creating a research space model

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

Introduction

The Creating a Research Space [C.A.R.S.] Model was developed by John Swales based upon his analysis of journal articles representing a variety of discipline-based writing practices. His model attempts to explain and describe the organizational pattern of writing the introduction to scholarly research studies. Following the C.A.R.S. Model can be useful approach because it can help you to: 1) begin the writing process [getting started is often the most difficult task]; 2) understand the way in which an introduction sets the stage for the rest of your paper; and, 3) assess how the introduction fits within the larger scope of your study. The model assumes that writers follow a general organizational pattern in response to two types of challenges [“competitions”] relating to establishing a presence within a particular domain of research: 1) the competition to create a rhetorical space and, 2) the competition to attract readers into that space. The model proposes three actions [Swales calls them “moves”], accompanied by specific steps, that reflect the development of an effective introduction for a research paper. These “moves” and steps can be used as a template for writing the introduction to your own social sciences research papers.

"Introductions." The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Coffin, Caroline and Rupert Wegerif. “How to Write a Standard Research Article.” Inspiring Academic Practice at the University of Exeter; Kayfetz, Janet. "Academic Writing Workshop." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. "The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John and Christine B. Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Skills and Tasks. 2nd edition. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004.

Creating a Research Space Move 1: Establishing a Territory [the situation] This is generally accomplished in two ways: by demonstrating that a general area of research is important, critical, interesting, problematic, relevant, or otherwise worthy of investigation and by introducing and reviewing key sources of prior research in that area to show where gaps exist or where prior research has been inadequate in addressing the research problem. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1 -- Claiming importance of, and/or  [writing action = describing the research problem and providing evidence to support why the topic is important to study]
• Step 2 -- Making topic generalizations, and/or  [writing action = providing statements about the current state of knowledge, consensus, practice or description of phenomena]
• Step 3 -- Reviewing items of previous research  [writing action = synthesize prior research that further supports the need to study the research problem; this is not a literature review but more a reflection of key studies that have touched upon but perhaps not fully addressed the topic]

Move 2: Establishing a Niche [the problem] This action refers to making a clear and cogent argument that your particular piece of research is important and possesses value. This can be done by indicating a specific gap in previous research, by challenging a broadly accepted assumption, by raising a question, a hypothesis, or need, or by extending previous knowledge in some way. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1a -- Counter-claiming, or  [writing action = introduce an opposing viewpoint or perspective or identify a gap in prior research that you believe has weakened or undermined the prevailing argument]
• Step 1b -- Indicating a gap, or  [writing action = develop the research problem around a gap or understudied area of the literature]
• Step 1c -- Question-raising, or  [writing action = similar to gap identification, this involves presenting key questions about the consequences of gaps in prior research that will be addressed by your study. For example, one could state, “Despite prior observations of voter behavior in local elections in urban Detroit, it remains unclear why do some single mothers choose to avoid....”]
• Step 1d -- Continuing a tradition  [writing action = extend prior research to expand upon or clarify a research problem. This is often signaled with logical connecting terminology, such as, “hence,” “therefore,” “consequently,” “thus” or language that indicates a need. For example, one could state, “Consequently, these factors need to examined in more detail....” or “Evidence suggests an interesting correlation, therefore, it is desirable to survey different respondents....”]

Move 3: Occupying the Niche [the solution] The final "move" is to announce the means by which your study will contribute new knowledge or new understanding in contrast to prior research on the topic. This is also where you describe the remaining organizational structure of the paper. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1a -- Outlining purposes, or  [writing action = answering the “So What?” question. Explain in clear language the objectives of your study]
• Step 1b -- Announcing present research [writing action = describe the purpose of your study in terms of what the research is going to do or accomplish. In the social sciences, the “So What?” question still needs to addressed]
• Step 2 -- Announcing principle findings  [writing action = present a brief, general summary of key findings written, such as, “The findings indicate a need for...,” or “The research suggests four approaches to....”]
• Step 3 -- Indicating article structure  [writing action = state how the remainder of your paper is organized]

"Introductions." The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Atai, Mahmood Reza. “Exploring Subdisciplinary Variations and Generic Structure of Applied Linguistics Research Article Introductions Using CARS Model.” The Journal of Applied Linguistics 2 (Fall 2009): 26-51; Chanel, Dana. "Research Article Introductions in Cultural Studies: A Genre Analysis Explorationn of Rhetorical Structure." The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes 2 (2014): 1-20; Coffin, Caroline and Rupert Wegerif. “How to Write a Standard Research Article.” Inspiring Academic Practice at the University of Exeter; Kayfetz, Janet. "Academic Writing Workshop." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. "The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John and Christine B. Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Skills and Tasks . 2nd edition. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004; Swales, John M. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings . New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990; Chapter 5: Beginning Work. In Writing for Peer Reviewed Journals: Strategies for Getting Published . Pat Thomson and Barbara Kamler. (New York: Routledge, 2013), pp. 93-96.

Writing Tip

Swales showed that establishing a research niche [move 2] is often signaled by specific terminology that expresses a contrasting viewpoint, a critical evaluation of gaps in the literature, or a perceived weakness in prior research. The purpose of using these words is to draw a clear distinction between perceived deficiencies in previous studies and the research you are presenting that is intended to help resolve these deficiencies. Below is a table of common words used by authors.

NOTE: You may prefer not to adopt a negative stance in your writing when placing it within the context of prior research. In such cases, an alternative approach is to utilize a neutral, contrastive statement that expresses a new perspective without giving the appearance of trying to diminish the validity of other people's research. Examples of how to take a more neutral contrasting stance can be achieved in the following ways, with A representing the findings of prior research, B representing your research problem, and X representing one or more variables that have been investigated.

• Prior research has focused primarily on A , rather than on B ...
• Prior research into A can be beneficial but to rectify X , it is important to examine B ...
• These studies have placed an emphasis in the areas of A as opposed to describing B ...
• While prior studies have examined A , it may be preferable to contemplate the impact of B ...
• After consideration of A , it is important to also distinguish B ...
• The study of A has been thorough, but changing circumstances related to X support a need for examining [or revisiting] B ...
• Although research has been devoted to A , less attention has been paid to B ...
• Earlier research offers insights into the need for A , though consideration of B would be particularly helpful to...

In each of these example statements, what follows the ellipsis is the justification for designing a study that approaches the problem in the way that contrasts with prior research but which does not devalue its ongoing contributions to current knowledge and understanding.

Dretske, Fred I. “Contrastive Statements.” The Philosophical Review 81 (October 1972): 411-437; Kayfetz, Janet. "Academic Writing Workshop." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. "The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John M. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings . New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990

• << Previous: 4. The Introduction
• Next: Background Information >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 10:07 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

• Departments
• For Students
• For Faculty
• Book Appointment

• Flow and Cohesion
• Reverse Outline
• Paper Skeleton

Creating a Research Space

• Personal Statements
• Literature Reviews

Typical Research Genre Structure

Swales’ Model of Rhetorical moves in Research Articles: Create A Research Space (CARS)

Move 1 Establishing a territory Step 1 Claiming centrality and/or Step 2 Making topic generalization(s) and/or Step 3 Reviewing items of previous research  Move 2 Establishing a niche  Step 1A Counter-claiming or Step 1B Indicating a gap or Step 1C Question-raising or Step 1D Continuing a tradition  Move 3 Occupying the niche  Step 1A Outlining purposes or Step 1B Announcing present research Step 2 Announcing principal findings Step 3 Indicating research article structure

The CARS Model (Create a Research Space), by John Swales

According to Swales, research writers frequently use  three rhetorical moves  to create a context for their work. These moves can happen both in the introduction of a piece, as well as on a larger scale, throughout the research paper/proposal/document:

MOVE 1: Establishing a Territory (Annotated Bibliography/Literature Review)

• Ask yourself:  “Why is my research important in this current moment of 2016 – politically, socially, historically?” Then
• Example phrase:  “In recent years, researchers have become increasingly interested in...” “A central issue in  ______  is...” “Many recent studies have focused on..."
• Imagine that all past research on your topic is an ongoing academic conversation that you need to understand fully before joining in; then, to structure your synthesis,  ask yourself:  "What would X author say to Y author? Does X author extend Y author's research, or does she critique it, etc.?"
• Example phrase:  “Much research has examined ______, though different conclusions have been made.”

MOVE 2: Establishing a Niche (Rhetorical Prospectus)

• Imagine that you now understand the conversation, and you see some limitation or place where extension is needed; join the conversation to make the limitation or need for more research clear.
• Example phrases:  (limitation) “However, these studies have failed to recognize the...” or (extension) “X...has been extensively studied. However, less attention has been paid to..."

MOVE 3: Occupying the Niche (Research Proposal)

• Imagine that you now have everyone’s attention, and that you must explain to fellow scholars how your ideas will add or move the conversation forward.
• Example phrases – for proposal:  “The purpose of this investigation is to...” or “To focus my research, I will ask the following questions..."
• Example phrases – for research article or dissertation introduction:  “The remainder of this paper is divided into five sections. Section 1 describes..."

Works Consulted:

• Swales, John M.  Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings  (1990)
• Swales, John M. and Christine B. Feak.  Academic Writing for Graduate Students  (2008)

[Adapted by Lisha Storey, May 2015]

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Organization & the CARS Model

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

Although each discipline has its own conventions for what articles, research reports, dissertations, and other types of scholarly writing should look like, academic writing shares some general characteristics across each field. One area of similarity is the introduction section. This handout provides strategies for revising introductions.

CARS (Creating a Research Space)

John Swales’ CARS model for introductions is based on his study of articles across a range of disciplines. He identified the following moves as common among most articles:

Move 1: Establishing a territory

Step 1 Claiming importance and/or

Step 2 Making topic generalizations and/or

Step 3 Reviewing items of previous research

Move 2: Establishing a niche

Step 1a Counter-claiming or

Step 1b Indicating a gap or

Step 1c Question-raising or

Step 1d Continuing a tradition

Move 3: Occupying the niche

Step 1a Outlining purposes or

Step 1b Announcing present research

Step 2 Announcing principle findings

Step 3 Indicating article structure

Writers can use these moves as a guide for revising their own writing, or for helping others.

Questions for Revision

Does the introduction to the piece of writing you are working with…

Topic Outline

A topic outline is a fast and easy way to analyze whether an introduction is effectively organized. According to Pyrczak and Bruce, a topic outline can help show the flow of an introduction to ensure it moves from a general introduction of the problem or gap to a specific discussion of the current research (33). The topic outline can be combined with the CARS model to improve your introduction or to offer advice to a peer.

Topic Outline Exercise

Works cited.

Pyrczak, Fred and Randall R. Bruce. Writing Empirical Research Reports : A Basic Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Los Angeles: Pyrczak Publishing, 2000. Print.

Swales, John. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings . 1990. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

We’re reviewing our resources this spring (May-August 2024). We will do our best to minimize disruption, but you might notice changes over the next few months as we correct errors & delete redundant resources. 

Creating a Research Space: CaRS Model 

The CaRS Model can help you build an introduction, especially in STEM fields. The model consists of three rhetorical moves that help identify the background, motivation, and focus of the research. This framework can help give your reader a basic overview of your larger project.

Move 1: Establish a Research Territory

The research territory, or broad topic, is the context required to both understand and conduct the research being explored. Your goal is to explain the current state of scholarship in the field and answer the question, “Why is this general research area important?” 

Language for Establishing a Research Territory:

__________ has been extensively studied... 

Interest in _________ has been growing. 

Recent studies have focused on... 

__________ has become a major issue...

Move 2: Establish a Niche

The niche is the reason or motivation for the research. You are preparing your audience to understand how your research relates to the background you have given, highlighting gaps/problems in current knowledge that justify or explain the need for further investigation.  

Methods for Establishing a Niche

Make a counter-claim (something is wrong) 

Indicate a gap (something is missing) 

Raise a question or make an inference (something is unclear) 

Continue a tradition (adding something) 

Language for Establishing a Niche

Previous studies of _______ have not examined...

Such studies are unsatisfactory because...

One question that needs to be asked, however is...

Research on _______ has mostly been restricted to _______ so...

Move 3: Occupying a Niche

This step is an explanation of how you are responding to the need for further investigation. Explain how your research addresses the need you identified in the previous step and list your specific research objectives, questions, or methods.  

Strategies for Occupying the Niche  

Outline purpose(s) of your research 

List research questions or hypotheses 

Announce principal research findings 

Indicate structure of your research process

Example: Three Moves in Action

Move 1:   Stress is a seemingly ever-present factor in the lives of university students, and many have difficulty regulating stress and functioning to their fullest potential. Many individuals choose to relieve their stress by listening to music, and stress relief as a result of music listening has been researched through both physiological and self-perception studies. Music listening decreases physiological stress by indirectly decreasing cortisol levels (a hormone linked to high stress levels) through a down-regulation of the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) Axis (Linnemann, Ditzen, Strahler, Doerr, & Nater, 2015). Studies focused on self-perceived stress levels found that listening to music with the goal of relaxation is significantly more effective than listening to music for the purpose of distraction according to self-report measures (Linnemann et al., 2015).   Move 2:   While the positive relationship between music listening and stress relief has been supported within the general population, little research has been done to examine music’s effect on the mental health and stress levels of university students in particular. University students exhibit a higher rate of both stress-induced depression and anxiety than the general population due to the pressures of completing complex programs while often living away from home for the first time (Hanser, 1985, p. 419; Regehr, Glancy, & Pitts, 2013). As a result, student stress relief is a critical part of ensuring student wellbeing, especially with student mental health at the forefront of many recent discussions among university faculty, staff, and students.   Move 3:   This investigatory survey is the first step in a multi-stage study on how undergraduate residents at Conrad Grebel University College use music in relation to stressful situations, and how stress relief through music listening is perceived. We hypothesize that students will report stress-relief as one of the primary reasons they choose to listen to music, and that they will report choosing music they enjoy when they need to relieve stress. Patterns observed in student responses will be used to determine specific research questions for further investigation, and research on student stress relief could help to inform university policy makers on ways to create healthier campuses.

Adapted from: Swales, John and Christine Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2013. Print. 

Topic Guide - Developing Your Research Study

• Purpose of Guide
• Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• APA 7th Edition
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model

Introduction

Writing tip.

• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• 10. Proofreading Your Paper
• Writing Concisely
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Annotated Bibliography
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Study
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Bibliography

The Creating a Research Space [C.A.R.S.] Model was developed by John Swales based upon his analysis of journal articles representing a variety of discipline-based writing practices. His model attempts to explain and describe the organizational pattern of writing the introduction to scholarly research studies. Following the C.A.R.S. Model can be useful approach because it can help you to: 1) begin the writing process [getting started is often the most difficult task]; 2) understand the way in which an introduction sets the stage for the rest of your paper; and, 3) assess how the introduction fits within the larger scope of your study. The model assumes that writers follow a general organizational pattern in response to two types of challenges [“competitions”] relating to establishing a presence within a particular domain of research: 1) the competition to create a rhetorical space and, 2) the competition to attract readers into that space. The model proposes three actions [Swales calls them “moves”], accompanied by specific steps, that reflect the development of an effective introduction for a research paper. These “moves” and steps can be used as a template for writing the introduction to your own social sciences research papers.

" Introductions ." The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Coffin, Caroline and Rupert Wegerif. “ How to Write a Standard Research Article .” Inspiring Academic Practice at the University of Exeter; Kayfetz, Janet. " Academic Writing Workshop ." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. " The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model ." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John and Christine B. Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Skills and Tasks . 2nd edition. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004.

Creating a Research Space Move 1: Establishing a Territory [the situation] This is generally accomplished in two ways: by demonstrating that a general area of research is important, critical, interesting, problematic, relevant, or otherwise worthy of investigation and by introducing and reviewing key sources of prior research in that area to show where gaps exist or where prior research has been inadequate in addressing the research problem. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1 -- Claiming importance of, and/or  [writing action = describing the research problem and providing evidence to support why the topic is important to study]
• Step 2 -- Making topic generalizations, and/or  [writing action = providing statements about the current state of knowledge, consensus, practice or description of phenomena]
• Step 3 -- Reviewing items of previous research  [writing action = synthesize prior research that further supports the need to study the research problem; this is not a literature review but more a reflection of key studies that have touched upon but perhaps not fully addressed the topic]

Move 2: Establishing a Niche [the problem] This action refers to making a clear and cogent argument that your particular piece of research is important and possesses value. This can be done by indicating a specific gap in previous research, by challenging a broadly accepted assumption, by raising a question, a hypothesis, or need, or by extending previous knowledge in some way. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1a -- Counter-claiming, or  [writing action = introduce an opposing viewpoint or perspective or identify a gap in prior research that you believe has weakened or undermined the prevailing argument]
• Step 1b -- Indicating a gap, or  [writing action = develop the research problem around a gap or understudied area of the literature]
• Step 1c -- Question-raising, or  [writing action = similar to gap identification, this involves presenting key questions about the consequences of gaps in prior research that will be addressed by your study. For example, one could state, “Despite prior observations of voter behavior in local elections in urban Detroit, it remains unclear why do some single mothers choose to avoid....”]
• Step 1d -- Continuing a tradition  [writing action = extend prior research to expand upon or clarify a research problem. This is often signaled with logical connecting terminology, such as, “hence,” “therefore,” “consequently,” “thus” or language that indicates a need. For example, one could state, “Consequently, these factors need to examined in more detail....” or “Evidence suggests an interesting correlation, therefore, it is desirable to survey different respondents....”]

Move 3: Occupying the Niche [the solution] The final "move" is to announce the means by which your study will contribute new knowledge or new understanding in contrast to prior research on the topic. This is also where you describe the remaining organizational structure of the paper. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1a -- Outlining purposes, or  [writing action = answering the “So What?” question. Explain in clear language the objectives of your study]
• Step 1b -- Announcing present research [writing action = describe the purpose of your study in terms of what the research is going to do or accomplish. In the social sciences, the “So What?” question still needs to addressed]
• Step 2 -- Announcing principle findings  [writing action = present a brief, general summary of key findings written, such as, “The findings indicate a need for...,” or “The research suggests four approaches to....”]
• Step 3 -- Indicating article structure  [writing action = state how the remainder of your paper is organized]

" Introductions ." The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Atai, Mahmood Reza. “Exploring Subdisciplinary Variations and Generic Structure of Applied Linguistics Research Article Introductions Using CARS Model.” The Journal of Applied Linguistics 2 (Fall 2009): 26-51; Chanel, Dana. "Research Article Introductions in Cultural Studies: A Genre Analysis Explorationn of Rhetorical Structure." The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes 2 (2014): 1-20; Coffin, Caroline and Rupert Wegerif. “ How to Write a Standard Research Article .” Inspiring Academic Practice at the University of Exeter; Kayfetz, Janet. " Academic Writing Workshop ." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. " The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model ." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John and Christine B. Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Skills and Tasks . 2nd edition. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004; Swales, John M. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings . New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990; Chapter 5: Beginning Work. In Writing for Peer Reviewed Journals: Strategies for Getting Published . Pat Thomson and Barbara Kamler. ( New York: Routledge, 2013), pp. 93-96.

Swales showed that establishing a research niche [move 2] is often signaled by specific terminology that expresses a contrasting viewpoint, a critical evaluation of gaps in the literature, or a perceived weakness in prior research. The purpose of using these words is to draw a clear distinction between perceived deficiencies in previous studies and the research you are presenting that is intended to help resolve these deficiencies. Below is a table of common words used by authors.

NOTE : You may prefer not to adopt a negative stance in your writing when placing it within the context of prior research. In such cases, an alternative approach is to utilize a neutral, contrastive statement that expresses a new perspective without giving the appearance of trying to diminish the validity of other people's research.

Examples of how this can be achieved include the following statements, with A representing the findings of prior research, B representing your research problem, and X representing one or more variables that have been investigated.

• Prior  research has focused on A, rather than on B...
• Prior research into A can be useful but to counterbalance X, it is important to consider B...
• These studies have emphasized A, as opposed to B...
• While prior studies have examined A, it may be preferable to contemplate the impact of B...
• After consideration of A, it is important to also recognize B...
• The study of A has been exhaustive, but changing circumstances related to X support the need for examining [or revisiting] B...
• Although considerable research has been devoted to A, less attention has been paid to B...
• Earlier research offers insight into the need for A, though consideration of B is also helpful...

Dretske, Fred I. “Contrastive Statements.” The Philosophical Review 81 (October 1972): 411-437; Kayfetz, Janet. " Academic Writing Workshop ." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. " The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model ." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John M. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings . New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990

• << Previous: 4. The Introduction
• Next: Background Information >>
• Last Updated: Mar 22, 2022 8:49 AM
• URL: https://leeuniversity.libguides.com/research_study_guide

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

"Create a Research I Space" (CARS) Model of Research Introductions 1

Related Papers

Ana Stefanelli

The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics

Lynne Flowerdew

Wasima Shehzad

Driving research questions from the prevailing issues and interests and developing from them new theories, formulas, algorithms, methods, and designs, and linking them to the interests of the larger audience is a vital component of scientific research papers. The present article discusses outlining purposes or stating the nature of the present research, and listing research questions or hypotheses in the introduction of academic papers. This corpus-based genre study focuses particularly on Move 3 of the model " occupying the niche. " The results indicating disciplinary variation show that the writers of Computer Science (CS) research articles, over the years have developed an increased use of outlining purpose/stating the nature of the present research, having the characteristics of purposive, descriptive, extension of the previous work, contrast to the existing work, brevity, complexity , and a description of methodology. It also shows that listing research questions or hypothesis may have distinctively different functions in developing genres as compared to the established ones such as physics.

Luz Gil-Salom

Humera Rahman

Academic writers have reported that research article Introductions are more problematic to write than the rest of the paper. It is because they have to choose from amongst the various options available to them for making a start. The CARS Model beautifully captures these options in functional terms which make it very easy to understand and implement. In this paper, I discuss the model with examples from published geology research articles to show the model&#39;s usefulness. However, the model is equally applicable to other disciplines.

Christian Merand Mendoza Azul

Yasir B J Al-shujairi

The discussion section is considered as a crucial part in the writing process of a research article (RA). Research writers find it difficult to write an effective discussion for their results and this could be due to the unawareness of the various move functions that shape this section. A rhetorical move is a sentence or group of sentences that serves a communicative function. This paper focuses on move Background information, its linguistic devices such as verb, tense, and self-reference and lexical bundles (LBs) including 3-to 5-word bundles that are used to construct this communicative move. The corpus of the study includes a total of 50 medical RAs discussion section which were selected from five prestigious journals in the field. The corpus was analysed in terms of the occurrence of move Background information, the linguistic devices associated with this move and the LBs that initiate it. The analysis of the move and the linguistic realizations was done manually and the identification of LBs was done using AntConc3.5.7w computer program. The findings revealed that 34 (64%) of the corpus included move Background information. This move was mainly employed to describe methodological aspects and restate the research purpose. These functions were characterized by the use of procedural verbs, first-person plural pronouns and simple past tense. Moreover, several 3-5 words LBs (e.g., we tested the hypothesis, this study was based on) were found to initiate move Background information. Further studies are needed to examine other obligatory and optional moves such as Explaining research findings and Indicating research limitations.

The discussion section forms an integral part in the writing process of a research article (RA). Research authors find it difficult to write and produce a well-structured discussion for their findings. The reason could be due to the unawareness of the main components (rhetorical moves) that shape this section. Therefore, this paper aims to provide a review of the studies that have been done to analyze the discussion section of RAs over the last 36 years. Also, this review seeks to examine the discussion section of RAs across various scientific disciplines and different types of journals. The review showed that the rhetorical structure of RAs discussion section witnessed some changes over the course of time. New moves such as Research Implications and Research Limitations started to be parts of the discussion section of RAs. In addition, it was revealed that differences in writing the discussion section can be varied broadly across disciplines such as soft sciences (e.g., applied linguistics, sociology, psychology) and hard sciences (e.g., engineering, chemistry, biology) and slightly across types of journals such as ISI and local journals. In conclusion, this paper offered several suggestions for further research to be conducted in the area.

Publishing Research Quarterly

Sweta Pandey

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Journal of Language and Communication

EFL Journal , Suhaily Abdullah

Su-Hie Ting

Applied Linguistics

assef khalili

Dialogicity in Written Specialised Genres

Hossein Saadabadi

Stefania M Maci

Journal of English Education and Teaching

Safnil Arsyad

Journal of Teaching Language Skills

Zohre Shooshtari

Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics

Kathy Ling Lin

Birutė Ryvitytė

Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, dan Pengembangan

Yazid Basthomi

Journal of Applied Languages and Linguistics

Muzaffar Hussain

Izet Masic, MD, PhD, FWAAS, FEASA, FIAHSI, FEFMI, FACMI

Budsaba Kanoksilapatham

Claudia Spaccavento

Global Journal of Foreign Language Teaching

Research in English Language Pedagogy

International Journal of Linguistics

Ahmad Tawalbeh

English for Specific Purposes

chan swee heng

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

CADW Resource Hub

Tools for writing program affiliated faculty, interdisciplinary: how to create a research space (cars).

“The Creating a Research Space [C.A.R.S.] Model was developed by John Swales based upon his analysis of journal articles representing a variety of discipline-based writing practices. His model attempts to explain and describe the organizational pattern of writing the introduction to scholarly research studies.” ( From an online tutorial on the CARS model found her e .)

Although this model was initially applied to social science research, subsequent studies revealed it applies to the humanities and STEM equally well, possibly because the three CARS moves follow the basic rhetorical steps of a proposal argument.

Introducing this model to CADW students can give them a framework to understand WHY they discuss existing research in the first place: not just to summarize viewpoints, but to establish the importance of their topic (move 1) and construct a “gap” or “need” in the field  (move 2). These two moves thus “create the space” that justifies their own contribution to a conversation (move 3). Teaching this model also gives students a powerful heuristic to investigate research articles in their field of study. This model can be integrated with student writing and research processes to help students shape what type of research they should look for (narrow the scope), how to review scholarship with a purpose, and how to frame their own contributions within an ongoing conversation in their area of study.

Comments are closed.

• About WordPress
• Get Involved
• WordPress.org
• Documentation
• Learn WordPress
• View Calendar

• Material Detail: The CARS Model

Material Detail

The cars model.

The Creating a Research Space [C.A.R.S.] Model was developed by John Swales based upon his analysis of journal articles representing a variety of discipline-based writing practices. His model attempts to explain and describe the organizational pattern of writing the introduction to scholarly research studies. Following the CARS Model is useful because it can help you to: 1) begin the writing process [getting started is often the most...

• Social Sciences  / Sociology  / Methodology

• User Rating
• Learning Exercises
• Bookmark Collections
• Course ePortfolios
• Accessibility Info
• Report Broken Link
• Report as Inappropriate

More about this material

Disciplines with similar materials as The CARS Model

People who viewed this also viewed.

Other materials like The CARS Model

Full Description

The Creating a Research Space [C.A.R.S.] Model was developed by John Swales based upon his analysis of journal articles representing a variety of discipline-based writing practices. His model attempts to explain and describe the organizational pattern of writing the introduction to scholarly research studies. Following the CARS Model is useful because it can help you to: 1) begin the writing process [getting started is often the most difficult task]; 2) understand the way in which an introduction sets the stage for the rest of your paper; and, 3) assess how the introduction fits within the larger scope of your study.

The model assumes that writers follow a general organizational pattern in response to two types of challenges [“competitions”] relating to establishing a presence within a particular domain of research: 1) the competition to create a rhetorical space and, 2) the competition to attract readers into that space. The model proposes three actions [Swales calls them “moves”], accompanied by specific steps, that reflect the development of an effective introduction for a research paper. These “moves” and steps can be used as a template for writing the introduction to your own social sciences research papers.

Edit Comment

Edit comment for material The CARS Model

Delete Comment

This will delete the comment from the database. This operation is not reversible. Are you sure you want to do it?

Report a Broken Link

Thank you for reporting a broken "Go to Material" link in MERLOT to help us maintain a collection of valuable learning materials.

Would you like to be notified when it's fixed?

Do you know the correct URL for the link?

Link Reported as Broken

Link report failed, report an inappropriate material.

If you feel this material is inappropriate for the MERLOT Collection, please click SEND REPORT, and the MERLOT Team will investigate. Thank you!

Material Reported as Inappropriate

Material report failed, comment reported as inappropriate, leaving merlot.

You are being taken to the material on another site. This will open a new window.

Do not show me this again

Rate this Material

Search by ISBN?

It looks like you have entered an ISBN number. Would you like to search using what you have entered as an ISBN number?

Searching for Members?

You entered an email address. Would you like to search for members? Click Yes to continue. If no, materials will be displayed first. You can refine your search with the options on the left of the results page.

Creating a Research Space

Swales’ Create-a-Research-Space (CARS) model of research article introductions

Just as plants compete for light and space, so writers of research papers compete for acceptance and recognition. In order to obtain this acceptance and recognition, many writers will use a rhetorical organizational pattern called Creating a Research Space (CARS). Writers follow this organizational pattern in response to two kinds of competition: 1) competition for research space and 2) competition for readers. In this Introduction pattern, the work of others and/or what is known about the world is primary, and your own work is secondary. This background-foreground relationship is reversed in Discussions. ― Swales, 1990, p. 328

The CARS model of English research article introductions consists of three basic moves. (A “move” in the discourse of research papers is a rhetorical unit of text – often a sentence or paragraph – that performs a coherent communicative function.) Here are the bare bones (to muddy the ecological metaphor) of the CARS model in three variants:

* In ecology, a niche is a particular microenvironment where a particular organism can thrive: here it is a context where a particular piece of research is fitting, makes particularly good sense, is well adapted…

Cayley in her academic writing blog Explorations of Style further gives a model for thesis introductions based on this research article model.

Here is a bit more flesh on the bones of Swales’ CARS model (taken from Swales, 1990):

For an elaboration of the above steps the reader is referred to the useful introduction to the CARS model given by USC Libraries guide for graduate students (providing advice more widely on how to develop and organize research papers in the social and behavioural sciences).

Swales’ extended ecological metaphor of researchers competing for contested territory has proved prescriptively powerful as well as descriptively fitting. Based on Swales’ analysis of a large corpus of existing research articles in various scientific disciplines (including social sciences), the three moves of establishing a territory, establishing a niche and occupying the niche have become an essential part of the writing repertoire of researchers wishing to acculturate to their discipline (dance to the same tune?). As Swales (2013) observes, the CARS model fits best ‘an environment in which originality (especially in theory) tends to be highly prized, competition tends to be fierce, and academic promotionalism and boosterism are strong.’

The following pdf download gives an analysis of an introduction to a paper on academic writing and culture (cf. the earlier post on academic writing in English and Czech).

A previous post on Academic Phrasebank touches on the generic language used in introductions that follow the CARS model, and Academic Phrasebank is a useful way to become familiar with the language associated with the three rhetorical moves.

Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. C., & Williams, J. M. (2008). The Craft of Research (3rd ed.). Chicago: Chicago University Press. Lewin, B. A., Fine, J., & Young, L. (2001). Expository discourse: A genre-based approach to social science research texts. London: Continuum. Siepmann, D., Academic writing and culture , Meta Volume 51, Number 1, March 2006, pp. 131–150. Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. Swales, J.M. & Feak, C.B. (2004). Academic Writing for Graduate Students – Essential Tasks and Skills. Second Edition. Univ. Michigan Press. Swales, J.M. (2013). Research Genres: Exploration and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

USC Libraries Introductions , Explorations of Style Finnish Virtual University K. Pennington, The introduction section (Helsinki Univ. Technology)

Andrew Goodall

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Andrew Goodall on Sentence Stack
• Jay on Sentence Stack
• Andrew Goodall on Academic style: impersonal language
• Andrew Goodall on Manchester Academic Phrasebank
• Teknik Informatika on Academic style: impersonal language
• Frequent mistakes
• Functional grammar
• Grammar and usage

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: The C.A.R.S. Model

• Purpose of Guide
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• The Research Problem/Question
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Evaluating Sources
• Reading Research Effectively
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Is it Peer-Reviewed?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism [linked guide]
• Annotated Bibliography
• Grading Someone Else's Paper

Introduction

The Creating a Research Space [C.A.R.S.] Model was developed by John Swales based upon his analysis of journal articles representing a variety of discipline-based writing practices. His model attempts to explain and describe the organizational pattern of writing the introduction to scholarly research studies. Following the C.A.R.S. Model is useful because it can help you to: 1) begin the writing process [getting started is often the most difficult task]; 2) understand the way in which an introduction sets the stage for the rest of your paper; and, 3) assess how the introduction fits within the larger scope of your study. The model assumes that writers follow a general organizational pattern in response to two types of challenges [“competitions”] relating to establishing a presence within a particular domain of research: 1) the competition to create a rhetorical space and, 2) the competition to attract readers into that space. The model proposes three actions [Swales calls them “moves”], accompanied by specific steps, that reflect the development of an effective introduction for a research paper. These “moves” and steps can be used as a template for writing the introduction to your own social sciences research papers.

" Introductions ." The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Coffin, Caroline and Rupert Wegerif. “ How to Write a Standard Research Article .” Inspiring Academic Practice at the University of Exeter; Kayfetz, Janet. " Academic Writing Workshop ." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. " The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model ." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John and Christine B. Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Skills and Tasks . 2nd edition. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004.

Creating a Research Space Move 1: Establishing a Territory [the situation] This is generally accomplished in two ways: by demonstrating that a general area of research is important, critical, interesting, problematic, relevant, or otherwise worthy of investigation and by introducing and reviewing key sources of prior research in that area to show where gaps exist or where prior research has been inadequate in addressing the research problem. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1 -- Claiming importance of, and/or  [writing action = describing the research problem and providing evidence to support why the topic is important to study]
• Step 2 -- Making topic generalizations, and/or  [writing action = providing statements about the current state of knowledge, consensus, practice or description of phenomena]
• Step 3 -- Reviewing items of previous research  [writing action = synthesize prior research that further supports the need to study the research problem; this is not a literature review but more a reflection of key studies that have touched upon but perhaps not fully addressed the topic]

Move 2: Establishing a Niche [the problem] This action refers to making a clear and cogent argument that your particular piece of research is important and possesses value. This can be done by indicating a specific gap in previous research, by challenging a broadly accepted assumption, by raising a question, a hypothesis, or need, or by extending previous knowledge in some way. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1a -- Counter-claiming, or  [writing action = introduce an opposing viewpoint or perspective or identify a gap in prior research that you believe has weakened or undermined the prevailing argument]
• Step 1b -- Indicating a gap, or  [writing action = develop the research problem around a gap or understudied area of the literature]
• Step 1c -- Question-raising, or  [writing action = similar to gap identification, this involves presenting key questions about the consequences of gaps in prior research that will be addressed by your study. For example, one could state, “Despite prior observations of voter behavior in local elections in urban Detroit, it remains unclear why do some single mothers choose to avoid....”]
• Step 1d -- Continuing a tradition  [writing action = extend prior research to expand upon or clarify a research problem. This is often signaled with logical connecting terminology, such as, “hence,” “therefore,” “consequently,” “thus” or language that indicates a need. For example, one could state, “Consequently, these factors need to examined in more detail....” or “Evidence suggests an interesting correlation, therefore, it is desirable to survey different respondents....”]

Move 3: Occupying the Niche [the solution] The final "move" is to announce the means by which your study will contribute new knowledge or new understanding in contrast to prior research on the topic. This is also where you describe the remaining organizational structure of the paper. The steps taken to achieve this would be:

• Step 1a -- Outlining purposes, or  [writing action = answering the “So What?” question. Explain in clear language the objectives of your study]
• Step 1b -- Announcing present research [writing action = describe the purpose of your study in terms of what the research is going to do or accomplish. In the social sciences, the “So What?” question still needs to addressed]
• Step 2 -- Announcing principle findings  [writing action = present a brief, general summary of key findings written, such as, “The findings indicate a need for...,” or “The research suggests four approaches to....”]
• Step 3 -- Indicating article structure  [writing action = state how the remainder of your paper is organized]

" Introductions ." The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Atai, Mahmood Reza. “Exploring Subdisciplinary Variations and Generic Structure of Applied Linguistics Research Article Introductions Using CARS Model.” The Journal of Applied Linguistics 2 (Fall 2009): 26-51; Chanel, Dana. "Research Article Introductions in Cultural Studies: A Genre Analysis Explorationn of Rhetorical Structure." The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes 2 (2014): 1-20; Coffin, Caroline and Rupert Wegerif. “ How to Write a Standard Research Article .” Inspiring Academic Practice at the University of Exeter; Kayfetz, Janet. " Academic Writing Workshop ." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. " The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model ." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John and Christine B. Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Skills and Tasks . 2nd edition. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004; Swales, John M. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings . New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990; Chapter 5: Beginning Work. In Writing for Peer Reviewed Journals: Strategies for Getting Published . Pat Thomson and Barbara Kamler. ( New York: Routledge, 2013), pp. 93-96.

Writing Tip

Swales showed that establishing a research niche [move 2] is often signaled by specific terminology that expresses a contrasting viewpoint, a critical evaluation of gaps in the literature, or a perceived weakness in prior research. The purpose of using these words is to draw a clear distinction between perceived deficiencies in previous studies and the research you are presenting that is intended to help resolve these deficiencies. Below is a table of common words used by authors.

NOTE : You may prefer not to adopt a negative stance in your writing when placing it within the context of prior research. In such cases, an alternative approach is to utilize a neutral, contrastive statement that expresses a new perspective without giving the appearance of trying to diminish the validity of other people's research.

Examples of how this can be achieved include the following statements, with A representing the findings of prior research, B representing your research problem, and X representing one or more variables that have been investigated.

• The research has focused on A, rather than on B...
• Research into A can be useful but to counterbalance X, it is important to consider B...
• These studies have emphasized A, as opposed to B...
• While prior studies have examined A, it may be preferable to contemplate the impact of B...
• After consideration of A, it is important to also recognize B...
• The study of A has been exhaustive, but changing circumstances related to X support the need for examining [or revisiting] B...
• Although considerable research has been devoted to A, less attention has been paid to B...
• This research offers insight into the need for A, though consideration of B is also helpful...

Dretske, Fred I. “Contrastive Statements.” The Philosophical Review 81 (October 1972): 411-437; Kayfetz, Janet. " Academic Writing Workshop ." University of California, Santa Barbara, Fall 2009; Pennington, Ken. " The Introduction Section: Creating a Research Space CARS Model ." Language Centre, Helsinki University of Technology, 2005; Swales, John M. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings . New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990

• << Previous: The Introduction
• Next: Background Information >>
• Last Updated: Sep 8, 2023 12:19 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.txstate.edu/socialscienceresearch

• University of Rhode Island Events
• Past Events

Creating a Research Space: The CARS Model

Thursday, October 31, 2019 1pm to 2pm

• Share Creating a Research Space: The CARS Model on Facebook
• Share Creating a Research Space: The CARS Model on Twitter
• Share Creating a Research Space: The CARS Model on LinkedIn

About this Event

208 Quinn Hall

Graduate students can become better researchers by developing core writing skills. In this session, Erin Harrington (Graduate Researcher for SciWrite@URI - a prestigious NSF science writing grant) will provide a framework for guiding graduate students in crafting effective introductions that help them define their research space and its significance.

Event Details

Contact Person

Cara Mitnick

Contact Email

[email protected]

Contact Phone

See Who Is Interested

+ 1 People interested in event

• Erin Chille
• Ronaldo A Canabe
• Amanda Deniger
• Hee Yoon Kwon

User Activity

No recent activity

How To Create A ‘Safe Space’ For AI Experimentation

Plus: The Longevity Of A U.S. CEO, Inflation Unexpectedly Drops, Stock Markets Rise To New Heights (And Fall), FTC Plans To Sue Pharmacy Benefit Managers

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

This is the published version of Forbes’ CEO newsletter, which offers the latest news for today's and tomorrow's business leaders and decision makers. Click here to get it delivered to your inbox every week.

Many of today’s executives spent years climbing the corporate ladder, preparing to ultimately take on a CEO position. But once they get there, how long do they stay?

A recent study from BusinessFinancing.co.uk found that U.S. CEOs tend to last 5.5 years , exactly at the midpoint of CEOs in other countries. Those in Azerbaijan have the shortest average tenure, at 2.8 years, while CEOs in Lebanon tend to stick around the longest: 8.5 years. Breaking it down by state, Mississippi has the longest-serving CEOs, who stay a median of 8.4 years, while Utah’s CEOs tend to last 3.9 years.

Six U.S. cities make the top 20 list of places where CEOs have the longest tenure: Laredo, Texas—with a median CEO tenure of 9.2 years, the second longest of any city in the world—Toledo, Ohio; Chula Vista, California; Edison, New Jersey; Baltimore, Maryland; and Hartford, Connecticut.

According to leadership recruiting firm Spencer Stuart , the average tenure of a CEO at a company on the S&P 500 in 2023 was 8.9 years, which represents a decline from 2021 and 2022. It shows the tailing off of a trend that started during the Covid-19 pandemic, in which CEOs and other executives tended to stay longer at their companies to help get through the disruption. And most of the CEOs who were new on the job in 2023—86%—came because their predecessors retired or voluntarily left the company. Spencer Stuart found that resignations under pressure grew in 2023, but still represented just one in 10 CEO changes.

The CEO’s job is undoubtedly a difficult one, though a steady business climate and economic growth have helped leaders want to stick around in these jobs. But as things get more stable, it could create space for change in the relationship between a CEO and a board, which might prefer new leadership to look at a company with a fresh perspective . Considering the many big changes that may be over the horizon with elections later in the year, it will be interesting to see where and how leadership shifts take place going forward.

A study this spring from Microsoft and LinkedIn found that 75% of full-time office workers are using AI in their jobs, but more than half of them don’t want their bosses to know because they fear it will make them look replaceable. I talked to David Steinberg, cofounder and CEO of AI-powered marketing tech company Zeta Global, about how executives can reassure their employees and institute an AI strategy to help the entire organization . An excerpt from our conversation is later in this newsletter.

ECONOMIC INDICATORS

The gold plated seal of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in Washington, DC.

Some good news on the inflation front: June’s rate was 3% , the lowest it’s been in a year. Economists had forecast last month would show 3.3% inflation, so the unexpected lower rate was a welcome surprise. Core inflation, excluding more volatile food and energy prices, was a bit higher at 3.3%.

And now the question on everyone’s mind: When will that translate to lower interest rates ? Well over nine in 10 are expecting the Federal Reserve’s Open Markets Committee to cut rates at its September meeting, according to the CME FedWatch tool . The odds of a September rate cut had been increasing in the last week and a half, reaching 76% after Labor Department figures showed a 4.1% unemployment rate early this month. Lower inflation and a weaker job market, experts say, are more likely to show the Fed that rate cuts will provide an overall economic benefit.

STOCK MARKET NEWS

Traders on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange as the Nasdaq and S&P 500 were on a record swing up last week.

The stock market in the last week can be summed up with a quote from Charles Dickens’s A Tale of Two Cities: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.” Last week, the Nasdaq, S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average all hit record highs. And the Nasdaq and S&P 500 also saw their worst day in three months . Tech stocks, buoyed by reports that Apple anticipates selling 10% more iPhones at the end of the year, skyrocketed last Wednesday, then crash landed on Thursday, with the Nasdaq closing down 1.9% and the S&P 500 down 0.88%.

Why the dramatic rise and fall? Part of it has to do with the unexpected inflation report . The markets had been dominated by Big Tech’s “Magnificent Seven”—specifically companies with a presence in AI, including Apple, Nvidia, Microsoft, Google parent Alphabet, Facebook parent Meta and Amazon. (Electric car maker Tesla is the seventh of that group.) Optimism around new developments drove many of the tech stocks’ rallies. But as an interest rate cut started appearing more likely on Thursday, stocks for some companies in other sectors suddenly became more attractive to investors. Lower interest rates more directly would impact companies like Home Depot, which was one of the biggest movers on the Dow on Friday. And investors’ renewed interest in companies outside of the AI sector boosted the less-tech-dependent Dow to its new highs. Deutsche Bank strategist Jim Reid told Forbes the Magnificent Seven fell a collective 4.3% on Thursday.

The shifting of investors’ attention and dollars might actually be a good thing for the market as a whole, Forbes senior writer Derek Saul says . Looking at market cap, the big seven tech stocks were worth 33% of everything traded on the S&P at the end of Thursday. “The performance gap between tech and the rest of the market is so wide that it’s reasonable to expect continued closing of that gap as markets more fully embrace the idea of the start of a rate cutting cycle,” Sevens Report founder Tom Essaye told Forbes .

LEGAL ISSUES

The Federal Trade Commission will sue three of the largest pharmacy benefit managers, accusing them of driving up the prices of vital medications , including insulin, and pushing customers away from less expensive alternatives. UnitedHealth Group’s OptumRx, Cigna Group’s Express Scripts and CVS Health’s Caremark manage roughly 80% of prescriptions in the U.S. The FTC has been investigating pharmacy benefit managers since June 2022, and has repeatedly warned of legal action if its inquiry found proof that they were blocking competitors, writes Forbes senior contributor Joshua Cohen . A report from the FTC asserted that pharmacy benefit managers exert substantial influence over pharmacies, and have control over the drugs that are available to patients, their price, and where they can be accessed. The lawsuit has not been officially filed yet, so it’s not clear how the legal battle may play out, but it could lead to major changes in the pharmaceutical business model.

TOMORROW’S TRENDS

Zeta global’s david steinberg on how to create a ‘safe space’ for ai at work.

Zeta Global cofounder and CEO David Steinberg.

A study this spring from Microsoft and LinkedIn found that about three quarters of employees are now using AI at work, but just over half are doing it in secret—mostly because they are afraid their bosses will think it means they are easily replaced. I talked to David Steinberg, cofounder and CEO of AI-powered marketing tech company Zeta Global, about what executives need to do to reassure their employees—and come together to use AI to help the company do better. This conversation has been edited for length, clarity and continuity.

The study seems to indicate that many employees are afraid they’d lose their jobs if their bosses knew they were using AI. Why aren’t more companies creating a “safe space” for employee experimentation?

Steinberg: I think most employers don’t think, ‘How do I empower my employees by using artificial intelligence?’ I think at a very high level, the board of directors is going to the CEO and saying, ‘What’s our AI strategy?’ And the CEO is going to the CMO, the CIO, the CTO, and saying, ‘What's our AI strategy?’

To step back for one second, I believe that all technology—starting with the Gutenberg printing press, the telegraph, the telephone, the internet—go through three very distinct cycles. The first is hyper investment into infrastructure. Why is Nvidia winning? Why did Cisco win during the internet [boom]? Then it moves to efficiency of running your business, which is where we’re getting to. And then the third is how do we generate revenue? I think every technology of note from an enterprise perspective has sort of followed that exact same thing.

I think most CTOs, CIOs, they come at it think, ‘Okay, how do we cut 30% of our employees by using this and grow the business by 20%?’ It’s hard to do both of those things. Even if you’re thinking it, you don’t go communicate, ‘We’re going to eliminate 20% of our workforce using this.’ Employees get that vibe and the fear is there.

Whereas if you say, ‘Listen, our goal is to double the size of the company over the next three years,’ and say, ‘By the way, our goal is to keep every person we have, but not hire large numbers of new people to get real leverage in our business model,’ I think you create excitement around that.

How can a company really make employees believe that AI is coming in to improve productivity?

I have long said that the key metric you need to focus on from your employees is productivity. It’s not hours of the day. It’s not are you doing it yourself? I equate it to when I was a kid, you couldn’t bring an HP calculator to engineering classes. And now my kids bring their laptops to class. You’ve got to build an environment where people can use the tools that are available to them to make the most of their job.

I find that if you give people really interesting stuff to do and make them feel like they can win with the organization, they’re going to be excited about coming to work. At the end of the day, I think the companies have to show people that if they can be more productive by using these tools, they’re going to have upward mobility as an individual. Most individuals in organizations want upward mobility. And that doesn’t mean that everybody who comes into work every day thinks they’re going to be the CEO of the company.

Peoples’ basic requirements are they want to feel good about themselves, they want to feel good about their organizations, they want to feel like they’re being productive. They want to feel like they’re getting some level of adulation. This is just human nature. Treat people with respect, and they’ll generally treat you back with respect. If you create an environment at work where people feel they’re going to win with the organization by using these tools, and they can do more with less, you’ve got to show them they’re going to be rewarded for that, not punished.

How about at the executive level? How can this mindset be built into a company’s overall AI strategy?

I think that executives have to understand this is a paradigm shift. I think a lot of people are looking at AI, and you’ve got two schools of thought. You’ve got the school of thought that it’s going to change the world, and the school of thought that it’s total hype. They’re probably both wrong. Pendulums swing very hard, and the truth normally lies in the middle. There are components of AI that are going to change everything, and there are components of AI that are going to be worthless in two or three years.

If you look at organizations that adopted the telephone early, [or] adopted computers first, then the internet, ones that really adopted these technologies have thrived. Look at the dot-com crash. There was a lot of hype around it, a lot of capital put to it, but who emerged from it? Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Nvidia. These organizations came through the dot-com crisis. They took advantage of the crash. They hired the world’s greatest people. They had raised enough capital to get through it, and here they are: some of the world’s most valuable and successful companies.

But you can look at other companies: industrial companies, manufacturing companies, companies that are focused on other things that embrace technology. They’ve been the winners versus the companies that said, “Eh, we make this. We know how to manufacture it. We don’t need that next evolution of technology.” Most of those guys, now their counterparts in India and China are doing their jobs.

FACTS + COMMENTS

Former Slync.io CEO Chris Kirchner was sentenced to prison last week , following his conviction on charges of defrauding investors of tens of millions of dollars .

20 years: Length of Kirchner’s prison term. He was also sentenced to pay $65 million in restitution

$240 million: Top valuation of Slync, which made a logistics analytics platform backed by Goldman Sachs. The company shut down last October

‘Projecting personal prosperity was more important to him than making payroll’: U.S. Attorney Leigha Simonton said about Kirchner

STRATEGIES + ADVICE

Being an executive is stressful, and it’s easy to feel burnt out . Mental health therapy can help both your mindset and your business .

It’s summertime and CEOs need to take vacations, too . Here are ways to maximize your time off and get the mental rejuvenation you need .

Costco announced last week that it will soon raise its membership fees . When was the last time the cost of membership at the bulk retailer went up?

See if you got the answer right here .

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

A new dynamic state estimation method for distribution network based modified svsf considering photovoltaic power prediction.

• 1 State Grid Shanxi Electric Power Company Electric Power Research Institute, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China
• 2 Shanghai University of Electric Power, Shanghai, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Select one of your emails

You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:

Notify me on publication

Please enter your email address:

If you already have an account, please login

You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here

The fluctuations brought by the renewable energy access to the distribution network make it difficult to accurately describe the state space model of the distribution network's dynamic process, which is the basis of the existing dynamic state estimation methods such as the Kalman filter. The inaccurate state space model directly causes an error of dynamic state estimation results. This paper proposed a new dynamic state estimation method which can mitigates the impact of renewable energy fluctuation by considering PV power prediction in establishing distribution network state space model. The modified smooth variable structure filter can improve the problem of state space model of the distribution network with a large amount of renewable energy and inherently improve the accuracy of dynamic state estimation. The case study and evaluations are carried out based on MATLAB simulation. The results prove that the smooth variable structure filter with photovoltaic power prediction has a better dynamic state estimation effect under the fluctuation of the distribution network compared with the existing Kalman filter.

Keywords: Dynamic state estimation, Smooth variable structure filter, Distribution networks, Photovoltaic power prediction, Voltage magnitude, Voltage phase angle

Received: 22 Apr 2024; Accepted: 18 Jul 2024.

Copyright: © 2024 Zhi, Chang, Wang, Mao, Fan, Wang, Song and Xiao. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Huiqiang Zhi, State Grid Shanxi Electric Power Company Electric Power Research Institute, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China Xiao Chang, State Grid Shanxi Electric Power Company Electric Power Research Institute, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China Jinhao Wang, State Grid Shanxi Electric Power Company Electric Power Research Institute, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China Rui Mao, State Grid Shanxi Electric Power Company Electric Power Research Institute, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China Rui Fan, State Grid Shanxi Electric Power Company Electric Power Research Institute, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China Tengxin Wang, State Grid Shanxi Electric Power Company Electric Power Research Institute, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China Jinge Song, State Grid Shanxi Electric Power Company Electric Power Research Institute, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.