PB2A

What makes a scholarly academic research paper different from a regular essay? A magazine article? A children’s book? The conventions and rhetoric used make these papers one-of-a-kind. By analyzing two different sources — an actual scholarly research paper and a paper created by a generator — we can explore these conventions and understand which are the most important in this genre. 

The scholarly research paper that I analyzed was about Tourette’s syndrome. It was titled “Dual Regulating Effect of Ningdong Granule on Extracellular Dopamine Content of Two Kinds of Tourette's Syndrome Rat Models”. Just like the papers from the SCI Generator, the title was confusing and contained many words that I had to look up. For example, one of the randomly generated papers was titled “On the Essential Unification of 32 Bit Architectures and IPv7”. There were multiple authors of the Tourette’s paper, all of which were listed under the title. In scholarly research papers, multiple authors can be highly beneficial to the overall work. There are ideas from multiple different sources instead of one, which establishes Ethos. 

The tone and intended audience are the most important conventions to be aware of when writing or reading a research paper. The tone of the Tourette’s paper, like those papers from the SCI generator, was very formal and informative. Formality is what the intended audience, which is colleagues who peer-review the essay, and then other scholars and well-educated people interested in the same field of study, expect to see when reading this kind of paper. Diction was important in maintaining this tone — high vocabulary was a major convention that made it all the more formal. Correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation furthered the formality as well. The authors wrote as formally and intelligently as they pleased, because their intended audience knew the subject well and most likely had experience in that particular line of research. 

The Tourette’s research began with a summary, while the SCI generator papers began with an abstract. Like an abstract, a summary gives a reader information on the paper and prepares them for what they are about to read. However, an abstract is meant to interest a reader enough for them to want to read the rest of the paper. The Tourette’s research began with a summary instead of an abstract because the authors assumed that their audience was already interested in what they had researched and discovered.

Both the paper on Tourette’s and the generated paper followed a certain format. Not only does this add to the formality of the paper, but helps its organization and structure as well. The reader has a much easier time understanding and retaining the information presented because it is split up into different sections. Each section has a heading, which tells the reader what they will be reading about and allows them to find a specific section of the work if needed. Some of these headings include introduction, results, and materials and methods. The scholarly research paper also includes subheadings, which break up the information even further. One example of this is the subheading “DTA Protein Expression in Striatum”. The papers are composed of multiple paragraphs, many of them beginning with transitional words that keep the paper flowing.

Both papers included graphs and tables, which help the reader to see the information in a different way. The figures are explained in a few sentences right beneath, offering the reader some insight into the significance of each table. 

The authors of the scholarly research paper appealed to Ethos once more when they used direct evidence from different sources. Like the paper from the SCI generator, they also listed all of their references at the very end of the paper, which allows the reader to determine whether or not it is a credible source.

Because the Tourette’s paper is an actual research project, it was much more involved and detailed than any of the papers created by the SCI generator. But besides this and the subject of the paper, there weren't many differences between the two. The conventions of a research paper are consistent enough that a scholarly research project and fake paper created using a generator contained similarities in almost every aspect of writing.