| Abstract | The present empirical analysis of the short texts accompanying research articles in the scientificjournal Nature covering a period from 1991 to 2005, not only shows that these texts are significantly
different from prescriptive models of abstracts, but that they have also recently undergone a further
change. Up until 1996, in contrast to the traditionally viewed structure of abstracts (Introduction-
Methods-Results-Conclusion/Discussion (IMRC/D)), the short texts in Nature vary considerably
in structure with only 18% of those studied having the basic IMRC/D format and the Results being
the only obligatory move. This manipulation of structure, accompanied by the predominant use of
the Present and Present Perfect active, the use of modifiers, the apparent removal of hedging to
strengthen claims all contribute to make these texts eye-catching, to advertise a paper’s contribution.
With the introduction of the e-version of the journal in 1997, further changes occurred. Many promotional
elements have been retained, and though the texts have become much more standardized in
their structure, the Methods have been completely removed and the Results incorporated into the
Conclusion which becomes the only obligatory move. This change in structure, combined with the
inclusion of a greater amount of commentary, greater inclusion of information concerning the
study’s effect of the field as a whole, and the inclusion of explicit definitions, shows an evident concern
for the ‘‘general reader’’ and indicates a kind of ‘‘democratization’’ of the scientific community.
Technological advancements in the field of science appear to have also contributed to these modifications
coming about.
|
