Main Article Content


Since authors intend to publish their academic research in reputable journals, promoting their research significance is pivotal to convincing journal gatekeepers for accepting their research articles (RAs). However, studies on research promotion within RAs are still limited, and none has comparatively studied this essential issue in English RAs published in reputable international journals and Indonesian highly-accredited journals as data sets. Thus, comprehending this gap has encouraged me to conduct the present study, by analyzing how claiming centrality and research contribution are employed in both data sets. For the data analysis, I employed a top-down approach for analyzing both data sets and used combined qualitative and quantitative approaches for the analysis reports. Then, the analysis results revealed that while claiming centrality appeared in most of both data sets, presenting research contribution appeared only in a few RAs of both data sets. Then, authors tend to express these two communicative steps using simple sentences more than the other three sentence types, except those published in reputable international journals as they mostly employ complex sentences in expressing their research contribution. These findings imply that promoting research by stating that the current research topic is important for research is important in the data, but using claiming centrality is more dominant than presenting research contribution. These findings also indicate that promoting the significance of current research topics is very essential.


claiming centrality promoting research research articles research contribution

Article Details

How to Cite
Warsidi. (2023). Promoting research through claiming centrality and explicit research contributions in applied linguistics research articles. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(2), 264–280.


  1. Abdi, J., & Sadeghi, K. (2018). Promotion through claiming centrality in L1 and L2 English research article introductions. International Journal of English Studies, 18(1), 53-70.
  2. Adnan, Z. (2009). Some potential problems for research articles written by Indonesian academics when submitted to international English language journals. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 11(1), 107-125.
  3. Adnan, Z. (2010). Rhetorical patterns of Indonesian research articles: A genre of Indonesian academic writing. VDM Verlag Dr Müller.
  4. Adnan, Z. (2011). ‘Ideal-problem-solution’(IPS) model: A discourse model of research article introductions (RAIS) in education. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 34(1), 75-103.
  5. Afros, E., & Schryer, C. F. (2009). Promotional (meta) discourse in research articles in language and literary studies. English for Specific Purposes, 28(1), 58-68.
  6. Alharbi, S. H. (2021). A comparative genre-based analysis of move-step structure of rais in two different publication contexts. English Language Teaching, 14(3), 12-24.
  7. Amnuai, W. (2021). A Comparison of Niche Establishments in English Research Article Introductions Published in International and Thai Journals. Discourse and Interaction, 14(2), 24-40.
  8. Andika, R. P., Arsyad, S., & Harahap, A. (2018). Rhetorical moves and linguistic features of journal article abstracts by postgraduate students, national and international authors in applied linguistics. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics & Literature), 3(1), 129-142.
  9. Anthony, P., & Sajed, S. I. (2017). Genre analysis of linguistics research introductions. University of Mindanao International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 2(1), 1-12.
  10. Arsyad, S. (2013). A genre-based analysis on the introductions of research articles written by Indonesian academics. TEFLIN Journal, 24(2), 180-200.
  11. Arsyad, S., & Adila, D. (2018). Using local style when writing in English: The citing behaviour of Indonesian authors in English research article introductions. Asian Englishes, 20(2), 170-185.
  12. Arsyad, S., & Arono. (2016). Potential problematic rhetorical style transfer from first language to foreign language: A case of Indonesian authors writing research article introductions in English. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 11(3), 315-330.
  13. Deveci, T. (2019). Sentence length in education research articles: A comparison between Anglophone and Turkish authors. Linguistics Journal, 13(1), pp, 73-100.
  14. Helal, F. (2014). Genres, styles and discourse communities in global communicative competition: The case of the Franco–American ‘AIDS War’(1983–1987). Discourse Studies, 16(1), 47-64.
  15. Lim, J. M.-H. (2012). How do writers establish research niches? A genre-based investigation into management researchers' rhetorical steps and linguistic mechanisms. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(3), 229-245.
  16. Lu, X., Casal, J. E., & Liu, Y. (2020). The rhetorical functions of syntactically complex sentences in social science research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 44, 100832.
  17. Mirahayuni, N. K. (2002). Investigating generic structure of English research articles: Writing strategy differences between English and Indonesian writers. TEFLIN Journal, 13(1), 22-57.
  18. Moreno, A. I. (2021). Selling research in RA discussion sections through English and Spanish: An intercultural rhetoric approach. English for Specific Purposes, 63, 1-17.
  19. Rochma, A. F., Triastuti, A., & Ashadi, A. (2020). Rhetorical styles of Introduction in English language teaching (ELT) research articles. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 304-314.
  20. Samanhudi, U. (2017). Introduction of research articles in applied linguistics by Indonesian and english academics. IRJE| Indonesian Research Journal in Education, 58-71.
  21. Sheldon, E. (2011). Rhetorical differences in RA introductions written by English L1 and L2 and Castilian Spanish L1 writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(4), 238-251.
  22. Suryani, I., Yaacob, A., & Abd Aziz, N. H. (2015). “Indicating a research gap” in computer science research article introductions by non-native English writers. Asian Social Science, 11(28), 293-302.
  23. Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
  24. Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge University Press.
  25. Verspoor, M., & Sauter, K. (2000). English sentence analysis: An introductory course. John Benjamins Publishing.
  26. Wang, W., & Yang, C. (2015). Claiming centrality as promotion in applied linguistics research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 162-175.
  27. Warsidi. (2021). Rhetorical Patterns of Indonesian Research Articles in Law and History Disciplines: A Genre-Based Analysis [Dissertation, University of New England, Australia].
  28. Warsidi, W. (2022). Genre analysis of English vs. Indonesian application letters. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 7(2), 419-435.
  29. Ye, Y. (2019). Macrostructures and rhetorical moves in energy engineering research articles written by Chinese expert writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 38, 48-61.
  30. Zhang, B., & Wannaruk, A. (2016). Rhetorical structure of education research article methods sections. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 51, 155-184.
  31. Zibalas, D., & Šinkūnienė, J. (2019). Rhetorical structure of promotional genres: The case of research article and conference abstracts. Discourse and Interaction, 12(2), 95-113.