ENGLISH FOR

SPECIFIC
English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 PURPOSES
www.elsevier.com/locate/esp

The schematic structure of literature reviews

in doctoral theses of applied linguistics
Becky S.C. Kwan *

Department of Education Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong

Abstract

In thesis manuals and writing programs, the notions of ‘‘introduction’’ and ‘‘literature
review’’ (LR) are often used interchangeably to refer to the beginning chapters of a thesis.
Samples of introductions from research articles and theses are sometimes employed to illus-
trate the structure and other features of an LR, which suggests that the introduction and
the LR chapters belong to the same category of text. However, little work has been undertaken
to confirm whether this is the case. This study seeks to identify the rhetorical structure of the
LR chapter and compare it with the revised CARS model [Bunton, D. (2002). Generic moves
in Ph.D. thesis introductions. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 57–75). London:
Pearson Education] that has been posited for thesis introductions. The corpus examined is
drawn from 20 doctoral theses produced by native English speaking students of applied lin-
guistics. The findings reveal that many of the LR chapters display an Introduction–Body–
Conclusion structure. Within the body part, the discussion is divided into thematic sections,
each of which displays recursive move structures that are similar to those found in thesis intro-
ductions. Of three moves identified, Move 3 appears least frequently. Although most of the
steps in BuntonÕs revised CARS model are present in the move structures, some new steps
are also distinguished. The findings suggest that LRs and introductions may not be structur-
ally entirely the same.
Ó 2005 The American University. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

*
Tel.: +852 34115778; fax: +852 34117894.
E-mail address: becky@hkbu.edu.hk.

0889-4906/$30.00 Ó 2005 The American University. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.esp.2005.06.001
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 31

1. Introduction

The past two decades have seen an increasing amount of research into various as-
pects of the post-graduate thesis (e.g., Belcher, 1994; Bunton, 1998, 1999, 2002; Dong,
1996, 1998; Dudley-Evans, 1999; Hocking, 2003; Ridley, 2000; Turner, 2003). This in-
crease has contributed significantly to our understanding of the genre and its compos-
ing process. However, despite the volume of work that has been undertaken, research
on the literature review (LR) chapters in theses that are organized in the traditional
Introduction–Literature review–Methodology–Discussion1 (I(Lr)MRD) format re-
mains rather limited. This is surprising given that reviewing the literature is an indis-
pensable and notoriously difficult task in the writing of post-graduate theses (Cooley
& Lewkowicz, 1995, 1997; Meloy, 2002; Shaw, 1991), a view that is also shared by
novice researchers (see Flowerdew, 2000). One possible reason for the lack of atten-
tion to this crucial part of the thesis is captured wittily and quite rightly by the remark
of Swales and Feak (2000) in their volume English in TodayÕs Research World:
The LR as part of a research paper, proposal, thesis, or dissertation is often
thought of as being a boring but necessary chore. Such LRs are often criticized
but are rarely praised. After all, one rarely hears comments such as ‘‘The most bril-
liant part of your thesis was the literature review’’! (Swales & Feak, 2000, p. 116)
The scarcity of research on LRs can also be attributed to their length, which is
always a central concern in thesis studies (Bunton, 2002). This work is an attempt
to fill the research gap, which aims to characterize the rhetorical movements in
LR chapters in theses that are organized in the ILrMRD format.

2. LRs, introductions and the CARS model

2.1. Rhetorical purposes of LRs

A crucial starting point for a move analysis is to consider the purposes of the tar-
get genre, which regulate its propositional contents, schematic pattern, and choice of
register (Swales, 1990). To identify the move structure of a genre, the analyst needs

1
So far, three major formats of thesis have been identified. One is the traditional ILrMRD format. The
second is the article-compilation format which is basically an anthology of individual publishable research
papers that contains its own introduction, methodology, results and discussion sections. The third type is
the topic-based format. A topic-based thesis is one that begins with a chapter that is headed
‘‘Introduction’’ and ends with a chapter headed ‘‘Conclusion’’. The chapters in-between are headed
according to the topics and sub-topics of the writerÕs investigation. The structure of the topic-based thesis,
however, does not mean that it carries no stand-alone literature review chapters; it is just that these
chapters are headed using titles other than the generic name of ‘‘literature review’’. Thus, strictly speaking
the topic-based thesis may be a different realization of the ILrMRD format. Although it has been found in
some studies that the article compilation format is becoming more frequently adopted, there are still a
great number of theses that are organized using the ILrMRD format (see Dong, 1998; Dudley-Evans,
1999). This was also observed in this study. In the initial round of thesis collection, which netted 23 theses,
18 were found to be in the ILrMRD format.
32 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

to be aware of the function of the text group and to determine how each move in the
structure contributes to the fulfillment of that function. As for the LR in a thesis, the
main purpose is to justify the value of the research, and to show why it is distinct
from what is documented in the literature (Creswell, 2003; Peters, 1997; Rudestam
& Newton, 2001). Hart (1998, 2001) specifies that the LR is both an argument for
oneÕs research and a part of the process in which the students learn about their topic
and the field. He offers five reasons for reviewing the literature:

 identifying work already done . . . that is relevant to [the studentÕs] own work;
 preventing . . . duplicating what has been done already;
 helping [the student] to avoid [flaws] in previous studies;
 informing the studentÕs own [research design];
 enabling [the student] to locate a gap in existing research and thereby giving [the
student] a unique topic (p. 3).

2.2. LRs and introductions

Some of the aforementioned functions of the LR have also been posited for intro-
ductions to research articles and post-graduate theses (collectively called Ôresearch
writingÕ and referred to as such henceforth; cf. Dudley-Evans, 1986; Bunton, 2002;
Swales, 1981, 1990), which suggests that LRs and introductions in research writing
may belong to the same genre. This is also alluded to in the literature and instruc-
tions on writing, in which the notions of introduction and LR are sometimes invoked
interchangeably, with some thesis manuals even employing LR as an umbrella term
to refer to the beginning chapters of a thesis (Geisler, 1994; Rudestam & Newton,
2001). Research writing introductions are sometimes even used as models to illus-
trate LRs. However, little has been done to examine whether LRs and introductions
as separate chapters in ILrMRD theses do indeed belong to the same genre and
share the same generic features, such as propositional content and schematic pattern.
Another purpose of this study is thus to compare the rhetorical structure of LRs with
the established CARS model (Swales, 1990) that has been posited for research writ-
ing introductions, and to investigate the extent to which the three-move model can be
applied to describe the move structure of LRs.

2.3. Development of the CARS model

In his seminal work on introduction analysis, Swales (1981) posits a four-move

structure to describe the schematic pattern of the introductions in research articles,
which he later revised to create the widely known CARS model as cited in Fig. 1.
The model has been widely studied since its first publication in 1991, and the
wealth of research on it has not only validated the three-move structure, but also re-
vealed its recursive nature (Bunton, 2002) and its varied realizations in research writ-
ing across contexts. For instance, Move 2 (Establishing a niche) has been found to be
unnecessary in work that is published in less competitive research communities. The
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 33

Move 1 Establishing a territory

Step 1 Claiming centrality and/or
Step 2 Making topic generalization(s) and/or
Step 3 Reviewing items of previous research
Move 2 Establishing a niche
Step 1A Counter-claiming
Step 1B Indicating a gap
Step 1C Question-raising
Step 1D Continuing a tradition
Move 3 Occupying the niche
Step 1A Outlining purposes
Step 1B Announcing present research
Step 2 Announcing principal findings
Step 3 Indicating RA structure
(Swales, 1990, p. 141)

Fig. 1. SwalesÕ CARS model.

Counter-claiming step of Move 2 appears less regularly in articles that are circulated
in some non-Anglophone or closely knit academic communities in which criticism of
works by other members can be a threat to face. (see for example, Ahmad, 1997;
Burgess, 2002; Lee, 2000, 2001; Melander, 1998). In contrast, new move elements
have continually been identified, which include definitions and exemplifications of
technical terms and concepts in Move 1 (Anthony, 1999) and the positive evaluation
of research approaches in Move 2 (Ahmad, 1997; Samraj, 2002). Despite the varia-
tions that have been recorded in the above-mentioned works, the structure has been
confirmed to be fairly stable at the move level in research articles that are published
in English-speaking communities.
Of the numerous studies on the CARS model, two recent works are particularly
pertinent to this analysis. The first was conducted by Bunton (2002), who examined
the move structure of introductions in Ph.D. theses that were drawn from a variety
of disciplines and written by both native and non-native speakers of English at a uni-
versity in Hong Kong. His introduction corpus in principle displays the three-move
structure, but also exhibits a range of new move elements (see the italicized parts of
Fig. 22) that led him to postulate the following revised model for thesis introduc-
tions, which forms a reference for comparison in this study.
The analysis in this study also draws on the work of Lewin, Fine, and Young
(2001), part of which examines the introductions of research articles taken from so-
cial sciences journals. Their study shows that five of the steps3 (i.e., Steps 1.1 and 1.2

2
Instead of using the term ‘‘steps’’ to describe the elements in each move, Lewin et al. adopt the notion
of ‘‘acts’’, which they borrow from the terminology of Sinclair and Coulthard. According to the authors,
an act is the minimal unit that is needed to realize a communicative purpose. When related acts occur
together to realize a particular communicative purpose, they form a move. In each move there is at least
one core element, which is called a head act (an obligatory act). A head act can be preceded or followed by
pre- or post-head acts (optional acts), which serve various purposes such as prefacing, extending, and
commenting, and realize various logical functions in relation to the head act.
3
A, Arts; So, Social Science; Eg, Engineering; Si, Science; M, Medicine; newly identified steps are in
italics.
34 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

Often present Occasionally present

Move 1 Establishing a Territory
STEPS
1. Claiming centrality
2. Making topic generalizations and giving Research parameters
background information
3. Defining terms (Eg, A, So)3
4. Reviewing previous research
Move 2: Establishing a niche
STEPS
1A Indicating a gap in research
1B Indicating a problem or need
1C Question-raising (So, A) Counter-claiming
1D Continuing a tradition (M, So)
Move 3: Announcing the Present Research
(Occupying the niche)
STEPS
1. Purposes, aims, or objectives Chapter structure
2. Work carried out (Eg, Sj) Research questions/hypotheses
3. Method Theoretical positions (So)
4. Materials or subjects Defining terms
5. Findings or results Parameters of research
6. Product of research (Eg)/model proposed (So)
7. Significance/justification Application of product (Eg)
8. Thesis structure Evaluation (Eg)
(Bunton, 2002, p. 74)
Fig. 2. BuntonÕs modified CARS model for Ph.D. theses introductions.

of Move 1; Steps 1.A and 1.B of Move 2; and Step 1.A of Move 3) that are posited in
the original CARS model occur with relatively high frequency, whereas the others
appear much less regularly (for example, Step 1.3 of Move 1) in their corpus. This
uneven frequency distribution has led the authors to consider the obligatory–
optional distinction to differentiate the two groups of steps. The work of Lewin
et al. is one of the few CARS studies that address the obligatory–optional nature
of the elements in the model, an issue that is also taken up by Bhatia (2001), who pro-
poses the use of the term ÔstrategyÕ in place of ÔstepsÕ to denote elements that do not
appear regularly or in sequential order (for example, the four steps in Move 2). In
the analysis in this study, the two types of move elements are differentiated accord-
ingly, with the obligatory and sequential constituents being referred to as steps and
the non-obligatory and non-sequential constituents being referred to as strategies.
Lewin et al. also developed a scheme of semantic features4 to describe the various
obligatory steps. The scheme is a valuable reference for coding, as studies of the
model have so far provided very little information on how the analysts went about
identifying the steps and their boundaries. Presumably, the coding criteria that are
employed in these studies are grounded in SwalesÕ (1990) earlier characterizing
account, which is functionally and semantically motivated. However, some of the

4
The authors have based the categorization of the semantic features on MartinÕs (1992) semantic
network theory. The semantic features in the head acts (obligatory act) in each move are categorized into
participants, claims, and processes (see Chapter 2 of the book).
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 35

studies of CARS do not seem to consistently follow the criteria that Swales provides.
As Lewin at al. observe, some coding seems to take sentences, independent clauses or
other lexicogrammatical items as the unit for move-step characterization. The
semantic scheme, such as that developed by Lewin et al., can help to achieve a degree
of consistency in coding, and is particularly useful for cross-study comparisons. In
this study, the step-specific attributes established by the authors together with those
that are identified in some other works are incorporated into the coding scheme
developed to guide the analysis.

3. The study

This study seeks answers to the following questions:

1. Do LRs in ILrMRD theses exhibit a common rhetorical move structure, and if

they do, what is the prototypical structure?
2. Are the elements in each of the moves obligatory or optional?
3. Do the obligatory move elements appear in a fixed sequential order?
4. Do LRs share the same move structure as that which has been found in introduc-
tory chapters of ILrMRD theses, such as that in BuntonÕs (2002) model?

3.1. The corpus

The LR texts analyzed in this study were drawn from 20 doctoral ILrMRD theses
on a variety of applied linguistic topics. The corpus was collected by John Flowerdew
(Flowerdew, 2004). The theses were all completed recently and were submitted by a
group of native English speakers from various universities in the UK, Australia, Hong
Kong and Singapore.5 As mentioned in the introduction, only the parts of the theses
that occur between the introductory and methodology chapters were selected for anal-
ysis. Some of the LR texts span more than one chapter, with the longest one occupying
a total of three. Twenty-nine LR chapters were collected, giving a total of 428,504
words. In collecting the material for the corpus, the writers themselves determined
what they considered to be the literature review of their thesis, which suggests that
it is an easily recognizable part, even though it may not be confined to a single chapter.
In addition to the writers contributing their literature reviews, two respondents indi-
cated that they were interested in cooperating, but that their theses did not contain a
literature review (Flowerdew, personal communication). Thus, it should be borne in
mind that not all Ph.D. theses contain a recognizable literature review.

5
We are aware that different universities have different requirements for theses, which may affect the
generalizability of the results that are derived from this study. However, it has been increasingly shown
that theses display few differences of rhetorical shape as a result of institutional or national characteristics
but that field of study, choice of methodology and choice of theory are strong factors for variations (see
review by Johns & Swales, 2002). For this reason, theses on applied linguistics topics were chosen to
maximize the homogeneity of the corpus.
36 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

3.2. Coding

Coding was conducted using a functional-semantic approach. A functional

approach to text analysis calls for cognitive judgment, rather than a reliance on lin-
guistic criteria, to identify the intention of a text and the textual boundaries (Bhatia,
1993; Paltridge, 1994). This approach is in line with the theoretical assumption of a
move; that is, that each move has a local purpose and also contributes to the overall
rhetorical purpose of the text. In this study, the function of each text segment was
first examined according to its local purpose, such as to highlight major research
studies, then according to its contribution to the ultimate goal of justifying the wri-
terÕs research. Coding was also conducted through the identification of predominant
semantic features of the target text segment. As this study is primarily a comparative
analysis to examine whether the move/step-specific semantic features of the CARS
model are also present in the LR corpus, references were made to the semantic
scheme that was developed by Lewin et al. (2001). However, as this scheme only cov-
ers the obligatory steps that are identified in the authorsÕ corpus, features that have
been generated in other studies were also enlisted (Anthony, 1999; Bunton, 2002;
Kwan, 1996; Melander, 1998; Samraj, 2002; Swales, 1990).
Pilot-coding was conducted, which involved myself and a research assistant, who
was an applied linguistics graduate student and was well-versed in the CARS model.
The research assistant and I hand-coded two LR chapters independently to check for
inter-rater reliability. We were presented with two immediate challenges, the first of
which was the length of each chapter and the presence of multi-themed sections. We
resorted to conducting a sectional analysis, which means that we divided each chap-
ter into thematic units based on the sectional boundaries that were indicated by such
meta-signals as section breaks, section headings, and their respective numbering sys-
tems. A CARS analysis was then conducted on each thematic unit. It was found that
many of the thematic units carry segments that resemble the steps that are posited in
BuntonÕs model. The inter-rater reliability at this stage was 70.1%. We fine-tuned the
semantic attributes of some of the steps, mostly through the clarification and elabo-
ration of their defining criteria. The second challenge came from the introductory
and the concluding texts found at the beginning and the end of some of the chapters.
Some of these texts carry elements that bear a resemblance to elements in the CARS
structure, but as they do not all serve to justify the writerÕs research, they were trea-
ted separately for analysis.
In the coding-proper, we began by dividing each writerÕs electronic LR text into
chapters. We skimmed through each of the chapters and parsed it into the three pre-
determined types of analytical units, namely, thematic units, introductory texts, and
concluding texts (if present). Each unit was then stored in an independent rich format
file and imported into the MAX QDA program (2001) for coding and descriptive
statistical analysis. The research assistant then coded the entire corpus, and I coded
three of the randomly chosen chapters (10% of the corpus6) for an inter-rater

6
The size of the corpus made it rather difficult to carry out inter-rater reliability checks on all of the texts.
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 37

reliability check, which reached 83.12% agreement. The parts upon which we most
disagreed were Steps 1.2 and 1.3 of Move 1 (to be discussed in two following two
sections). These discrepancies were resolved through discussion and re-coding of
the two steps. As in the pilot study, we further fine-tuned the semantic attributes
of some of the steps, and developed more codes to accommodate the new steps that
emerged from the corpus.

4. Findings and discussion

4.1. Introductory texts and concluding texts

As mentioned earlier, introductory and concluding texts figure as two major ana-
lytical units in the corpus, and thus their schematic patterns merit close investigation.
However, as space is limited, I confine my discussion to their functions and semantic
features.
Twenty-six (89.66%) of the 29 chapters open with texts that are headed ‘‘Introduc-
tion’’. These texts are relatively short compared with the thematic sections. The
shortest text is only a few lines long, and the longest one occupies two whole pages.
The analysis of the propositional contents of the texts suggests that the introductions
primarily serve as advance organizers which inform the reader of the aims, structures
and themes to be covered in the forthcoming chapters. In some of the introductory
texts, the writers take the extra step of making a case for reviewing the themes as
indicated in the underlined parts in the following text example.
2.1 Introduction
In this chapter, I examine the literature relevant to the . . . study objectives pre-
sented in chapter one . . . In so doing, I am to provide a theoretical framework
within which I will consider issues relating to the definition and evaluation of
X, as well as identifying areas of potential for further research . . . I draw upon
literature from the disciplines of Applied Linguistics and Education . . . Follow-
ing this, in Section 2.4, in order to provide the wider study of context, I con-
sider literature from the discipline of Evaluation. (B_chp2_intro 1:1)
The concluding texts are mostly entitled either ‘‘Summary’’ or ‘‘Conclusion’’, and
were found in 14 (48.3%) of the chapters. Most of these texts summarize the gist of
the chapter, reiterate the purposes of the review, or present insights that emerge from
the review, as illustrated in the following concluding text.
2.6 Summary of chapter and conclusion
In this chapter, the relevant literature on . . . has been reviewed . . . Working
definitions of ÔdisciplineÕ and Ôdiscourse communityÕ have been proposed. Stud-
ies of disciplinary discourses have shown that students in different disciplines
write in different ways. [Summarizing the gist].
The main argument developed through this review was that the concepts of . . .
are complex and plural. Disciplines are groupings that . . . while genre does not
38 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

imply . . . [Relating new insights emerging from the chapter]. (S_chp2 summary
1:3)
In some cases, the writers announce where some of the points will be elaborated
or revisited as is indicated in the underlined parts of the following example.
While it is not possible to review these disciplines comprehensively in such a
brief chapter, there are a number of themes and issues that are pertinent to this
Ph.D. study. Many of those raised in this chapter will necessarily be re-visited
and expanded upon in following chapters. In chapters four and five, this is
done in relation to . . .; in chapters six and seven, with reference to the analysis
of the data relating to . . .; and finally, in chapter eight, with regard to . . .
(B_chp2 7:7)
Some of the writers introduce their research aims and theoretical positions in the
concluding texts, suggesting that they are also places where Move 3 can be realized,
as illustrated in the following example.
II.8. Conclusion
The purpose, therefore, of the thesis is to develop new insights into the distinc-
tive style, structure and textural properties of contemporary, English-language
. . . hard news reports. The project relies specifically on the insights of . . . but
also draws inspiration . . . from a range of theoretical approaches. . . (T_chp2
summary 1:3)

4.2. Thematic units and the CARS structure

One hundred and twenty-seven thematic units were identified. Many of them dis-
play segments that suggest the presence of the three moves of the CARS model as
proposed by Bunton (2002) for thesis introductions. Table 1 presents the frequency
distribution of the three moves.
One of the aims of this study is to examine the obligatory–optional nature of the
three moves and their respective elements. A move is considered to be obligatory if it
appears in 100% of the 127 thematic units. Likewise, a move element is categorized
as obligatory if it occurs in all instances of a corresponding move. The frequency
distribution of the three moves shown in Table 1 indicates that none of the three
moves is obligatory. However, the high occurrence rates of Move 1 and Move 2 re-
flects that they are the two predominant moves found in the corpus.

Table 1
Frequency counts of the three moves
Individual counts Number of units with the move
Move 1 665 124 (97.64%)
Move 2 513 121 (95.28%)
Move 3 160 70 (55.12%)
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 39

A close examination of the move combinations in the thematic units reveals a

variety of schematic patterns, some of which are provided in Table 2 below.
Fig. 3 shows the frequency distribution of the various configurations. As can be
seen, Moves 1 and 2 tend to occur in a relatively regular 1–2 order that is realized

Table 2
Examples of the move configurations
Observed patterns Examples
Single move
Move 1 only 1 [J_chp2_1 2:6]
Move 2 only 2 [G_chp2_4 2:3]
Two-move configurations
Regular (1–2)n 1-2 [T_chp3_4 3:66]
1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1 [B_chp2_4 2:53]
Regular (1–3)n 1-3 [D_chp2_1 2:4]
1-3-1-3 [T_chp3_5 3:30]
Three-move configurations
Regular (1–2)n 3 1-2-1-2-3 [E_chp2_3 2:18]
1-2-1-2-1-2-3 [O_chp2_1 2:11]
Regular (1–2–3)n 1-2-3 [T_chp2_4 3:13]
1-2-3-1-2-3 [T_chp2_1 3:20]
Irregular 3-move 1-2-1-3-2 [J_chp2_2 2:13]
1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-3-1-2-1-3-1-3-1-2-3 [A_Chp2_1 4:68]

45.00
42.52
40.94
40.00

35.00
% of thematic units

30.00

25.00

20.00

15.00

10.00
5.51
5.00 3.94
2.36 2.36
1.57
0.79
0.00
irr-3 moves (1-2)n (1-2)n-3 (1-2-3)n (1-3)n 1 only 2 only 2-3

Different move combinations

Fig. 3. Frequency distribution of the move configurations (number of thematic units = 127).
40 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

in the patterns of (1–2)n, (1–2)n 3 in 46.45% of the units. In fact, 46 of the 53 irr-3
move units have a high concentration of pairings of Move 1 and Move 2 (1–2), which
outnumber the other pairings (1-3-1-3 or 2-3-2-3) within the same unit by at least
50% (1-3-1-2-1-2-1-3-1-2-1-2-1). Although these frequency counts do not qualify
the 1–2 pattern as obligatory, they do imply that it is the predominant pattern in
the LRs.
In the forthcoming sections, the different elements that are identified in the three
moves are described, and special attention is drawn to the new items that emerged
from this study. As the elements in each of the three moves neither appear in any
fixed order, nor co-occur with each other in any predictable order, they are referred
to as ‘‘strategies’’ in the remaining discussion.

4.3. Establishing a thematic territory as a starting move

The majority of the thematic units open with segments that establish partic-
ular themes that are related to the writerÕs research. These segments fall roughly
into three categories, each of which displays semantic and functional character-
istics that correspond to those in a respective step of Move 1 in BuntonÕs
model.

4.3.1. Strategy 1A: Surveying the existing state of knowledge and non-research
practices
Surveys of non-research-oriented accounts of the state of knowledge in the field
occur in many of the Move 1 instances. They are neutral accounts that mostly share
the semantic features of Step 1.2 (Making topical generalizations) of the CARS model.
Their propositional content includes definitions or explanations of terminology, con-
structs and theories, the beliefs and characterizations of non-research practices or
phenomena that are associated with the themes.

4.3.2. Strategy 1B: Claiming the centrality of the theme reviewed

Another major type of strategy that is found in Move 1 is that of centrality-claim-
ing, which can further be classified into thesis-internal claims and thesis-external
claims. Thesis-internal claims explicitly relate the importance of or need to review
the themes of the writerÕs own thesis, as in the following two examples (see the under-
lined parts).
Since this study is situated in an academic context, it is important not to over-
look the significance of the expectations of the academic community when
examining feedback. (K_Chp4_4 25:25)
It is important . . . to clarify how ‘‘evaluation’’ is being used by . . . and to dif-
ferentiate it from . . . both for the purposes of the present discussion and for the
clarity of use in the following chapters. (O_Chp2_2 16:16)
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 41

Thesis-external claims are similar to Step 1.1 of the CARS model (Swales,
1990), and assert the centrality of themes by referring to both epistemic and
non-epistemic phenomena. The following text segment exemplifies thesis-external
claims.
One of the most widely accepted and applied forms of text analysis is Halliday
and HasanÕs (1976) framework for analysing cohesion. (G_Chp2_2: 10_10)

4.3.3. Strategy 1C: Surveying research activities

Surveys of research which correspond to Step 1.4 of BuntonÕs model, were also
observed in the corpus. These were segments in which the writers review different as-
pects of previous studies, such as procedures, materials, subjects, and findings. Some
complications arose in the identification of this strategy. There was difficulty in cod-
ing segments that display what appear to be mixed features of Strategy 1A and Strat-
egy 1C, as illustrated in the following example.
(1) The third compromise is to combine learner control with advice which, it
is suggested, makes a powerful tool (Johansen and Tennyson, 1983), results
in effective instructional materials (Mattoon et al., 1991), increases retention
of knowledge (Milheim and Azbell, 1988) and develops metacognitive skills
and knowledge (Lee, 1991). (2) Laurillard (1983a) found that users wanted
learner control but they also wanted advice when making specific decisions.
(3) Milheim (1990) supports this combination (termed advisement) because
it can help students make sensible decisions. (4) Other writers have also
found advisement to be more effective than learner control alone (Arnone
and Grabowski, 1992; Goetzfried and Hannafin, 1985; Hannafin, 1984; Mid-
oro et al., 1988; Santiago and Okey, 1992). (5) Some writers have also con-
sidered adaptive advisement which adapts to learnersÕ needs based on their
performance. (6) One study found that it was effective, appealing and effi-
cient (Santiago and Okey, 1992). (7) While there is considerable support
for advisement, Davey et al. (1995) found that providing learners with
too much help limited their potential for engaging in the learning process.
(H_chp3_2 22:22)
In Sentences 2, 4, 6, and 7, we can see a repeating occurrence of the semantic attri-
butes of researchers, the research action of discovering, and the phenomena discovered
(in this case the effectiveness of combining advisement and learner control) that is
realized in the formulaic integral citation form ‘‘X found. . .’’, which creates the
temptation to code the segment as Strategy 1C. However, the segment cannot be
considered to be a straight survey of research items as the sentences are interspersed
with non-finding-fronted7 citations (Sentences 1, 3, and 5). These sentences exhibit
semantic attributes such as non-research practice (compromising between control

7
As there is no evidence from the propositional content which can indicate the type of literature that the
ideas have been cited from, the citations can only be described as non-finding-fronted as the ideas can be
cited from research or non-research literature.
42 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

and advice in the design of CAL materials), expertsÕ views about the practice, and the
claimed effectiveness of the practice that make them appear to be instances of Strat-
egy 1A.
To code such ambiguous segments, we looked for clues from the section heads
and introductory texts. In the previous example, we found that the writer provides
a thematic preview (see below) that suggests that the segment is intended to be a
survey of the current understanding of learner control and advisement in CAL
material design, rather than a review of the research that has been conducted on
this topic.
This section will discuss control of interactive media in order to clarify the
issues involved in assigning control to learners. It will look at how control is
defined in the literature . . . compromises which can maximise the benefits of
learner control. (H_chp3_2 3:3)
Resorting to signals that are provided in the metadiscourse helped in the iden-
tification of a number of confusing segments. However, we were still left with the
task of re-ascertaining the semantic value of the finding-fronted citations that are
located in non-research-fronted surveys, such as the previous example. Insights
were drawn from previous studies of citational practices, which indicate that cita-
tions of research findings with no specific mention of research events can be inter-
preted as knowledge claims of varying degrees of negotiability and reader
engagement (Buckingham & Neville, 19978). Non-integral citation forms with no
citing verb phrase, such as Sentence 1, are usually used to present cited content
as accepted knowledge, whereas negotiable knowledge claims tend be presented
in the form of integral citations that carry citing verb phrases and reporting clauses
such as those found in Sentences 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7. Using this reinterpretation of
citation forms, we can see that the previous text example can be coded as Strategy
1A with greater certainty.
The confusion concerning the differentiation of Strategy 1A and Strategy 1C has
led us to fine-tune the criteria for both strategies. A segment is thus qualified as an
instance of Strategy 1C if it is signaled explicitly as such through the metadiscourse
provided for the segment (the section head and the introductory text), which
should realize the research attribute using such lexical items as ‘‘studies’’, ‘‘re-
search’’, or their equivalents. Furthermore, each of the citations that is provided
in the segment needs to exhibit at least one of the following research-related
semantic features: research focuses, findings, research processes, or participants
in the research (e.g., subjects, informants). In contrast, segments are considered
to be instances of Strategy 1B if they display a mix of integral and non-integral
citations of research findings and non-research claims. Admittedly, even with these

8
The analysis draws on the paired notions of author acts versus writer acts and denotational verbs
versus evaluational verbs of Thompson and Ye (1991) and on SwalesÕ (1990) integral vs. non-integral
citations.
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 43

criteria set, there still remain a noticeable number of unidentifiable segments that
feature elaborate discussions of research activities intertwined with knowledge
claims cited from sources of unknown types. These segments were coded as Strat-
egy 1D.
Table 3 summarizes the varying frequency counts of the three strategies. The high-
est counts are for Strategy 1A. However, the strategy occurs in only 66.02% of the
Move 1 instances, which explains why the elements of this move are considered to
be strategies only.
It is worth noting here that the counts of Strategy 1B and Strategy 1C are
markedly lower than those of Strategy 1A. The wide frequency gap between
Strategy 1A and the other two strategies suggests that neither, particularly Strat-
egy 1C, is strongly preferred in LRs in applied linguistics theses. The relatively
low occurrence rate of Strategy 1C also echoes the observation that is made by
Hyland (1999, 2000) in his examination of citation practices in research articles.
The author notes that when compared with those published in soft sciences such
as applied linguistics and sociology, research articles published in the hard disci-
plines, such as engineering and physics, display a greater use of research-related
verbs (e.g., analyze, explore, observe, develop). Hyland ascribes this difference in
citation behavior to the epistemological orientation of the hard disciplines, which
see laboratory activities as the key sites where knowledge is generated. As the
author explains, this view represents ‘‘the experimental explanatory schema typi-
cal of the sciences’’ (p. 360), which is less shared in the humanities and social sci-
ences. This may also be the reason for the weak presence of Strategy 1C in the
present corpus.
The three strategies appear in a variety of combinations, as illustrated in the fol-
lowing Move 1 configurations that are taken from six LR texts:

1A–1C (A_chp2_1 10:12);

1B–1C (N_chp1_3 241:243);
1B–1A–1C (D_chp2_5 5:6);
1A–1B–1A–1C (G_chp2_3 17:25).

Fig. 4 displays the frequency distribution of different Move 1 configurations.

Most of the Move 1 strategies appear singly, with Strategy 1A being the most com-
mon realization of the move. The distribution suggests no predictable co-occurrence
of the three strategies.

Table 3
Frequency counts of Move 1 strategies (total counts of Move 1 = 665)
Individual counts Number of instances of Move 1 with the strategy
1A 605 439 (66.02%)
1B 309 234 (35.19%)
1C 252 219 (32.93%)
1D 84 71 (10.68%)
44 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

40.00
37.44

35.00

30.00
% of total counts of Move 1

25.00

20.00
17.89
16.39

15.00

10.00

5.86
5.00
4.36 3.76
2.71 2.71 3.16
2.11 1.80 1.80

0.00
A AB C BC B ABC ABD AC D ABCD AD Misc

Different combinations of strategies

Fig. 4. Distribution of Move 1 configurations (total counts of Move 1 = 665) (Note. The double/multi-
strategy configurations that are displayed in the figure do not imply any sequential order of the strategies.
They simply refer to the co-occurrence of more than one strategy in the Moves. AB, for instance can mean
A–B or B–A–B).

4.4. Evaluating the state of the field as the second move

Move 2 is present in most of the thematic units, and is realized in six major types
of evaluative elements that vary in their degree of negativity and affirmativity.

4.4.1. Negational strategies

Two major negational elements that are noted in the corpus correspond to Step
2A (counter-claiming) and Step 2B (gap-indicating) in the CARS model. Most of
the counter-claiming elements (Strategy 2A) criticize epistemological and ontological
weaknesses in existing epistemic pursuits of the topic or problems that are associated
with existing research or non-research practices. The gap-indicating elements (Strat-
egy 2B) mostly relate to paucity or scarcity (gaps) of various sorts, such as epistemic
and non-epistemic practices, a lack of understanding of a particular phenomenon, or
the need for research or non-research action. According to BuntonÕs model, these
features represent two separate strategies: Gap-indicating and Problem/need-indicat-
ing. However, this distinction is not followed in this analysis for two reasons. First,
the semantic attributes of the two strategies are often realized in close syntactic prox-
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 45

imity, which makes it almost impossible to parse some of the segments into separate
strategies, as illustrated by the following text example. The segment begins with a
gap indication (‘‘the dearth’’) followed, in the main clause of the second sentence,
by a claim of need for ‘‘multi-faceted, macro level studies to provide the Ôbig pic-
ture’’Õ. ‘‘The picture’’ is immediately commented upon in the subsequent post-mod-
ifying clause as ‘‘inevitably lacking’’ reiterates the up-to-date knowledge of the broad
patterns of language use in various sectors in Hong Kong.
There is still a dearth of up-to-date information on broad patterns of language
use in the public and private sectors in Hong Kong. In particular, there is a
clear need for multi-faceted, macro-level studies to provide the ‘‘big picture’’
that is inevitably lacking in the profession-specific studies which have hitherto
dominated research in Hong Kong. (Q_chp2_2 115:115)
Although they are not particularly addressed in previous CARS research, ‘‘needs’’
and ‘‘gaps’’ are in fact alluded to as being semantic attributes – and therefore lexical
realizations of gap-indicating – in examples that are used to illustrate the step
(Swales, 1990; Samraj, 2002). For this reason, ‘‘need’’ is taken in this study to be
both a semantic attribute and a lexical choice that that is used to realize the gap-indi-
cating strategy.

4.4.2. Affirmative strategies

The Move 2 elements, which are identified in this analysis but rarely reported in
previous CARS studies (except in Samraj, 2002), are elements that writers use to
show their acceptance of the citations that are provided in Move 1. They are collec-
tively referred to as affirmative strategies.

4.4.2.1. Strategy 2X: Making confirmative claims. One type of the affirmative strategy
is realized explicitly in the form of positive appraisals of the citations in Move 1. This
type corresponds to what Moravcsik and Murugesan (1975; cited in Swales, 1986)
refer to as confirmative citations. According to the authors, a confirmative citation
is a claim that is made in a citing paper that affirms the correctness of the citation. In
this analysis, the notion is extended to include claims of the significance, value, or
strength of the citation or the contribution that is made by it. The two following
examples are given for illustration.
The main contributions from schema theory [surveyed in the previous para-
graphs of the text] have been the move to incorporating background knowl-
edge and . . . (A_chp2_1 19:19)
This notion of power, status and identity [surveyed in previous paragraphs of
the text] is central to understanding the way in which . . . are maintained in the
workplace. . . . An SFL approach in combination with the ideas presented by
Fairclough (1992,1995), Clark and Ivanič (1997), Ivanič (1998) and others
working within the CDA tradition will lead us forward in understanding the
way in which language makes meaning. (J_chp2_7 26:26)
46 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

4.4.2.2. Strategy 2Y: Relevancy-claiming. Some writers make explicit affirmations by

claiming the applicability or relevancy of the surveyed items to their own research, as
in the following two examples.
These studies offer findings which may be generalisable and are of relevance to
this study in the areas of practice, popularity of IV, studentsÕ use of video and
the value of learner control (see Table 3.7 for a summary). (H_chp3_6 91:91)
This characterization can be usefully applied to the various discourse commu-
nities I posit in this study. (C_chp3_1 47:47)

4.4.2.3. Strategy 2Z: Synthesizing the theoretical framework/position. Some affirma-

tive strategies are enacted through arguments to introduce a new perspective or a
theoretical framework that is abstracted from the works cited in Move 1, which indi-
cates the writerÕs acceptance of the works. The following text example is an illustra-
tion of this strategy.
It can be seen from the above discussion that both the objective and subjec-
tive approaches can be utilized in an NA and a theoretical basis can be
found for this in a systemic approach that includes both external and inter-
nal phases of the NA process. In addition, balance is best served by includ-
ing as many stakeholders as possible in the NA. Thus, we arrive at the
following characteristics of a balanced approach to needs analysis that
includes:
1. Some aspect of both the target situation (learning product) and the learning
process. . .
2. A variety of stakeholders are involved: e.g., . . . (O_chp2_3 112:114)
A total of 779 instances of Move 2 strategies were identified, and the counts for
each strategy type are shown in Table 4. As can be seen, Counter-claiming stands
out as the most frequently used strategy possibly because work at the doctoral level
requires students to demonstrate their ability to think critically, and in particular
their ability to identify flaws in the existing knowledge in the field. This requirement
is characteristic of the dialectical approach to advancing knowledge in the Anglo-
phone academic community. However, despite this, the strategy appears in only

Table 4
Frequency counts of the strategies identified in the Moves 2 (total counts of Move 2 = 513)
Individual counts Number of instances of Move 2 with the strategy
2A 456 356 (69.39%)
2X 133 128 (24.95%)
2B 88 78 (15.20%)
2Y 72 74 (14.42%)
2Z 10 8 (1.56%)
2C 2 2 (0.39%)
Others 18 –
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 47

60.00

50.00 48.34

40.00
% of total counts of Move 2

30.00

20.00

11.31
10.00 8.77
7.80
5.65 5.65
4.09
2.73
1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 0.97
0.00
AX AX Y B AB AY Z BY ABX ? AXY Misc
Different configurations of Move 2

Fig. 5. Distribution of Move 2 configurations (total counts of Move 2 = 513).

69.39% of the 513 instances of Move 2. This figure suggests that none of the elements
of Move 2 elements is obligatory, and explains why they are qualified as strategies
only.
Only 126 (24.56%) of the 513 instances of Move 2 have more than one strategy.
These 126 instances, however, display no predictable patterns of combination, as
illustrated in Fig. 5 below.
Strategy 2A (i.e., Counter-claiming) is the most common realization of Move
2, which outnumbers the other patterns (2A/2X and 2A/2B) by at least four
times. Again, this pattern occurs in only 48.34% of the Move 2 instances. This
occurrence rate, together with the wide variety of configurations of the move,
clearly indicates that none of the patterns can be considered to be obligatory,
which further confirms the optional and non-sequential status of these move
elements.

4.5. Announcing one’s own research as the third move

The last move that is identified in most introduction studies is that of Occupying
the research niche. However, only 27 of the thematic units in the corpus end with this
move. Many of the Move 3 occurrences are realized in medial positions in the units,
as exemplified in the following two move structures.
48 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

1-3-1-2-1-2-1-3-1-2-1-2-1 (R_chp3_2 9:72)

1-2-3-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-3 (F_chp2_2 16:102)

It should be noted that instances of Move 3 were also found in the concluding
texts of some of the LR chapters (see the section on concluding texts), in which
the writers perform overall niche-occupying. Six of the 14 concluding texts have at
least one count of Move 3. The occurrences of Move 3 at the chapter ends suggest
the possible nesting of move structures in the LR texts.
Most of the instances of Move 3 involve segments that introduce aspects of the
research of the writers, as outlined and exemplified in the following (see the under-
lined parts).
Announcing the aim of the research (Strategy 3A)
The analysis was carried . . . in order to investigate their importance to ESL
readers from different cultural and educational backgrounds. (A_chp2_1 48:48)
Announcing the theoretical position or the theoretical framework (Strategy 3B)
The basic frame informing this project is that virtually all human communica-
tion, and certainly organizational or institutional communication, can be illu-
minated by multilevel analysis. (R_chp3_1 83:83)
As the present study was designed to investigate the reading practices of . . .
post-graduate students at two points in time . . . and the changes which had
taken place between these two semesters, a framework incorporating two the-
ories, metacognitive theory and framing theory, was incorporated. (A_chp2_1
4:4)
Announcing the research design or the research process (Strategy 3C)
In this study attempts are made to overcome these drawbacks by using a single
group of learners who make multiple uses of software which develops in
response to their feedback. Findings are not based on statistical evidence but
on learnersÕ perceptions which are discussed and confirmed with participants.
(H_chp3_7 12:12)
Announcing the adoption of terms or definitions of terms (Strategy 3D)
The present study will apply the notion of genre as a ‘‘staged goal-oriented pro-
cess’’ and will follow XÕs argument in regard to register . . . (J_ chpt2-6 26:26)
Two major steps of Move 3 that are posited in BuntonÕs model (Presenting re-
search findings and Thesis-structuring) are absent from the LRs in this corpus, which
implies that that they are not major purposes of an LR.
One hundred and ninety segments that can be categorized as one of these four
types were registered. Table 5 displays their frequency distribution. As can be seen,
Strategy 3A is the most common of the four. However, it occurs in only 41.88% of
the instances of Move 3, which once again explains why the constituents of this move
are considered to be strategies only.
Unlike the strategies in the other two moves, those of Move 3 seldom recur or co-
occur, as indicated in Fig. 6. The most frequent realization of the move is Strategy
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 49

Table 5
Frequency counts of Move 3 strategies (total counts of Move 3 = 160)
Individual counts Number of instances of Move 3 with the strategy
3A 67 67 (41.88%)
3B 44 44 (27.50%)
3C 36 36 (22.50%)
3D 36 36 (22.50%)
Others 7 7 (4.38%)

3A, which was found in only 30% of the 160 instances of Move 3. The figures that are
presented in Fig. 6 suggest that the strategies do not come in any predictable sequen-
tial order, and further confirm their non-step status.
In a small number of the instances of Move 3, the writers take a further step to
justify the announced aspects of their work. In the following example of Move 3,
Writer D provides several reasons for the treatment of the terms that are announced
at the start of the move.
In this thesis, however, innovation and change will be used interchangeably for
the following reasons. Firstly, on the grounds that it is the common practice.
Secondly, the issue of whether a teaching approach is an innovation or a
change is a highly personal decision and so varies amongst teachers.
(D_chp2_1 4:4)
In the following Move 3, Writer I explains in detail why a particular set of test
components was adopted for one part of the research design.

35.00

30.00
30.00

25.00
% of total counts of Move 3

21.25
20.00
17.50
16.25
15.00

10.00

5.00 5.00
5.00
1.88 1.88
1.25
0.00
A D C B A/B A/C B/C A/B/C Misc
Different configurations of Move 3

Fig. 6. Distribution of Move 3 configurations (total counts of Move 3 = 160).

50 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

In this study, the test instruments focus on tasks which are assumed to be facil-
itated by an awareness of discourse structure and test relevant aspects of read-
ing comprehension. The overall rationale for the choice of the test components
is . . . (I_chp2_3 120:120)
In some cases, the writers assert the contributions which their work makes to the
field. The following is a case in point (see underlined parts).
By investigating the educational and cultural influences on the reading prac-
tices of a sample group of post-graduate students from . . . it was hoped that
the findings would lead to greater and more appropriate provision of service
in line with the X courses for (o)verseas (s)tudents. (A_chp2_3 5:5)
Thirty-two counts of justifying or value-claiming were identified, 29 of which were
found to co-occur with at least one of the Move 3 strategies. These co-occurrences
suggest that the justifications are not stand-alone strategies, but are sub-strategies
of the respective Move 3 strategies.

5. Conclusion

In this study I attempt a structural analysis of a group of LR texts drawn from 20

doctoral theses that were written by a group of English native-speakers, and com-
pare the findings with those that are posited in BuntonÕs revised CARS model for
Ph.D. thesis introductions. It is found that most of the LR texts are realized in more
than one chapter, and that the majority of the chapters display an Introduction–
Body–Conclusion structure. The introductory texts found in the LRs serve two pos-
sible purposes: to provide of an advance thematic organizer and to justify the themes
that are pursued in the chapter. Most of the conclusions carry cursory reviews of the
themes that are discussed in the chapters and the intentions of their discussions.
In the body parts of the LRs, extensive discussions are divided into thematic units
that are marked by section heads. The majority of these thematic units involve moves
that resemble the three moves that are posited in BuntonÕs CARS model. The three
moves are realized in a highly recursive manner in which the pattern of Move 1–2
recurs most often. Move 3 occurs the least frequently, which suggests that it is
weakly preferred by the writers. Move 3 also occasionally figures in some of the
chapter conclusions. Although most of the identified elements of the three moves
match with the steps in BuntonÕs study, a new group is identified that relates the wri-
terÕs affirmative stance towards the knowledge or research practices that are surveyed
in Move 1 (strength-claiming, relevancy-claiming, and the synthesizing of the theo-
retical framework). None of the elements occurs in 100% of their respective move,
nor do the elements appear in a predictable sequential pattern. Thus, they are
qualified as strategies only in this study. A move structure is proposed (see Fig. 7)
to describe the schematic pattern of the thematic sections that are found in the body
texts of LRs. Note that the strategies in each move are arranged in ascending order
of frequency, and that the arrangement does not suggest any sequential pattern.
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 51

Move 1 Establishing one part of the territory of one’s own research by

Strategy A# surveying the non-research-related phenomena or knowledge claims
Strategy B# claiming centrality
Strategy C surveying the research-related phenomena
Move 2 Creating a research niche (in response to Move 1) by:
Strategy A counter-claiming
Strategy B gap-indicating
Strategy C asserting confirmative claims about knowledge or research practices surveyed
Strategy D asserting the relevancy of the surveyed claims to one’s own research
Strategy E abstracting or synthesizing knowledge claims to establish a theoretical position or a
theoretical framework
Move 3(optional) Occupying the research niche by announcing:
Strategy A research aims, focuses, research questions or hypotheses *
Strategy B theoretical positions/theoretical frameworks *
Strategy C research design/processes *
Strategy D interpretations of terminology used in the thesis *
*Sub-strategy: justifying or claiming contributions
# Strategy 1B tends to precede Strategy 1A when the two co-occur.

Fig. 7. A move structure for the thematic units in LR chapters.

The analysis in this study also indicates that the move structure is realized in two
possible modes (See Fig. 8). The first and more common mode is the linear, modular
arrangement of theme-bound move structures (left), whereas the second and less
common mode comprises a nested arrangement of the structures (right).
The chapter structuring and the realization of the CARS structure within the
main individual thematic sections, together with the new strategies that are identi-
fied, suggests that the LR is not entirely the same as the introduction chapter. The
multi-chaptering, multi-thematic sectioning, and the highly recursive and complex
move structures in the LRs in this study reveal that the genre is a sophisticated rhe-
torical exposition that serves to delineate the complex conceptual and theoretical
contours of a thesis, and in a small number of cases to prepare the ground for specific
methodological aspects of the writerÕs research study. The sophistication that is

Chapter Introduction Chapter Introduction

Body [nested move structures]

Body [modular move structures] Theme-bound Move Structure 1
Theme-bound Move Structure 1 Theme-bound Move Structure 2
Theme-bound Move Structure 2 Theme-bound Move Structure 3 *
Theme-bound Move Structure 3 * …

Chapter conclusion Chapter conclusion

Summarizing the gist Summarizing the gist
Occupying the major niches created
in the chapter body

* The number of theme-bound move structures is not fixed.

Fig. 8. Modes of arrangement of the theme-bound move structures in LR chapters.

52 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

involved in the construction of the LR is probably a result of the complex nature of

the writerÕs research topic, the objects that are studied, the disciplines to which the
writer belongs, the need that the writer feels to demonstrate their extensive knowl-
edge of – and critical thinking about – the field, and in some cases the long history
of the field. In contrast, the introduction chapter may have a more macro function of
creating the research space for the thesis in more general terms. The differential roles
that these parts of a thesis play, together with the different realizations of the CARS
model, suggest that the LR and the introduction chapters in ILrMRD theses are not
structurally entirely the same. However, the resemblance between the introduction
and the LR that is identified in this study indicates that the two sections both belong
to the genre agnation network (Martin, 1992), or a genre colony (Bhatia, 2001,
2004), of academic research introductions. The differential functions of LRs and
introductory chapters can be further explored by comparing LRs and introductory
chapters from the same theses.
It should be noted that this study was conducted on a small corpus drawn from
applied linguistic theses written by native speakers of English, and that validation of
the findings is thus needed. For instance, contrastive studies can be pursued to exam-
ine whether the theme-bound CARS model is equally applicable to describe LR texts
produced by non-native speakers of the language (Kwan, in preparation). Cross-
disciplinary comparison is equally worth pursuing to determine the generalizability
of the findings to theses that are drawn from other disciplines. Another useful
line of research in this regard would be to ascertain whether Strategy 1C and the cri-
tique of methodological issues have a stronger presence in experimental theses,
including those that are written in the soft fields of the social sciences. With the
increasing emergence of secondary disciplines as a result of calls for interdisciplinary
approaches to real-world problems (Parry, Atkinson, & Delamont, 1994) and the
blurring of disciplinary boundaries at the institutional level (Becher & Trowler,
2001; Bhatia, 2004; Clark, 1998; Mok, 2002; Mok & Welch, 2002; Sporn, 1999),
we are likely to see more students who are engaged in studies that require them to
draw on multidisciplinary literature, which will add to the complexity of their
LRs. Comparative studies therefore also need to address these disciplinary changes.
Research could be conducted to compare the LRs drawn in theses that are written in
the primary (traditional) disciplines, such as anthropology and chemistry, and those
that are produced at the nexuses of disciplines, such as IT and education, and law
and economics.
On the pedagogical fronts, concordancing can be developed to tap into the various
linguistic realizations of each of the strategies that are identified in this study, which
can then be turned into teaching materials. For instance, the sentences of prominent
strategies, such as Centrality-claiming can be tagged to examine their predominant
syntactic choices, lexical bundles, and use of tenses (Flowerdew, in preparation).
Likewise, citational practices in strategies such as Surveying research-related phenom-
ena can be explored to determine whether integral or non-integral citations are more
common (Flowerdew & Kwan, in preparation). To date, concordancing for literature
reviews to date is still lacking, but could prove to be a useful learning resource for doc-
toral students who are non-native speakers of English.
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 53

As the findings of this study show, there are noticeable structural differences be-
tween LRs and introductions in research writing. Writing instructors are thus ad-
vised to teach the writing of the LR by using authentic LR texts and presenting
them in their entirety, which will allow students to appreciate the complexity and
the kinds of deliberation that are involved in the construction of LRs. To this
end, the models of chapter structure and the two theme-bound move structures that
are generated in this study provide some useful metalanguage to help raise the
awareness of students of the schematic patterning of LRs. However, instructors need
to be mindful of possible cross-disciplinary variations in the models, and should con-
sider guiding their students to discover alternative field-specific patterns. This can be
carried out by training students to perform simple move analyses of LRs in theses in
the disciplines that are most pertinent to their own work.

Acknowledgments

I give special thanks to my colleague John Flowerdew for his comments on early
drafts of this article, and most importantly for allowing me to use the corpus of lit-
erature reviews that he collected from the 20 contributors. I express my appreciation
to Miss Ann Wong for organizing, maintaining and coding the corpus. My thanks
go also to Shin Gyonggu, Joyce Bell, May Chan and in particular the two reviewers
for their very insightful comments. Last but not least, both John Flowerdew and I
express our gratitude to all of the contributors of the LR texts, without whom this
project would not have been possible.

References

Ahmad, U. K. (1997). Research article introductions in Malay: Rhetoric in an emerging research

community. In A. Duszak (Ed.), Culture and styles of academic discourse (pp. 273–303). Berlin, Federal
Republic Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
Anthony, L. (1999). Writing research article introductions in software engineering: How accurate is a
standard model? IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 42, 38–46.
Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories (2nd ed.). Buckingham, UK: The
Society for Research and Higher Education and the Open University Press.
Belcher, D. (1994). The apprenticeship approach to advanced academic literacy: graduate students and
their mentors. English for Specific Purposes, 13(1), 23–34.
Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman.
Bhatia, V. K. (2001). Analyzing genre: Some conceptual issues. In M. Hewings (Ed.), Academic writing in
context: Implications and applications (paper in honor of Tony Dudley-Evans) (pp. 79–92). Birmingham,
UK: University of Birmingham.
Bhatia, V. K. (2004). Worlds of written discourse: A genre-based view. New York: Continuum.
Buckingham, J., & Neville, M. (1997). A model of citation options. ARAL, 20(2), 51–66.
Bunton, D. (1998). Linguistic and textual problems in Ph.D. and M.Phil. theses: an analysis of genre moves
and metatext. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Hong Kong.
Bunton, D. (1999). The use of higher level metatext in Ph.D. theses. English for Specific Purposes,
18(Supplement 1), S41–S56.
Bunton, D. (2002). Generic moves in Ph.D. thesis introductions. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic
discourse (pp. 57–75). London: Pearson Education.
54 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55

Burgess, S. (2002). Packed houses and intimate gatherings: Audience and rhetorical structure. In J.
Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 196–215). London: Pearson Education.
Clark, B. R. (1998). The entrepreneurial university: demand and response. Tertiary Education and
Management, 4(1), 5–16.
Cooley, L., & Lewkowicz, J. (1995). The writing needs of graduate students at the University of
Hong Kong: a project report. Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching, 18,
121–123.
Cooley, L., & Lewkowicz, J. (1997). Developing awareness of the rhetorical and linguistic conventions of
writing a thesis in English: Addressing the needs of EFL/ESL postgraduate students. In A. Duszak
(Ed.), Culture and styles of academic discourse (pp. 113–129). Berlin, Federal Republic Germany:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand
Oaks, US: Sage Publications.
Dong, Y. R. (1996). Learning how to use citations for knowledge transformation: non-native doctoral
studentsÕdissertation. Research in the Teaching of English, 30(4), 428–457.
Dong, Y. R. (1998). Non-native graduate studentsÕ thesis/dissertation writing in science: self-reports
by students and their advisors from two US institutions. English for Specific Purposes, 17(4),
369–390.
Dudley-Evans, T. (1986). Genre analysis: an investigation of the introduction and discussion sections of
MSc dissertations. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Talking about text (pp. 128–145). Birmingham: English
Language Research.
Dudley-Evans, T. (1999). The dissertation: A case of neglect?. In P. Thompson (Ed.) Issues in EAP writing
research and instruction (pp. 28–36). Reading University: CALS.
Flowerdew, J. (in preparation). Applied genre analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Flowerdew, J. (2000). Discourse community, legitimate peripheral participation, and the nonnative-
English-speaking scholar. TESOL Quarterly, 34(1), 127–150.
Flowerdew, J. (2004). Corpus of PhD literature reviews. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong.
Flowerdew, J. Kwan, B. S. C. (in preparation). Citational practices in literature reviews.
Geisler, C. (1994). Academic literacy and the nature of expertise: Reading, writing, and knowing in academic
philosophy. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hart, C. (1998). Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science research imagination. London: Sage.
Hart, C. (2001). Doing a literature search: A comprehensive guide for the social sciences. London: Sage
Publications.
Hocking, D. (2003). The genre of the postgraduate exegesis in art and design: An ethnographic
examination. In L. Cooley & J. Lewkowicz (Eds.), Thesis and dissertation writing at postgraduate level:
Theory and practice (pp. 54–77). (A Special Issue of Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(2)).
Hyland, K. (1999). Academic attribution: citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge. Applied
Linguistics, 20(3), 341–367.
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman.
Kwan, B. S. C. (1996). Introductions in state-of-the-art, argumentative, and teaching tips TESL journal
articles: Three possible sub-genres of introduction? Research Monograph 12. City University of Hong
Kong, Department of English.
Kwan, B. S. C. (in preparation). A genre analysis of literature reviews in doctoral thesis.
Johns, A. M., & Swales, J. M. (2002). Literacy and disciplinary practices: opening and closing perspectives.
Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1, 13–28.
Lee, S. (2000). A contrastive rhetorical study on Korean and English research paper introductions. Journal
of Pan Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 316–336.
Lee, S. (2001). A contrastive rhetoric study of Korean and English research paper introductions University of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Ann Arbor, United States: UMI.
Lewin, B. A., Fine, J., & Young, L. (2001). Expository discourse: A genre-based approach to social science
research texts. New York: Continuum.
Martin, J. R. (1992). English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
MAXQDA. (2001). VERBI software. Consult, Sozialforchung, GmbH, Berlin, Germany.
 B.S.C. Kwan / English for Specific Purposes 25 (2006) 30–55 55

Melander, B. (1998). Culture or genres? Issues in the interpretation of cross-cultural differences in scientific
articles. In I. Fortanet, S. Posteguillo, J. C. Palmer, & J. F. Coll (Eds.), Genre studies in English for
academic purposes (pp. 211–226). Castello de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I.
Meloy, J. M. (2002). Writing the qualitative dissertation: Understanding by doing (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mok, K. H. (2002). Toward entrepreneurial universities: changing higher education governance in East
Asia. In Paper presented at the international symposium globalization and educational governance change
in East Asia 2002. City University of Hong Kong: Hong Kong.
Mok, K. H., & Welch, A. (2002). Economic rationalism, managerialism and structural reform in
education. In K. H. Mok & D. Chan (Eds.), Globalization and education: Quest for education quality in
Hong Kong (pp. 23–40). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Moravcsik, M., & Murugesan, P. (1975). Some results on the function and quality of citations. Social
Studies of Science, 5/1.
Paltridge, B. (1994). Genre analysis and the identification of textual boundaries. Applied Linguistics, 15(3),
288–299.
Parry, O., Atkinson, P., & Delamont, S. (1994). Disciplinary identities and doctoral work. In R. G.
Burgess (Ed.), Postgraduate education and training in the social sciences: Processes and products
(pp. 34–52). London, UK: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Peters, R. L. (1997). Getting what you came for (revised ed.). New York: Noonday.
Ridley, D. (2000). The different guises of a PhD thesis and the role of a literature review. In P. Thompson
(Ed.), Patterns and perspectives: Insights into EAP writing practice (pp. 61–76). Reading, UK:
University of Reading.
Rudestam, K. E., & Newton, R. R. (2001). Surviving your dissertation: A comprehensive guide to content
and process (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Samraj, B. (2002). Introductions in research articles: variations across disciplines. English for Specific
Purposes, 21(1), 1–17.
Shaw, P. (1991). Science research studentsÕ composing processes. English for Specific Purposes, 10,
189–206.
Sporn, B. (1999). Towards more adaptive universities; trends of institutional reform in Europe. Higher
Education in Europe, XXIV(1), 23–33.
Swales, J. M. (1981). Aspects of article introductions. Birmingham, England: LSU, University of Aston.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2000). English in todayÕs research world: A writing guide. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
Turner, J. (2003). Writing a PhD in the contemporary humanities. In L. Cooley & J. Lewkowicz (Eds.),
Thesis and dissertation writing at postgraduate level: Theory and practice (pp. 34–53). (A Special Issue
of Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(2)).