Theoretical support
Writers usually begin, in their introduction, by relating their work to what other well-known academics have said about the subject. By surveying  more widely-known and perhaps widely-accepted work, they hope to show

• where their own work fits in, &
• that it has academic credibility.

Example
Title : On the teachability of communication strategies
Here, Selinker is the major theoretician referred to, with other authors developing his theory of 'CSs'. The Introduction begins:

"In the 1970s, four studies prepared the ground for the study of communication strategies (CSs), a new area of research within applied linguistics. Selinker's (1972) classic article on interlanguage introduced the notion of strategies of L2 communication. Varadi (1973) and Tarone (1973) elaborated on Selinker's notion by .... etc." (Dornyei, 1995: 55)

Notice how, by implying that the concept is well established, the writer attempts to fit into a particular research community.

Empirical support
We also commonly build our arguments by citing the findings of other researchers. This is done to suggest factual or 'empirical' (actually observed) evidence in support our case.

Note: The more space you give to an author or their work, the more it is clear to the reader that you approve of their work, and that it supports your own thesis or argument.

Example
Here, David Nunan cites a specific study to support his argument for a more learner-centred curriculum:

"More recently, Slimani (1992) has sought to determine what individual learners claim to have learned from interactive classroom events ..... . Slimani found that topics initiated in the classroom by the learners were much more likely to be nominated as having been learned than those nominated by the teacher" (Nunan, 1995: 135)

Last updated 03 March 2003