoric as a tool of disciplinary identity

Recent studies reaffirm that the methodology section is a central component of a scientific article, providing transparency and credibility to the research process. According to Lim [3, 89] and Swales and Feak [89], this section outlines the methods, procedures, and analytical tools used to obtain research results, allowing others to evaluate or replicate the study. It plays a pivotal role in establishing the validity and reliability of the findings [4, 90]. Swales and Feak [89] outlined core functions of the methodology section in academic writing:

1. Describing the actions taken to answer the research question.

2. Explaining how those actions were operationalized.

3. Justifying the choice of research design and methods.

4. Clarifying how data were collected, measured, and analyzed.

Yang and Allison [85] further emphasize that methodology sections in research articles function rhetorically to persuade readers of the study’s rigor. They argue that authors must strategically present procedures using discipline-specific conventions to demonstrate competence and methodological soundness.

Additionally, scientific writing continues to be characterized as precise, objective, and planned, requiring clear descriptions of:

• Research instruments and materials.

• Data collection protocols.

• Measurement and sampling strategies.

• Statistical tools and justification for their use [91, 92].

Such clarity not only ensures reproducibility but also enhances reader trust and journal acceptance rates.

The methodology section of a research article serves to detail the procedures undertaken during the study, ensuring transparency and reproducibility. Kanoksilapatham [50] emphasizes that this section outlines the research process, providing a clear account of the methods employed. Pramoolsook, Li, and Wang [93] further elaborate that the communicative purposes of the methodology section include describing data collection methods, measurement of variables, and data analysis procedures.

Swales [2] posits that the methodology section informs readers about the research methods used, thereby establishing the reliability and validity of the study’s findings. However, he notes a trend toward abbreviated methodology sections, attributing this to authors’ assumptions about readers’ familiarity with standard research methods. Lim [3] argues that referencing established methods and techniques within the methodology section not only demonstrates the appropriateness of the research design but also engages professional readers by highlighting widely accepted practices.

Berkenkotter and Huckin [94] emphasized that the methodology section is pivotal in legitimizing research findings, as it demonstrates the study’s methodological rigor. They argue that research articles function as genres through which discourse communities communicate, each adhering to specific structural conventions. Consequently, the methodology section plays a crucial role in establishing the credibility of the research within its respective academic community.

Building upon this foundation, recent scholarship continues to explore the dynamic nature of genre in academic writing. For instance, Tardy [76] discusses how genre knowledge evolves and is negotiated within academic communities, highlighting the interplay between established conventions and emerging practices. Similarly, Devitt [95] examines the flexibility of genre structures, noting that while certain conventions persist, they are subject to adaptation based on disciplinary needs and audience expectations. These contemporary perspectives underscore the importance of the methodology section not only as a site for detailing research procedures but also as a rhetorical space where authors establish their credibility and align their work with disciplinary norms.

Berkenkotter and Huckin [19, 94] emphasized that the methodology section is pivotal in legitimizing research findings, as it demonstrates the study’s methodological rigor. They argue that research articles function as genres through which discourse communities communicate, each adhering to specific structural conventions. Consequently, the methodology section plays a crucial role in establishing the credibility of the research within its respective academic community.

Building upon this foundation, recent scholarship continues to explore the dynamic and often overlooked nature of the methodology section in genre analysis. For instance, Mosquera and Tulud [40] conducted a genre analysis of graduate thesis manuscripts and found that methodology sections frequently lack standardized rhetorical structures, highlighting their underrepresentation in academic writing research. Similarly, Farnia and Baratizade [96] noted that despite its importance, the methodology section has received relatively little attention compared to other sections such as introductions and discussions—particularly in cross-linguistic and disciplinary contexts. Flowerdew [97] supports this view, observing that methodology sections are often neglected in genre-based academic writing instruction, leaving students less prepared to construct methodologically sound research narratives.

Tardy [76] also emphasizes how genre knowledge evolves within academic communities, reflecting both convention and innovation. Devitt [95] reinforces this idea, noting that genre conventions, including those of the methodology section, must be viewed as adaptable structures that vary across disciplines and audiences. These contemporary perspectives underscore the importance of the methodology section not only as a procedural narrative but also as a rhetorical space where authors establish credibility, justify design choices, and preempt criticism.

Although genre analysis has extensively explored sections like introductions and discussions, relatively few studies have been conducted on the methodology sections of research articles. This trend is evident in the limited disciplinary range of such studies, often restricted to one field or a small corpus size. Berkenkotter and Huckin [81] emphasized that the methodology section is crucial for persuading readers of the study’s validity and rigor, yet paradoxically, it remains underexamined. Similarly, Morales [98] regarded it as one of the most important yet most neglected components in genre analysis research. Kanoksilapatham [50] further noted that despite spanning multiple disciplines, the methodology section has received “little attention” and lacks a universally accepted structural model.

Recent scholarship confirms this gap. Farnia and Baratizade [96] found that while introductions and conclusions receive substantial attention in genre analysis, methodology sections remain underrepresented, especially in cross-disciplinary studies. Mosquera and Tulud [40] also observed that existing research tends to overlook the rhetorical complexity of methodology sections, contributing to a lack of standardization and pedagogical clarity. This persistent neglect highlights the need for broader, more comparative analyses across fields to better understand and teach the rhetorical functions of this essential section.

Swales [2] emphasizes that writing the methodology section is not a straightforward task. Despite its critical role in detailing the methods and processes that underpin the research, this section has often been overlooked in genre analysis studies. It provides material meaning to other sections and determines the type and amount of data collected. Moreover, editors of major journals frequently conduct methodological screenings, rejecting articles that do not meet their methodological standards [99]. Swales [1] observes that, in experimental sciences, methodology sections tend to be “vague, general, probabilistic, and with little expression of logic or discussion,” whereas in the humanities, they are more step-by-step and precise. He attributes the lesser emphasis on methodology in experimental sciences to their quantitative nature [81].

Kanoksilapatham [50, 53] asserts that there is no clear model for the methodology section across disciplines, as researchers have not given it special attention. Unlike the introduction section, which often follows Swales’ [1] CARS model (Move 1-2-3), the methodology section requires different patterns tailored to each discipline.

Recent studies continue to highlight the variability and complexity of methodology sections. For instance, Mosquera and Tulud [40] conducted a genre analysis of graduate thesis manuscripts and found that methodology sections often lack standardized rhetorical structures, indicating a need for more focused research in this area. Similarly, Farnia and Baratizade [96] observed significant differences in the rhetorical structures of method sections across languages, emphasizing the underrepresentation of this section in genre-based studies. Flowerdew [38] also notes that methodology sections are frequently neglected in academic writing instruction, leaving students less prepared to construct methodologically sound research narratives.

Users often consider these structures as conventional patterns that are not explicitly taught but are identified through move analysis [100]. Connor and Mauranen [101] define a move in a text as an obligatory functional unit used for specific rhetorical purposes [101]. A move is a segment of discourse that performs a particular communicative function and is defined in genre analysis as a “rhetorical and discoursal unit” that plays a coherent communicative role in reading and writing situations [2]. Moves indicate semantic and functional units of text that have specific purposes [50]. The basis of move analysis is the hierarchical pattern structure of texts [102]. With this mindset, we can say that a move is a semantic unit that relates to the author’s purpose. It is important to note that move analysis is only part of genre analysis, which is emphasized in this research.

2.7 How methodologies shape knowledge

2.8 Research on methodology sections

While it seems that few individuals have examined the move structure of the methodology section of scientific articles, their results are very important for our research. These studies discuss inter-disciplinary differences in detail to provide information on how to guide language learners in understanding the relationship between rhetorical moves and their associated linguistic choices. Some of the studies conducted on the structural pattern of the methodology section of scientific articles are as follows:

• Brett [83] → 21 sociology articles

• Nwogu [102] → 15 medical articles

• Lim [3] → 21 managements articles

• Kanoksilapatham [50] → 12 biochemistry articles

• Peacock [81] → 288 articles in 8 different disciplines

• Bruce [117] → 61 academic articles in various disciplines

Swales and Feak [89] dedicated part of a chapter to discussing the linguistic features of the methodology section, addressing the use of sentence connectors, imperative verbs, active and passive voice, and past tense, but they only briefly examined the rhetorical categories in the methodology section. They concluded that, unlike in the sciences, engineering, and medicine, where the methods and techniques used are very different, the methodology in social sciences, education, and public health is often very important and heavily discussed. Particularly in social sciences like linguistics and psychology, Swales and Feak’s attention on linguistic aspects offers a useful basis for this analysis of the sections on methodology. But their scant focus on rhetorical devices emphasizes the need of the thorough movement analysis applying Lim’s [3] methodology in this work.

Brett [83] identified three rhetorical moves for the methodology section of articles:

1. Explaining how data was obtained;

2. Explaining the concepts and variables of the research work;

3. Stating, but not explaining, the statistical methods used to obtain the results. Suggesting that discipline-specific move structures may vary, a hypothesis tested in this study, Brett’s three-move model for sociology articles provides a valuable contrast for the examination of methodological sections in linguistics, literature, and psychology.

Berkenkotter and Huckin [94] studied 351 articles in scientific journals and interviewed 27 research scientists in physics and biology. They found that the methodology section in the relevant scientific disciplines had been downplayed over a 45-year period from 1944 to 1989. Their findings did not indicate that the methodology section was unimportant for science but merely showed that interest in this section was low among regular readers of journal articles in physics and biology. Berkenkotter and Huckin’s historical view of the declining relevance on methodology sections in physics and biology contrasts with their importance in social sciences, so supporting the focus of this study on disciplines like linguistics and psychology where methodology sections are essential for establishing research validity.

Nwogu [102] analyzed 15 articles in medical research and identified three moves for the methodology section in medical articles:

1. Describing the data collection method;

2. Describing the experimental methods;

3. Describing the data analysis methods. Nwogu’s three-move model for medical publications is quite similar to Lim’s [3] model, therefore supporting its relevance to parts on methodology. This work expands Nwogu’s method by using a similar move analysis across Persian and English papers in linguistics, literature, and psychology.

He identified steps for each move; for example, for the first move, data collection method, the steps included the source or location of the data and its size or population. Maswana et al. [30] examined 151 scientific articles with the IMRD (Introduction-Method-Results-Discussion) structure and concluded that the methodology section was of less importance among the various sections of articles, and authors paid less attention to this section. The results of Maswana et al. on decreased focus on methodological sections draw attention to a gap this study closes by stressing their rhetorical structure, especially in fields where methodological rigor is absolutely essential for non-native English writers hoping for worldwide publication.

Swales [2, 118] considers the move structure and function of the methodology section challenging for non-native speakers and even for native speakers. Vassileva [118] claims that these challenges will be even greater if authors of research in a non-native language are not inclined to be aware of genre conventions, which are likely to differ across disciplines. The pedagogical objectives of this study are directly informed by Swales and Vassileva’s emphasis on the difficulties experienced by non-native speakers, so addressing cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary genre conventions and directly guiding Persian researchers writing methodology sections in English.

While these points indicate that both native and non-native researchers need to understand the structure of the methodology section, few studies have examined their structure, and only a limited number of research articles from a few different disciplines have been analyzed. This observation supports the need of the thorough research of methodology sections spanning linguistics, literature, and psychology since it provides a larger disciplinary scope and cross-linguistic perspective to improve academic writing instruction.

Gao et al. [119], in an article titled “Trends in Methodology in Applied Linguistics: China and the West,” examined and compared the trends in the methodology section of applied linguistics in China and the West. The results showed that in China, applied linguistics research has shifted from non-experimental studies to an experimental orientation, whereas in the West, research in this field has established an experimental paradigm, challenging the quantitative paradigm with qualitative approaches. Suggesting that cultural and regional variations may affect methodological rhetorical structures, Gao et al.’s cross-cultural analysis of methodology trends in applied linguistics offers a comparative framework for this study of Persian and English publications.

Lim [3], conducted an analysis based on moves and steps in the methodology section of scientific research articles in business management. His aim was to describe how linguistic features related to the communicative goals of the author and how these goals were achieved. Lim also examined the extent to which the results of an analysis could aid in learning the syntactic and lexical structure of the second language in the methodology section of scientific articles in management. In this regard, he proposed a three-move model for this section, which forms the basis of the analysis in the present study.

Lim acknowledged that no single model can be entirely suitable for language learners in different academic disciplines and explained why each section’s constituent steps should be examined in detail to provide a meaningful educational model for second language learners in a specific discipline. Considering the concerns for the pedagogical application of genre analysis, his article suggests that article writing courses in higher education institutions should be tailored to the needs of students facing difficulties related to linguistic features and communicative roles in academic texts.

He claims that, by using an innovative and comprehensible approach to describing the stages of each rhetorical move, he has provided principles that are useful in teaching genre characteristics in the methodology section of management research articles. Lim emphasizes the importance of this section, stating that without a meaningful methodology section, authors will not be able to convince readers of the validity of the tools used to obtain findings [120].

His article focuses on the moves and steps that form the overall structure of the methodology section and examines to what extent various linguistic choices can be studied in relation to rhetorical moves and their constituent steps. Such an analysis argues that it can provide a basis for developing educational materials in reading and writing articles. Lim [3] claims that the methodology section is very important and that we should pay more attention to their main structures, which have been overlooked in various sciences. Lim’s three-move model is central to this study, providing a robust framework for analyzing methodology sections. His pedagogical focus aligns with this study’s aim to support Persian ESL/EFL writers, while his call for discipline-specific models supports the need for this study’s cross-disciplinary analysis across linguistics, literature, and psychology.

Peacock [81], states that few studies have addressed the structure of the methodology section in research articles. This article reports analyses based on the structure of communicative moves in the methodology section of 288 scientific articles across eight academic disciplines: physics, biology, chemistry, environmental science, business, language and linguistics, law, and public and social administration.

Initial examinations of these articles reveal seven different moves for the methodology section, although not necessarily in this order in all articles: (1) overview, (2) location, (3) research objectives, questions, or hypotheses, (4) subjects or materials, (5) procedures, (6) limitations, and (7) data analysis. This study revealed inter-disciplinary differences in moves and move cycles, including clear differences between the sciences and other disciplines, and for the first time, the existence of move cycles in the methodology section was studied.

Peacock notes that, from Swales [1], the discussion of communicative moves in research articles has attracted considerable attention to the structure of moves in the introduction section of academic writing; however, few studies have apparently examined the methodology section, and there seems to be no model for its move structure. Peacock identified the standard research method for identifying moves based on the objectives of the study, using the four-stage method proposed by researchers Dudley-Evans [48] and Holmes [104, 112].

1. Search for structures and patterns and identify moves and boundaries;

2. Utilize sentence-level analysis;

3. Assign all sentences within a move;

4. Validate move categorization using two independent evaluators who subsequently compare their findings.

The objective of that study was to examine the move structure in the methodology section of research articles and the interdisciplinary variation across eight disciplines. Peacock, acknowledging that only a few authors have investigated the move structure of the methodology section in articles, considers their results highly significant for his own research due to their focus on a single discipline. He demonstrates that this area has not received its deserved attention and that non-native speakers require assistance in research writing.

The distinction between Peacock’s work and previous studies on the methodology section was that he examined eight different disciplines in one study, whereas previous works focused on a single scientific discipline. Additionally, each author had analyzed a relatively small number of research articles. The results for sociology, medicine, and management were nearly identical. The structure of the methodology section in these disciplines included (1) data collection, (2) experimentation, and (3) data analysis. The findings for biochemistry and chemistry were also very similar, comprising (1) material structure, (2) equipment, and (3) research method. These similarities among specific disciplines are notable and surprising. Peacock states the objectives of his research as follows:

1. Examine the move structure of the methodology section in research articles across eight academic disciplines.

2. Investigate interdisciplinary variation in the methodology section of articles.

3. Compare the move structures of previous models and propose new models. Peacock’s comprehensive review of eight disciplines, including linguistics, serves as a critical baseline for this study’s cross-disciplinary approach to linguistics, literature, and psychology. His observation of seven steps and move cycles shows a higher level of structural complexity than Lim’s model, motivating this investigation to investigate whether similar variations occur in the targeted disciplines and languages.

Other research writings such as Beasley and Weissberg [121] or Swales and Feak [1] claim additional moves for the methodology section, including (1) overview, (2) subjects or materials, (3) location or source, and (4) limitations. Peacock [81] demonstrated that more empirical research is needed for the methodology section and that such research should utilize a larger number of articles to assess variation across a wide range of disciplines. These findings may reveal more about the true nature of methodology and allow teachers and research writers to accurately present the common move sequences and cycles of that section. The proposed moves by Beasley and Weissberg, as well as Swales and Feak, complement Peacock’s findings, implying that this study’s usage of Lim’s model may need to account for additional moves, such as constraints, particularly in qualitative disciplines like literature.

Kanoksilapatham [122], in a study titled “Facilitating Scholarly Publication: Genre Characteristics of English Research Article Introductions and Methods,” stated that their study examines the important and progressive role of English scientific articles. The study provided a detailed description of the introduction and methodology sections in English scientific articles for researchers who lack sufficient proficiency in English. The dataset comprised 60 articles selected from high-quality journals in biomedical engineering, and the moves and steps of the introduction and methodology sections were examined through genre analysis.

Subsequently, the pervasive and prominent linguistic features in each move or step in the samples were analyzed. This analysis revealed that each section displays a schematic structure consisting of a set of moves and steps. Furthermore, the template of semantic-grammatical features associated with the communicative function was identified. This stylistic analysis indicates that structural patterns and linguistic features functionally interact with each other. Kanoksilapatham believes that her findings are educationally appropriate for researchers in creating the correct genre and for better access to the content they need from scientific articles and effective publication of their achievements in relevant fields. Kanoksilapatham’s comprehensive evaluation of methodology sections in biomedical engineering emphasizes the relationship of linguistic and rhetorical features, serving as a model for this research’s investigation of linguistic choices in Persian and English methodology sections, especially among non-native English writers.

Ghadyani and Tahririan [99] sought to determine whether there is a significant difference between two groups, including Iranian authors and native authors, in the use of interactive markers. For this purpose, the methodology section of 90 English-language medical research articles written by Iranian and native authors published between 2005 and 2010 was used. Hyland’s [123] metadiscourse marker was used as the analysis model. The findings showed a significant difference between these groups in the use of boosters. They attribute these differences to native language, culture, and also authors’ lack of awareness of rhetorical meanings in writing the methodology section of English academic medical research. Ghadyani and Tahririan’s research on cultural differences in Iranian and native English methodology sections strongly informs this study’s evaluation of Persian and English articles, implying that rhetorical markers might vary owing to cultural factors.

Pramoolsook and colleagues in 2015 stated that among different sections of articles, the introduction has been widely studied while much fewer studies have been conducted on the materials and methods section. Moreover, many existing studies have focused only on examining one discipline or comparing two disciplines. However, comparing the rhetorical structure between two sub-disciplines of an academic field has been done very rarely.

In their study, they analyzed and compared the methodology section in two business sub-disciplines, namely, management and marketing, to identify rhetorical variations. Two sets of articles, each with ten methodology sections from two reputable journals in management and marketing fields, were selected and Lim’s [3] model for the rhetorical structure of the materials and methods section in management was adopted as the analytical framework.

The results showed that the chosen analytical framework could not provide sufficient explanation for the rhetorical structure in the methodology section of articles in these two business sub-disciplines and even revealed differences between the text frameworks. Only 30% of the methodology sections in management articles seemed to fit Lim’s model, while in marketing articles, the methodology sections, given the requirements for publication in those two journals, had a more interesting variety of rhetorical patterns. The results of that study consider important issues for writing the methodology section in business disciplines, such as the need for explicit and clear teaching of conventions and guidance for understanding rhetorical differences between these two sub-disciplines. Pramoolsook et al.’s findings on the limitations of Lim’s model in business sub-disciplines warn this research to account for probable variations in languages, literature, and psychology, emphasizing the importance of discipline-specific instructional advice for Persian writers.

Musa and colleagues [4] in an article set the study’s objective as identifying moves in the methodology section of engineering articles, as well as frequent verbs in the moves of this section of articles. For this purpose, 60 scientific articles from engineering disciplines were selected from the Scopus website. The findings revealed that there are crucial aspects in the methodology section of engineering articles that authors should prioritize, not only to enhance the quality of their work but also to meet reader expectations. Musa et al.’s emphasis on rhetorical moves and linguistic elements in engineering methods sections lends a comparative perspective to this research, implying that discipline-specific objectives may influence move patterns in linguistics, literature, and psychology.

This study contributes to the development of customized academic writing instruction for non-native English writers, particularly Persian researchers, by focusing on the limited number of studies on methodology sections and providing empirical data on move structures, thereby improving their ability to adhere to international publication standards.

2.9 Lim’s model: Moves and steps

Lim’s [3] Model moves and steps are as follows (Table 1):

2.10 Step 1: Describing the sample

Describing the sample is a step that includes the following information: (1) location or source of the sample, (2) size or population, (3) characteristics of the sample, and (4) sampling methods or criteria. This move was present in all 20 articles studied by Lim, where information about respondents or organizations from which statistical data was obtained is presented. For example, names indicating occupations (e.g., clergy, construction workers, and managers) or organizations (e.g., companies) were presented in Move 1.

All of these research articles mentioned the data sources. In Move 1-Step 1, typically at the beginning of the methodology section, the location of a sample is given (Table 2).

2.11 Step 2: Describing the data collection procedures

In this step, authors explain their methods of data collection. They use the simple past tense to describe the data collection process, mentioning the sequential actions taken and their chronological order. Example: This study was conducted approximately 2 months after the announcement of unemployment and 1 month before the respondents’ termination of work.

2.12 Step 3: Justifying the data collection method

This step includes two sub-steps: (1) specifying the advantages of using the sample and (2) demonstrating the representativeness of the sample. Move 1-Step 3 only exists if Move 1-Step 2 is present, and it enables readers to understand the characteristics and acceptability of the data collection methods. Example 1: This industry was considered suitable for testing our hypothesis (as it included companies facing ambiguous and dynamic challenges as well as those competing in very stable environments). Example 2: This selection criterion was chosen (because the research concerns issues related to business-level strategic management (as opposed to large corporate level)). Authors typically justify data collection methods by the following:

1. Mentioning the advantages of using the sample compared to other samples used in previous studies.

2. Demonstrating the extent to which the sample represents the population. The most distinctive sign of such conformity is the use of words with positive meanings that highlight the size and representativeness of the sample (e.g., advantage, representative, appropriate, adequate, etc.). Evidently, authors usually refer to previous research methods in an effort to justify their data collection method.

2.13 Move 2: Delineating procedures for measuring variables

After describing the sample in Move 1, authors typically proceed to explain how dependent and independent variables are measured. This move is the most challenging to write in the methodology section, as the validity of the research method and findings largely depends on the degree of precision in defining each variable and explaining how they are measured. Headings commonly used to indicate the start of Move 2 include research design, measurements, and measuring independent variables. This move differs from Move 1 in that the authors do not focus on the sampling method or sample but rather discuss the variables that need to be measured in the overall research design. This defining difference between Moves 1 and 2 can also justify the fact that in some articles, the second move is separated from the first move (for describing the sample or sampling method) by a subheading, “Research Design,” which describes various measures.

3.1 Studying the structure of scientific method

Given the objective of the present study, which is to linguistically examine the methodology section of English and Persian articles in linguistics, literature, and psychology from a genre perspective, this chapter details all stages including research design, statistical population and sample, sampling method, instruments, research implementation process, and data analysis method to clarify how the research findings were obtained.

3.2 The anatomy of a methodology section

Considering the overall aim of the research, which is analyzing the structure of the methodology section in Persian and English articles across three disciplines – linguistics, literature, and psychology – and comparing their move structures, the research method is applied research using a descriptive approach. In this regard, data collection was conducted through library research. Applied research includes a set of methods aimed at describing the conditions or phenomena under study [126]. To achieve the desired results and properly implement the research method for developing theoretical foundations, definitions, and concepts, library resources were used, with the most reliable sources in this research being scientific websites. The information and data required for this research were collected from various sources depending on their type. Information related to research literature and theoretical discussions was gathered from library resources, scientific databases, and foreign and domestic articles. The library method includes studying Persian and Latin books and articles (internet sources), master’s theses, as well as reviewing related completed research projects. Additionally, the data needed to calculate research variables was manually obtained by analyzing the methodology section of selected articles based on Lim’s [3] model.

3.3 Cross-disciplinary and cross-linguistic parameters

3.4 Data measurement tool

In this study, to determine the degree of conformity of the methodology section in the target articles with Lim’s model, a table was prepared in which each of the moves and steps in Lim’s model, comprising three moves and nine steps, was coded. In the next stage, each article was individually studied and examined, and the mentioned moves and steps were identified in them, thus collecting the data. It should be noted that in the present study, only the presence of moves and steps was examined, and their sequence and order were not considered, as this order was also not addressed in Lim’s [3] article, which forms the basis of this research (Table 3).

This coding scheme, based on Lim’s [3] model, ensures that methodological sections in Persian and English papers are thoroughly and objectively examined in terms of linguistics, literature, and psychology. By emphasizing the presence of moves and steps, the tool aids in the identification of rhetorical patterns, granting invaluable information for developing pedagogical resources for non-native English writers, particularly Persian researchers aiming at achieving international publishing standards.

3.5 Designing the analytical framework

4.1 Method of analyzing findings

Data analysis was performed using SPSS 23 software, and the hypotheses were examined and the degree of conformity of the methodology section of Persian and English articles in linguistics, literature, and psychology with Lim’s [3] model was compared. After collecting data from the representative sample of the population, the next is data analysis. For data analysis, descripive and inferential techniques were applied using SPSS 23. Descriptive techniques were used in classifying and orgainizing alog with the calculation of frequency indices. For this purpose, line and pie charts with frequency tables were used. For inferetinal techniques and to test hypotheses as well as the level of conformity of research variables with the model, analysis of variance, multivariate analysis and t-etest were used accordingly.

5.1 Describing, justifying, and measuring: The three moves

In this chapter, we first report information about the subjects, which includes the presence or absence of moves in Lim’s [3] method in the methodology section of Persian and English scientific research articles in linguistics, literature, and psychology using descriptive statistics indicators such as frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation. To document the occurrence of these moves, first, we show descriptive statistics including frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation. Using inferential statistics—that is, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), and t-tests—to test the research hypotheses—we then evaluate the conformity of these papers with Lim’s model.

5.2 How scholars describe data and tools

6.1 Who is the researcher talking to? Voice and stance

8.1 The rhetoric of evidence and argumentation

Swales [1] asserts that the value of a researcher is determined by their ability to write successful scientific articles publishable in reputable journals for use by other researchers. Consequently, researchers must understand how to write in accordance with the social objectives, form, structure, and rules specific to that academic community; in essence, they must be familiar with its norms and conventions [99]. To this end, the present study aims to examine and analyze the moves employed in the methodology sections of Persian and English scientific articles in the fields of Linguistics, Literature, and Psychology.

8.2 What the moves reveal about scientific thinking

8.3 Key findings

8.4 Conclusion

Writing scientific articles encompasses scientific action components that largely depend on the author’s ability to use appropriate language structure in that scientific field [4]. The main purpose of writing a scientific article is to help the reader understand the concepts and theories that the author intends to convey through the article. Therefore, the author must be familiar with the skills of writing articles correctly to ensure that the new knowledge acquired can be effectively communicated to the scientific community and that they are able to comprehend it. This study demonstrated that the rhetorical structure of scientific articles can be analyzed and may include different structures depending on the field to which it belongs. The results of this research help researchers and article authors firstly to understand that they need to be aware of the structure and writing style of articles in their field, and secondly, it assists authors in the fields of Linguistics, Literature, and Psychology to write the methodology section in a correct and comprehensible format for readers.

Considering the objective of this research, which was to analyze the structure of the methodology section of articles in three different disciplines – Linguistics, Literature, and Psychology – and to compare the move structure of the methodology section in Persian and English articles in these three disciplines, the results of the research show a significant difference between the methodology sections of articles in these three scientific fields among Persian and English articles.

8.5 Practical and research recommendations