Investigating the Implementation of IMRaD Structure in Abstracts of Undergraduate Students' Theses
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32332/joelt.v11i2.7144Keywords:
Abstract, Undergraduate Thesis, IMRaD structureAbstract
The IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) structure is a crucial framework for organizing information in abstract writing, enabling clear and effective communication of research findings. Hence, this research aims to analyze the adherence of undergraduate students to the IMRaD structure in their thesis abstracts. The study focuses on students who graduated from a private university in 2019. A sample of 77 from 326 thesis abstracts was selected from the population using the simple random sampling technique. Data collection involved a document review technique. The result shows that among the 77 students, all abstracts included the Introduction section, indicating a high level of adherence. However, the Method and Results sections were found in the abstracts of only 70 students, suggesting a relatively lower compliance rate. Surprisingly, the Discussion section was present in the abstracts of only 31 students, representing the lowest adherence to the IMRaD structure. This research reveals a need for interventions to enhance undergraduate students' understanding and implementation of the IMRaD structure in their thesis abstracts. Therefore, lecturers and institutions should provide guidance and support to improve students' adherence to this important academic writing convention. By enhancing students' proficiency in applying the IMRaD structure, their thesis abstracts can become more effective and aligned with scholarly standards.
References
10.14569/IJACSA.2019.0100231
Cusen, G. (2018). “Borders” in the writing of academic texts: Investigating informativeness in academic journal abstracts. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae Philologica, 10 (2), 141- 154. https://doi.org/10.2478/ausp-2018-0019
Dubova, A., Egle, B., Proveja, E. (2020). IMRaD usage in Latvian language research papers. Proceedings of CBU in Social Sciences, 1, 33-39. https://doi.org/10.12955/pss.v1.42
Dumai, J., & Cai, L. (2015). Using content analysis as a research methodology for investigating intellectual capital disclosure: A critique. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16(1), 121-155. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-04-2014-0043
Fahuzul, M., Ulfah, B., Surayatika, D. (2022). The Correlation Between grammar mastery and writing ability of the eighth grade students. ULIL ALBAB: Jurnal Ilmiah Multidisiplin,1(12), 4394-4403. https://doi.org/10.56799/jim.v1i12.1098
Gjesdal, A.M. (2013). The influence of genre constraints on author representation in medical research articles: The French indefinite pronoun on in IMRAD research articles. Discours,12. https://doi.org/10.4000/discours.8770
Jamar, N., Sauperl, A., Bawden, D. (2014). The components of abstracts: The logical structure of abstracts in the areas of materials science and technology and of library and information science, New Library World, 115 (1), 15-33. https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-09-2013-0069
Malini, N. (2022). A generic structure of thesis abstracts written by undergraduate students. Buana Pendidikan, 18 (2), 174-182. https://doi.org/10.36456/bp.vol18.no2.a5274
Masic, I. (2018). How to write an efficient discussion?. Journal of the Academy of Medical Sciences, 72(4), 306-307. https://doi.org/10.5455%2Fmedarh.2018.72.306-307
Moerdisuroso, I., & Kherid, Z.Y.A. (2020). Thesis writing model of art practice. International Journal of Creative and Arts Studies, 7 (1), 61-75. https://doi.org/10.24821/ijcas.v7i1.4162
Moskovitz, C., Harmon, B., Saha, S. (2023). The structure of scientific writing: An empirical analysis of recent research articles in STEM. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 0(0), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047281623117185
Oriokot, L., Buwembo, W., & Munabi, I., Kijjambu, S.C. (2011). The introduction, methods, results and discussion (IMRAD) structure: A survey of its use in different authoring partnerships in a students' journal. BMC Research notes, 4 (250), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-4-250
Shah, J.N. (2020). Science of writing for publication in scientific journals: Steps and resources. Journal of Patan Academy of Health Sciences, 7 (3), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.3126/jpahs.v7i3.33730
Siyaswati, S.,& Rochmawati, D. (2017). Rhetorical Perspectives of undergraduate students’ thesis abstracts. Register Journal, 10(2), 157-169. https://doi.org/10.18326/rgt.v10i2.157-169
Teodosiu, M. (2019). Scientific writing and publishing with IMRaD. Journal of Foresty and Environmental Sciences, 53 (1). https://doi.org/10.15287/afr.2019.1759
Trinh TPT, Tran T, Nguyen T, Nghiem TT, Danh NN. Comparative analysis of national and international educational science articles in Vietnam: Evidence from the introduction, methods, results, and discussion structure. European Journal of Educational Researc, 9(3), 1367-1376. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.3.1367
Vyas, H. A., & Panara, K. (2016). Tantraguna – the ancient criteria for scientific writing. An International Quarterly Journal of Research in Ayurveda, 37 (3), 158-162.https://doi.org/10.4103/ayu.ayu_25_16
