(Taken from Burgess, 2014)

• While the two groups of texts are relatively similar in terms of move structure, differences at the step level suggest that authors adopt strategies tailored to the needs of either international or national audiences.
• In those moves and steps which optionally involve referencing the research literature, the authors of the Spanish texts are marginally less likely to cite sources.
• When contextualising their research, the authors of the English texts use a wider range of strategies.
• There is only a small difference in the proportion of text segments devoted to gap or deficiency identification between the two sets of RAs. This suggests that Spanish authors may have adopted rhetorical strategies associated with international publications in English (Burgess, 2014).

• Move 4, ‘Describing the procedure,’ is the most relevant one in both corpora given the main communicative function of the Methods section, which is to provide a detailed account of the research carried out so it can be replicated.
• However, there are significant differences in the frequency of use of other moves, such as moves 2, ‘Describing data collection procedure,’ and 5, ‘Describing data analysis procedure,’ revealing the influence of the publication context variable in the rhetorical structure of this section (Gea Valor, 2014).

(Taken from Gea-Valor, 2014)

(Taken from Martín-Martín, 2014)

• There is a great deal of similarity across both groups of texts, though some degree of divergence is also observed.
• Spanish writers tend to omit specific comments on the meaning of the results or the data presented in tables and figures, considering them self-standing elements that speak for themselves,
• Writers in English tend to put more effort into discussing the contents of tables and figures (Martín-Martín, 2014).

• The results show apparent differences across the Spanish and English samples at the move level. More significant differences, however, can be found at the step level within all moves.
• Interestingly, fewer RAs in English include citations when providing background information.
• More RAs in Spanish highlight specific results when summarising or restating key findings.
• More RAs in English include deductions and comparisons with previous studies when discussing key findings and other features.
• More RAs in English point out negative features or limitations of the current study and evaluate the state of knowledge, practice or previous studies when evaluating research.
• When drawing implications, more RAs in English include recommendations for future practice or research, while more RAs in Spanish suggest the applicability of results or the usability of findings or outcomes.

(Taken from Moreno, 2014)