Raisa Tahsin
May 17th 2019
Writing for Engineers
Missy Watson
Introduction
Writing is essential to all fields of study. Specifically, in engineering, writing is used to communicate ideas about experiments, findings, and discoveries to circulate information in the STEM world to other STEM professionals. Mainly, engineers write lab reports, journals, memos and research articles with the specific purpose of informing and detailing newly discovered information to engineers with similar interests. However, there is a multitude of rhetorical techniques done by engineers in writing that many are not aware of. As evidenced by Dr. Budsaba Kanoksilapatham in her article “Distinguishing textual features characterizing structural variation in research articles across three engineering sub-discipline corpora”the study of rhetorical moves in engineering writing has been overlooked. Through the analysis of two articles from different sub fields of engineering, this paper will discuss the rhetorical moves and techniques found commonly in engineering writing and the use of calculations to elevate a research paper and create exigency for the study being conducted.
Methodology
In this paper, the rhetorical moves and methods of two peer reviewed engineering articles will be analyzed using the CARS (Create a Research Space) analysis method, developed by John Swales, which details the similarities and patterns of rhetorical techniques found in the introductions of research papers and how they rhetorically function to build credibility. The application of the CARS method will allow novice engineers to understand how the introduction sets the stage for the rest of the paper and how the introduction functions in the larger scope of the paper Additionally, this paper will look at the use of thorough calculations in both articles and how they contribute to the research paper and discuss how the rhetorical moves identified represent larger social actions and values in engineering. The application of the CARS analysis method to the two engineering articles will allow beginning engineers to better understand the stylistic choices engineers make in their writing and how the rhetoric choices reflect what is important in engineering writing such as having a sense of exigency and creating a gap in their respective field to ensure the readers know that the research is relevant and needed.
Selecting Articles to Analyze
First, two peer-reviewed articles were chosen from two different sub fields of engineering. Through the use of the CCNY online library, I was able to narrow the search to my interests. The “research by subject” option helped me to find specifically what I was looking for. When choosing “biomedical engineering” and picking a database I had to think about the kind of article I wanted, the length, content and the research topic. Once I picked the Embase database, which contains the most extensive collection of biomedical engineering literature, I used the key word search to get articles specific to my interests. Knowing that I wanted to concentrate on Hashimoto’s disease and specifically the diagnosis, my key words were “Hashimoto’s AND diagnosis.” When searching for an article to compare and contrast with the first article, I wanted to see how medical imaging could be used in different sub fields of engineering and I know that imaging has a lot to do with electrical engineering so to find my next article I used the keywords “Electrical Engineering and Ultrasonogram” on google scholar.
For the purpose of this study, the first article chosen was a biomedical engineering article published in Biomedical Engineering Onlinein 2012, “Assessment of Significance of Features Acquired from Thyroid Ultrasonograms in Hashimoto’s Disease,” by Robert Koprowski, Witold Zieleznik, Zygmunt Wrobel, Justyna Malyszek, Beata Stepien and Waldemar Wojcik. This paper details the study of the “analysis of the features obtained from thyroid ultrasound images” (1). There was a total of 89 patients in the study, the authors took four ultrasound images in transverse and longitudinal sections of the right and left lobe of the thyroid of each patient. Using applied methods of analysis and image processing the researchers were able to profile 10 distinct features of each image. During their preliminary image analysis stage, an expert marked the area of analysis in each image of the thyroid lobes and a statistical and morphological analysis was conducted using common analysis techniques and image processing. The statistical and morphological analysis of the 376 images helped Koprowski et al. come to the formulation that there are two main measured characteristic parameters for Hashimoto’s: “an average brightness value after the removal of clear follicles of any diameter and measurement of statistical parameters of follicles whose size and size and shape is not strictly defined” (3). The authors claim that their research is significant because it proves that the assessment of Hashimoto’s disease requires the analysis of more than one feature, the results of the study show which features are significant in the diagnosis of Hashimoto’s. Ultimately, the study makes the diagnosis of Hashimoto’s disease easier and more accurate.
The second article chosen for this study was an electrical engineering article published in the Journal of Multimedia in 2010, “CLG Optical Flow Approach and Frequency Analysis of Cranial Ultrasonogram Image Sequences,” co-authored by Mohiuddin Ahmad, Muhammad Muinul Islam, Lutfunessa Lata, Taohida Taslima and Masayoshi Yamada. This article details the study where they calculate tissue motion due to artery pulsation in cranial ultrasound image sequences by using CLG optical flow technique. Using their research, Ahmad et al. proposed a method to estimate tissue motion quantitatively by combining local and global motion estimation methods, combined local-global (CLG) optical flow technique in cranial ultrasonogram of new born babies. The analysis of their results demonstrated an association between pulsation and blood flow. The authors claim that their research is significant due to the advances towards “quantitative characterization of artery pulsation” which helps greatly with medical diagnosis.
After choosing the two journals, and reading each one multiple times, I generated two types of summary for both. The first summary for each research study was for content, here I summarized the study, the methods, and what the authors were hoping to accomplish. In the second summary for each paper, I detailed the rhetorical moves made by each author, the purpose of the rhetorical moves, where and why they made those rhetorical moves. The purpose of the first summary was to better understand the text as a whole and the second summary was a preliminary analysis of the text using the CARS analysis method. The CARS method was applied to both articles to analyze the rhetorical moves taken by the authors and to discuss how they rhetorically function in the text as a whole. Next, a second method of analysis was developed and then applied. Both journals had an extensive use of calculations in their methods and results sections. It intrigued me that each calculation was meticulously written out, in both papers. Usually, a formula is provided followed by result and the authors don’t mention how they derived the answer. This begs the question Why are calculations relevant in these papers and how does quantitative data help or contribute? Who are the calculations targeted to?
- John Swales’ “Create a Research Space” Analysis of Research Paper Introductions
The Create a Research Space analysis looks at the “rhetorical moves” made by authors in introductions of research papers. The CARS analysis method is a very specific tool that is particular to the introduction of research papers, the application of the method allows the detection and analysis of rhetorical moves used by the authors and brings to light how the author gives importance to their research and study. According to John Swales, there are three main “moves” an author can make within the introduction of their research paper to create “space” for their research and write an effective introduction. The three moves consist of multiple sub-steps to achieve the moves.
Move 1: Establishing a Territory (the situation)
- Demonstrate that a general area of research is critical, interesting, relevant or worthy of investigation
Move 2: Establishing a Niche (the problem)
- Making a clear argument that the research is important and has value in the field.
Move 3: Occupying the Niche (the solution)
- Discuss how the study/research will contribute new knowledge or new understanding in contrast to the prior research on the topic.
II. Analyzing Calculations Used in Engineering Writing
Alongside the CARS analysis of the introduction of both research papers, I decided to analyze another prominent feature found in engineering articles. Math calculations are quite ubiquitous in the engineering field, they are an integral part of what engineers do and to their research. In engineering journals, the common trend is for the author to provide the formula used in their research but then they skip the work and provide the reader with the answer and then jump to the significance of the answer. In “Assessment of Significance of Features Acquired from Thyroid Ultrasonograms in Hashimoto’s Disease” and “CLG Optical Flow Approach and Frequency Analysis of Cranial Ultrasonogram Image Sequences” formulas and math are a large portion of their studies. After studying several equations, I noticed the several common features. First, the authors included every calculation worked out. Second, the worked-out problem would often appear in the body of the text rather than the appendices. I thenanalyzed each equation to determine whether they followed these conventions and then critically questioned the larger goals and purposes of the use of calculations. The use of calculation in both journals will be analyzed to reveal the larger purpose of including them, how they function within the paper and who they are targeted to.
Results and Discussion
I. Analysis using CARS
The purpose of the CARS analysis method is to look at the introduction of research papers and study how the author of the research paper creates a need or importance for their research, how they structure their writing to show that their study is valuable. In other words, how the author makes space for their research.
In their biomedical engineering paper, “ (Robert Koprowski, 2012),” coauthors Koprowski, Zieleznik, Wrobel, Stepien and Wojcik, want their research to demonstrate the most significant features to study when diagnosing Hashimoto’s using ultrasonograms. There are other ways to diagnose Hashimoto’s, the first question a person reading this paper may ask is “why are you conducting this study if there are other methods?” Thus, the authors must create exigency for their study, Koprowski et al. begin by utilizing step three of move one. The authors cite previous literature in the field regarding Hashimoto’s and ultrasonograms, this allows them to establish a basis with the reader and explain the previous method for echogenicity assessment, which is the main characteristic of Hashimoto’s that can only be seen using an ultrasonogram. Echogenicity assessment is defined as the “average brightness of pixels per unit area of the thyroid lobe” this is a very important element of thyroid assessment because it accounts for any changes of the histological structure of the thyroid gland. The authors reference a study conducted by Mailloux et al, who performed a very similar experiment to Koprowski et al. The purpose of referencing this study was to validate their reasoning for doing a similar experiment and demonstrate why their research is crucial for their work. In the past, echogenicity was assessed qualitatively which is not always as accurate. After explaining the old ways, Koprowski et al. move onto moves two and three simultaneously. In move two, establishing a niche, the authors begin to counterclaim. When discussing different methods of assessing thyroid echogenicity, the authors stated “this method [Mailloux’s] was not introduced to common clinical practice because the authors used various tools to measure image echogenicity. The image itself was obtained after image pre-processing, so instrument settings had a major impact on the obtained results. For this reason, the results were not consistent.” (2) Then the authors move onto occupying the niche by announcing their present research and approach which is move three step two. These two moves allow for the authors to show that the previous methods can no longer be used because of their inaccuracy and then they jump straight into their methodology to provide their solution for the problem they outlined in their introduction. Even though Koprowski et al. did not utilize all the moves outlined in Swales’ CARS analysis method and did not follow the order of the CARS method, they were able to write a well thought out introduction that detailed the problems they are trying to solve and the authors successfully demonstrated exigency for their project.
In the second engineering article, “CLG Optical Flow Approach and Frequency Analysis of Cranial Ultrasonogram Image Sequences” co-authors Ahmad, Islam, Lata, Taslima and Yamada begin with move two step two which is indicating a gap by stating “there are few attempts to analyze the tissue motion from the moving images of ultrasonogram for pediatrics diagnosis” (47). This quote shows that the authors are attempting to demonstrate that there is not enough research in this particular subject in their field and there is a gap of knowledge that they want to fill. Furthermore, Ahmad et al. reinforce that their study will help make advances in pediatric diagnosis which is using step 3a of the CARS analysis which is outlining a purpose. This gives the readers and idea of what the authors hope to accomplish and allows them to see the significance of the research. Generally, the John Swales’ analysis method is applied to the introductions of research papers, however, Ahmad et al. utilize a few of the moves detailed in the CARS method in their conclusion. For example, in the conclusion section of the paper, the authors conclude the paper with their findings and once again reiterate the significance of their study. This aligns with step 3c and 3d (announcing principal findings or argument and indicating structure) of the CARS analysis. After reporting their findings, the researchers mention future research which indicates a structure and ultimately contributes to the significance of their research because they show that what they accomplished here can be applied in the future to make more medical advances.
II. Analysis of the use of Calculations
Calculations and formulas are usually a part of engineering journals and they are used to communicate ideas; however, they are usually not worked out step by step. In the paper written by Koprowski et al. there are multiple calculations for each distinct feature being studied. For the 10 features of the thyroid lobe the formulas were provided and then the authors described how they got the numbers they got. The co-authors of the electrical engineering article had a different approach when it came to calculations. Ahmad et al. provided a multitude of formulas for artery pulsation, blood flow, tissue motion and the combined local-global estimation. For each formula they included every step of every calculation and explained the importance of the math in the body of the text rather than in the appendices. Of course, the obvious reason for including the calculations in both journals is to validate their results to other engineers, scientists and professionals. However, the underlying reasons may include replication, a targeted audience, and the fact that quantitative data allows for the reader to follow along with the researchers thinking. For replication purposes, the calculations will make certain parameters of the experiment clear to someone attempting to duplicate an experiment. Engineering articles are often written by engineers for engineers. In the hopes that someone may want to replicate, cite, reference or build off their research, adding detailed calculations helps make the procedure clearer.
Furthermore, another possible reason for including such detailed calculations is that engineers want their research to be top, to be cited and this happens if they are more specific, have more information. When thorough calculations are coupled with graphs, charts, diagrams and drawing, the evidence seems irrefutable and more trustworthy to someone reading the research paper.
III. Comparing and Contrasting the two journals
In general, the two articles chosen for analysis for the purpose of this study, did not utilize much of the CARS method but there were a multitude of rhetorical moves present which collectively contribute to explaining the research conducted and the significance. Koprowski et al. begin by explaining what “thyroid echogenicity” (1) is and detail the previous studies done on thyroid echogenicity. In the article published by Ahmad et al, the format of the introduction was similar to Koprowski et al., it consisted of a much longer and more detailed introduction that gave background information on key terms, important concepts, different techniques used throughout the experiment. Both researchers without a doubt build exigency for their research beginning in the introduction and they continue to build throughout the paper. Koprowski et al. and Ahmad et al. go about it in different ways, but they have the same goal inmind, to create space in their respective fields for their work. What is intriguing about both articles is that they both used similar methods but went about the methods in different ways. Both articles also used calculations to back their results, but the electrical engineering article was much more detailed and thorough with the calculations and numbers while the biomedical engineering article included many formulas with written description of what the formulas are and how they were used. This may have something to do with the core principles and values of the two different sub fields of engineering. Perhaps, electrical engineers are more focused on the presentation of quantitative data and numbers while biomedical engineers give importance to quantitative data but when it comes to math, it can be a bit more conceptual.
Conclusion:
Ultimately, researchers in engineering use a variety of rhetorical moves in their papers which, many a times, the novice reader is not aware of. These rhetorical moves serve the greater purpose of creating exigency for the topic of the research paper and establish a sense of validity. The introduction of a research paper is critical because it pulls the reader to the text and sets up the rest of the experiment. Having the rhetorical moves in the introduction makes the overall paper much stronger and more appealing to read. The detailed calculations in both research papers reflect the value engineers put in qualitative data and the data serves to validate their research to other engineers and scientists. Everything an author does in their paper is to create space for their work, validify their results and prove that their research is valuable to their field.
Works Cited
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2014). Distinguishing textual features characterizing structural variation in research articles across three engineering sub-discipline corpora. Elsevier, 74-86.
Mohiuddin Ahmad, M. M. (2010). CLG Optical Flow Approach and Frequency Analysis of Cranial Ultrasonogram Image Sequences. Journal of Multimedia, 47-54.
Robert Koprowski, W. Z. (2012). Assessment of Significance of Features Acquired from Thyroid Ultrasonograms in Hashimoto’s Disease. BioMedical Engineering OnLine, 1-20.
