Kendra Twist

Fahler

Writing 2

3, May 2020

Writing Project 1

Identifying and Comparing Genre Conventions in Academic

Writing
 Context and function are two key components within writing that defines a piece of work

while categorizing it into a genre. Genres become important when dictating who the audience

may be by conforming to a certain format or abiding by a certain structure within the writing.

Using this sort of methodology in literary works can categorize the arguments and thoughts of

the author to follow an accepted format based on the discipline of which they are writing from.

This allows for, “members to keep in touch with each other, carry on discussions, explore

controversies, and advance their aims; genres are their vehicles for communication”(Johns 565)

when exploring various texts within a genre. This idea will be explored in this paper by

analyzing writings from the academic disciplines of psychology and philosophy and how they

chose to discuss the topic of meditation. Both disciplines have similar views on meditation in

their chosen articles, however their differences are most apparently expressed by the changes of

writing style and formatting in the articles.

When analyzing the article written by the psychology discipline, there is already a

prevalent format which the writing takes. Being a more science-based viewpoint, Campos’

article serves to prove meditational benefits by conducting an experiment using various subjects

to explain their findings including charts and data analysis throughout the writing. These are

simply a few aspects which make the article fit into the discipline it is writing in. The article

itself doesn’t contain any use of creative diction as its sole purpose is to provide the reader with

clear evidence based on their discoveries, “the frequency of meditation practice is related to the

levels of dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion and happiness” Campos (2016) proving that

the diction remains formal throughout the article as there is no need to give creative explanation.

This quotation exemplifies the scientific form of writing style which the whole article is written

in, expressing the idea that different disciplines conform to certain formats which help define
their argument. The words ‘frequency’ or ‘dispositional mindfulness’ prove to connect this genre

to the discipline it belongs to. This idea of diction use is best is expressed in Academic

Arguments, stating, “some academic writing is clearly aimed at specialists in a field who are

familiar with both the subject and the terminology that surrounds it” Lunsford et al. exemplifying

the purpose of the psychology article and the audience it is meant for. While it does provide

interesting information regarding meditation to the reader, the research motivating the article

shows that it is also aimed for specialists in this field of study. This is shown as the formatting

and careful use of word choice dictate who the audience is.

The article under the philosophy discipline undergoes research as well, but it takes a

more theory based approach instead of conducting an experiment containing scientific evidence.

The format of the article obtains no graphs or charts, moreover simply explaining the benefits of

meditation by describing the theory and practice of it. This itself is already a noticable difference

between the two articles by using physical research versus outside sources to discuss and analyze

the topic. Bitbol references different scholarly articles using the “sources as the Upanishads and

the Advaita Vedânta, as well as Yogacâra and Mâdhyamika Buddhism, is rich, accurate,

scholarly” Bitbol (2015) to analyze each of those authors approach to meditation. Mentioning

outside sources is a convention in this genre of writing as other articles are needed to help

convey the author’s argument. Unlike the writing style of the psychology article, the author of

the philosophy article writes using more of an input of their opinion throughout the piece,

“objective knowledge should be traced in lived experience” when describing his theory of

meditative outcomes. Expressing thought this way suits this academic discipline’s expectations

of writing as it is a humanities based research that creates arguments out of theory rather than
scientific evidence. One would expect an article as this, developed with the displayed standards

of context and format, to be found in this genre’s style of writing.

After reading both of the articles all the way through, it is apparent that they are both

arguing for the same idea. Where they differ is by the way they chose to explain evidence and

formatting in the article to show the different methods of research. In a more scientific field of

study, “the focus is on the subject or topic rather than the authors, the tone is straightforward, the

language is largely unadorned” Lunsford et al. (382) which was shown in the psychology article

discussed above. The writing styles displayed are the most different between the two articles.

The psychology article examined and explained their methods of testing their theory with science

while providing the reader with an in-depth understanding of the question they were choosing to

challenge. The philosophy article still provides the reader with lots of knowledge about the

research, but it mostly just references outside sources and compiles them to help present the

argument. Using these carefully selected ways of writing proves the idea that writing style plays

a large role in dictating who the audience may be and categorizing it into a discipline.

A more obvious difference between the two academic pieces would be how they both

were chosen to be organized and formatted. The classic scientific approach was demonstrated by

the psychology article providing a thesis, method, and evidence to show the reasoning behind the

research. The philosophy approach was to provide a thesis with sources followed by a detailed

analysis of each throughout the piece of writing to demonstrate an argument with some more of

the author’s input. Lunsford’s argument brings forward the idea of understanding who the

audience is when writing an article, as it can help the tone and format of the piece. This is an

important idea to note in this type of analysis as the audience seems to dictate the organization of

the article, based on the discipline it was. Both of these writings demonstrated this as they
appeal to a certain audience and synthesize information based on their given academic

background.

After giving much thought and analysis to each article, both contain many other obvious

differences other than simply the writing style and format which they take. They both serve the

same function, however the audiences and differentiation of argumentation also help place these

works of writing into the desired disciplines. Whether it is by means of analyzing data or other

scholarly sources from different authors, these sort of choices help appropriately categorize these

writings into their own genre. By studying both writings, I learned how the structure and

function of an article can even help dictate a desired audience. It is interesting to analyze the

purpose of each written article while deciphering why a certain discipline writes this way. Much

of this analysis goes to show how a simple change in style or format has more complexity than

one would think, by means of categorizing works of writing into its own academic community.
 Works Cited

Bitbol, M. (2015). Waking, Dreaming, Being: Self and Consciousness in Neuroscience,

Meditation, and Philosophy. Retrieved April 27, 2020, from https://www-jstor-

org.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:9443/stable/pdf/43854365.pdf?

refreqid=excelsior:328c72cca1d5f80f0dd2194d6c90d30a

Campos, D. et al. (2016). Meditation and Happiness: Mindfulness and Self-compassion May

Mediate the Meditation–happiness Relationship. Retrieved April 27, 2020, from

https://www-sciencedirect-

com.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:9443/science/article/pii/S0191886915005450?via=ihub

Johns, A. M. (n.d.). Discourse Communities and Communities of Practice. Retrieved April 27,

2020, from

https://gauchospace.ucsb.edu/courses/pluginfile.php/6162286/mod_resource/content/1/Jo

hns, Discourse communities.pdf

Lunsford et al. (n.d.). Academic Arguments . Retrieved April 27, 2020, from

https://gauchospace.ucsb.edu/courses/pluginfile.php/7925168/mod_resource/content/1/Lu

nsford et al. 2016, ch17.pdf