What the study found
Dissertation discussion chapters in applied linguistics and sociology used most metadiscourse similarly, but they differed significantly in evidentials, code glosses, and self-mentions.
Why the authors say this matters
The authors conclude that the findings highlight the situated nature of metadiscourse and shed light on preferred patterns of metadiscoursal usage in applied linguistics and sociology dissertation discussion chapters.
What the researchers tested
The researchers used Hyland’s 2019 metadiscourse model to analyze a corpus of 20 dissertation discussion chapters from two social sciences disciplines: applied linguistics and sociology.
What worked and what didn't
The two groups of dissertation writers appropriated a majority of metadiscoursal items similarly. Significant differences occurred in evidentials, code glosses, and self-mentions, with p < .05.
What to keep in mind
The abstract does not describe limitations beyond the small corpus of 20 chapters from two disciplines.
Key points
- Most metadiscourse items were used similarly in applied linguistics and sociology dissertation discussion chapters.
- Significant differences were found in evidentials, code glosses, and self-mentions.
- The study used Hyland’s 2019 metadiscourse model to analyze 20 dissertation discussion chapters.
- The authors say the findings highlight the situated nature of metadiscourse.
Disclosure
- Research title:
- Metadiscourse use differed in two dissertation disciplines
- Authors:
- Beibei Ren, Wei Zhu
- Institutions:
- City University of Macau, University of South Florida
- Publication date:
- 2026-03-17
- OpenAlex record:
- View
Get the weekly research newsletter
Stay current with peer-reviewed research without reading academic papers — one filtered digest, every Friday.