Beyond the Template: The Art of Writing the Introductory Paragraph in Empirical Research

Introduction. The Introduction section of an empirical article serves the function of justifying the research motivation and setting the problem in its current scholarly context. The first paragraph of this section sets the tone for the entire work, establishes the relevance and intended contribution of its novelty, and shapes the initial attention and expectations of the academic community. Despite the existence of extensive recommendations for constructing research article Introductions, the microarchitecture of its opening paragraph remains insufficiently described and conceptually developed in the methodological literature.

Purpose. To develop a rhetorical structure that ensures the construction of a compelling, original, and contextually rich first paragraph of the Introduction in a manuscript of research articles.

Rhetorical Structure of the First Paragraph of the Introduction. The rhetorical structure of the opening paragraph of the Introduction is presented as a sequence of rhetorical steps, each of which is given a theoretical justification and a functional interpretation within the framework of the original empirical research. This approach clarifies the purpose of each step, elucidates its contribution to the coherence and argumentative force of the paragraph, and sets criteria for its correct implementation in the text. The resulting structure consists of the following steps: (1) Topic sentence with a cognitive hook; (2) Disciplinary context and field focus; (3) Operationalized drawback/contrast; (4) Stakes/relevance; (5) Preliminary operationalization of mechanisms; (6) Bridge to the second paragraph of the Introduction.

Analysis of the First Paragraph of the Introduction through the Prism of the Editor's Perception: Specific comments are provided on the strong and problematic areas of the paragraph, clarifying the conformity of the stated moves with genre expectations and the logic of argumentation. Based on the identified drawbacks and successful solutions, practical recommendations are provided for effectively structuring the opening paragraph of an original empirical study, aimed at increasing the coherence, evidence-basedness, and readability of the text. 

Conclusions: The presented rhetorical paragraph model and recommendations for its integration into an original empirical research are aimed at improving the functional effectiveness of the text and the reproducibility of argumentation. Their systematic application allows authors and editors to construct paragraphs that ensure correct indexing in scientometric databases, increasing visibility, and, consequently, potential growth in citation rates.

1. Косычева, М. А., & Тихонова, Е. В. (2022a). Аннотация исследовательской статьи: стратегии построения и оптимизации. Health, Food & Biotechnology, 4(1), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.36107/ hfb.2022.i1.s135

2. Косычева, М. А., & Тихонова, Е. В. (2022b). Введение к эмпирической статье: от структуры к функциональному содержанию. Health, Food & Biotechnology. 2022;4(2), 6-16. https://doi.org/10.36107/hfb.2022.i2.s155

3. Тихонова, Е.В. & Кириллова, О.В. (2022). Культура цитирования: поведение цитирующих авторов vs доверие к результатам научных исследований. Научный редактор и издатель, 7(2),166-181. https://doi.org/10.24069/SEP-22-58

4. Alanazi, M., & Alqarni, M. (2022). The very first sentence in research article introductions: A rhetoric comparative approach. Heliyon, 8(8), e10241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10241

5. Aleshinskaya, E. V. (2023). Rhetorical structure of research paper introductions in computer science: a comparative analysis. RESEARCH RESULT. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.18413/2313-8912-2023-9-3-0-4

6. Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines. Open University Press.

7. Barsalou, L. W., Dutriaux, L., & Scheepers, C. (2018). Moving beyond the distinction between concrete and abstract concepts. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373(1752), 20170144. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0144

8. Gross, A. G., & Harmon, J. E. (2014). Science from sight to insight: How scientists illustrate meaning. The University of Chicago Press

9. Hyland, K. (1990). A Genre Description of the Argumentative Essay. RELC Journal, 21(1), 66-78. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368829002100105

10. Hyland, K. (2018). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. Bloomsbury Publishing.

11. Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2019). Academic Discourse and Global Publishing. Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429433962

12. Kidd, D. C., & Castano, E. (2013). Reading literary fiction improves theory of mind. Science, 342(6156), 377–380. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1239918

13. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.

14. Rahman, M., Darus, S., & Amir, Z. (2017). Rhetorical structure of introduction in applied linguistics research articles. International Journal for Educational Studies, 9(2), 69–84.

15. Rochma, A. F., Triastuti, A., & Ashadi (2020). Rhetorical styles of introduction in English language teaching (ELT) research articles. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 304–314. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v10i2.28593

16. Samur, D., Tops, M., & Koole, S. L. (2018). Does a single session of reading literary fiction prime enhanced mentalising performance? Four replication experiments of Kidd and Castano (2013). Cognition & emotion, 32(1), 130–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2017.1279591

17. Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge University Press.

18. Swales, J. (2004). Research genres: Exploration and application. Cambridge University Press.

19. ​​Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. University of Michigan Press.

20. Tavakol, M., & O’Brien, D. (2023). The importance of crafting a good introduction to scholarly research: strategies for creating an effective and impactful opening statement. International Journal of Medical Education, 14(14), 84–87. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.6499.82af

21. Tikhonova, E. V., & Mezentseva, D. A. (2024). Wordiness in academic writing: a systematic scoping review. Research Result. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 133-157. https://doi.org/10.18413/2313-8912-2024-10-1-0-8

22. Tikhonova, E., Zavolskaya, O., & Mekeko, N. (2025). Stylistic redundancy and wordiness in introductions of original empirical studies: Rhetorical risks of academic writing. Journal of Language and Education, 11(2), 125-136. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2025.27389