بررسی و تحلیل تفاوت‌های بین‌رشته‌ای در ساختار ژانر علمی بخش «مقدمة» مقالات پژوهشی علوم انسانی

هدف: هدف این پژوهش تحلیل ژانر علمی بخش مقدمة مقالات پژوهشی بر اساس مدل cars سوئلز به‌عنوان یک الگوی شناخته‌شده در علوم انسانی و نشان دادن تفاوت‌های احتمالی بین‌رشته‌ای آن در این حوزه بود.روش‌شناسی: این پژوهش به روش تلفیقی بر اساس الگوی cars و بررسی تفاوت‌های احتمالی بین‌رشته ای طراحی شد. داده‌های متنی پژوهش، شامل مقدمة مقالات در سه حوزة متفاوت علوم انسانی بود که عبارت‌اند از: 1. علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی 2. ادبیات فارسی 3. مدیریت. در مجموع، 45 مقاله به روش تصادفی خوشه‌ای از بین مقالات مورد تایید وزارت علوم در دهة اخیر، به‌عنوان نمونه انتخاب شد. این مقالات در بخش کیفی به روش تحلیل محتوا مبتنی بر کدگذاری گام‌ها و زیر گام‌های گفتمانی مدل cars بررسی شد. سپس، با کمک مقیاس لیکرت، به هر گام به‌عنوان یک متغیر امتیاز داده شد و میانگین امتیاز گام‌ها در بخش کمّی برای هر مقاله محاسبه و با آزمون آماری کروسکال والیس به‌صورت بین رشته‌ای مقایسه شد.یافته‌ها: نتایج پژوهش حاکی از آن بود که رعایت زیر گام‌ها در رشته‌های منتخب به‌طور محسوس و معناداری متفاوت است. مقالات رشتة مدیریت بیشترین انطباق را با گام‌ها و زیر گام‌های گفتمانی مدل cars داشت. گام نخست (تعیین قلمرو پژوهش) و گام سوم (پر کردن خلا پژوهش) بیشترین انطباق را در هر سه رشته داشت و گام دوم (تبیین خلا پژوهش) کمترین انطباق مشاهده‌شده در هر سه رشته بود.نتیجه‌گیری: این پژوهش نشان داد که یکی از الگوهای مقبول نگارش علمی در سطح بین‌المللی در کشور ما به‌خوبی رعایت نمی‌شود. این ناهمگونی به‌ویژه در بیان چرایی و لزوم انجام پژوهش مشهودتر بود. ازآنجاکه ژانر نوشتار علمی موجب افزایش قابلیت درک متن علمی توسط خوانندة متخصص می‌شود. این موضوع موجب افزایش احتمال استناد به مقاله و درنتیجه، افزایش رویت پذیری مقاله و استنادات بیشتر می‌شود؛ لذا نتایج به‌دست‌آمدة این پژوهش در ارزیابی مشکل موجود کاربردی و قابل‌اجرا است.

analysis of interdisciplinary differences in the structure of the scientific genre in the introduction section of humanities research articles

purpose: the purpose of this research was to analyze the genre of the introduction section of research papers in the humanities, based on john swales’ cars model, and to demonstrate the potential interdisciplinary differences related to this model. to this end, the introductions of research papers in three disciplines of the humanities—namely, (1) psychology, (2) persian literature, and (3) management—were analyzed using the cars model. this analysis focused on compliance with discursive moves, as well as the expected meaning and content associated with these moves and their corresponding steps. the research aimed to explore the discursive strategies employed in the introduction sections of research papers across various fields. additionally, the study examined whether there was a statistically significant variation in the frequency of adherence to genre-based discursive moves within the fields under investigation.methodology: this research was designed as a mixed-method study to analyze the genre of research in the introduction sections of research papers written in persian, based on the cars model, and to investigate potential interdisciplinary differences. the textual data for the research comprised the introduction sections of papers from three distinct fields of humanities, as previously mentioned. a total of 45 papers were randomly selected from indexed journals approved by the ministry of science over the past decade to serve as the sample. the papers were analyzed in the qualitative section of this mixed-method study using content analysis based on coding to identify the discursive moves and steps of the cars model. subsequently,  a score was assigned to each move as a variable using the likert scale. the mean score of the moves in the quantitative section was calculated for each paper and compared using the kruskal-wallis statistical test in a cross-disciplinary manner.findings: the results of this study indicate that compliance with the primary discursive moves, as well as the obligatory and optional steps of the cars model, varies significantly across the selected disciplines. in response to the first research question, papers in the management field demonstrated the highest level of compliance with this model. the first step (determining the scope of research) and the third step (addressing the research gap) exhibited the highest compliance across all three disciplines, while the second step (explaining the research gap) demonstrated the lowest compliance in each field. furthermore, there was no evidence of compliance with the second component of the third step (introduction of the present research) in any of the disciplines. in response to the second research question, a quantitative review of the research data revealed that the average scores for compliance with discursive moves in the introduction section of the management field were higher than those in the other two fields. following management, the psychology field ranked second, while persian literature ranked third.conclusion: since scientific articles serve as a communication platform for researchers across various scientific fields, the style and genre of writing enhance the comprehensibility of these texts for expert readers. this, in turn, increases the likelihood of citing the article, thereby enhancing its visibility and citation count. the present study demonstrated that one of the internationally recognized models of scientific writing is not adequately followed in our country. this heterogeneity was particularly evident in explaining the rationale and necessity of research in the introduction sections of humanities papers. the most common application of both obligatory and optional steps across all three disciplines is the initial discursive move, which involves identifying the research scope. this indicates that researchers, as authors of the papers, have become more inclined to emphasize the centrality and significance of the topics under investigation. while articulating the rationale for the research is a crucial discursive strategy for comprehending the research topic and is essential for maintaining text coherence as well as facilitating effective communication between the author and the reader, a notable weakness was evident across all three fields concerning the second move. it appears that researchers in all three disciplines devote less attention to elucidating the reasons for and the necessity of their research. the findings of this research are both applicable and feasible for evaluating the current challenges in scientific writing. in this context, two key recommendations have been proposed to improve academic writing in the persian language. first, there is a need for further research specifically focused on various sections of academic papers, including abstracts, introductions, methodologies, findings, and conclusions. second, experts should organize training courses at the academic level that incorporate academic writing in the scientific genre as part of graduate education.