Uni-edit English Writing Tip 014

Prove It! (2017) Confidence, Evidence, and Citations

Difficulty: Intermediate

Groundbreaking research pioneers new directions by identifying gaps in
the literature, and by forming new hypotheses to reconcile contradictory
findings.

You can’t achieve this goal without knowing the literature. You have to
report the findings of your predecessors and peers accurately in order
to confirm or refute them. Moreover, you want your readers to focus on
evidence that is central to your study hypothesis, and your own
interpretation of your own analysis.

In this tip, we’ll review some common ways to report findings with many
example sentences. You’ve probably seen these structures hundreds of
times, and used them in your own papers. However, after reading this
tip, hopefully you’ll have a better awareness of what your readers think
when you use these common phrases and structures.

Method \#1 - Use a Reporting Verb

Every academic writer uses reporting verbs like “report”, “demonstrate”,
and “show”, which indicate findings or evidence from previous research.
Reporting verbs are common and expected in every paper.

Neurogenesis has been shown to be essential to the hippocampus’s ability
to tolerate stress (Lehmann, 2013). Transcription factor Spi-B has been
demonstrated to be specifically expressed by M cells in gut epithelium
(4). It has been reported that texture weakening can be achieved by
alloying Mg with yttrium and rare earth elements such as cerium or
neodymium \[1-3\].

Note that the sentences above all use the passive voice: i.e., the
English does not tell you who ‘showed’ what. At Uni-edit, we have
noticed that non-native speakers of academic English seem to prefer
passive voice. Advocates of passive voice often claim objectivity as one
of its advantages: i.e., because passive voice doesn’t specify the
agent, the finding, method, etc. should be true regardless of who does
it.

Many studies have reported that texture weakening can be achieved by
alloying Mg with yttrium (Y) and rare earth (RE) elements such as cerium
(Ce) or neodymium (Nd) \[1-3\].

On the other hand, specifying the author of a study by name is an
effective strategy for novel, unique, controversial, or uncorroborated
findings. This tells your reader a finding is specific to a certain
study or studies, and they should consult that reference to learn more
about the experimental method, conditions, limitations, etc.

Using the active voice implies the same level of confidence as the
passive voice, but immediately and intuitively shows the evidence, in
fewer words.

Terahara et al. found that transcription factor Spi-B is specifically
expressed by M cells (2008). Transcription factor Spi-B has been found
to be specifically expressed by M cells (Terahara et al., 2008).

Method \#2 - State Findings as Facts (but Add a Citation)

Let’s take another look at these sentences: isn’t there other text that
conveys the level of evidence? The answer is yes: the citations.

Citations let you report a finding in confident, natural English: just
report it as a fact.

Transcription factor Spi-B is specifically expressed by M cells (4).
Process innovation is critical in influencing service industry dynamics
(Klepper, 1996). Texture weakening can be achieved by alloying Mg with
yttrium and rare earth elements such as cerium or neodymium \[1-3\].

Upon reading a sentence like one of these, your readers will think:
“This is a finding that has been corroborated by several studies: I can
assume it is true.” This is good practice for common knowledge in the
field, or assumptions made by many related papers. Reporting verbs like
“show” aren’t necessary: the presence of a citation makes it obvious you
are referencing the literature.

Many studies have shown that process innovation is critical in
influencing service industry dynamics (e.g., Klepper 1996).

What Does This Have to Do with Confidence?

You probably know intuitively that the Introduction section should
progress from broad to narrow: it should start with broad,
high-confidence statements about your field and subfield, and gradually
introduce specific findings and studies relevant to your research.

For broad statements, it makes sense to present the findings as facts
(Method \#2); for specific findings, on the other hand, it makes sense
to name or enumerate the studies individually (Method \#1). Enumerating
the number of studies (“one study”, “several studies”, “only a few
studies”, etc.) is less precise than naming the authors of the relevant
studies, but can imply the level of importance of a finding with greater
nuance.

What about Controversial or Contradictory Findings?

Note that good research should not only present well-supported or
established findings, but also controversial or contradictory findings.
There are several possible reasons to report findings or evidence that
might not be completely true: 1. The purpose of your study is to
corroborate the low-evidence finding. 2. Your findings disagree with the
other study’s findings. 3. To tell your reader there is controversy, or
that conflicting findings have been found, or that a final agreement has
not been reached. 4. To acknowledge a high-profile paper in your field,
if you agree with it (or especially if you don’t!).

Summary

As we can see, readers can draw different inferences from language that
is only slightly different, even for some of the most common phrases in
academic writing! Mastery of reporting verbs like “show”, “demonstrate”,
and “report”, combined with efficient use of citations and the active
voice, will ensure your readers can separate the uncontroversial
background of your study from its new, unusual, and groundbreaking
elements.

END OF TIP