The significance of research article (RA) abstract as a key academic genre has recently motivated analysts to focus on this neglected area. Considering a summary function for abstracts, most genre researchers have adopted the conventionally proposed Introduction- Method- Results- Discussion (or Conclusion) (IMRD) model for analysis. However, the problems reported, especially for Results and Discussion sections, question the vitality of such accounts and prompt further scrutiny. Moreover, in spite of claims about disciplinary and cultural variations which can affect communication within and across discourse communities, sufficient contrastive studies which address the Iranian academics' need to communicate with and participate efficiently in the international discourse communities are scarce. Inspired by English for Specific/Academic Purposes tradition of genre analysis, this paper tries to fill these gaps presenting a comparative generic analysis of soft sciences abstracts to see what the characterizing features of the texts of Iranian scholars and their international peers are. The macro-structure, micro-structure, and some features of 100 experimental RA abstracts taken from a number of reputable Iranian (Persian) and international (English) journals were analyzed and explained drawing upon some existing rigorous models. The results revealed similarities in the presence of Introduction, Method, and concluding units, while there were also differences in the realization of units, Moves, and Steps. It is argued that the differences can point to the varying cultural norms and values of the two groups. Plus, considering the inadequacy of the four-way macro-model, an alternative three-way model was suggested, instead. Some implications of the study are discussed, too
