Chapter7ﻫDiscussionofResultsIntroductionThe FunctionsofaThesisDiscussion ofResultsSample Analysis of aMastersThesis Discussion of ResultsFrequentlyAskedQuestionsIntroductionInthischapter,wewillbeconsideringthe discussionof resultsasaseparatechapter from thepresentationof resultsand conclusionchapters.Some theses combinetheir presentationanddiscussionofresultsorfindingsinasinglechapter.Incontrast,sometheses combinethediscussionof resultsandconclusioninonechapter.Theadvantagesof haingacombinedchapter :itcan avoidrestatingtheresultswhenyoudiscussthem.itis mucheasierfor the readertofollowthedevelopmentof thethesis.Theapproachthatistakenis oftendetermined by discipinarypreferenceandthetypeofthesis thatis beingwritten.A discussionwithyoursupervisorwillassistyou in arrivingattheoption best suitedtotheresearchyou arereporting.Theapproachtakeninthischaptercanbeeasilyadapted tothechoice you make.Ifyoudecidetocombineyour presentationofresultswithyour discussion ofthoseresults,youwill mostlikelydevideyourresultsintomeaningful sections(e.g.according toresearchquestions/hypotheses,thematicormethodological foci)andpresentyourdiscussionofeachsection ofresultsimmediatelyaftereachsectionorpartsectionofresults thathasbeenpresented.Thesameapproachwouldapplyifyoudecidedtocombineyourdiscussion ofresultsandyourconclusion.Consideringnowthediscussionofresults asa singlechapter,webegin witha consideratonofthepurposeandfunctionsofthe chapterbeforelooking atarangeofmoveandsub-moveoptionsthatmightbe considered.The chapter willagain concludewith a discussion ofsomekeylingustic featuresof discussionchapters,some answersto frequentlyaskedquestons,further activitiesandsuggestionsfor furtherreading.Whatismeantby discussing aresult?Whenyou discussaresult,youshouldgobeyondtheresult andexpressyourownopinionsabouttheresult,i.e.yourpersonalspeculationon thereasonsfora result,yourjudgementonitssignificance,implications,andthe possible direction forfutureresearch,etc.Theessentialdifferencebetweenreporting aresultanddiscussing theresult isthat theformeris fact-driven whilethelatter is opinion-driven.However,youropinionsarenotwhateveryouhavethoughtaboutbuttheyshouldbebasedoneitherexistingtheories or previousstudiesorcommonsense.Therefore,indiscussion,referencesareindispensable.Usuallythediscussion goingtogetherwiththe reportof aresultcannotbe too long sincea lengthydiscussion willseparatethe answerstotheresearchquestionsanditwill distractthereader'sattention.Theelaborationof adiscussion,if itis necessary,can bemade inthelastchapterofConclusion.TheFunctionsof aThesis Discussion ofResultsThekeypurposeofthischapter istodiscuss themeaningandsignificanceoftheresults or findingsofthe research youarereporting.1.Anoverviewoftheaimsoftheresearchthatreferstotheresearchquestions or hypotheses2.A summary ofthetheoreticalandresearch contextsofthe study3.Asummaryofthemethodologicalapproachfor investigatingthe researchquestionsorhypotheses4.Adiscussionofthecontributionyoubelieve yourresultsorfindingshave madetotheresearchquestions orhypothesesandthereforetoexistingtheory,research andpractice(i.e.theirimportanceandsignificance)5.Thisdiscussionwilloftenincludeaninterpretation ofyourresults,acomparisonwithother research,an explanationofwhytheresultsoccurredasthey didandanevaluationoftheircontributiontothefieldof knowledgeThe Content and StructureofaThesis DiscussionofResultsMoves1.Provide background information2.Presentastatementofresult(SOR)3.Evaluate/commentonresults orfindingsSub-movesa.restatementofaims,researchquestionsandhypothesesb.restatementofkeypublishedresearchc.restatementof research/methodological approacha.restatementofakeyresultb.expandedstatement aboutakeyresulta.explanationof result—suggest reasonsforresultb.(un)expectedresultc.reference topreviousresearchd.exemplification—provideexamples ofresulte.deductionor claimf.supportfrompreviousresearchg.recommendationh.justificationforfurther researchSampleAnalysisof aMastersThesisDiscussionofResultsIntroduction to DisussionofResultsThischapter provides adetailedanalysisofkeyresearchfindingspresentedinchapter 4,withreference toeachoftheresearchquestions.Theresults ofthestudyare also discussedin relationtopreviousresearchstudies.The firstsection(Section5.2) discussestherelationship betweenself-reportWTCandWTCbehaviorinthethreeclassroomcontextsobserved. DifferencesobservedinWTCbehavior ineachofthecontexts,andvariationsinWTCover time,arediscussedin Sections5.3and5.4.Thefourthsection presentsthefactorsthatlearners perceived asbeingof mostimportanceinaffectingtheirWTCinclass.Thelastsectionisa briefsummaryofthechapter.Thisonealsoprovidesanadvanceorganizerofwhatis to bepresentedinthechapter.The authorbegins byexpainingthatherdiscussionwill beorganizedaroundthe fourresearchquestionsandthatitwillfocusonthe relationshipbetween her resultsandthose ofearlier researchstudies.Whilethisisanimportant feature ofadiscussionchapter,it should alsoreferto theother featursofthediscussion thatareincludedinthediscussionchpter.Theparagraphthenoutlines the focusof each section ofthe discussionchapter.ResearchQueston11.Thefirstresearchquestioninvestigatedtherelationshipbetweenself-reportWTC andWTCbehaviorinclass.2.Thisqueston relatestotheconceptofWTCasatrait variableor astatevariable.3.correlatonanalysis,indicatedthatself-reportWTCstronglypredicted WTCbehavioringroup works,whileself-reportWTCnegativelypredicatedWTC inthe whole class andpair work.4.Thestrongpositiverelatonshipbetweenself-reportWTCandWTCgroup workdemonstratedthatparticipants'self-report WTCwasconsistentwiththeir WTC behaviorin groupwork.5.However,participants'WTC behaviorinthe wholeclassandinpairwork contradicatedtheir WTC reported inthe questonnaire.Move1a(background)Move2a(SOR)Move2b(expansion)6.Resultsformanexaminationoftherelationshipbetweenself-reportWTC and WTCbehaviorinthreeclassroomcontexts onanindividual basis,were foundtobemixed(seeTable4.1).7.Forhalfoftheclass(Sherry,Jerry,RayandCathy),self-report WTCwas consistent with actualWTCbehaviorinclass,whereasfor theotherhalf(Erica,Sophie,AllanandJohn),self-reportWTCcontradicted classroomWTCbehavior.Move2a(SOR)Move2b(expansion)8.Itisinterestingto notethatErica,whoreportedhigh WTC inthequestionnaire,appearedtodemonstratelowWTCacrossthethreeclass situations,aswellas appearingtolackinterestinclass.9.She was observed tobe ratherquietandworkedonthetasksbyherselfmostofthetime.10.Sometimes theteacher had to callher toanswerquestions.11.Intheinterview,she attrivutedherextremelylow participation across all contextstothe classmateswhomshe seemedtobe unfamiliarwith,andsomeofwhom,toher,seemed tohave 'snatched'opportunitiesforcommunication.12.Forthislearner,WTC didindeedappeartobeinfluencedbylackof familiaritywithinterlocutorsandlack ofappropriate opportunitiestoparticipateinclass.13.Likewise,AllanandJohn,whoreportedhighWTC,seemedtoberelativelyquietintheclassroom.14.Bothdenonstrated lowwillingnesstocommunicate,particularlyin thewholeclasssituations.Move3d(illustration)Move3a(explanation)Move 3d(illustration)15.Thismayhavebeendue toanover-optimistic self-reportingof theirWTC,suggesting,perhaps,that theirself-report WTCwasin effectpaying'lipservice'to the survey,withoutactuallyhavingmadeanycommitmentto participateactively(DornyeiandKormos 2000:290).16.Inotherwords,theymayhavebeenconcerned aboutpresentingthemselvesfavorably,thuscauseing them torespondinaccurately.17.Anotherpossibleinterpretationcouldbe thatthey hadhightraitWTC,buttheymayhaveneededextraencouragement from theteacher,andmorecooperationfromtheirpeerclassmates,forthemtoparticitpatemore.18.Allanactuallyexpressedhis concernintheinterviewthattherewerenot any chancestotalkwhentheteachertalked mostofthetimeinthewholeclasssituation.Move3a(explanation)Move 3c(previousresearch)Move3a(explanation)19.Sophie,whobelongedto thegroup oflowWTCinself-report,onthe other hand,showedveryhighWTCinthe whole classandwasanequally activeparticipant in pairandgroupwork.20.Herself-reportWTCseemedtocontradictherclaimofherselfbeinggenerallyan extrovertedandtalkativeperson,apersonalitytraitwhichwasmanifested in her actualbehaviorinclass.21.The findingsaboveseemed toreveal thedualcharacteristicsofWTCproposed in previousstudies:thetrait-like WTCandthesituation-based WTC.22.MacIntyreet al'.s(1998:546) claim that WTCinL2 should not belimited toa trait-likevariablebuta‘situationalvariable withbothtransientandenduring influences’appeared tobe supportedbythefindingsofthisstudy.Move 3d(illustration)Move 3e(claim)Move3c(previousresearch)23.Itispossible, however,that learners' WTC behavior intheclass contextwasinfluencedbybothtrait-levelWTCand state-levelWTC.24.AsMacIntyreetal'.s(1999) haspointedout,trait WTCmaybringanindividualintosituationsinwhichcommunicationwaslikely,butoncein aparticularsituation,state WTCcouldinfluencewhether communication wouldtake place.25.MacIntyreandhis colleaguesarguedthat stateWTCpredictedandaffectedthe decisionto initiatecommunicationwithinaparticularsituation,shichmayexplainthediscrepancy betweenself-report WTCandWTCclassbehavioramonghalfoftheparticipantsinthepresentstudy.26.Althoughtheirtrait-levelWTCdetermined theirgeneraltendency incommunication,state-levelWTCappeared tohaveaparticularlystrong impactontheparticipants'communicationbehaviorinparticularclasscontext.27.Their state-levelWTCseedmed to beinfluencedby avarietyoffactors, whichwill bediscussedinSection5.5.Move 3e(claim)Move3f(previousresearch)Move3e(claim)28.The findingsoftherelationshipbetween self-reportWTCandWTCbehaviorinclassin thisstudydonotappeartofully supportthose ofChanand McCroskey(1987),inwhich observationaldataindicatedthatfewerof thestudentswho had lowscoreson theWTC scaleparticipatedin class, thanthosewhoscoredhighonthescale.29.InChanandMcCroskey'sstudy,more of the totalparticipationin classcame fromstudentswithhigh scoresthanfromstudents with lowscores. 30.Theythereforeconcluded thatclassparticipationmay beinlargemeasureafunctionof anindividual'sorentationtowardcommunication(traitWTC).31.The resultsofthecurrentstudy do notsupportthisconclusion.32.A possibleexplanationisthat ChanandMcCroskeyconsideredstudents' participationin class whereL1 insteadofL2wasused.33.This wouldmake thefindingsofthe presentstudynotcomparablewiththoseofChan and McCroskey's,sinceWTCinL2 wasunlikeytobe‘asimplemanifestationofWTC intheMove3b(unexpected)Move3c(previousresearch)Move3a(explanation)L1’MacIntyreetal'.s(1998:546).34.ItwasalsopossiblethatnotalllearnerswithhighWTCin thepresent studyexhibitedhighparticipation.35.Similar resultstothose ofChan andMcCroskeymayhavebeenfound hadthesamplesizebeenlarger.36.The findingsofthe presentstudy do,however, supportWeaver's(2004)conclusionthat students' WTCwithintheEFL classroom varied significantlyacrossdifferentspeaking situations andtasks.Move3b(unexpected)Move3c(previousresearch)37.Thefindingsalsolendsupport toMacIntyreetal'.s(2001a:377)acknowledgementofthe weakenssoftheself-reportquestionnnaireasa reliablemethod forexanimingstateWTC, because‘thinkingabout communication inthe L2isdifferentfromactuallydoing it’.38.While theirstudyfailedtofindanyevidence forthe existenceof statedWTCbyusingthe singlemethodofa self-reportsurvey,inthepresent study,stateWTCwas identified byobservationof WTCinthreeclassroom contexts.39.On this basis,structuredobservation isproposed asamoresuitable method fortheexaminationofstateWTC,a variabledifficulttoidentifybyusing asingleself-reporttechnique.Move3b(expected)Move3c(previous research)Moves3g&h(further research&justification)1.Sentences1-2:arestatementofthequestionbeingaddressed.2.Sentences3-7:astatement of resultis presentedwitha shortexpansion.3.Illustrationsofthestatementofresult arethen presented,firstthoserevealing thesame pattern—Erica(sentences 8-12) andAllen and John(sentences13-18)—and thenanillustrationoftheoppositepatternSophie(sentences19-20).4.Inprestentingthefirstgroupofillustrations,explanationsare alsooffered.Previousresearchwasreferredtoonceinorder tosupporttheexplanation being given.5.As aresultoftheseillustrationsof thestatementofresult,furtherclaimsare made(sentences21-27)and thesearesupportedwithreference topreviousresearch.6.theextentto which theresultswere expected orunexpectedinlightof previousresearchisthenconsidered(sentences28-38).Firsttheauthorconsiderstheresearchthather resultsdonotsupport(sentences28-35) and,in doingso,offerssomeexplanations(sentences32-35).Then she refers tostudiesthat dosupportherresults(sentences26-38).7.Thediscussioncloseswitha recommendation and justificationforfurtherresearch(sentences 39).8.Theauthorthenmovesontodiscussher results forthesecond reserarchquestion.However,wewillfocus ourattentionnowonpartof herdiscussionoftheresults forresearchquestion 4.ResearchQuestion4Researchquestion 4 investigatedthefactorsthatcouldhaveaninfluence onwillingnesstocommunicatebehaviourinclass.In aseparate sub-sectionforeachfactor,the authorconsidersarangeofvariables.Theseare identified in her introductiontothediscussionof question4results.Oncewe have looked atthisintroducition,we willfocusourattentionon herdiscussionoftwo ofthesefactors(mediunofcommunication andculturalinfluences).1.Previousstudies havefoundthatfactorssuchasmotivation,attitudes,perceivedcompetenceand languageanxietyplayedaroleindeterminingwillingnesstocommunicateandactualcommunicativebehavior.2.Culturacontextwasalso confirmedby empirical studies ashavingan impactontherelationship between WTCandits antecedents.3.Thesefactorswereidentified bymeans ofself-report data.4.This study,however,managedtodistinguishanumber offactorsthatappearedtoaffectlearners'WTCinvariousclasssituationsfrombothself-report dataandlearners'perceptionsfromtheparticipant interviews.5.Thesefactorsincluded:numberof interlocutor(s) inaparticularcontxt,familiaritywithinterlocutor(s),interlocutor(s)' task performance,faniliarity withandinterest intopicsunderdiscussion intasks,tasktypesforpair/groupwork,mediunofcommunicationandparticipants' culturalbackgrounds.Mediumofcommunication1.WhetherL1 orL2wasusedasthe mediumofcommunicationalsoapperedtoexertan influenceon learners' WTC.2.AsMacIntyreet al'.s(1998:546)havesuggested,thedifferencesbetweenL1and L2 WTC maybedueto‘theuncertaintyinherentinL2use’,andthe leveloflinguisticcompetencycanbe one differentiating factorexisting in L1 andL2WTC.3.Inthis study,Jerrynoted thatalackoflinguisticcompetencein L2 inhibitedcommunication,butwhenL1was used,such aproblem wasnot present.4.Cathyalsoconsidereda lackoflexicalresoucesinL2asa factoraffectingherperceivedcompetence,whichin turninfluencedwillingnesstocommunicateattimes.5.ThisseemstosupportHouse's(2004) claimthat lackofactual lingustic competenceinL2 canprevent communication.Move2a(SOR)Move3a(explanation)Move3d(exemplification)Move3b&c(expectedresult&previous research)6.Differencesin L1andL2WTCwerealsodetectedin taskengagementinpairwork.7.DornyeiandKormos(2000)foundthatlearners'relationshipswiththeirinterlocutorhad aconsiderableimpactontheextentoftheirengagementin thetaskinL1,but thisrelationshipfailed to emergeinanL2task.8.TheysuggestedthatwhenL2was usedasthe mediumofcommunication,thechallengeof tryingtoexpressone'sthoughtsusingalimitedlinguisticcode inadditiontodecodingtheinterlocutor'sutterances,creatd anemotionalstatedifferentfromthecommunicationmodeinL1,whichmay‘alterone'sperceptions oftheconstraints oftheinteracion’(ibid.293).9.Differences in WTCinpairworkinbothL1and L2were,however,beyondthescopeofthisstudyand were not,as aconsequence,examined.10.Itappearstobeanotherareaforfurtherresearch.Move2a(SOR)Move3c(previousresearch)Moves3a&c(explanation&previousresearch)Move 3g(furtherresearch)Culturalinfluences1.Kubotahasarguedthat‘thewaypeople think,speak,writeandbehave iscertainlyinfluencedbythe cultureinwhichtheyarebrought up,and certainlyculturaldifferenceindeedexists’(1999:15).2.Asdiscussed inthepreviouschapter,empiricalstudieshaveshownthatthecultural contexthasanimpactonWTC,andWTCvariesgreatlyacrosscultures.3.Although thesestudieswereassociatedwithWTC inL1,itseemed one's cultural background alsoexercisedan effectonone'sWTCin L2.4.Atleast onelearnervoiced thispointof view in thisstudy.Move1b(background)Move2a(SOR)5.Ray mentionedthe influenceof his home culture on hiswillingnessto communicateandrelativelylowlevelofcommunicationinwholeclasssituations.6.RaycamefromJapan,acountrywhoseculture initsdiscourseischaracterizedbycollectivism,which promotesconformityto groupgoalsand homogeneity,theoppositeface ofwhich isthediscouragementofindividualdiversityand creativety(Kublta1999:20;Cheng2000).7.Culturalnorms inJapando notvaluetalkativeness,andJapanesegenerallytendnotbo beouspoken(McCrosskeyetal.1985).8.It hasbeencited inthe literaturethatthisperceived reticencewasduetoConfucian influences(Cheng2000).9.Rayattributedhisrelativequietnessinthewholeclass tothisculturalinfluencerooted deeply inhim.10.Heregarded itasinappropriatetovolunteeranswerswithout beingcalleduponbyteacher.11.This attitudeseemsto supportTsui's(1996)claimthatthereappearedtobea widespreadphenomenoninHongKongschoolsMove 3d(exemplification)Move3c(previousresearch)Moves3a&c(explanation&previous research)Move3d(exemplification)Move 3b&c(expected &previousresearch)thatstudentswouldnottake theinitiativeto volunteeranswersuntilthey werecalled uponbytheteachertodo so.12.Itwasaninterestingpointthat Raymadeof himself,ofnotwantingtoberegardedasbeingtalkativeorattractingtheteacher'sattentionbyhispeers.13.Heseemed tobeawareofhisrelationswithothers in the socialprocessof conducting himself(WenandClement2003) ashetriedtoavoid negative evaluationfromhispeers(Tsui1996).14.Thisconcern hefeltabout the judgementofthepeersuponhisWTCbehavior inclasscausedhimbo becomelesslikeslytogetinvolvedinwholeclasscommnications. 15.Althoughfor particularlearnerssuchanRay,WTC seemedtoreflecttheinfluence ofhishome culture,it wasnotpossible todrawanypatternbetween culturalbackgroundandWTCbehavior inclassin thisstudy,giventhesmallsamplesize;anditwasnot aresearch questionaddressedinthisstudy.Moves3a&d(explanation&exemplification)Moves3a,c,d(explanation,previousresearch,exemplification)Moves3a&d(explanation&exemplification)Move3e&g(impliedhypothesisfor furtherresearch)Conclusion1.Thischapterhassummarizedthe present study's findings,anddiscussedthemwithreferencetoeach oftheresearchquestions.2.Theresultshavealsobeenconsidered inrelationtorelevantprevious studies.3.The studyconfirmedthat WTCinL2 possessesdualcharacteristics:atrait-levelWTCandastate-level WTC.4.It suggestedthattraitWTCmaydetermine an individual'sgeneraltendencyto initiate communicationwould take place.5.Beinga situational-basedvariable,WTC inL2 was foundtobe subjecttochangeacrosssituationsandovertime.6.Itsupportedthe claimthatasingleself-report methodwas notappropriatetoexaminestateWTC,avariabledetected bytheobservationalmethodemployedinthis study.7.Structuredclassroomobservationwasthus proposedtobe amoresuitablemethodfortheexaminationof state WTCin class,avariablediffcultto identify byusingasingle self-reportmethod.8.Resultsfrom thisstudypointedtoanumberoffactorsthat participantsperceivedasbeingofmostimportanceininfluencingtheirWTC behaviorinthreeclassroomcontexts.9.Thesefactors included:numberofinterlocutor(s)ina particularcommunicativecontext,faliliaritywithinterlocutor(s),interlocutor(s)' task performance,self-confidenceincommunication,falimiarity with andinterestintopicsunderdiscussion,task typesfor pair/groupwork,medium of communicationandinfluenceof participants' culturalbackgrounds.SomeKeyLinguisticFeaturesofa ThesisDiscussionofResultsAsyou discussthe significance ofyourfindings in lightof the bigpicture(theliteratureyoupresentedinyour literature review chapter),there will be occasionswhenyoucanbequiteassertiveabout thesignificanceand contribution ofyourfindingstothefieldyouareworking within and occasionswhenyouneedtobemoretentativeintheclaims thatyou make.Whilecareneedstobe taken,youshouldnot shyawayfrom claiming thataparticularfindingsupportsordoesnotsupport existing researchandknowledgeif it does.In thediscussion chapter,y
本文档为【学术论文写作指导(Discussion of Results)【优质PPT】】,请使用软件OFFICE或WPS软件打开。作品中的文字与图均可以修改和编辑,
图片更改请在作品中右键图片并更换,文字修改请直接点击文字进行修改,也可以新增和删除文档中的内容。
该文档来自用户分享,如有侵权行为请发邮件ishare@vip.sina.com联系网站客服,我们会及时删除。
[版权声明] 本站所有资料为用户分享产生,若发现您的权利被侵害,请联系客服邮件isharekefu@iask.cn,我们尽快处理。
本作品所展示的图片、画像、字体、音乐的版权可能需版权方额外授权,请谨慎使用。
网站提供的党政主题相关内容(国旗、国徽、党徽..)目的在于配合国家政策宣传,仅限个人学习分享使用,禁止用于任何广告和商用目的。