0

Writing Project 1

Identifying and Comparing Genre Conventions in Academic Writing:

Mass Media Communication and Social Psychology Writings Analysis

Anosha A. Anwar

Writing 2

Valentina Fahler

May 4, 2020
Mass Media Communication and Social Psychology Writings Analysis
1
Different forms of writing can be analyzed to reveal the authors’ identities. While one

discipline, social psychology, is designed to explain the “how” through experiments, the other

discipline, mass media communications, is designed to explain “why.” The first article being

analyzed, under the discipline of mass media communication and found in the Journal of

Advertising, is called “The Third-Person Effect in Advertising: A Meta-Analysis.” Quickly

summarizing the article, we can understand that it analyzes 28 years of research on the third

person effect and makes conclusions based on all the evidence put together. The second article,

under the discipline of psychology and found in the European Journal of Social Psychology, is

called “The Perceived Impact of the Mass Media: Reconsidering the Third Person Effect.” This

article, through two experiments, provided evidence to show that people aren’t as invulnerable to

the third person effect as they may think. In fact, compared to other people, they were more

vulnerable to being persuaded. Even though both articles are about the same topic, there is a

distinct difference in the way researchers from each discipline produce evidence to prove or

strengthen the present theories on the third person effect. Both articles provide insight on the

topic, but each article explains different points and this connects with each discipline because it

shows how they have focuses that set them apart. While one discipline, social psychology, is

designed to explain the “how” through experiments, the other discipline, mass media

communications, is designed to explain “why.” Throughout the analysis, we will be looking at

several criteria that may set them apart such as argumentation, use of evidence, and

organization., and word choice/voice.

In the genre of academic articles, we can specifically identify professional identities as

researchers. Academic communities, existing in disciplines, are able to organize teachings, both

old and new, under a classification of subjects verified through institutionalization. To begin
Mass Media Communication and Social Psychology Writings Analysis
2
analyzing academic articles, we must begin with identifying what disciplines and genres are.

According to Bickmore (2016), “A genre is a typified utterance that appears in a recurrent

situation...evolves through human use… to be a… form for carrying out human communicative

intentions…”. Breaking the definition down, we understand that a genre classifies forms of

writing according to their similarities and differences. Disciplines, on the other hand, are much

more complicated. Each discipline has an object of research that they have accumulated with

theories, concepts, and research. In academic communities, professionals “..often share language,

knowledge, and values with a large, fairly heterogeneous group…” (Johns, 1997). Understanding

what a genre is expected to be and how every human plays a part in expanding genres is key to a

well-informed essay while analyzing the genre conventions of two articles belonging to two

different academic communities. Now that these two terms have been identified, we can begin

analyzing the two academic articles.

Evidence, in my opinion, is the backbone of an argument, without which a claim is

baseless and disregarded. In both articles, evidence is provided before any sort of discussion or

experiments. This highlights the first difference between these two disciplines: These two

articles have different definitions of what counts as evidence. Looking at the meta-analysis, the

evidence is previously written meta-analyses and different studies found from academic

databases. The author also, for the sake of easy reading, creates a table of important variables

and their definitions that the reader should know of while reading his analysis. When looking at

the meta-analysis, we notice this sentence: “...from each study is considered (Bijmolt and Pieters

2001). Therefore, this meta-analysis accounts for dependencies of effect sizes…” (Eisend, 2017,

p. 383). This text incorporates evidence through paraphrasing. They include phrases from their

sources in their sentences to further prove the present argument. When compared to the other
Mass Media Communication and Social Psychology Writings Analysis
3
article, under social psychology, the evidence for their argument is provided with two

experiments, statistical results, and an interpretation of those results. These two experiments are

designed to prove a new hypothesis correct or incorrect. The reason why I am pointing out all

these different observations of how each discipline incorporated evidence into their work is

because it provides context for the main point. The use of evidence by the social psychology

articleThis provides new knowledge about the topic at hand, which is the third person effect.

Now we see that, in contrast, Eisend handpicks language, phrases, or statements from his sources

and interprets them in a new way, therefore not introducing new material, but refashioning old

research to support new claims.

When forming an article, writers must have a concrete argument that comes from facts.

According to Lunsford et al. (2016), academic writing “draws upon sources and builds

arguments from research done by experts…” (p. 383). These sources, as mentioned before for

Eisend, are previous meta-analyses, which are summarized findings of different researchers that

come from different academic articles found on several different article databases. These past

meta-analyses form the base argument for Eisend’s thesis on the third person effect in

advertising. By taking bits and pieces from every source that is useful to him, Eisend compiles a

grand argument or thesis that is inclusive of all the information that’s available to him. In Duck

and Mullins article, at first, a theory is introduced and through a small literature review on past

research/experiments done in similar ways, they present their argument and methods to prove or

support their theory. Along with that, they mention what parts of the research, even from other

disciplines, are lacking and later answer what questions it brings up in the discussion. “Indeed,

communication studies have demonstrated… Drawing on psychological theory for a rationale,...”

(Duck & Mullin, 1995, p. 78). This specific statement in the essay notes how research from the
Mass Media Communication and Social Psychology Writings Analysis
4
communication discipline is lacking and draws on theory from psychology to provide a better

rationale for the point. It is important to note that according to Lunsford et al. (2016), academic

writing “draws upon sources and builds arguments from research done by experts…” (p. 383).

By listing what is lacking from previous research, the authors of this discipline are highlighting

the importance of their experiment/study, thus proving that their argument is worthy of the

readers’ attention. One point that specifically shows the difference between these two disciplines

is o pull from this is that the social psychology this discipline pulls lacking information from

other research to add new information and strengthen how a phenomenon occurs, but the

communications discipline analyzes old research and rephrases it to break it and explain why it

happens.

This is where organization also comes into play. According to Johns (1997), “Writers

should provide ‘maps’... telling the readers where… they are going.” (p. 568). The writers in the

social psychology discipline guide the reader by separating the results, methods, and discussion

for each experiment. In the communications discipline, however, the readers are guided through

several different explanations of different hypotheses. While both articles provided good

arguments supporting their thesis and the key details, they were also providing maps that would

tell the reader where the argument is going (Johns, 1997, p.568). What we should notice about

theaboutThe main focusthe organization of both articles, however, is to note the fact that their

hypothesis is representative of their argument along with their commentary in the literature

review. Incorporating a map within the reading strengthens the essay and guides the intended

audience through the argument. This is key in setting these two discourse communities apart.

“Writers should provide ‘maps’... telling the readers where… they are going.” (p. 568). In the

social psychology discipline, the argument and thesis is present in the literature review and
Mass Media Communication and Social Psychology Writings Analysis
5
introduction and reinforced in the discussion section while in the communications discipline, the

thesis is present when introducing the topic and the argument is present throughout the paper

under labels such as ‘explanation’, ‘findings’, ‘analytical procedure’, etc. The ways that the

academic papers are organized assist in the understanding of the topic being explored. In my

perspective, the more organized and labeled article would be from the communications discipline

and I feel this way because I am a student in the community. The key observation is that the

essays are put together in ways that would appeal to the jargon and the academic report templates

native to each group.

In conclusion, academic articles provide great insight on the author(s) and the disciplines

that they come from. These articles can share similarities with each other, but their differences

can be defined through an analysis of their word choices, type of evidence, types of arguments,

and organization. Through the placement of their arguments and clever use of evidence, these

two articles serve two different purposes. The meta-analysis, from the mass media

communications disciplines, serves the purpose of explaining why the phenomenon at hand

occurs by analyzing previous research on the topic. The experimental study, from the social

psychology discipline, serves the purpose of explaining how the phenomenon occurs by

observing the occurence in reality. This is what sets these two disciplines apart and makes them

unique. From a quick glimpse at both articles, it is difficult to see how both articles differ

because both seem to be wanting to prove the same thing about the topic. However, a thorough

analysis sets distinction between the very purpose of both disciplines and why researchers within

that academic community write these academic articles.

Mass Media Communication and Social Psychology Writings Analysis
6

References

Bickmore, L. (2016, August 1). GENRE in the WILD: Understanding Genre Within Rhetorical

(Eco)systems. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from

Mass Media Communication and Social Psychology Writings Analysis
7
https://openenglishatslcc.pressbooks.com/chapter/genre-in-the-wild-understanding-genre-within-

rhetorical-ecosystems/

Duck, J. M., & Mullin, B.-A. (1995). The perceived impact of the mass media: reconsidering the

third person effect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25(1), 77–93. https://doi-

org.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:9443/10.1002/ejsp.2420250107

Eisend, M. (2017). The Third-Person Effect in Advertising: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of

Advertising, 46(3), 377–394. https://doi-

org.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:9443/10.1080/00913367.2017.1292481

Johns, Ann M. (1997). “Discourse Communities and Communities of Practice: Membership,

Conflict, and Diversity.” Text, Role, and Context: Developing Academic Literacies, Cambridge

UP, pp. 51-70

https://gauchospace.ucsb.edu/courses/pluginfile.php/6162286/mod_resource/content/1/Johns

%2C%20Discourse%20communities.pdf

Lunsford, A. A., Ruszkiewicz, J. J., & Walters, K. (2016). Everythings an argument: with

readings(7th ed.). Boston, NY: Bedford/St. Martins, A Macmillan Education Imprint.

https://gauchospace.ucsb.edu/courses/mod/resource/view.php?id=3733333