PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 18, 2026Journal of English for Academic Purposes2 citationsOpen Access

Stance in successful grant application abstracts: Trends across disciplinary domains

View Full Paper
YWYing Wang

Key Points

  • The study aims to explore how stance features are used in successful grant application abstracts across different disciplines.
  • Analyzed a 2.7-million-word corpus of 12,187 successful grant application abstracts.
  • Focused on stance features related to attitudes, judgments, and commitment.
  • Examined trends in wording over a 12-year period across five disciplinary domains.
  • Moderate changes in stance features observed over 12 years, reflecting a shift toward more assertive language.
  • Increase in assertive modal verbs (will, can) and decrease in tentative verbs (would, may).
  • Hard science disciplines favor more assertive expressions, while soft sciences employ more hedging.

Abstract

Stance, i.e., the expression of attitudes, judgements, and degrees of commitment, is a central feature of academic discourse. Yet its role in promotional communication within high-stakes genres such as grant proposals and their related subgenres remains relatively underexplored in EAP research. This study investigates the use of 193 features in a 2.7-million-word corpus of 12,187 abstracts from successful grant applications across five disciplinary domains, awarded by the Swedish Research Council between 2011 and 2022. Notably, the analysis reveals only moderate change over the 12-year period, despite broader trends toward increasingly promotional rhetorical styles in academic communication. A gradual rise in assertive modal verbs ( will, can ) and a decline in tentative ones ( would, may ) suggest a subtle shift toward greater rhetorical certainty. While a core repertoire of stance features is broadly shared across five disciplinary domains, hard science fields tend to favor more assertive and evidential expressions, whereas soft science fields more often employ hedging and interpretive stance, consistent with previous findings. Further variation is observed in how novelty, methods, and significance are promoted, providing more nuanced insights into disciplinary conventions of persuasion. These findings inform EAP pedagogy by supporting discipline-specific stance awareness and encouraging reflective, responsible self-promotion.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Ying Wang (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69ba425c4e9516ffd37a2916https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2026.101666
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Examining promotional strategies and trends in successful grant application abstracts: Moves and appraisal resources2024 · 3 citations
  2. 2Trends in the Expression of Epistemic Stance in NIH Research Funding Applications: 1985–20202023 · 10 citations
  3. 3Metadiscourse: Diverse and Divided Perspectives2010 · 183 citations
  4. 4Toward predicting research proposal success2017 · 39 citations
  5. 5Variation in rhetorical moves in grant proposals of US humanists and scientists2000 · 128 citations