Identifying Specific Arguments in Discussion Sections of Science Research Articles: Making the Case for New Knowledge

Rhetoric Review Oct 2023

Identifying Specific Arguments in Discussion Sections of Science Research Articles: Making the Case for New Knowledge

Michael Carter

Abstract

Discussion sections of research articles are important because they are where researchers make claims for advancing knowledge in their fields. There has been a growing interest in research articles focused on Discussions. However, only a few studies have centered on the role of arguments. What is missing in this literature is the potential for rhetoricians to identify specific, sentence-level arguments. The idea is that to analyze persuasion in Discussions, rhetoricians should be able to identify arguments contributing to persuasion. Toward that aim, I refer to Aristotle’s Rhetoric as a catalyst for specific arguments and examples from thirty science research articles.

Journal: Rhetoric Review
Published: 2023-10-02
DOI: 10.1080/07350198.2023.2269010
Open Access: Closed
Topics: scientific writing

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

Zerbe et al. (2025)

The Rhetoric of Science in (Times of) Crisis

Rhetoric Society Quarterly

Cites in this index (2)

Walsh (2010)

The Common Topoi of STEM Discourse: An Apologia and Methodological Proposal, Wi…

Written Communication
SWALES et al. (1987)

The Writing of Research Article Introductions

Written Communication

Also cites 14 works outside this index ↓

10.18869/acadpub.ijal.18.1.1

↗
10.1016/j.jeap.2009.07.001

↗
10.1016/j.jeap.2011.10.004

↗
10.1016/j.jeap.2016.09.001

↗
10.4324/9780203431269

↗
10.7208/chicago/9780226458106.001.0001

↗
10.1016/j.esp.2015.03.003

↗
10.1057/9780230511910

↗
10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00003-1

↗
10.1016/j.esp.2021.02.002

↗
10.1016/j.esp.2011.03.001

↗
10.1515/9783110214406.165

↗
10.1017/CBO9780511840005

↗
10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00026-1

↗

CrossRef global citation count: 1 View in citation network →