, Volume 117, Issue 3, pp 1381–1403 | Cite as

Comparison of the discussion sections of PhD dissertations in educational technology: the case of Turkey and the USA

  • Meva Bayrak KarsliEmail author
  • Sinem Karabey
  • Nergiz Ercil Cagiltay
  • Yuksel Goktas


In academic studies, the discussion section is important in which the effect of the results of the study on the existing literature is highlighted and interpreted. The aim of the current paper is to compare the discussion sections of Turkish and American PhD dissertations in the field of Educational Technologies, taking into consideration the basic features that should be found in an effective discussion section. For this purpose, a content analysis was carried out using a checklist developed to examine the basic components, the presentation of the results, the interpretation of the results, and the overall language of 120 PhD dissertations published in this field. The study showed although there were strong aspects, the contribution to the literature and limitations of studies were only included in some of the Turkish PhD dissertations; however, they were included in the majority of American PhD dissertations. Almost all of the dissertations explained the findings and their significance; however, there was no emphasis on the significant and interesting findings in Turkish PhD dissertations. The number of pages of the discussion section in Turkish and American PhD dissertations was almost the same, and the relationship between the number of pages of the discussion section and the quality of the discussion section was rather weak in the dissertations from both countries. The results obtained from the study were evaluated in general and suggestions to consider when writing the discussion section are given.


Educational technology Academic writing Discussion section Turkey–USA comparison 


  1. Alexandrov, A. V. (2004). How to write a research paper. Cerebrovascular Diseases, 18(2), 135–138. Scholar
  2. Basturkmen, H. (2009). Commenting on results in published research articles and masters dissertations in Language Teaching. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(4), 241–251. Scholar
  3. Basturkmen, H. (2012). A genre-based investigation of discussion sections of research articles in dentistry and disciplinary variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2), 134–144. Scholar
  4. Bitchener, J., & Basturkmen, H. (2006). Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(1), 4–18. Scholar
  5. Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., & Williams, J. M. (2003). The craft of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Borja, A. (2014). Six things to do before writing your manuscript. Retrieved 25 May 2018, from
  7. Borja, A. (2015). Writing the first draft of your science papersome dos and don’ts. Retrieved 24 May 2018, from
  8. Bornmann, L., Nast, I., & Daniel, H. D. (2008). Do editors and referees look for signs of scientific misconduct when reviewing manuscripts? A quantitative content analysis of studies that examined review criteria and reasons for accepting and rejecting manuscripts for publication. Scientometrics, 77(3), 415–432. Scholar
  9. Bornmann, L., Weymuth, C., & Daniel, H. D. (2010). A content analysis of referees’ comments: How do comments on manuscripts rejected by a high-impact journal and later published in either a low-or high-impact journal differ? Scientometrics, 83(2), 493–506. Scholar
  10. Bruce, I. (2009). Results sections in sociology and organic chemistry articles: A genre analysis. English for Specific Purposes, 28(2), 105–124. Scholar
  11. Celik, E., Gedik, N., Karaman, G., Demirel, T., & Goktas, Y. (2014). Mistakes encountered in manuscripts on education and their effects on journal rejections. Scientometrics, 98(3), 1837–1853. Scholar
  12. Clyne, M. (1987). Cultural differences in the organization of academic texts: English and German. Journal of Pragmatics, 11(2), 211–241. Scholar
  13. Davidson, A., & Delbridge, E. (2012). How to write a research paper. Paediatrics and Child Health, 22(2), 61–65. Scholar
  14. Day, R. A. (1996). Bilimsel bir makale nasıl yazılır ve yayımlanır? (4. Baskı). (G. A. Altay, Çev.). Ankara: Tübitak Yayınları.Google Scholar
  15. Docherty, M., & Smith, R. (1999). The case for structuring the discussion of scientific papers: Much the same as that for structuring abstracts. BMJ British Medical Journal, 318(7193), 1224–1225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Drotar, D. (2009). Editorial: How to write an effective results and discussion for the Journal of Pediatric Psychology. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34(4), 339–343. Scholar
  17. Ekmekçi, A., & Konaç, E. (2009). Bilimsel yazımın bazı temel kuralları. Türk Bilim Araştırma Vakfı, 2(1), 17–121.Google Scholar
  18. Fischer, C. C. (2004). Managing your research writing for success: Passing the “Gate Keepers”. Retrieved 10 May 2016, from
  19. Fox, H. (1994). Listening to the world: Cultural issues in academic writing. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.Google Scholar
  20. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York: McGram-Hill Companies.Google Scholar
  21. Gopen, G. D., & Swan, J. A. (1990). The science of scientific writing. American Scientist, 78(6), 550–558.Google Scholar
  22. Hartley, J., Pennebaker, J. W., & Fox, C. (2003). Abstracts, introductions and discussions: How far do they differ in style? Scientometrics, 57(3), 389–398. Scholar
  23. Hess, D. R. (2004). How to write an effective discussion. Respiratory Care, 49(10), 1238–1241.Google Scholar
  24. Holmes, R. (1997). Genre analysis, and the social sciences: An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 321–337. Scholar
  25. Hoogenboom, B. J., & Manske, R. C. (2012). How to write a scientific article. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 7(5), 512–517.Google Scholar
  26. Hopkins, A., & Dudley-Evans, T. (1988). A genre-based investigation of the discussion sections in articles and dissertations. English for Specific Purposes, 7(2), 113–121. Scholar
  27. Hyland, K. (2002). Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(8), 1091–1112. Scholar
  28. Jenicek, M. (2006). How to read, understand, and write ‘Discussion’ sections in medical articles. An exercise in critical thinking. Medical Science Monitor, 12(6), 28–36.Google Scholar
  29. Jogthong, C. (2001). Research article introductions in Thai: Genre analysis of academic writing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.Google Scholar
  30. Johns, A. M., & Swales, J. M. (2002). Literacy and disciplinary practices: Opening and closing perspectives. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 13–28. Scholar
  31. Kallestinova, E. D. (2011). How to write your first research paper. The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 84(3), 181.Google Scholar
  32. Kwan, B. S. C., & Chan, H. (2014). An investigation of source use in the results and the closing sections of empirical articles in information systems: In search of a functional-semantic citation typology for pedagogical purposes. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 14, 29–47. Scholar
  33. Lim, J. M. H. (2010). Commenting on research results in applied linguistics and education: A comparative genre-based investigation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(4), 280–294. Scholar
  34. Lin, P. Y., & Kuo, Y. R. (2012). A guide to write a scientific paper for new writers. Microsurgery, 32(1), 80–85. Scholar
  35. Loi, C. K., & Evans, M. S. (2010). Cultural differences in the organization of research article introductions from the field of educational psychology: English and Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(10), 2814–2825. Scholar
  36. Lovejoy, T. I., Revenson, T. A., & France, C. R. (2011). Reviewing manuscripts for peer-review journals: A primer for novice and seasoned reviewers. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 42(1), 1–13. Scholar
  37. McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (7th ed.). London: Pearson.Google Scholar
  38. Nadim, A. (2005). How to write a scientific paper? Ain Shams Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ASJOG), 2, 255–258.Google Scholar
  39. Newren, E. F. (1992). Pushed to publish? Writing for publications in the field of instructional media. International Journal of Instructional Media, 19(2), 111–125.Google Scholar
  40. Özkaya, Ö., Bingöl, D., Üsçetin, İ., Aksan, T., Karahangil, M., & Akan, M. (2012). Tıbbi bilimsel makale yazımında temel kurallar, tercihler ve seçenekler nelerdir? Okmeydanı Tıp Dergisi, 28(2), 65–71. Scholar
  41. Parkinson, J. (2011). The discussion section as argument: The language used to prove knowledge claims. English for Specific Purposes, 30(3), 164–175. Scholar
  42. Peacock, M. (2002). Communicative moves in the discussion section of research articles. System, 30(4), 479–497. Scholar
  43. Rosenfeldt, F. L., Dowling, J. T., Pepe, S., & Fullerton, M. J. (2000). How to write a paper for publication. Heart, Lung and Circulation, 9(2), 82–87. Scholar
  44. Ruiying, Y., & Allison, D. (2003). Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes, 22(4), 365–385. Scholar
  45. Samraj, B. (2013). Form and function of citations in discussion sections of master’s theses and research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(4), 299–310. Scholar
  46. Şanlı, Ö., Erdem, S., & Tefik, T. (2013). How to write a discussion section? Turkish Journal of Urology, 39(Suppl 1), 20–24. Scholar
  47. Singer, A. J., & Hollander, J. E. (2009). How to write a manuscript. The Journal of Emergency Medicine, 36(1), 89–93. Scholar
  48. Skelton, J. R., & Edwards, S. J. (2000). The function of the discussion section in academic medical writing. British Medical Journal, 320(7244), 1269–1270. Scholar
  49. Soler-Monreal, C. (2016). A move-step analysis of the concluding chapters in computer science PhD theses. Ibérica, 32, 105–132.Google Scholar
  50. Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis. English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2004). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills (Vol. 1). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  52. Turbek, S. P., Chock, T. M., Donahue, K., Havrilla, C. A., Oliverio, A. M., Polutchko, S. K., et al. (2016). Scientific writing made easy: A step-by-step guide to undergraduate writing in the biological sciences. The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 97(4), 417–426. Scholar
  53. Vassileva, I. (2001). Commitment and detachment in English and Bulgarian academic writing. English for Specific Purposes, 20(1), 83–102. Scholar
  54. Vintzileos, A. M., & Ananth, C. V. (2010). How to write and publish an original research article. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 202(4), 344-e1–344-e6. Scholar
  55. Yılmaz, A. G. M. C., & Emiroğlu, O. N. (2015). Bilimsel Makale Nasıl Yazılır? Hemșirelikte Araștırma Geliștirme Dergisi, 1(2), 26–38.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Education and Instructional TechnologyAtaturk UniversityErzurumTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Software EngineeringAtilim UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations