The Persuasiveness of Research Abstracts through Analytical Thinking and Emotional Tone Domains in Academic Research Writing

Abstract

Analytical Thinking and Emotional Tone are two important psycholinguistic domains of the LIWC framework by Pennebaker, Boyd, Jordan, & Blackburn [12] LIWC framework. These domains were used to examine the perceptions on the unresolved issue of native and non-native English rhetoric in academic writing. The persuasiveness of these two domains was explored in the genre of research abstract compositions. One hundred and twenty Malaysian ESL respondents were sampled in this survey research to rate their perceptions of persuasiveness towards selected research abstracts in an adapted Persuasive Discourse Inventory (PDI) questionnaire. The selected research abstracts (RAs) were presented based on two criteria; 1) RAs with a standard usage of English nativeness versus non-nativeness, and 2) RAs with an over-usage or underusage of Analytical Thinking and Emotional Tone. It was found that RAs with non-native English rhetoric were more persuasive to ESL readers than RAs with native English in composing research abstracts, thus implying that native English rhetoric was apparently perceived as non-essential to ESL users in academic research writing. The persuasiveness of non-native English rhetoric was further evident through an over usage of elements related to Analytical Thinking and an under usage of elements related to Emotional Tone. Future research was recommended to explore the possible mediation of culture on the mismatch of perceptions between prior literature on the ESL writers' tendency to write with over usage of emotional tone compared to that of analytical Thinking because the ESL readers' perceptions in this research showed the opposite findings.