1. Abdel Salam El-Dakhs, D. (2018). Why are abstracts in PhD theses and research articles different? A genre -specific perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 36, 48-60. [
DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2018.09.005]
2. Amornrattanasirichok, A., & Jaroongkhongdach, S. (2017). Engagement in literature reviews of Thai and international research articles in applied linguistics. Online Proceedings of the International Conference: DRAL 3/19th ESEA 2017, 312-327. http://sola.kmutt.ac.th/dral2017/proceedings/5-6Additional/312-327_Engagement%20in%20literature%20reviews_Supattra%20Amornrattanasirichok%20and%20%20Woravut%20Jaroongkhongdach.pdf
3. Akinci, S. (2016). A cross-disciplinary study of stance markers in research articles written by students and experts. Unpublished masters' thesis. Iowa State University. http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/15144
4. Alcaraz-Ariza, M. Á. (2002). Evaluation in English-medium medical book reviews. International Journal of English Studies, 2(1), 137-153.doi: [
DOI:10.6018/ijes/2011/1/137141]
5. Babaii, E., Atai, M. R., & Saidi, M. (2017). Are scientists objective? An investigation of appraisal resources in English popular science articles. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 5(1), 1-19. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312580984_Are_scientists_objective_An_investigation_of_appraisal_resources_in_English_popular_science_articles
6. Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines. (2nd Ed). Buckingham: Open University Press.
7. Bellés-Fortuño, B. (2017). A contrastive study between English and Spanish university lectures. Languages in Contrast, 18(2), 155-174. doi: 10.1075/lic.15018.bel [
DOI:10.1075/lic.15018.bel]
8. Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. Journal of Applied Psycholinguistics, 57(3), 195-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0034701 [
DOI:10.1037/h0034701]
9. Dahl, T. (2004). Textual metadiscourse in research articles: a marker of national culture or of academic discipline? Journal of Pragmatics, 36(10), 1807-1825. [
DOI:10.1016/j.pragma.2004.05.004]
10. Durrant, P. (2017). Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation in university students' writing: Mapping the territories. Applied Linguistics, 38(2), 165-193. doi: 10.1093/applin/amv011 [
DOI:10.1093/applin/amv011]
11. Ebrahimi, S. F., & Heng, C. S. (2018). Grammatical subject in results and discussion section of research articles: Disciplinary variations. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 27(1), 97-125. doi: 10.22099/jtls.2018.30374.2557
12. Fernandes, A. (2011). Appraisal of evaluative language in people with phasia's Cinderella Narratives. Unpublished Master Thesis, University of Groningen.
13. Fitriati, S. W., & Solihah, Y. A. (2019). Non-native writers and the use of appraisal resources in research article introductions. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(3), 638-645. doi: 10.17509/ijal.v8i3.15265 [
DOI:10.17509/ijal.v8i3.15265]
14. Gastil, R. G. (1960). The distribution of mineral dates in time and space. American Journal of Science, 258(1), 1-35. http://www.ajsonline.org/content/258/1/1.abstract [
DOI:10.2475/ajs.258.1.1]
15. Ghaemi, F., & Sarlak, H. (2015). A critical appraisal of ESP status in Iran. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 9(1), 262-276. https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/6bee84 _552d1ca5c28a416c81592f0283a00112.pdf
16. Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
17. Hood, S. (2004). Appraising research: Taking a stance in academic writing. PhD Thesis, Faculty of Education, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved online from: http://grammatics.com/appraisal/suehoodphd/hoods-phd-links.htm
18. Hu, G., & Liu, Y. (2018). Three minute thesis presentations as an academic genre: A cross-disciplinary study of genre analysis. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 35, 16-30. [
DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2018.06.004]
19. Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173-192. doi/pdf/10.1177/1461445605050365 [
DOI:10.1177/1461445605050365]
20. Hyland, K. (2008). Persuasion, interaction, and the construction of knowledge: Representing self and others in research writing. International Journal of English Studies, 8(2), 1-23. Retrieved from https://revistas.um.es/ijes/article/view/49151
21. Hyland, K. (2010). Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 116-127. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003 [
DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003]
22. Hyland, K. (2011). Academic discourse. In K. Hyland, & B. Paltridge (Eds.), Continuum companion to discourse analysis (pp. 171-184). London/New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
23. Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25(2), 156-177. doi: 10.1093/applin/25.2.156 [
DOI:10.1093/applin/25.2.156]
24. Jalilifar, A., Bardideh, A., & Shooshtari, Z. (2018). From academic to journalistic texts: A qualitative analysis of the evaluative language of science. Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS), 37(1), 127-158. doi: 10.22099/jtls.2018.30299.2554
25. Jalilifar, A., Hayati, M., & Mashhadi, A. (2012). Evaluative strategies in Iranian and international research article introductions: Assessment of academic writing. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 3(1), 81-109. http://rals.scu.ac.ir/article_10373.html
26. Johns, C., Chapman, M., & Woods, P. C. (1972). The characteristics of the literature used by historians. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 4(3), 137-156. doi: 10.1177/096100067200400301 [
DOI:10.1177/096100067200400301]
27. Khoo, C. G., Nourbakhsh, A., & Na, J. (2012). Sentiment analysis of online news text: A case study of appraisal theory. Online Information Review, 36(6), 1-18. [
DOI:10.1108/14684521211287936]
28. Li, X. (2016). An attitudinal analysis of English song discourse from the perspective of appraisal theory. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 7(3), 559-565. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0703.17 [
DOI:10.17507/jltr.0703.17]
29. Li, T., & Wharton, S. (2012). Metadiscourse repertoire of L1 Mandarin undergraduates writing in English: a cross-contextual, cross-disciplinary study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(4), 345-356. [
DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2012.07.004]
30. Liu, X. (2010). An application of appraisal theory to teaching college English reading in China. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 1(2), 133-135. doi:10.4304/jltr.1.2.133-135 [
DOI:10.4304/jltr.1.2.133-135]
31. Liu, X. (2013). Evaluation in Chinese university EFL students' English argumentative writing: An appraisal study. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 10(1), 40-53. http://e-flt.nus.edu.sg/archive/v10n12013.html
32. Liu, X., & McCabe, A. (2018). Attitudinal evaluation in Chinese university students' English writing: A contrastive perspective. Singapore: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-6415-9 [
DOI:10.1007/978-981-10-6415-9]
33. Liu, X., & Thompson, P. (2009). Attitude in students' argumentative writing: A contrastive perspective. Language Studies Working Papers, 1, 3-15. https://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/english-language-and-literature/ell_language_Liu_and_Thompson_vol_1.pdf
34. Llinares, A. (2015). The interpersonal function of language in CLIL secondary education: Analysis of a spoken and written corpus (INTER-CLIL). European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 343-347. doi: [
DOI:10.1515/eujal-2015-0003]
35. Martin, J. R. (1997). Analyzing genre: Functional parameters. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genres and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 3-39). London, UK: Cassell.
36. Martin, J. R. (2000). Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 142-175). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause (2nd edition). London: Continuum.
38. Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan. [
DOI:10.1057/9780230511910]
39. Mei, W. S., & Allison, D. (2003). Exploring appraisal in claims of student writers in argumentative essays. Prospect, 18(3), 71-91. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Exploring-appraisal-in-claims-of-student-writers-in-Mei-Allison/a9f6c67bd6786548a6570a09b3e166b5af0c5db4
40. Millán, E. L. (2014). The projection of critical attitude in research article introductions by Anglo-American and Spanish author. RevistaCanaria de EstudiosIngleses Año, 2(1), 137-153. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5002745
41. Mizusawa, Y. (2010). Language use in English academic writing by a tertiary overseas student. Juntendo Health and Sports Science Research, 1(4), 494-501. https://www.juntendo.ac.jp/hss/sp/albums/abm.php? f=abm00008387.pdf&n=vol16_p494.pdf
42. Mori, M. (2017). Using the Appraisal framework to analyze source use in essays: a case study of engagement and dialogism in two undergraduate students' writing. Functional Linguist, 4(11), 1-22. [
DOI:10.1186/s40554-017-0046-4]
43. Myskow, G., & Ono, M. (2018). A matter of facts: L2 writers' use of evidence and evaluation in biographical essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 41, 55-70. [
DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2018.08.002]
44. Munday, J. S. (2015) Engagement and graduation resources as markers of translator/interpreter positioning. Target, 27 (3), 406- 412. https://doi.org/ 10.1075/target.27.3.05mun [
DOI:10.1075/target.27.3.05mun]
45. Ngo, T., & Unsworth, L. (2015). Reworking the appraisal framework in ESL research: refining attitude resources. Functional Linguistics, 2(1), 1-24. doi: 10.1186/s40554-015-0013-x [
DOI:10.1186/s40554-015-0013-x]
46. Omidian, T., Shahriari, H., & Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (2018). A cross-disciplinary investigation of multi-word expressions in the moves of research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 36, 1-14. [
DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2018.08.002]
47. Oteíza, T. (2017). The appraisal framework and discourse analysis. In T. Bartlett, G. & O'Grady (Eds.). The Routledge handbook of systemic functional linguistics (pp.457-472). London: Routledge.
48. Pascual, M. (2010). Appraisal in the research genres: An analysis of grant proposals by Argentinean researchers. RevistaSigos, 43(73), 261-280. https://scielo.conicyt.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S0718-09342010000200004&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=en [
DOI:10.4067/S0718-09342010000200004]
49. Põldvere, N., Matteo, F., & Carita, P. (2016). A study of dialogic expansion and contraction in spoken discourse using corpus and experimental techniques. Corpora, 11(2), 191-225. doi: 10.3366/cor.2016.0092 [
DOI:10.3366/cor.2016.0092]
50. Rahman, R. F. (2018). Engagement systems in the introduction sections of international journal articles. Proceeding of the 65th TEFLIN International Conference, Universitas Negeri Makassar, Indonesia 12-14 July 2018, 65(1), 261-265. https://ojs.unm.ac.id/teflin65/article/view/6282/3621
51. Sadeghi, E., & Tahririan, H. (2014). ESP for psychology and law tertiary level students: Attitudes, challenges and obstacles. Research in English Language Pedagogy, 2(2), 62-77. http://relp.khuisf.ac.ir/article_533614.html
52. Shahrokhi, M., Sadeghi, A., & Amiri Dehnoo, M. (2013). Lexical cohesion patterns in research articles: Hard science vs. soft science disciplines. International Journal of Social Science & Education, 4(1), 196-204. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Lexical-Cohesion-Patterns-in-Research-Articles%3A-vs.-Shahrokhi-Sadeghi/cdb8f9ea713e616af56245e0c57bb20df1ac8147
53. Sheldon, E. (2018). Knowledge construction of discussion/conclusion sections of research articles written by English L1 and L2 and Castilian Spanish L1 writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 37, 1-10. [
DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2018.11.002]
54. Su, W., & Hunston, S. (2019). Adjective complementation patterns and judgment: Aligning lexical-grammatical and discourse-semantic approaches in appraisal research. Text & Talk, 39(3), 415-435. https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/text.2019.39.issue-3/text-2019-2031/text-2019-2031.xml [
DOI:10.1515/text-2019-2031]
55. Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
56. Thompson, G., & Yiyun, Y. (1991). Evaluation in the reporting verbs used in academic papers. Applied Linguistics, 12(4), 365-382. [
DOI:10.1093/applin/12.4.365]
57. Taboada, M., Carretero, M., & Hinnell, J. (2014). Loving and hating the movies in English, German and Spanish. Languages in Contrast, 14(1), 127-161. doi: 10.1075/lic.14.1.07tab [
DOI:10.1075/lic.14.1.07tab]
58. White, P. R. (1998). Telling media tales: The news story as rhetoric. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney, Australia.
59. White, P. R. (2002). Appraisal-the language of evaluation and stance. In J. Verschueren, J. Östman, J. Blommaert, & C. Bulcaen (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics (pp.1-23). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamin.
60. Wu, H. (2013). Appraisal perspective on attitudinal analysis of public service advertising discourse. English Language and Literature Studies, 3(1), 55-66. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ells.v3n1p55 [
DOI:10.5539/ells.v3n1p55]
61. Wu, S. M., & Allison, D. (2003). Exploring appraisal in claims of student writers in argumentative essays. Prospect, 18(3), 71-91. http://www.ameprc.mq.edu.au/docs/prospect_journal/volume_18_no_3/18_3_5_WuSiewMei.pdf
62. Yang, R., & Allison, D. (2003). Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes, 22(4), 365-385. doi: [
DOI:10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00026-1]