PB2A

Comparison Between “SciGen” Article and Scholarly Academic Publication

Both the articles had a similar like structure where both publications could be considered journals instead of articles. The journals both consisted of multiple authors; most informational or research based journals involve about three or more authors. The possible reason for the multitude of authors is that one person could not attain this amount of information efficiently  and in a timely manner. Abstracts are found useful in these journals as well; they come to use as an eye opener to details that will be important in the paper. The abstracts let the audience know that one journal was about the connection between water supply and gastrointestinal infections. While the other journal had a different topic, the journal’s abstract focused on the making an outline of a program to support the “evaluation of the context free-grammar.”  Before viewing the abstracts, the papers also have rather long titles. For example, the two journals analyzed were called “Decoupling Robots from Active Networks in Hierarchical Databases” and “A basic bottom- up approach for small systems of safe water supply: a decentralized case study in Uganda.” Following the abstracts, introductions connected the main ideas to the rest of the journal. The introductions function to attract the readers attention and state the topic more thoroughly.

The arrangements of the subtopics in the journals were distinct, but primarily similar. Charts and data were demonstrated whether in word format or in graphs. The charts are seen as line graphs or bar graphs depending on the information one was more adequate than the other. For the water supply journal, the bar graphs showed the answers to one question before the water supply intervention took place and the after the intervention. In the technology article, the line graphs compared the relationship between the “work factor” and the “popularity of the networks being decoupled.” Consisting of method subtopics, the journals exemplified over the research that they found using different methods. The water supply journal showed how the borehole, wells or other water resources affected the health of the people. Results are important to these research text because it gives the support to the reasoning and importance of the topic. As a usual subtopic in journals, results come towards the end since these journals are recorded in a chronological fashion. The conclusions usually end the journal to point out any details that were needed to be emphasized and the main ideas are reiterated. After the conclusions, it is reasonable for a journal author to have a section for references. References state where other information of books or articles came from if they were used to support the research.

    Some major differences between these two journals were additional topics or conventions in the text. The water supply article had a questionnaire to add to the research. Groups of people were asked to take an opinion on what was the reason why people’s health was being effected. Another major question the researchers had was who populated the area and what what was the quantity. It was necessary for the group of people to express their opinion on a intervention of the water supply. In this article, there was a discussion where the whole project was revised and “discussed” as pointed out. The conclusion and discussion are two separate subtopics because conclusion tie up the loose ends for this journal. Acknowledgements were added onto this journal; the acknowledgements generally give thanks to helpers of the project whether it be doctors in certain areas of expertise or those who help funding the project.

The purpose of journals is to inform a general audience or a specific set of experts who need this research to make a difference. The tone or style of journals are serious, yet educational. Viewing the social aspect of the piece of text, it connects the public or experts.