1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of English for Research Publication Purposes
  4. Volume 6, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 6, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2590-0994
  • E-ISSN: 2590-1001
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Self-reference plays an important role in academic writing since it reflects the identity of the authors and may also serve as an indicator of authorial presence. This study investigates the diachronic change in self-reference by conducting a quantitative analysis of 23 self-reference markers in a 10-million-word corpus comprising research articles published in from 1997 to 2021. The analysis also compares the diachronic change of self-reference in both abstracts and full texts. Our diachronic analysis reveals three salient trends: (1) divergent patterns between abstracts and full texts, with abstracts demonstrating higher authorial presence overtime; (2) a significant increase in first-person plural pronouns and determiners (we/our/us/ours), particularly prominent in abstracts; (3) a significant rise of third-person noun phrases (i.e., the author) and inanimate noun phrases (i.e., this study), particularly in full texts; does not read well. Such shifts in authorial presence may have evolved as a promotional discourse strategy. Finally, the findings of this study yield both empirical and pedagogical implications.

© 2025 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.24011.wei
2025-12-04
2026-01-13

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.24011.wei
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Batres-Prieto, V., & Abbas, A.
    (2025) Self-mentions in design area disciplines: A corpus analysis. Heliyon, 11(1), e41200. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e41200
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e41200 [Google Scholar]
  2. Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R.
    (1998) Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511804489
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804489 [Google Scholar]
  3. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
    (1999) Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Pearson.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Brezina, V., Weill-Tessier, P., & McEnery, A.
    (2020) #LancsBox (Version 5.x) [Computer software]. Lancaster University. corpora.lancs.ac.uk/lancsbox
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Can, T., & Cangır, H.
    (2019) A corpus-assisted comparative analysis of self-mention markers in doctoral dissertations of literary studies written in Turkey and the UK. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 421, 100796. 10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100796
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100796 [Google Scholar]
  6. Çandarlı, D., Bayyurt, Y., & Martı, L.
    (2015) Authorial presence in L1 and L2 novice academic writing: Cross-linguistic and cross-cultural perspectives. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 201, 192–202. 10.1016/j.jeap.2015.10.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cao, X., Lei, L., & Wen, J.
    (2020) Promoting science with linguistic devices: A large-scale study of positive and negative words in academic writing. Learned Publishing, 34(2), 82–88. 10.1002/leap.1322
     https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1322 [Google Scholar]
  8. Chen, R.
    (2020) Single author self-reference: Identity construction and pragmatic competence. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 451, 100856. 10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100856
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100856 [Google Scholar]
  9. Deng, L., Cheng, Y., & Gao, X.
    (2024) Promotional strategies in English and Chinese research article introduction and discussion/conclusion sections: A cross-cultural study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 681, 101344. 10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101344
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101344 [Google Scholar]
  10. Dong, J., Du, K., & Buckingham, L.
    (2024) Author self-reference: A cross-linguistic/cultural and cross-disciplinary analysis. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 681, 101352. 10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101352
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101352 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dontcheva-Navratilova, O.
    (2023) Self-mention in L2 (Czech) learner academic discourse: Realisations, functions and distribution across master’s theses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 641, 101272. 10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101272
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101272 [Google Scholar]
  12. Flowerdew, L.
    (2004) The argument for using English specialized corpora to understand academic and professional language. InU. Connor & T. Upton (Eds.), Discourse in the professions: Perspectives from corpus linguistics (pp.11–33). John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.16.02flo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.16.02flo [Google Scholar]
  13. Gao, X.
    (2018) A cross-disciplinary corpus-based study on English and Chinese native speakers’ use of first person pronouns in academic English writing. Text & Talk, 38(1), 93–113.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Gillaerts, P., & Van de Velde, F.
    (2010) Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 128–139. 10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.004 [Google Scholar]
  15. Harwood, N.
    (2005a) “We do not seem to have a theory…the theory I present here attempts to fill this gap”: Inclusive and exclusive pronouns in academic writing. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 343–375. 10.1093/applin/ami012
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami012 [Google Scholar]
  16. (2005b) “Nowhere has anyone attempted…In this article I aim to do just that”: A corpus-based study on self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics, 371, 1207–1231. 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.01.012
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.01.012 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2006) (In)appropriate personal pronoun use in political science: A qualitative study and a proposed heuristic for future research. Written Communication, 23(4), 424–450. 10.1177/0741088306293921
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088306293921 [Google Scholar]
  18. Ho, V., & Li, C.
    (2018) The use of metadiscourse and persuasion: An analysis of first-year university students’ timed argumentative essays. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 331, 53–68. 10.1016/j.jeap.2018.02.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  19. Hyland, K.
    (2001) Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20(3), 207–226. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(00)00012‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00012-0 [Google Scholar]
  20. (2002a) Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(8), 1091–1112. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00035‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00035-8 [Google Scholar]
  21. (2002b) Options of identity in academic writing. ELT Journal, 56(4), 351–358. 10.1093/elt/56.4.351
     https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.4.351 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2003) Self-citation and self-reference: Credibility and promotion in academic publication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(3), 251–259. 10.1002/asi.10204
     https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10204 [Google Scholar]
  23. (2004) Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(2), 133–151. 10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hyland, K., & Jiang, F.
    (2017) Is academic writing becoming more informal?English for Specific Purposes, 451, 40–51. 10.1016/j.esp.2016.09.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  25. Ivanič, R.
    (1998) Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. John Benjamins. 10.1075/swll.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.5 [Google Scholar]
  26. Işık-Taş, E. E.
    (2018) Authorial identity in Turkish language and English language research articles in sociology: The role of publication context in academic writers’ discourse choices. English for Specific Purposes, 491, 26–38. 10.1016/j.esp.2017.10.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.10.003 [Google Scholar]
  27. Khedri, M., Heng, C. S., & Ebrahimi, S. F.
    (2013) An exploration of interactive metadiscourse markers in academic research article abstracts in two disciplines. Discourse Studies, 15(3), 319–331. 10.1177/1461445613480588
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445613480588 [Google Scholar]
  28. Kuo, C.
    (1999) The use of personal pronouns: Role relationships in scientific journal articles. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), 121–138. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(97)00058‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00058-6 [Google Scholar]
  29. Lee, Y.
    (2007) The construction of identity with “I”: Writer identity in EFL writing through the first person pronoun. English Teaching, 62(4), 373–390. 10.15858/engtea.62.4.200712.373
     https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.62.4.200712.373 [Google Scholar]
  30. Li, Z.
    (2021) Authorial presence in research article abstracts: A diachronic investigation of the use of first person pronouns. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 511, 100977. 10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100977
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100977 [Google Scholar]
  31. Lorés-Sanz, R.
    (2006) “I will argue that”: First person pronouns as metadiscoursal devices in research article abstracts in English and Spanish. ESP Across Cultures, 31, 23–40.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. (2011) The construction of the author’s voice in academic writing: The interplay of cultural and disciplinary factors. Text & Talk, 31(2), 173–193. 10.1515/text.2011.008
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2011.008 [Google Scholar]
  33. Martín, P., & Pérez, I. K. L.
    (2014) Convincing peers of the value of one’s research: A genre analysis of rhetorical promotion in academic texts. English for Specific Purposes, 341, 1–13. 10.1016/j.esp.2013.09.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2013.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  34. Martínez, I. A.
    (2005) Native and non-native writers’ use of first person pronouns in the different sections of biology research articles in English. Journal of Second Language Learning, 14(3), 174–190. 10.1016/j.jslw.2005.06.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  35. McEnery, T., & Hardie, A.
    (2012) Corpus linguistics: Method, theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Millar, N., Salager-Meyer, F., & Budgell, B.
    (2019) “It is important to reinforce the importance of…”: ‘Hype’ in reports of randomized controlled trials. English for Specific Purposes, 541, 139–151. 10.1016/j.esp.2019.02.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2019.02.004 [Google Scholar]
  37. Molino, A.
    (2010) Personal and impersonal authorial references: A contrastive study of English and Italian linguistics research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 86–101. 10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.007 [Google Scholar]
  38. Mur-Dueñas, P.
    (2007) “I/we focus on…”: A cross-cultural analysis of self-mentions in business management research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 61, 143–162. 10.1016/j.jeap.2007.05.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2007.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  39. Rongen Breivega, K., Dahl, T., & Fløttum, K.
    (2002) Traces of self and others in research articles: A comparative pilot study of English, French and Norwegian research articles in medicine, economics and linguistics. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(2), 218–239. 10.1111/1473‑4192.00032
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1473-4192.00032 [Google Scholar]
  40. Salas, M. D.
    (2015) Reflexive metadiscourse in research articles in Spanish: Variation across three disciplines (Linguistics, Economics and Medicine). Journal of Pragmatics, 771, 20–40. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.12.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.12.006 [Google Scholar]
  41. Samraj, B.
    (2005) An exploration of a genre set: Research article abstracts and introductions in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 24(2), 141–156. 10.1016/j.esp.2002.10.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2002.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  42. Starfield, S., & Ravelli, L. J.
    (2006) “The writing of this thesis was a process that I could not explore with the positivistic detachment of the classical sociologist”: Self and structure in New Humanities research theses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(3), 222–243. 10.1016/j.jeap.2006.07.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.07.004 [Google Scholar]
  43. Swales, J.
    (1990) Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Tang, R., & John, S.
    (1999) The “I” in identity: Exploring writer identity in student academic writing through first person pronoun. English for Specific Purposes, 18(Suppl.), S23–S39. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(99)00009‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(99)00009-5 [Google Scholar]
  45. Vassileva, I.
    (1998) Who am I/who are we in academic writing? A contrastive analysis of authorial presence in English, German, French, Russian and Bulgarian. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 163–190. 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.1998.tb00128.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.1998.tb00128.x [Google Scholar]
  46. Wang, J., & Zeng, L.
    (2021) Disciplinary recognized self-presence: Self-mention used with hedges and boosters in PhD students’ research writing. Sage Open, 11(2). 1–13. 10.1177/21582440211005454
     https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211005454 [Google Scholar]
  47. Wen, J. U., & Lei, L.
    (2022) Linguistic positivity bias in academic writing: A large-scale diachronic study in life sciences across 50 years. Applied Linguistics, 43(2), 340–364. 10.1093/applin/amab037
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amab037 [Google Scholar]
  48. Wheeler, M. A., Vylomova, E., McGrath, M. J., & Haslam, N.
    (2021) More confident, less formal: Stylistic changes in academic psychology writing from 1970 to 2016. Scientometrics, 1261, 9603–9612. 10.1007/s11192‑021‑04166‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04166-9 [Google Scholar]
  49. Xia, G.
    (2017) A cross-disciplinary corpus-based study on English and Chinese native speakers’ use of first-person pronouns in academic English writing. Text & Talk, 38(1), 93–113. 10.1515/text‑2017‑0032
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2017-0032 [Google Scholar]
  50. Yakhontova, T.
    (2006) Cultural and disciplinary variation in academic discourse: The issue of influencing factors. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(2), 153–167. 10.1016/j.jeap.2006.03.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.03.002 [Google Scholar]
  51. Yuan, Z. M., & Yao, M.
    (2022) Is academic writing becoming more positive? A large-scale diachronic case study of Science research articles across 25 years. Scientometrics, 127(11), 6191–6207. 10.1007/s11192‑022‑04515‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04515-2 [Google Scholar]
  52. Yao, M., Wei, Y., & Wang, H.
    (2023) Promoting research by reducing uncertainty in academic writing: A large-scale diachronic case study on hedging in Science research articles across 25 years. Scientometrics, 128(8), 4541–4558. 10.1007/s11192‑023‑04759‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04759-6 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.24011.wei
Loading
Authorial presence in academic writing
Journal of English for Research Publication Purposes 6, 66 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1075/jerpp.24011.wei
/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.24011.wei
/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.24011.wei
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): authorial presence; research promotion; science; scientific writing

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error