Academic writing frequently requires us to cite the work of other authors, and we can do this with verbatim quotations, paraphrases, summaries or syntheses.
One of the problems inexperienced (and even experienced) writers come up against is how to introduce the ideas of others in our writing without being too repetitive and using the same phrase over and over again at the risk of boring the reader. There are, after all, only so many options in the thesaurus for "according to".
Coincidentally, this problem is one that relates well to another academic writing problem: laundry listing. Finding fresh and varied ways of introducing citations can also help us to avoid the problem of merely providing a list of assertions and citing their sources. Some of these tactics require you to think in an analytical and synthetic way, while providing you with space to introduce your authentic researcher voice seamlessly into the narrative.
This is not an exhaustive list and it should of course be used judiciously with respect for the exact meaning of what you are trying to convey. Merely substituting any of them for "according to" will end up not making much sense, and that is definitely not what you want.
1. Author - verb - assertion formula I
[Author] asserts/ maintains/ is of the opinion/ is of the view that / {paraphrase or verbatim quotation}[citation].
This is the simplest alternative. However, it does not do much to evade the risk of laundry listing, because you are merely stating your authority's view without providing much of your own input.
2. Author - verb - assertion formula II
[Author, citation] considers [concept] to be [author's perspective].
This useful alternative to formula I introduces a nuance of position, perspective or judgement on the authority's part. It suggests that there are alternative opinions and opens up your narrative to further discussion, because it raises the reader's expectation of a "but" or "however". You can follow this up with your own perspective, or that of another author. Your voice as a writer and active and critical reader is starting to become apparent when you use this formula.
3. Situate the argument in a context
In the context of the discipline of [discipline], [Author]'s finding that [finding] [citation] applies specifically to...
Providing a theoretical, historical, disciplinary or thematic context for an authority's statement gives you an opportunity to add perspective, while varying the way you introduce sources. It gives weight to the idea, rather than the author, and that is what matters the most.
4. Integrate the assertion with your interpretation or with your data
[Author, citation]'s argument that [concept] supports this study's finding that...
Notice that this formulation uses a noun (argument) rather than a verb (argues). This helps you to open up the narrative because it requires you to say something about the authority's argument. In the process, you will be giving evidence of one of the things that your examiner or reviewer is looking for: your ability to interpret information and contextualise your findings.
The choice of synonyms is also much richer than "according to" (see list below), but be careful to choose a suitable one. An argument is not the same as a finding!
5. Introduce a comparison
Whereas [Author 1, citation] asserts that [concept], [Authors 2 & 3, citations] introduce the notion of [concept], which expands the definition to apply to...
A comparison is a very useful tool for synthesis. At the recipe card stage of your draft, you can identify candidates for this formula.
A dynamic range of terms like "while", "although", "in contrast to" can be used to introduce comparisons, giving life to your writing.
Useful synonyms for introducing assertions
Using synonyms is an easy way to create variety and interest. But remember that not all synonyms mean exactly the same thing; the items in this list are not completely interchangeable. Think carefully about what you are saying before picking one at random from this list.
Noun | Verb | Comment |
assertion | asserts | A basic mode of academic discourse, BUT an assertion must be backed up by evidence. A strong statement. |
opinion | is of the opinion (​opines is clumsy: avoid) | An opinion is a personally held view and is not necessarily backed up by empirical evidence. |
statement | states | A definite expression of something. A statement does not need to be backed up by evidence in the way an assertion does. |
finding | finds | Requires evidence |
(consideration) (Generally not used in this context) | considers | Applies to a judgement or perspective |
- | maintains | Requires a substantiation or argument against another argument |
thesis | ​- | ​A statement backed up by theory and evidence |
theory | theorises | ​ |
- | agrees | Useful in synthesis and comparisons |
proposal | proposes | ​ |
argument | argues | ​ |
suggestion | suggests | ​ |
contention | contends | Usually used when the argument contrasts with other arguments |
conclusion | concludes | ​ |
​ | posits | ​ |
​ | notes | ​ |
observation | observes | ​ |
professes | USE WITH CARE: - May refer to an authoritative, complex and very well-supported argument that is often contentious or that has notable counter-arguments which are typically more dominant. - Alternatively, may refer to an argument that is not backed up by significant evidence. Because of this possible ambiguity, it is important to be 100% sure of the context in which you are using this term, so that your reader is aware of which of these meanings you intend. | |
​ | proffers | Rather avoid this term: it may be associated with an argument that is weak, uncertain or poorly supported. |
postulate | postulates | This term has a highly specific meaning in the hard sciences, but can be more loosely defined in common language. Strictly speaking, a postulate is an assumption that is made and stated when conducting research (for example, that digital literacy is dependent on textual literacy). A postulate entails a degree of uncertainty, because like an hypothesis it can be invalidated by empirical evidence. However, its purpose in research is slightly different. Hypotheses are constructed for the purposes of a specific test of evidence in a research project and are not assumed to be true (the study aims to find out if evidence supports them or not), whereas postulates are constructed as a basis for reasoning, and for the purposes of the research project are assumed to be true. They are held to be true until contradictory evidence is found for them. |