Discussion of results in original research: Rhetorical moves and their implementation

Abstract

The Discussion section in the manuscript of an original empirical study is the most creative and challenging part to construct. Incorrect discussion of results in many manuscripts submitted to scientific journals often leads to their rejection, even if the results themselves hold potential significance for the scientific community. The absence or poor quality of interpretation of results by the authors can negatively affect the overall perception of the study by readers. The most complete functional implementation of the Discussion section is achieved by adhering to its rhetorical structure. The purpose of this article is to analyze the functions, content, and rhetorical organization of the Discussion section of an original empirical study. The main function of the Discussion section is to interpret and explain the significance of the study’s results, highlight the current state of knowledge on the stated problem, and explain new aspects arising from the results obtained. Authors also need to specify the external validity of the data and demonstrate how these data can be generalized. The most effective way to implement the stated function is by relying on a model of the interdisciplinary rhetorical structure of the Discussion section, which can be modified according to the conventions of the discipline and the characteristics of the specific study. Depending on the study’s logic, certain rhetorical moves or steps of the structure may be omitted; however, a more comprehensive list of moves provides a more thorough interpretation of the results. Understanding the content of each move and its steps allows authors to present all necessary information regarding the obtained results in a way that ensures their objective and unambiguous perception by readers.