CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 352Discourse Analysis in Language StudiesDoctoral Education Challenges and SolutionsAcademic Writing and Publishing

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section

Bitchener, John, Basturkmen, Helen·2006·Journal of English for Academic Purposes
DOI 10.1016/j.jeap.2005.10.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jeap.2005.10.002

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Postgraduate EFL students struggle significantly with the literature review component of theses, particularly in their ability to synthesise sources critically rather than merely describe them.

    “Bitchener and Basturkmen (2006) found that postgraduate EFL students struggle significantly with the literature review component of theses, particularly in their ability to synthesise sources critically rather than merely describe them.”

    From Challenges in Undergraduate Research Proposal Writing: Evidence from a Capstone Course (2026) · cites this paper as Bitchener and Basturkmen (2006)

  • There remains a conspicuous gap in the literature specifically examining the proposal-writing challenges of Arab EFL undergraduates at this level.

    “Despite this growing institutional emphasis, there remains a conspicuous gap in the literature specifically examining the proposal-writing challenges of Arab EFL undergraduates at this level.”

    From Challenges in Undergraduate Research Proposal Writing: Evidence from a Capstone Course (2026) · cites this paper as Bitchener & Basturkmen, 2006

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 27

  1. Allison, 1998, Dissertation writing in action: The development of a dissertation writing support program for ESL graduate research students, English for Specific Purposes, 17, 199, 10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00011-2 · DOI
  2. Basturkmen, H., & Bitchener, J. (in press). The text and beyond: Exploring the expectations of the academic community for the Discussion of Results section in Masters thesis. New Zealand Studies in Applied Linguistics.
  3. Belcher, 1994, The apprenticeship approach to advanced academic literacy: Graduate students and their mentors, English for Specific Purposes, 13, 23, 10.1016/0889-4906(94)90022-1 · DOI
  4. Braine, 1989, Writing in science and technology: An analysis of assignments from ten undergraduate courses, English for Specific Purposes, 8, 3, 10.1016/0889-4906(89)90003-3 · DOI
  5. Brett, 1994, A genre analysis of the results section of sociology articles, English for Specific Purposes, 13, 47, 10.1016/0889-4906(94)90024-8 · DOI
  6. Cadman, 1997, Thesis writing for international students: A question of identity?, English for Specific Purposes, 16, 3, 10.1016/S0889-4906(96)00029-4 · DOI
  7. Casanave, 1992, The writing assignments and writing problems of doctoral students: Faculty perceptions, pedagogical issues, and needed research, English for Specific Purposes, 11, 33, 10.1016/0889-4906(92)90005-U · DOI
  8. Cooley, 1995, The writing needs of graduate students at the University of Hong Kong: A project report, Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching, 18, 121
  9. Cooley, 1997, Developing awareness of the rhetorical and linguistic conventions of writing a thesis in English: Addressing the needs of ESL/EFL postgraduate students, 113
  10. Dong, 1998, Non-native graduate students' thesis/dissertation writing in science: Self-reports by students and their advisors from two US institutions, English for Specific Purposes, 17, 369, 10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00054-9 · DOI
  11. Dudley-Evans, 1999, The dissertation: A case of neglect?, 28
  12. Gale, 1994, Conversing across cultural boundaries: Rewriting ‘self’, Journal of Advanced Composition, 14, 455
  13. Golombek, 1998, A study of language teachers' personal practical knowledge, TESOL Quarterly, 32, 447, 10.2307/3588117 · DOI
  14. Hinkel, 2003, Simplicity without elegance: Features of sentences in L1 and L2 academic texts, TESOL Quarterly, 37, 275, 10.2307/3588505 · DOI
  15. Hirvela, 2001, Coming back to voice: The multiple voices and identities of mature multilingual writers, Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 83, 10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00038-2 · DOI
  16. Jenkins, 1993, The role of writing in graduate engineering education: A survey of faculty beliefs and practices, English for Specific Purposes, 12, 51, 10.1016/0889-4906(93)90027-L · DOI
  17. Johns, 1993, Written argumentation for real audiences: Suggestions for teacher research and classroom practices, TESOL Quarterly, 27, 75, 10.2307/3586952 · DOI
  18. J. Lantolf (Ed.) (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  19. O'Connell, F., & Jin L. (2001). A structural model of literature review: An analysis of Chinese postgraduate students' writing. Paper presented at BALEAP conference, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK.
  20. Paltridge, 2002, Thesis and dissertation writing: An examination of published advice and actual practice, English for Specific Purposes, 21, 125, 10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00025-9 · DOI
  21. Parry, 1998, Disciplinary discourse in doctoral education, Higher Education, 36, 273, 10.1023/A:1003216613001 · DOI
  22. Prior, 1994, Response, revision, disciplinarity. A microhistory of a dissertation prospectus in sociology, Written Communication, 11, 483, 10.1177/0741088394011004003 · DOI
  23. Samaraj, 2002, Introductions in research articles: Variations across disciplines, English for Specific Purposes, 21, 1, 10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00023-5 · DOI
  24. Shen, 1989, The classroom and the wider culture: Identity as a key to learning English composition, College Composition and Communication, 40, 459, 10.2307/358245 · DOI
  25. Silva, 1994, Writing instruction for ESL graduate students: Examining issues and raising questions, ELT Journal, 48, 197, 10.1093/elt/48.3.197 · DOI
  26. Starfield, 2003, The evolution of a thesis-writing course for arts and social sciences students: What can applied linguistics offer?, Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8, 137
  27. Williams, 1999, Results sections of medical research articles: Analysis of rhetorical categories for pedagogical purposes, English for Specific Purposes, 18, 347, 10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00003-9 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bitchener, J., & Basturkmen, H.
Affiliations
Auckland University of Technology (NZ)
Corresponding author
Bitchener, John
Venue
Journal of English for Academic Purposes
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-01
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
4-18
ISSN
1475-1585 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jeap.2005.10.002
OpenAlex
W2026587808
Cited by
352
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 23
FWCI
72.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
Journal of English for Academic Purposes (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Hong Kong
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Doctoral Education Challenges and Solutions
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Writing and Publishing
Keywords
second language writing, discussion section, student perceptions, supervisor perceptions, academic writing difficulties, second language proficiency, supervisor-student relationship

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review